Ion Rail Guns .. wth ?

[Isalina]

Gunships have long dominated the field of battle ,especially in TDM . For those of us who do not play GS ie: scouts ,bombers and SF's this ion rail is a frustrating and undeniable "super weapon" that gives more and more advantage to the GS , unbalancing the flow of combat. When you are ripped out of a barrel roll , or full boost to lie dead in the water so to speak 20-10k (well out of weapon range) , with no power to engines, or weapons or shields ,and an added bonus that drains your recharge preventing you from boosting out , or evading the predictable next attack is terrible. All one can do is sit and watch the charge of the next rail attack usually slug and your demise , over and over again. It's practically impossible to breach a GS wall now ,this has frustrated me now no end for a long time. Developers maybe you should take a look at GSF battles and the GS kill ratio compared to scouts etc and give us some form of defence against these attacks to even the playing field .. with 2 -4 GS's acting as a wall with Ion and Slug rounds , Average players like myself cannot even get close, let alone break it, you may as well crash into something over and over to end the match, or not play at all. Im sure some of you with exceptional abilities will disagree ,but to noobs and less exceptional pilots like myself it's a "why bother playing it at all scenario".

[btbarrett]

I don't want to belittle your concerns, but this has literally been brought up a hundred times and rebutted a hundred more times. I suggest you do a search for gunship and look at one of the many threads that makes suggestions on how a player like you can contribute positively towards hunting gunships.

[RickDagles]

Counters to ion railgun:

Booster recharge

Power dive

 

Counters to any railgun:

Distortion field

Evasion armor

Running Interference co-pilot

Edited October 11, 2015 by RickDagles

[Danalon]

Once I had similar concerns regarding Gunships and the only thing you can do about that is learning how to counter them.

 

You can either search the forum for further information or, if you don't find anything or want to ask specific questions, just ask here. I'm sure we'll find some answers.

Edited October 11, 2015 by Danalon

[Bolo_Yeung]

Counters to ion railgun:

Booster recharge

Power dive

 

PD - sometomes hard to aim it correctly

BR - means you are giving up much of your offensive power

 

Counters to any railgun:

Distortion field

Evasion armor

Running Interference co-pilot

 

Counter to RI: Wingman. 5% advantage, same CD/duration.

PS. Not "any" railgun... Sentry drone laugs at evasion and turning speed.

 

PS. I agree that ion railgun is way OPed. Unfortunately, no one in dev team cares enough (at least it isn't noticeable). So, practically every TDM boils down to candyballs... Domination is a little better maybe.

 

 

However, this topic was already done for zilionth times:

 

Some agree with me,

Some say that scouts are counters to gunships.

Everyone thinks that he/she is right ( I am! See, it is much easier to see a GS ball tactic than scout swarm... )

 

And to be honest, I dont think changing it will be a good idea... every a few patches, not including GSF, we have some strange bugs in GSF (like components-stealing thieves). Imagine what would happen if there would be an actual GSF patches...

though the idea of flying -due to a bug - a capship instead of my starfighter sounds runny

Edited October 11, 2015 by Bolo_Yeung

[RickDagles]

PD - sometomes hard to aim it correctly

BR - means you are giving up much of your offensive power

 

 

 

Counter to RI: Wingman. 5% advantage, same CD/duration.

PS. Not "any" railgun... Sentry drone laugs at evasion and turning speed.

 

PS. I agree that ion railgun is way OPed. Unfortunately, no one in dev team cares enough (at least it isn't noticeable). So, practically every TDM boils down to candyballs... Domination is a little better maybe.

 

 

However, this topic was already done for zilionth times:

 

Some agree with me,

Some say that scouts are counters to gunships.

Everyone thinks that he/she is right ( I am! See, it is much easier to see a GS ball tactic than scout swarm... )

 

And to be honest, I dont think changing it will be a good idea... every a few patches, not including GSF, we have some strange bugs in GSF (like components-stealing thieves). Imagine what would happen if there would be an actual GSF patches...

though the idea of flying -due to a bug - a capship instead of my starfighter sounds runny

 

Power dive is sometimes hard to aim correctly? Really? Centering a railgun shot on a scout constantly zipping around the map is certainly a lot harder than poking your nose up 45 degrees and hitting 3.

[Bolo_Yeung]

Well, you have to LOS the shooting gunship at the end of the power dive. It ends in 3 seconds and after ion rail hit you still have no engine power (aka you're sitting duck)

[Majdloch]

The fact that people keep bringing it up is lost on some.

[Ardaneb]

Shipyards TDM does seem to favor gunships. I have seen many good scouts go gunship even with just one bomber in play on that map. Personally, I hate that map. It is only one map out of 5.

 

Having said that, gunships are pretty well balanced in domination and Kuat Mesas TDM. I would hate to see them nerfed. Bombers would be completely out of control on all the domination maps if gunships were nerfed.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Ardaneb

[Verain]

The fact that people keep bringing it up is lost on some.

 

The type of player that keeps bringing it up is something that is impolite to point out.

[Ramalina]

Gunships have long dominated the field of battle ,especially in TDM . For those of us who do not play GS ie: scouts ,bombers and SF's this ion rail is a frustrating and undeniable "super weapon" that gives more and more advantage to the GS , unbalancing the flow of combat. When you are ripped out of a barrel roll , or full boost to lie dead in the water so to speak 20-10k (well out of weapon range) , with no power to engines, or weapons or shields ,and an added bonus that drains your recharge preventing you from boosting out , or evading the predictable next attack is terrible. All one can do is sit and watch the charge of the next rail attack usually slug and your demise , over and over again. It's practically impossible to breach a GS wall now ,this has frustrated me now no end for a long time. Developers maybe you should take a look at GSF battles and the GS kill ratio compared to scouts etc and give us some form of defence against these attacks to even the playing field .. with 2 -4 GS's acting as a wall with Ion and Slug rounds , Average players like myself cannot even get close, let alone break it, you may as well crash into something over and over to end the match, or not play at all. Im sure some of you with exceptional abilities will disagree ,but to noobs and less exceptional pilots like myself it's a "why bother playing it at all scenario".

 

So as a primarily strike pilot, but also having played from early access, I should point out that Ion Railgun with its current duration bug on the T5 upgrades, has been heavily nerfed from what it originally was.

 

In fact, the nerfs covered pretty much the complete list of what I (in the role of irate strike fighter advocate) asked for in terms of nerfs almost 2 years ago (not that I think they just did what I asked, more like they independently reached similar conclusions about railgun balance), and the duration bug/buff reversion covers the one thing I wanted that wasn't in the "official patch notes" version of the Ion Railgun nerfs.

 

As far as balance of mechanics goes, it's actually pretty hard to make a justified case that Ion Railgun in its current form is overpowered. What's getting to you is lack of experience in dealing with it.

 

 

Tips for counter Ion play:

 

Look for gunships and pay attention to where they are, who they are targeting, how far away they are, which ones are getting a lot of kills, and how much the ones getting lots of kills are moving around. The first step of self defense against railguns is knowing if you are in danger, and if so how much danger you are in. ALL practical successful defenses are based on having this knowledge. Gunships are a danger if within 15 and with clear line of sight to you. So you have to keep track of all gunships within 15 km. Skilled GS pilots will also move around a lot because they want to be a danger to everyone so you have to watch them even if farther out than 15 km because they will try to move closer to get a shot at you as soon as is practical.

 

Don't get low on engine energy. Never go below 50% if you don't have a gunship escape plan, and start thinking about recharge at around 60-70% fuel. As you get more skilled you can push those numbers a lot lower and get away with it most of the time, but even for highly skilled players being in an Ion Railgun's field of fire while low on engine energy is a risk.

 

Use line of sight obstacles. Especially in a strike or bomber this is really the primary defense against railguns. Think of yourself as a cat hunting a mouse (if you're trying to kill a gunship) and use cover to stalk the gunship(s). If you are hunted think more like a deer that's being shot at with a semi-auto rifle; move fast, move erratically, and get behind solid cover as quickly as you can. When traveling in gunship territory plan your travel in terms of moving from one patch of cover to the next, and include pauses to regenerate engine energy.

 

Use defensive cooldowns well. Stuff other people talked about above. If you're doing good defensive flying then these are more insurance policies than primary defenses. If you're running low on cooldowns in most matches then you need to practice the basics of defensive flight more.

 

Don't fly a strike fighter: Starguard, Rycer, Pike, Quell, Clarion, or Imperium. It's sad to say, but to date none of the strikes have been truly competitive in GSF, and managing defensive flying against multiple competent gunship pilots is a very demanding test of pilot skill. In general just staying alive pushes the limits of what a strike is capable of against a skilled gunship pilot. Going on the offensive in a strike against a T1 gunship isn't impossible, but it's at least two bonus levels worth of extra difficulty (think of it as ranked nightmare mode GSF).

 

 

 

 

 

A well flown scout or strike can manage the threat from 1-2 Ion Railguns without too much difficulty. Bombers have more trouble, but they are the ship class least suited to countering gunships, and this is by deliberate balancing design. Even so, if you can make it to cover in a bomber and fly well once you get there it should take a very long time for a single gunship to be able to kill.

 

In many vs. one situations if the ships are relatively balanced the many should generally win, if they are playing in their ships' designed roles. Strikes are underpowered enough that they generally fail this test, but the other ship classes are more or less ok. So if gunships are ganging up on you, gang up back at them.

[Verain]

Shipyards TDM does seem to favor gunships. I have seen many good scouts go gunship even with just one bomber in play on that map.

 

If the enemy team is all gunship there, you really do want to line your side with scouts and gunships. But I agree that the first bomber to enter the field changes the optimal scout count a lot more than it should.

 

Shipyards TDM is pretty much the most gunship favorable map in the game, and I definitely agree with you on that. Even then, you can't just spam gunships if your opponents are organized.

 

Having said that, guships are pretty well balanced in domination and Kuat Mesas TDM. I would hate to see them nerfed. Bombers would be completely out of control on all the domination maps if gunships were nerfed.

 

A lot of the balance threads do have gunship nerfs, but as part of scout burst nerfs and mild bomber node control nerfs. Often in those threads, strikes can own bombers as well. I'm on record with some mild recommended railgun nerfs as well- but only as part of a real attempt to shift the meta, an attempt that also addresses the other ships.

[Bolo_Yeung]

The type of player that keeps bringing it up is something that is impolite to point out.

 

"New players"? ... Ones who do not know that TDM where 4+ ships belongs to one class is considered as "perfectly ballanced"?

 

TBH, the main problems are T1/T3 GS, T2 scout. and T1 bomber. With those ships removed, GSF would be ballanced

[davidrodriguezjr]

"New players"? ... Ones who do not know that TDM where 4+ ships belongs to one class is considered as "perfectly ballanced"?

 

TBH, the main problems are T1/T3 GS, T2 scout. and T1 bomber. With those ships removed, GSF would be ballanced

 

Really? Balanced? Without a T1 GS how would you deal with this http://i.imgur.com/kYNpS7q.png ?

[LilSaihah]

Really? Balanced? Without a T1 GS how would you deal with this http://i.imgur.com/kYNpS7q.png ?

 

No seismics?

 

CHARGED PLATING ERRYDAY

[Archonitek]

No seismics?

 

CHARGED PLATING ERRYDAY

 

3 rails though

[OKonst]

Really? Balanced? Without a T1 GS how would you deal with this http://i.imgur.com/kYNpS7q.png ?

 

That looks very much like THIS: http://i.imgur.com/95YyT1r.jpg

 

Honestly, if T1-Gunships and Bombers were ever removed/nerfed beyond use, people (or "bads" if you like) would just stack T2-Bombers like hell.

Edited October 12, 2015 by OKonst

[WiseStranger]

Really? Balanced? Without a T1 GS how would you deal with this http://i.imgur.com/kYNpS7q.png ?

 

Considering this game was from Drako's stream and his 8 man team played against a team of noobs. If I recall the stream correctly they went 6-7 bombers (There are at least 4 bombers active on that screenshot). It doesn't matter what they picked to fly, the team of noobs didn't stand a chance.

 

And since you don't know how to deal with that if there was no Ion AoE, have you checked EMP missile? If there was no Ion AoE in GSF at all - I'm sure a lot of people would have it on their bar and use it against bombers.

 

There is always a possibility to use Slug Railgun to remove mines/drones (yes it takes aim and time) or HLC with maxed out range or any other primary with good accuracy at 4-5k mark. There is also an EMP charge on T1 scout and charged plating builds.

[WiseStranger]

"New players"? ... Ones who do not know that TDM where 4+ ships belongs to one class is considered as "perfectly ballanced"?

 

TBH, the main problems are T1/T3 GS, T2 scout. and T1 bomber. With those ships removed, GSF would be ballanced

 

Amazing solution, why don't we remove 1/3 of all ships available in the game just to make it easier on you.

 

Or better yet make all ships the same and give them access to one of each:

Blaster

Missile

Railgun

Mine

Drone

System

Engine

Shield

& each type of minor component.

[davidrodriguezjr]

Considering this game was from Drako's stream and his 8 man team played against a team of noobs. If I recall the stream correctly they went 6-7 bombers (There are at least 4 bombers active on that screenshot). It doesn't matter what they picked to fly, the team of noobs didn't stand a chance.

 

And since you don't know how to deal with that if there was no Ion AoE, have you checked EMP missile? If there was no Ion AoE in GSF at all - I'm sure a lot of people would have it on their bar and use it against bombers.

 

There is always a possibility to use Slug Railgun to remove mines/drones (yes it takes aim and time) or HLC with maxed out range or any other primary with good accuracy at 4-5k mark. There is also an EMP charge on T1 scout and charged plating builds.

 

not counting missiles/interdiction sentry drones and seeker mines that you would have to go through to get to the railgun drones

 

EMP Missle 7+k range with a 3 sec lockon vs railgun 100% acc 10k range

HLC 7+k (max) range vs railgun 100% acc 10k range

EMP field 4500 radius vs railgun 100% acc 10k range

 

Without ion aoe I don't think I would fly

[Verain]

Considering this game was from Drako's stream and his 8 man team played against a team of noobs. If I recall the stream correctly they went 6-7 bombers (There are at least 4 bombers active on that screenshot). It doesn't matter what they picked to fly, the team of noobs didn't stand a chance.

 

Specifically, I goaded everyone into playing girl bombers. For most of the match we were 7 bombers and a scout, but for that part we may have been all 8 bombers. It was for the lulz- the double premade we were trying to queue into had just ended for the night, so we got that.

 

That being said, EMP missile would be a very poor way to deal with this stuff. EMP is decent on node assist, but it can't handle real deployable pressure because the cooldown is very long, and the long lockon and medium disance required means you can be peeled, because you are within dive range of bombers.

 

 

Ion railgun is very good for this game. The fact that the game has deployables is only a small part of that.

 

Bolo's comment about removing four ship types to improve balance is amusing, but we've absolutely had that commentary quite seriously before (and I'm pretty sure he was there). The thing is, we have 12 ships in the game, and five of them are important to the meta. If you were to remove the top four of them, would you awaken the slumbering seven? No, because the problems those ships have are not that other ships are better, it's that they are mediocre. Yes, the type 2 gunship would see play if you removed all the other gunships, such a victory. And the type 1 scout would take over for the type 2 scout. But the strikes wouldn't get any jobs. If you were a scout player, you'd have one ship to play still. If you were a gunship player, you'd have less ships to play (1 ship down from 2). If you were a strike, you'd have 0 ships to play still. If you were a bomber, you'd have one ship to play, down from two. You'd end up seeing charged plating at inappropriate times, because of the general power it would grant against scout lasers, and scouts would be down to just a pods playstyle instead of having multiple playstyles.

 

And you'd have a really hard time dealing with deployables and stacked stuff in general.

 

And when we say that the meta is about 5 ships deep, that's not quite fair to the type 3 scout and type 1 scout. It's not exactly fair to the Clarion.

 

 

There's ways to improve balance in the game. We've discussed them. None of them are "delete the rail sniper" tho, or "delete the battle scout". And certainly the boy bomber adds so much depth to gameplay, you wouldn't want to get rid of him.

 

 

And since you don't know how to deal with that if there was no Ion AoE, have you checked EMP missile? If there was no Ion AoE in GSF at all - I'm sure a lot of people would have it on their bar and use it against bombers.

 

I really don't think so. I think the game would favor gunships a lot more, and gunship play would become thinner and lamer, because nests would be much harder to crack. The strike trying to land an EMP would get eaten alive by battle scouts and slug railgun, and the type 3 scout trying the same thing might be a bit harder to intercept, but can't take much of a hit at all.

 

 

Anyway, the point isn't that you'd see a lot of bombers doing thing X, the point is that the game would become narrower when it should become broader. Every idea about removing stuff is a non-starter. The game needs more things, not less.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Verain

[caederon]

the point is that the game would become narrower when it should become broader. Every idea about removing stuff is a non-starter. The game needs more things, not less.

This is precisely the key point to remember. Adding viable options makes deeper gameplay. Subtracting viable options to make the bad ones look better makes everything worse.

 

Giving players more meaningful, viable choices is the best way to improve GSF.

 

Looking at components that do not get used on competitive builds, asking 'why are these components not being used,' and changing those components to make them choices that will be competitive is SO much better than removing the things that are actually effective.

 

(and countless threads here have performed those exact examinations, but the NERF THIS THING argument keeps getting trotted out, so I guess we need to keep repeating ourselves)

 

Despon

Edited October 12, 2015 by caederon

[WiseStranger]

not counting missiles/interdiction sentry drones and seeker mines that you would have to go through to get to the railgun drones

 

EMP Missle 7+k range with a 3 sec lockon vs railgun 100% acc 10k range

HLC 7+k (max) range vs railgun 100% acc 10k range

EMP field 4500 radius vs railgun 100% acc 10k range

 

Without ion aoe I don't think I would fly

 

Just so you know... railgun drone dies from one full slug shot (1.6k damage)

It takes 3.5 seconds for the drone to charge up and 2 seconds to reload.

It deals 650 damage (130 Direct hull damage, rest is based on your shields)

 

You're trying to tell me that HLC that has ~700 DPS at max range (and it's not that hard to hit a stationary target that you're going for from the start) will not be able to deal with a railgun drone?

 

Even a bomber with power to engines can boost 3km under 1 second. After that you're in range to start firing at the railgun drone. You have 2.5 seconds to deal 1.6k damage with a weapon that dishes out 700 DPS. I'm pretty sure it can be done before the drone does any damage to you. And in the worst case your hull got scratched by 130.

 

Now... EMP missile has 2.6 seconds lock on and 7.7km range. Again you're firing at a stationary target and the worst damage you will suffer from it is 130 hull damage, the rest will go to shields.

 

Oh yea... I almost forgot. If you're brain dead to target the farthest railgun drone - I can see where you're having problems. It's quite obvious that you will fire the missile at the closest available drone/mine and let it deal whatever was caught in 3.5km AoE range. If the railgun drone is farther than 2.3km from the missile target you don't even risk taking any damage from it.

 

Now to the EMP Field... scout can cover ~4km/s while boosting with power to engines. Even if you don't take extra range on the blast to get you 5k radius, you need to cover 6km to be sure the drone is in range. Wow... I'm sure you can reach the railgun drone and disable it within 3.5 seconds it takes for the drone to charge the shot.

 

I look forward to your arguments that are better than 1 vs entire team or team of 2-shippers you can't rely upon vs aces. Assume both teams/players have equal access to everything.

[WiseStranger]

Specifically, I goaded everyone into playing girl bombers. For most of the match we were 7 bombers and a scout, but for that part we may have been all 8 bombers. It was for the lulz- the double premade we were trying to queue into had just ended for the night, so we got that.

 

That being said, EMP missile would be a very poor way to deal with this stuff. EMP is decent on node assist, but it can't handle real deployable pressure because the cooldown is very long, and the long lockon and medium disance required means you can be peeled, because you are within dive range of bombers.

 

 

Ion railgun is very good for this game. The fact that the game has deployables is only a small part of that.

 

Bolo's comment about removing four ship types to improve balance is amusing, but we've absolutely had that commentary quite seriously before (and I'm pretty sure he was there). The thing is, we have 12 ships in the game, and five of them are important to the meta. If you were to remove the top four of them, would you awaken the slumbering seven? No, because the problems those ships have are not that other ships are better, it's that they are mediocre. Yes, the type 2 gunship would see play if you removed all the other gunships, such a victory. And the type 1 scout would take over for the type 2 scout. But the strikes wouldn't get any jobs. If you were a scout player, you'd have one ship to play still. If you were a gunship player, you'd have less ships to play (1 ship down from 2). If you were a strike, you'd have 0 ships to play still. If you were a bomber, you'd have one ship to play, down from two. You'd end up seeing charged plating at inappropriate times, because of the general power it would grant against scout lasers, and scouts would be down to just a pods playstyle instead of having multiple playstyles.

 

And you'd have a really hard time dealing with deployables and stacked stuff in general.

 

And when we say that the meta is about 5 ships deep, that's not quite fair to the type 3 scout and type 1 scout. It's not exactly fair to the Clarion.

 

 

There's ways to improve balance in the game. We've discussed them. None of them are "delete the rail sniper" tho, or "delete the battle scout". And certainly the boy bomber adds so much depth to gameplay, you wouldn't want to get rid of him.

 

 

 

 

I really don't think so. I think the game would favor gunships a lot more, and gunship play would become thinner and lamer, because nests would be much harder to crack. The strike trying to land an EMP would get eaten alive by battle scouts and slug railgun, and the type 3 scout trying the same thing might be a bit harder to intercept, but can't take much of a hit at all.

 

 

Anyway, the point isn't that you'd see a lot of bombers doing thing X, the point is that the game would become narrower when it should become broader. Every idea about removing stuff is a non-starter. The game needs more things, not less.

 

We all know Bolo-lolo well by now so I don't think we should spend much time exploring his ideas in depth.

 

I think you've missed my point about EMP missile or you assume 1 ship with EMP missile vs 8 bombers. I'll tell you the same thing I said to davidrodriguezjr: Assume both teams/players have equal access to everything.

[Bolo_Yeung]

We all know Bolo-lolo well by now(...)

Reporting for hate speech, personal attack etc.

(disclaimer: the emoticon after text suggests it is a joke. Apparently someone didn't get it before...)

 

PS. Strangely quite a few people agrees with some of my ideas about OPed gunships. Still 'aces' say otherwise.

While it is possible that 'scouts are good counter to gunships', it is rarely seen in equal skill team TDMs. Most boils down to '4+ GS against similar enemy team composityion'.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Bolo_Yeung