What would you do if upcoming patch notes or mining indicated any GSF changes?

[Nemarus]

I think, regardless of the change, I'd need to go to an empty room at work and have a good cry.

 

My subsequent reaction would depend on where the changes land on this spectrum:

 

(I'd do a little dance) < Slight Balance pass ---- Strike buffs ---- New maps ---- New ships > (strip and run through the streets)

[MaximilianPower]

I think, regardless of the change, I'd need to go to an empty room at work and have a good cry.

 

My subsequent reaction would depend on where the changes land on this spectrum:

 

(I'd do a little dance) < Slight Balance pass ---- Strike buffs ---- New maps ---- New ships > (strip and run through the streets)

 

Pretty sure my reaction would be similar; a jig on the "balance pass" end...I might go so far as to poop my drawers on the "new ship" end.

 

Even a lone yellow post would elicit a tear of joy.

[ShallowHal]

Die of heart failure due to shock

[DakhathKilrathi]

Pretty much nothing different. I guess I'd wonder how they'd manage to make things worse if it was a balance pass. Bioware doesn't balance things appropriately; they've proven this multiple times. If they get it right, it's entirely by accident. Edited January 25, 2016 by DakhathKilrathi

[Drakkolich]

First step would be to get Stasie playing again, because he said he'd come back as soon as there were changes made.

 

Second step would be a theory crafting session with Verain, to figure out how to configure any of the new ships that came out or to figure out optimal positioning on a new map.

 

Third step would be to write a guide for the new stuff that came out. ^^

[ALaggyGrunt]

Check back in ~6 months and see if they actually happened.

[Toraak]

Check the calendor to see if it's April Fool's day, since that would be the only time they'd mention GSF unfortunately.

 

I've lost all hope for anything new for GSF.

[Ramalina]

I'd be pretty happy with bug fixes, and thrilled with a strike balance pass.

 

Anything else, and I'd be slack jawed with astonishment.

[Archonitek]

Sacrifice a goat to the gods

[tunewalker]

First step would be to get Stasie playing again, because he said he'd come back as soon as there were changes made.

 

Second step would be a theory crafting session with Verain, to figure out how to configure any of the new ships that came out or to figure out optimal positioning on a new map.

 

Third step would be to write a guide for the new stuff that came out. ^^

 

Knowing me I would figure out when you guys are doing the theory crafting and crash in it with you guys to help as best I can. (you know third person with some numbers and working theories, you know me I enjoy theory crafting.)

 

 

Edit: though I am pretty much with most here, just a yellow post saying "we are looking at things still" is more then I hope for at this point, but even the slightest balance changes would be huge at this point, and that is honestly kind of sad.

Edited January 26, 2016 by tunewalker

[RickDagles]

I'm still holding out hope that the Strikes will be buffed eventually. Hopefully they will take Vexxial's idea and make them super strafing beasts!

[Jazyra]

Game Update 4.1.0

 

General

 

Cross-server OR 1 EU/1 US Mega-server

 

Galactic Starfighter

 

General

 

Basic swtor space mission design overhaul with gsf remake (Why not make it like pve to give a bit of req when q pop are dead)

Crew menber design overhaul remake

Both faction get the same combination of crew menber passive & active ability

Fix bug blabla

Matchmaking System Improvment

New maps

New Game mode

New ships, of each type

Few new component coming with those ships

No more crit, get replaced by a % amount of damage

Distortion Field does not break missile anymore Get replaced by +10% shield

Nerf overall evasion by 15 % to avoid evasion stacking (hello scouts)

Slug railgun damage nerfed by 25 %

Ion railgun effect nerfed by % 50 (Burning weapon & boost energy)

Burst Laser Canon damage nerf by 30%

Scout's passive speed reduced by 10%

Targeting Telemetry doesn't bring evasion anymore, get replaced by dunno something

Strike fighter's passive speed buff by 10%

Strike fighter buff range primary & secondary weapons by a passive 15%

engine maneuver does now break any cc effect

Buff a bit some unused component a bit to show what gonna happen with a brand new meta

 

Classes + Combat

 

General

 

Fixbug blabla

Sorc Nerf

Jug Nerf

Pt Nerf

Blabla

Edited January 27, 2016 by Jazyra

[RickDagles]

Game Update 4.1.0

 

General

 

Cross-server OR 1 EU/1 US Mega-server

 

Galactic Starfighter

 

General

 

Basic swtor space mission design overhaul with gsf remake (Why not make it like pve to give a bit of req when q pop are dead)

Crew menber design overhaul remake

Both faction get the same combination of crew menber passive & active ability

Fix bug blabla

Matchmaking System Improvment

New maps

New Game mode

New ships, of each type

Few new component coming with those ships

No more crit, get replaced by a % amount of damage

Distortion Field does not break missile anymore Get replaced by +10% shield

Nerf overall evasion by 15 % to avoid evasion stacking (hello scouts)

Slug railgun damage nerfed by 25 %

Ion railgun effect nerfed by % 50 (Burning weapon & boost energy)

Burst Laser Canon damage nerf by 30%

Scout's passive speed reduced by 10%

Targeting Telemetry doesn't bring evasion anymore, get replaced by dunno something

Strike fighter's passive speed buff by 10%

Strike fighter buff range primary & secondary weapons by a passive 15%

engine maneuver does now break any cc effect

Buff a bit some unused component a bit to show what gonna happen with a brand new meta

 

Classes + Combat

 

General

 

Fixbug blabla

Sorc Nerf

Jug Nerf

Pt Nerf

Blabla

 

Pretty good ideas except getting rid of DF missile break. That would make seeker mines OP and therefore make the GS/bomber ball harder to break.

Edited January 27, 2016 by RickDagles

[Wildtee]

I'm just going to go ahead and add another reaction of "poop my pants"

 

Happy dances would then occur, followed by the obvious shower.

[Greezt]

Pretty good ideas except getting rid of DF missile break. That would make seeker mines OP and therefore make the GS/bomber ball harder to break.

 

I think someone around here suggested to move the missile break to QC shields. I haven't really though about it, but moving the break to another shield is definitely a good idea... There's no reason the same shield that protects you from all evasion affected weapons also counters weapons that counter evasion.

Edited January 28, 2016 by Greezt

[FlavivsAetivs]

Sacrifice a goat to the gods

 

We sacrifice chic-fil-a dinners at our Roman reenactment events and have yet to be rained out.

 

~ Eudoxia

[RickDagles]

I think someone around here suggested to move the missile break to QC shields. I haven't really though about it, but moving the break to another shield is definitely a good idea... There's no reason the same shield that protects you from all evasion affected weapons also counters weapons that counter evasion.

 

Actually there is. Without evasion+missile break, there would be absolutely no way to counter the bomber+gs combo in Deathmatch. If the break was on QC shields then gunships would eat scouts alive due to 9% less passive evasion and a whopping 44% less active evasion.

 

If you are going to get rid of DF missile break then you need to replace seeker mines with something else. Maybe concussion mines.

 

If you put the missile break on QCS then you need to make railguns much less accurate. Maybe 20% less accurate.

 

While we're at it, it might be nice to nerf railgun drones a bit so there's at least a small chance that they sometimes miss against super high evasion. It's kind of weird that they are a guaranteed hit.

Edited January 30, 2016 by RickDagles

[Greezt]

Actually there is. Without evasion+missile break, there would be absolutely no way to counter the bomber+gs combo in Deathmatch. If the break was on QC shields then gunships would eat scouts alive due to 9% less passive evasion and a whopping 44% less active evasion.

 

If you are going to get rid of DF missile break then you need to replace seeker mines with something else. Maybe concussion mines.

 

If you put the missile break on QCS then you need to make railguns much less accurate. Maybe 20% less accurate.

 

While we're at it, it might be nice to nerf railgun drones a bit so there's at least a small chance that they sometimes miss against super high evasion. It's kind of weird that they are a guaranteed hit.

 

A scout can still stack up to 47% evasion with TT and RI. Sure, it's not the six-seconds-invulnerability you get with DF, but it's still pretty good. I think making a scout choose between a second missile break and stacking evasion could be interesting. Also, if you look at the current shields, DF is by far the strongest one. It protects you against everything but non-seeker mines and railgun drones... No other shield comes even close to that.

 

Nerfing railguns is a good idea, considering gunships are bomber counters. They shouldn't be able to hit scouts as easily as they do. Same goes for railgun sentry drones.

[caederon]

Nerfing railguns is a good idea, considering gunships are bomber counters. They shouldn't be able to hit scouts as easily as they do. Same goes for railgun sentry drones.

Gunships do not hit scouts easily, by any stretch of the imagination. It is not at all uncommon for five or six properly aimed shots in a row to miss a scout that has its defensive abilities activated. With Wingman active, the gunship has a better (but hardly infallible) window to hit scouts. Unmastered gunships have it even worse, and may as well not even fire at a fully upgraded scout. It's a waste of time that they could be using to hit other targets. Even when fully upgraded, I'll usually try to bounce ion railgun splash off of a less Evasive target to catch nearby scouts instead of firing directly at the ones I know to be fully upgraded scouts.

 

Despon

[RickDagles]

A scout can still stack up to 47% evasion with TT and RI. Sure, it's not the six-seconds-invulnerability you get with DF, but it's still pretty good. I think making a scout choose between a second missile break and stacking evasion could be interesting. Also, if you look at the current shields, DF is by far the strongest one. It protects you against everything but non-seeker mines and railgun drones... No other shield comes even close to that.

 

Nerfing railguns is a good idea, considering gunships are bomber counters. They shouldn't be able to hit scouts as easily as they do. Same goes for railgun sentry drones.

 

Passive scout evasion (33) + TT (8) + RI (15) is actually 56% evasion not 47%. BUT Railgun with wingman is 124% accuracy on a centered shot. 124 minus 56 is still a 68% chance of that slug doing 1760 damage to the scout. If we assume the scout is in F3 or F1 when hit, it has 1287 shields + 950 hull. That's 2237 HP. So a full slug has a 68% chance to take a scout down to 477 hull health. Any nearby railgun drones (or newly aggressively popped railgun drones) easily finish the job.

 

DF is not a six-seconds-invulnerability. If there is no TT or RI popped, the gunship still has a 56% chance to land the shot. Even on TRE where I get lots of lag, I hit through DF a few times every game with my gunship. It feels like I land almost half the shots, in fact. If the enemy has TT+DF+RI popped I usually don't bother firing, but even against that you have a 33% chance to hit. This is all assuming dead centered shots, which I am almost always able to attain. Lag on european servers makes it a lot harder, though. When SRW fought against Drak's premade on Harbinger I quickly learned that even flying a maximum stacked evasion scout in enemy territory is super dangerous and I would die very quickly if I lingered more than a few seconds. When you have deadly accurate snipers like Mikaboshi, Drak, Verain, and Xiayou all targeting you at the same time, the chances of one of them hitting is actually pretty high if they all shoot from 33% chance. 4 chances to hit at 33% chance? I'd take those odds in a casino wouldn't you? And the railgun drone was happy to finish the job. Popped my DF too early? Seeker mines would make me blow my barrel roll/powerdive back to safety -- and it's a wasted attack run.

 

These are the reasons wingman is mandatory on a gunship, and anyone still using hydrospanner, bypass, or running interference on their gunship is really hurting their maximum potential. Without wingman most of these high evasion targets are not worth firing at. During the 40 second downtime of wingman I usually turn my attention to enemy gunships, strikes, and sometimes bombers.

 

I agree that DF is the only reasonable choice, but nerfing it would destroy the game because gunship+bomber would be OP.

Edited January 30, 2016 by RickDagles

[Drakkolich]

Passive scout evasion (33) + TT (8) + RI (15) is actually 56% evasion not 47%.

Incorrect

 

Passive Scout Evasion with Distortion field as Shield = (33) + TT (8) + RI (15) is 56%

 

However if you subtract the 9% from the Distortion field passive it is (24) + TT (8) + RI (15) which is 47%.

Greezt was giving you the passive Evasion number of a Scout not running Distortion field.

 

For those curious how we come up with these numbers.

Scout chassis has 10% passive evasion.

There is a crew passive that gives 5% passive evasion.

The Lightweight armor minor component can be upgraded to give 9% passive evasion.

The Distortion Field shield component gives 9% passive evasion.

The Targeting Telemetry system component can be upgraded to give 8% evasion while active.

The Running Interference co pilot active gives 15% evasion while active.

[Greezt]

Gunships do not hit scouts easily, by any stretch of the imagination. It is not at all uncommon for five or six properly aimed shots in a row to miss a scout that has its defensive abilities activated. With Wingman active, the gunship has a better (but hardly infallible) window to hit scouts. Unmastered gunships have it even worse, and may as well not even fire at a fully upgraded scout. It's a waste of time that they could be using to hit other targets. Even when fully upgraded, I'll usually try to bounce ion railgun splash off of a less Evasive target to catch nearby scouts instead of firing directly at the ones I know to be fully upgraded scouts.

 

Despon

 

With DCDs up, a scout is pretty much invulnerable, that's why I like the idea of moving the break from DF to QC. But without DCDs a gunship can hit a scout almost every time, especially with wingman up.

[Greezt]

Passive scout evasion (33) + TT (8) + RI (15) is actually 56% evasion not 47%....

 

...

I agree that DF is the only reasonable choice, but nerfing it would destroy the game because gunship+bomber would be OP.

 

Drakko got this before me, but I was thinking about a scout without DF, so you lose the 9% passive evasion.

 

If gunships had a base accuracy more similar to that of lasers (something like 85-90% at max range and 115% at min), scouts could do without all that evasion, and then they could choose between DF and QC. Gunships would still be able to hit strikes and bombers, since they can't really stack evasion. With 85% base accuracy, a gunship would have 105% with wingman, so a scout at 15k meters would have 42% evasion chance on a centered shot (with QC and TT/RI up). Right now, a scout with all DCDs up is unhittable by anything except for AoE (ions or EMP), railgun drones, and mines (except for seeker). How is that even remotely fair? A good scout can time his cooldowns, wreck a squad, and get back out with maybe one hit (sometimes not even that).

 

Personally I feel that evasion is a bad mechanic that shouldn't even exist, but since it's here I could live with making it the same as other defensives - with pros and cons.

 

Reminder: shields work against all weapons except: HLC, BLC, railguns (slug/drone),missile sentry drone, ion weapons of all types, missiles (torps, concussions, EMP, even clusters have a bit of shield piercing, not to mention sabotage probes...), rocket pods, seismic and concussion mines.

 

DR works against all weapons except: HLC, BLC, railguns (slug/plasma/drone), missiles (torps, concussions, EMP, sabotage probes), rocket pods.

 

Evasion (with DF) works against all weapons except: AoE (ion, EMP), railgun drone, mines (all but seeker).

 

The current meta ships are mostly centered around evasion for a reason - it's too strong. I know CP has a niche use for the T1 bomber in DOM, and the T3 gunship can't actually stack anything except shields, but other than that, pretty much every ship that can stacks evasion. Is it really that bad to see it reduced in effectiveness?

 

As for your last point, if gunships only had one missile break maybe you'd see some more missiles in the game (excluding clusters). If scouts had to choose between two missile breaks and evasion, maybe strikes would find their place. At least, I hope so.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Greezt

[caederon]

As for your last point, if gunships only had one missile break maybe you'd see some more missiles in the game (excluding clusters). If scouts had to choose between two missile breaks and evasion, maybe strikes would find their place. At least, I hope so.

I know it's not a 50/50 split, but I'm not the only one out there running Feedback Shield over DF on my T1 gs, which gives me one missile break. T3 gs pilots use Directionals over DF frequently enough for it to be a thing, but again I can't reliably guess the % of each... so one missile break there, too.

 

The problems strikes face run deeper than missile breaks. The T2 strike would of course benefit from there being less of those around, but it would benefit more from having some unique system or ability inherent to itself that helped it lock or land more missiles. I don't think a reduction in missile breaks would really improve the offensive output of the T1 or T3 strike fighters much at all.

 

If you want to see fewer people choose the missile break on DF, make the other side of the tree's choice better and more interesting so there's a reason to pick it.

 

Despon

[NeverEvar]

Nerfing evasion is a huge boost to one class...and to one build.

 

For scouts it`s a gigantic boost to quad/pod builds(Even if i use one, i`m addressing this matter)

 

combining it with switch of m-break we would see a lot of switches to quad/pod/pd.

 

But the main issue is that it would mean a massive boost for bombers , since their natural counter would be more open for scout counter. Mostly cluster spam.

 

This would lead to even more bombers, that at this state of the game are key to winning most Doms. If as well you would cut the power of a bomber in hmm...something from 1/3 to 1/2 it would make sense . But we are still thinking in a way to nerf good ships instead of making weaker ships better.

 

Regards.

 

E3