Needed/suggested change to GSF

[Porsan]

Ok, it's great that GSF has had a resurgence due to 5.0. But it's also become completely idiotic.

Most Death match fights on the Red Eclipse now are gunship slugfests. And I mean that as in 6-7 GS and 1-2 bombers on either side. Domination aren't much better, but it's just 4-5 bombers either side.

 

This has an easy fix though: A limit.

As in, limit the number of gunships to any one fight to 1 or 2 for an 8v8 match...and 2-3 for a 12v12 match. Preferably the lower number. Same for bombers. This would mean the majority of the team would have to play scouts or strike fighters. Which would mean we have an actual space combat sim.

[caederon]

This has an easy fix though: A limit.

As in, limit the number of gunships to any one fight to 1 or 2 for an 8v8 match...and 2-3 for a 12v12 match. Preferably the lower number. Same for bombers. This would mean the majority of the team would have to play scouts or strike fighters. Which would mean we have an actual space combat sim.

Hi, thanks for sharing your thoughts. This is an issue that has been discussed many times, and while it is tempting to think that a limit would be an easy solution, there are a lot of problems that would come with such a fix once you look below the surface. A few include...

• Who gets to fly the limited ship class(es)? First-come first-serve? Most experienced? Best stats with the given ship? Which of those solutions would not prompt extensive arguments about '_____ got to fly GS and it made us lose'
  
• Removing strategic depth from the game by preventing people from switching to or from the limited ship classes during play. Situations often dictate one team composition is better than another. Restricting ship class representation takes depth away from the game, and also doesn't recognize the different roles and capabilities of various ships within each class.
  
• Unintended consequences would likely arise. If you've ever played against a swarm of good scout pilots, you'd know that it is just as (or even more) difficult to deal with. TRE used to be noted for this, I guess it isn't anymore.
  

_

The problem you are facing is one of team inexperience in dealing with compositions that are very counterable. Overloading any ship type makes a team vulnerable in many ways, to specific counters. For example, Type 2 scouts with Quad Laser Cannon, Rocket Pods, Targeting Telemetry, Distortion Field, Retros and copilot Wingman and/or Running Interference (if more evasion is desired) are very effective gunship killers. Type 1 Gunships themselves are a natural counter to bombers. Part of succeeding in the game is having a team that knows how to counter what is thrown against it. It sucks when that doesn't happen, but it is an issue of team knowledge/execution rather than imbalanced ship classes.

 

I wrote a whole guide about killing gunships, which will give you many tips... and there is a GSF School YouTube channel which has tutorials and match breakdowns that can demystify things.

 

Good luck, keep practicing, and learn the techniques needed to deal with difficult situations!

 

- Despon

Edited January 14, 2017 by caederon

[Porsan]

Hey. I see many of your points, and here are my 2 cents...

 

Who gets to fly the limited ship class(es)? First-come first-serve? Most experienced? Best stats with the given ship? Which of those solutions would not prompt extensive arguments about '_____ got to fly GS and it made us lose'

 

I wouldn't mind a "first come" way at all. And it's not like it's a permanent first come...this might actually make people TALK to eachother prior to a fight "My GS in mastered" and so on. I would never feel like I'd been cheated out of a role...but then, I PREFER to play a scout or strike fighter. As for the people who'd prompt those arguments you mention...they'd get over it as they learn other roles.

 

Removing strategic depth from the game by preventing people from switching to or from the limited ship classes during play. Situations often dictate one team composition is better than another. Restricting ship class representation takes depth away from the game, and also doesn't recognize the different roles and capabilities of various ships within each class.

 

Personally, I'm actually in favor of limiting the shipswitching. I'd prefer having made my choice...and then have to stick with it. But I see your point and do realize ths isn't for everyone.

 

Unintended consequences would likely arise. If you've ever played against a swarm of good scout pilots, you'd know that it is just as (or even more) difficult to deal with. TRE used to be noted for this, I guess it isn't anymore.

 

Actually, I did play back in the "scout swarm" days too. And I prefered them. Atleast if I get outflown by a superior pilot I feel I've been bested honestly. Getting stuck in a 8v8 with 7 GS on either side is BORING. Especially since the lastest thing on TRE is to have PREMADES with gunships. Even the best geared scout can't get near if a voicecom team focuses.

[caederon]

they'd get over it as they learn other roles.

History suggests otherwise. "Getting over it" isn't a trait I'd often ascribe to internet gamers, or GSFers.

 

First-come, first-serve would inherently favor people with fast internet connections on local servers. Load in fast enough and you get to play the ship of your choice. Have latency and... well, there's leftovers.

 

Even the best geared scout can't get near if a voicecom team focuses.

I won't call you out on the inference that gunships get their kills dishonestly (except in this subtle backhanded way in which I am totally calling you out for suggesting gunships get their kills dishonestly). If that voicecom team is focusing on that scout, what are the other 7-11 players doing? Other than 'not being focused and thus free to wreak havoc.' Also, if you've played in the scout-swarm days, you know very well that even focusing a scout pilot like Neutrinos or Tomm or Siraka only does so much to limit them. They still do their damage.

 

The solution to the problem of 'players not wanting to deal with certain ships' is actually the oldest one in the book, and the one I've been proposing for literally years. A custom match lobby like every other internet game ever has would totally solve this by enabling people to host matches with the conditions of their choice which other like-minded pilots are free to join. This would eliminate a massive amount of complaints about this or that OP ship, while not severely upsetting the generally pretty balanced state of the game.

 

- Despon

Edited January 14, 2017 by caederon

[Porsan]

OK, first off...I didn't mean to infer that GS-pilots come by their kills dishonestly (Although now that it's been mentioned, many of them do...I've seen many who somehow manages to hide behind walls and shoot THROUGH that wall). What I meant was simply that I feel better about getting killed by a better scout/strikefighter. And I'm not hating on the class of GS either. In many fights where there are just two or even three, I don't mind them. Or getting shot to pieces by them. Then I just roll up my sleeves and try for revenge. And they DO fill a tactical role.

 

My issue is simply that I feel it's a total gamebreaker when these "almost exclusive GS teams" start their thing. Because it forces the other team to do the same, it seems. Atleast, my experience since 5.0 is that it does.

 

I'd happily listen to ANY suggestion that means this gets solved (short of the old "NERF them all" type of solution). I don't mind loosing...but I want to have FUN while I play...and the mass-GS-teams on TRE are ruining the game for me.

Edited January 14, 2017 by Porsan

[caederon]

I'd happily listen to ANY suggestion that means this gets solved (short of the old "NERF them all" type of solution). I don't mind loosing...but I want to have FUN while I play...and the mass-GS-teams on TRE are ruining the game for me.

I sympathize, I know it is frustrating to get slotted in against teams that your side is not doing a good job of combating.

 

There is no developer-implemented solution to this problem coming (and it is debatable where the 'problem' lies, as shown by the debate we are engaging in).

 

So the solution is: get good at killing gunships in your scout, and find people who will do likewise. There are real techniques that will get you there, even in the face of a gs wall. If you have a team full of good scout pilots, they will take out massed gunships. If the gs wall then swaps to bomberball and adds in some T2 bombers with rail drones, your side adds an ion gs or two to the scout attack. It's the cycle of life, GSF style. Adapt, compete, succeed.

 

I don't like 'massed ______' as a strategy, for any ship, because it leaves holes that are exploitable by pilots who know what they're doing and capable of executing the right counters. I agree that it can be frustrating to play against when your side doesn't know or have the skills to stop it. The only real solution you can implement is get people to learn the techniques to defeat the strat in question.

 

- Despon

[Lendul]

History suggests otherwise. "Getting over it" isn't a trait I'd often ascribe to internet gamers, or GSFers.

 

First-come, first-serve would inherently favor people with fast internet connections on local servers. Load in fast enough and you get to play the ship of your choice. Have latency and... well, there's leftovers.

 

 

I won't call you out on the inference that gunships get their kills dishonestly (except in this subtle backhanded way in which I am totally calling you out for suggesting gunships get their kills dishonestly). If that voicecom team is focusing on that scout, what are the other 7-11 players doing? Other than 'not being focused and thus free to wreak havoc.' Also, if you've played in the scout-swarm days, you know very well that even focusing a scout pilot like Neutrinos or Tomm or Siraka only does so much to limit them. They still do their damage.

 

The solution to the problem of 'players not wanting to deal with certain ships' is actually the oldest one in the book, and the one I've been proposing for literally years. A custom match lobby like every other internet game ever has would totally solve this by enabling people to host matches with the conditions of their choice which other like-minded pilots are free to join. This would eliminate a massive amount of complaints about this or that OP ship, while not severely upsetting the generally pretty balanced state of the game.

 

- Despon

It's not what you are saying man it's how you are saying it. Do you really need to make thing personal just because you disagree with someone?

[caederon]

It's not what you are saying man it's how you are saying it. Do you really need to make thing personal just because you disagree with someone?

Thanks, as usual, for your keen insight and salient observations.

 

Perhaps you'll note that I was not the one who posted the argument you're referring to regarding the tone of your posts vs. the substance, as I find both disagreeable and wrongheaded. Opinions! Everyone's got em.

 

Perhaps you'll also note that the discussion in this thread has been a level-headed exchange of ideas. Except that you are not exchanging ideas, you're just (as usual) dumping on me anytime I post without even addressing the OP's point. So, well done, I guess?

 

Perhaps you'll also note that I am undeterred in expressing my thoughts to people in a way which I find relevant and meaningful, while simultaneously also discussing the thing they intended to discuss. On a forum. Where ideas are discussed by people who can represent themselves as they please within the rules of conduct.

 

I find it disagreeable when people make claims of '_____ pilots have no skill' or other similar comments. I responded to that in a civil, if pointed, way. Porsan, do you think I was out of line to do so? Do you think the tenor of our discussion has been tainted by such a comment? I'd rather hear your opinion, since it is directly relevant.

 

- Despon

[Lavaar]

I have heard complaints from many different pilots on many different servers, and I have at one time or another heard complaints about too many of each ship class being present in a match. I have heard "too many scouts are cheap, I can't hit them and I can't escape them." I've heard "too many bombers, I can't kill them and their mines are cheap." I've heard "too many gunships, I can't hit them from that far away and they make the game boring." And, yes, I've even heard "too many strikes, their missiles lock on too easy and all I hear is beep beep beep."

 

Reading through this conversation and hearing this being suggested before almost makes me wonder about entertaining the thought of a system whereby no single ship type can stack up to become more than 50% of the team's composition. This would not necessarily happen at the beginning of a match, but would kick in when a player dies and needs to select a new ship. If currently 50% or more of the pilots on their team are flying a certain type of ship, they cannot choose that class and are instead prompted to choose another.

 

While this would certainly limit some of the more exotic tactical mixups some teams take pleasure in forming, this would probably also end up having the effect of making the teams BETTER in the end by forcing balanced teambuilding. On the other hand, it would ABSOLUTELY punish newer players that die earlier by forcing them into ships they aren't as comfortable (or geared) in, and forcing them to, inherently, compete against an opposing team which would by definition be more balanced and difficult to counter. I also wonder if a system like this would give rise to more specialized builds which would try to "fill in" if their primary ship class is barred to them. A great example would be a bomber heavy team employing clarions as backups if the bomber limit is exceeded.

 

Always interesting to hear new perspectives on this, however I, for the record, would not support any kind of restrictions on ship classes if by some miracle a BW employee was to glace upon this thread. However discussion is why we are here, and discussion is what I provide. Limiting gunships and bombers in a match would be counterproductive, and I am sure the vast majority of this forum agrees (it is also incredibly biased, since scout swarms can be the most frustrating and difficult to counter of them all). Would the system I detailed here be a better compromise?

[Porsan]

Porsan, do you think I was out of line to do so? Do you think the tenor of our discussion has been tainted by such a comment? I'd rather hear your opinion, since it is directly relevant.

 

No, I haven't found any part of our discussion bad or offensive or in anyway annoying. Although I HAVE been somewhat amused by one aspect...that I feel you've sort of assumed I'm not a good or skilled pilot myself (You can learn to kill GS and so on and so on). But even that has only amused me.

 

So again, no. I appreciate the exchange of ideas, and no opinion is ever bad, as long as it's constructive.

[Porsan]

Reading through this conversation and hearing this being suggested before almost makes me wonder about entertaining the thought of a system whereby no single ship type can stack up to become more than 50% of the team's composition. This would not necessarily happen at the beginning of a match, but would kick in when a player dies and needs to select a new ship. If currently 50% or more of the pilots on their team are flying a certain type of ship, they cannot choose that class and are instead prompted to choose another.

 

I like it.

[caederon]

Reading through this conversation and hearing this being suggested before almost makes me wonder about entertaining the thought of a system whereby no single ship type can stack up to become more than 50% of the team's composition. This would not necessarily happen at the beginning of a match, but would kick in when a player dies and needs to select a new ship. If currently 50% or more of the pilots on their team are flying a certain type of ship, they cannot choose that class and are instead prompted to choose another.

I don't like it!

 

For one, there are those who derive 'fun' from being a one-shipper... ie limiting themselves to a single ship in their hangar for reasons of personal challenge or otherwise. Their 'fun' is as valuable as the 'fun' of those who want to impose other restrictions, and so if 'fun' is the defining quantity, that gets tossed out at first glance. It would also eliminate people who run a bar full of, say, bombers and a tensor scout. Does their opinion not count?

 

It also would be unworkable in terms of players who do not have a full hangar to work with, or may not possess the specific ship type that is currently not being limited by the team comp. Would they then be locked out of the game? Or is your rule operating under wholly different conditions where everyone starts with a full hangar, or all ships are always available? What unintended consequences might that have?

 

Further, it would not prohibit having 6 bombers out of 12 players (or any other class but bombers 'stack' the most powerfully). 6/12 bombers is still plenty enough to spam a team of new players out of competition, so that problem still exists. 6/12 gunships is still a lot of gunships. 4/8 gunships is a lot, particularly depending on who's flying them. Would you enjoy facing Lompi, Max, Aimbot, and Phil, let's say, in gunships? Or feel any more confident in taking them on with your scout?

 

Here's a great way to combat spam strategies: buff strikes to be viable counters to something (anything) in the way that various other ships effectively counter each other. Implement stealth ships as they were revealed to have been designed. With more counters (both soft and hard) available, you increase diversity of gameplay and make spam strategies generally untenable.

 

Add options instead of removing them or limiting them.

 

- Despon

[Nasja]

The thing with GSF is a certain type of ship very often counters another. As is mentioned often and also in this thread...

 

Gunship counters Bomber, Bomber counters Scout, Scout counters Gunship and a mixture of Gunships and Bombers are countered by Gunships.

The problem with the gamestyle is it limits the choice of the ship you like to fly if you are coming to win off course.

If you go in your gunships against a pre-made team of 8 scouts, the scouts are going to like you

 

But anyways, lets think about the limit of certain ships. In order for it to work we would need to have only 2 / 3 ships per type. This means that, if there is the usual 8 vs 8 match, you always fly with and against:

 

2 Bombers

2 Gunships

2 Scouts

2 Strikes

 

In a 10 vs 10, yeah that would be a more difficult limit. It will be likely that there will be a limit of 3 of every class of ship so there is some variation in this type of match.

 

In a 12 vs 12, thats easier again:

 

3 Bombers

3 Gunships

3 Scouts

3 Strikes

 

I can say that I wouldn't be against this type of gsf.. however it would require a huge overhaul and it would probably require that ships are simply "standard". No more requisition being earned and spend, just having selections, like they are now, just all maxed out.

[Porsan]

Their 'fun' is as valuable as the 'fun' of those who want to impose other restrictions, and so if 'fun' is the defining quantity, that gets tossed out at first glance. It would also eliminate people who run a bar full of, say, bombers and a tensor scout. Does their opinion not count?

 

I like it because I'm not either of those. But you're right, ofcourse they do. Sadly, I have no good solution to this that DOESN'T involve limiting. Considering this rather instant debate, I can see there's not going to be an easy solution either. Or, atleast not one that won't have others screaming bloody murder.

 

And as I've said, I do NOT want a nerf of any class. I guess what I wish, in total, is for my fellow TRE pilots to stop massing Gunships. But this too, is a moot point...they seem to like it.

 

To be fair though...after I posted this, I've had a very positive number of fights where none of the above was true and we could all play what we wanted without fear of mass anything.

[Lendul]

Their 'fun' is as valuable as the 'fun' of those who want to impose other restrictions, and so if 'fun' is the defining quantity, that gets tossed out at first glance.

I am not sure if you play any of the ground game at all, but systems like this are already in place. Some people like playing dps and nothing else, but if they make that choice they also choose to sit in queue longer than those that queue up as tank or healer. The same could be done for GSF. Edited January 15, 2017 by Lendul

[caederon]

I am not sure if you play any of the ground game at all, but systems like this are already in place. Some people like playing dps and nothing else, but if they make that choice they also choose to sit in queue longer than those that queue up as tank or healer. The same could be done for GSF.

I do not play the ground game at all. Increasing queue times doesn't seem like an appealing thing to me. I still maintain a custom match lobby solves the problem without hurting anyone. If people could post 'scouts only' matches or '3s 3f 3b 3gs' matches or whatever format they like, existing outside the main queue, I don't see where that would hurt anyone and would help many people.

 

- Despon

[Lavaar]

I do not play the ground game at all. Increasing queue times doesn't seem like an appealing thing to me. I still maintain a custom match lobby solves the problem without hurting anyone. If people could post 'scouts only' matches or '3s 3f 3b 3gs' matches or whatever format they like, existing outside the main queue, I don't see where that would hurt anyone and would help many people.

 

- Despon

 

I think this would also open a lot of people's eyes to how horribly, inconceivably dull a strike/scout only matchup really is and stop asking for the game to change into that.

[Lendul]

I think this would also open a lot of people's eyes to how horribly, inconceivably dull a strike/scout only matchup really is and stop asking for the game to change into that.

Who said anything about scout & strike only? The suggestion was two of each ship type for 8v8 and 3 of each for 12v12. Edited January 15, 2017 by Lendul

[ALaggyGrunt]

Scout + enough lethality for them to be wary of you + careful use of LoS = lots of them wasting time waiting for you to peek while they don't shoot at the rest of your team.

 

Once most of them point back at the rest of your team, you can come out and fly evasively at the other one or two so they have something to think about again.

 

Against bomber spam, bring lots of gunships with ion splash, a bomber or two of your own, and some scouts. The gunships can clear mines, the bombers can repair and lay hyperspace beacon, and the scouts can melt the bombers once the mines have been cleared out. Quads+pods+retro+BO will melt anything without charged plating pretty fast.

Edited January 15, 2017 by ALaggyGrunt

[Nasja]

I am not sure if you play any of the ground game at all, but systems like this are already in place. Some people like playing dps and nothing else, but if they make that choice they also choose to sit in queue longer than those that queue up as tank or healer. The same could be done for GSF.

 

If such a system would be put into place, you need to be able to queue for more then 1 "role" which in gsf is replaced by ship class off course. The size of the hangar needs to be increased and yes, if you (solo) queue with just scout(s) or gunship(s) in your hangar you would sit in queue longer then you would sit in queue when you put just strike(s) in your hangar.

[Eli_Porter]

Make commendation tokens legacy bound. Easiest fix there is.

[phalczen]

Make commendation tokens legacy bound. Easiest fix there is.

 

Are you referring to the requisition grants from the dailies and weeklies? or fleet comms? Honestly both should be BoL but only the requisition grants from the daily and weekly can upgrade ships.

[Nasja]

The suggestion isn't exactly... on topic tbh

[Eli_Porter]

Are you referring to the requisition grants from the dailies and weeklies? or fleet comms? Honestly both should be BoL but only the requisition grants from the daily and weekly can upgrade ships.

 

I was talking about requisition grants, my bad.

 

The suggestion isn't exactly... on topic tbh

 

It's perfectly on topic. It's a soft way of making GSF legacy, and it's a small change on three items any person could do.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Eli_Porter

[Nasja]

It's perfectly on topic. It's a soft way of making GSF legacy, and it's a small change on three items any person could do.

 

Maybe I don't get it but how does it "help" against matches where more then 50% of the ships are of a certain type of ship (6 gunships or 6 blc scouts etc.)