How to improve strikes

[Lavaar]

You seem really hung up on what the words "should" mean here and aren't understanding what they are actually meant to be. A scout is whatever they say it is, and in this case they say its an offensive powerhouse, which it is. They could call it a "Bunny" for all I care and it would still be an offensive powerhouse even if "bunnies are meant to be cute not dangerous". They also say a strike fighter is a jack of all trades, which is tries to do, but that's also what makes it **** and unable to kill anything in any match that matters. Like I don't even understand how you're making an argument on how this game should follow your definition on what constitutes a scout based on its name alone. I don't see bombers throwing down ordinance on ground based targets (what REAL bombers do BTW) so why aren't you getting worked up about that too? Just rubs me up the wrong way carrying on like this.

 

And while I'm at it, who cares if you run straight at a gunship and kill it? Anything can do that. Bombers can do that, gunships that forgot their railguns at home can do that, its not special at all....at all. Whats important is what works in the matches where you look at the red lineup and say "How can I beat these guys, they've been tearing it up all night, how can I stop them?". A lot of folks around here seem to just throw up their hands and say "unfair premades, gunships OP, lag hacks, blah blah blah" and just keep doing what they have always done confident in the knowledge that those reds are just cheap honorless scum pails and those matches just "don't count". Every pilot who flies a strike regularly HAS to have some sort of coping mechanism/mental block from the tough matches and blame it on something else unless they are methodically and dubiously avoiding any hard matches, getting their *** seriously carried or are flying on a dead-*** server. Only time I've seen strikes do OK against solid pilots is when they are outnumbering the opponents who have all their missile breaks are gone and are forced to play aggressive positions out of necessity.

 

But hey, strikers gonna strike.

[Neflarion]

You seem really hung up on what the words "should" mean here and aren't understanding what they are actually meant to be. A scout is whatever they say it is, and in this case they say its an offensive powerhouse, which it is. They could call it a "Bunny" for all I care and it would still be an offensive powerhouse even if "bunnies are meant to be cute not dangerous". They also say a strike fighter is a jack of all trades, which is tries to do, but that's also what makes it **** and unable to kill anything in any match that matters. Like I don't even understand how you're making an argument on how this game should follow your definition on what constitutes a scout based on its name alone. I don't see bombers throwing down ordinance on ground based targets (what REAL bombers do BTW) so why aren't you getting worked up about that too? Just rubs me up the wrong way carrying on like this.

 

And while I'm at it, who cares if you run straight at a gunship and kill it? Anything can do that. Bombers can do that, gunships that forgot their railguns at home can do that, its not special at all....at all. Whats important is what works in the matches where you look at the red lineup and say "How can I beat these guys, they've been tearing it up all night, how can I stop them?". A lot of folks around here seem to just throw up their hands and say "unfair premades, gunships OP, lag hacks, blah blah blah" and just keep doing what they have always done confident in the knowledge that those reds are just cheap honorless scum pails and those matches just "don't count". Every pilot who flies a strike regularly HAS to have some sort of coping mechanism/mental block from the tough matches and blame it on something else unless they are methodically and dubiously avoiding any hard matches, getting their *** seriously carried or are flying on a dead-*** server. Only time I've seen strikes do OK against solid pilots is when they are outnumbering the opponents who have all their missile breaks are gone and are forced to play aggressive positions out of necessity.

 

But hey, strikers gonna strike.

 

You seem really hung up on not wanting your scouts nerfed because they really are the only OP class of ship in GSF.

 

Now lets get something straight. When I say OP, I don't mean they're unstoppable, unfairly balanced killing machines. I'm not even saying they can't be offensive powerhouses. What I am saying, is for their class type, they do more damage then they should realistically. I have already stated earlier that a scout should be able to beat a strike 1v1. That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying, is a scout shouldn't be able to kill a strike at full hp/sp in 3-4 hits. In a 1v1 battle, a scout should win because of more time on target on the strike.

 

Only in 1 situation do I think GS or bombers are annoying, but not OP. A gunship wall for gunships, and tick bombers for bombers. In neither of those situations do I think either class is OP or cheating in some way, just really, really annoying. What I do find OP is when I'm on someone's tail and a scout I didn't see, comes flying in, hits me a few times and I'm dead.

[Ramalina]

So the core issue for you is not so much the damage output as the fact that Bioware through some confusion about Star Wars precedent managed to misspell "interceptor" as "scout."

 

After all a gunship can 2-3 shot a strike. A strike can 2 shot a scout assuming it can hit (one proton torp plus one HLC shot with piercing = 100% dead scout).

 

In any case, scouts aren't OP with respect to scouts, they aren't OP with respect to gunships, and they aren't OP with respect to bombers.

 

Either strikes are underpowered with respect to all the other classes, or all of the other classes are OP with respect to strikes.

 

Pure 1v1 balance has some bearing on ship performance, but that sort of encounter is so rare that overall balance has to be wider than that if the game as a whole is to be balanced.

 

In a theoretical space, a strike might be able to force a T1 gunship to a draw by perfect use of LOS and maneuvering.

 

What matters is that in practice two T1 gunships demolish two strikes with ease, two scouts demolish two strikes with ease, and that everyone is ready to draw a pension by the time two strikes finish demolishing two bombers.

[Greezt]

You think strikes pose no threat to a gunship and only serve to be eaten by them? Other then mastered GS which one shot everyone. I routinely, in a strike, boost face first into single gunships and rip them to shreds and only get hit once. Smart gunship pilots book it before I finish them off, but unless I get a tail, rarely do they ever escape.

 

What I take from this is that, if a gunship is lazy/bad (because they did not notice you coming or did not move when you did) then you can kill them. But balance isn't done around lazy/bad players.

 

You can't say strikes pose no threat to gunships, when any class of ship who sits in their bubble and lets them snipe with no harassment, is gonna end up the same way.

 

That's not true at all. Scouts can pop their DCDs and be almost immune to gunship railguns for enough time to close the distance (91% evasion for 6 seconds, 56% evasion for 15 seconds, both cases before accounting for engine overcharges). Gunships can obviously deal with gunships. Bombers, while incapable of directly dealing with a gunship, can do their job while denying the gunship the opportunity of dealing with them - meaning, they provide other ships the chance of dealing with gunships better.

 

Again we're back to "Battlescout" vs "scout". If BW wanted scouts to be hard hitting fighters, they should have just called them fighters. Strike fighters and fighters are not the same. Fighters are specialized air superiority, strike fighters, are multi-role.

 

You're still hung on names. They are only names, nothing more. You can argue what BW intended for scouts/ fighters or whatever, but fact is they gave these ships certain tools. That speaks volumes more of their intents than a name, because that's the action they took.

 

And lets remove the scout classification. In any game where you have a light agile class, that has high evasion they don't hit near as hard in a single attack as their heavier less agile counter parts. For example a rogue type class vs a knight type class. The rogue is going to be more agile and harder to pin down and hit than the knight, but in a single attack the knight is going to be much more devastating.

 

That's the problem with scouts right now. You have the agile hard to hit scout, that hits harder than the heavier easier to hit strikes. In no meta in any other game does this make sense.

 

Sure, let's go with that. Infiltration shadows are a rogue type class, right? And they're very high burst. Higher than, for example, Vigilance guardians? Even though Vigilance is a knight type class? So that doesn't work here either.

 

Let's take another space twitch shooter I love bringing up as an example - Star Conflict. I bring this one up because it's almost identical to GSF in most aspects of the game. They have 3 main ship classes there - interceptor (scout equivalent in GSF because it is lightweight and maneuverable yet squishy), fighter (strike fighter in GSF since it is a middle ground ship meant to fill multiple roles) and frigate (gunship/bomber equivalent depending on the specific ship, since they are slow and tanky, yet can create area denial or fire long-range artillery).

 

Funnily enough, interceptors over there are built quite similarly to scouts here - they're the burstiest ships in the game. They have specialized tools meant to destroy ships in seconds. Not by mistake, not because they confused names, but because that's how the game was designed.

 

I think that probably answered your last sentence too.

 

A gunship wall for gunships, and tick bombers for bombers. In neither of those situations do I think either class is OP or cheating in some way, just really, really annoying.

 

Can you deal with these situations in a scout? Or do you know someone who can? Presumably, since scouts are OP, a full scout team would be able to clear a gunship/bomber conglomerate, yet we never see that happening.

 

That's because scouts, while having the highest burst and maneuverability in the game, are still extremely vulnerable to enough things that mitigate them. Strikes just don't happen to be on that list of things, but that speaks more about strikes then about scouts.

[Ornithopoda]

It's also worth pointing out that a BLC/cluster scout has to be in pretty close range to be fully effective. A strike with HLC's and concussion missiles or protorps can hit from much farther away if upgraded right, and do a considerable amount of damage that way. The only problem there is that gunships can hit hard from way farther away than any strike build, thus neutralizing any advantage that range would otherwise have given the strike class.

 

Regardless of what ship you're flying, if you let a battlescout (or any ship for that matter) get clos enough to unload on you, it's your own fault for not paying attention to your surroundings. Situational awareness is one of, if not the most important parts of GSF.

[Storm-Cutter]

FWIW I flew a lot of strikes and scouts in the early days when there were the basic 3 ships. Components aside, the problem I find with Strikes nowadays is the meagre engine pool and the over-long-lock missiles. - And I consider myself not half bad keeping a missile lock. ( so much so that double clusters can run out far too quick )

 

For a fight across the map, (or even midpoint Denon Ex) without a Beacon I'd rarely choose a Strike on respawn in a close game. - Especially with the amount of Ion rail about. Chug-chug-chug. Hide- try and avoid Ion fry.... wait...wait a bit longer....chug...chug.....

 

Is it any wonder I stick mainly with scouts. -In, blaze away, - out. The potential for DPS is so much better.

[Lavaar]

You seem really hung up on not wanting your scouts nerfed because they really are the only OP class of ship in GSF.

 

Is this the "Spamming scouts" guy?

[NeverEvar]

I always thought that strikes need a range buff, engine buff and access to other guns. Like HLC for T3, BLC for T1.

 

Also i think that giving 25-35% armor pen to all of the guns would be a nice touch.

 

Cause when you think about it, a LOSing Bomber around a SAT is pain the *** for a strike, since he can have only HLC as a weapon with armor pen, that is semi-workable vs a CP bomber. Also it would prevent such situations that a newbie is facing against a ship that he has no tools to deal with.

 

Still, CP would provide decent defense.

 

As for missiles, concs should have there lock on time reduced, to be more workable vs 2 m-break ships, same goes for every missile except spammable clusters .

 

Range. Anyone who flown with range cap 6900 HLC, and was able to adapt to GUI range indicator bug, knows that it provides a nice punch.

 

I would suggest:

 

Rapid.LLC, Ion 4000>5000 min

Quad/LC 5000>6000

HLC 6000>7000

 

This would allow to make them more as a mid range specialist, would help to deal with BLC scouts(a bit) and would allow to clear mines. Armor pen on non HLC guns would help with turrets as well. Also it would decresse GS "Safe range bubble)

Engines, Pool + 20%, Regen + 20%

 

This should help with getting into GS range(which now, the same range is smaller, thanks to guns)

 

What we would get is still a versatile craft, But with that changes the it can pressure and win vs any other craft.

 

More spammable missile, armor pen, better mobility.

 

Vs GS with HLC and changed range of HLC in a chase vs a gunship it could bleed the GS out.

 

Vs bombers, it would negate part of CP super around sat advantage

 

Vs scouts, it would get engage range, and ability to keep up for a short time in a run

 

And sure, GS would still have range advantage and ion would be a pain in the ***.

 

Side bonus. (LC/Quad armor pen/range changes, buffs Quad/pod and t1 and t3 scouts. bringing T1 scout closer to meta. And making a Quad/pod t2 scout another meta option)

[Eldarion_Velator]

Scouts are meant to check out the area ahead of advancing troops and report back enemy positions.

 

I don't think you actually understood/read my 4-point post (and instead chose to quote its entire length verbatim). Therefore, I'll have to respond to your responses with shorter replies (for the sake of other posters as well). When you say "scouts are meant to check out the area ahead of advancing troops and report back enemy positions" you are basically outlining a subset of roles that I explained in point 4 ("scouts are supposed to be solo operators, advance parties, and movement spearheads") - my definition is more general/flexible and can encompass multiple roles for scout ships (e.g. simple reconnaissance, a recon-in-force, "hit-and-run"), whereas your definition of what tactical role scouts play is more limited and less accurate. The T1 scout (Novadive/Blackbolt) does actually fit your understanding of scouts fairly well, but your limited definition of scouts fails to incorporate the current tactical realities present in GSF maps (for maps that are limited in size relative to tactical range such as the ones in GSF, simple recon is basically replaced entirely by recon-in-force/"hit-and-run" as the main tactical role for scouts).

 

The Wikipedia page on reconnaissance (specifically the sections on discipline and types) is actually fairly useful as a general primer on scout functions.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Eldarion_Velator

[Eldarion_Velator]

What people are saying, is that there is no circumstances a scout, should be able to fly in, and out damage a strike and kill them in a few shots.

 

Here's the thing - scouts are faster, more maneuverable, and in the case of BLCs, carry the laser equivalent of a shotgun - if they get in close, of course they're going to destroy any ship in a handful of shots or less (assuming the ship is unable to adequately resist) because those are the ranges where the BLCs outperform all other primary lasers. BLCs are actually defensive weapons (cf. BLCs on gunships), but the great speed and maneuverability of T2 scouts enables them to use these defensive weapons (in terms of a meta, BLCs on a scout would be intended to be defensive in nature, just to ward off any interlopers who get in too close) in an offensive capacity, which is a tactical adaptation unique to T2 scouts but also sometimes employed by Condor/Jurgoran pilots.

 

Let me repeat this for emphasis: BLCs are basically the shotguns of laser cannons, and if you've ever played other PvP games like CounterStrike, the way T2 scouts typically defeat their opponents is the equivalent of running up to an opposing player and throwing a HE grenade at them while firing a shotgun to the face). Very effective for shock tactics, but these methods are counterable.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Eldarion_Velator

[Eldarion_Velator]

Should scouts be able to kill a strike 1v1? Yes, but it shouldn't be because they do so much more damage then a strike. It should be because they're able to out maneuver the strike and keep up a steady barrage on the strike.

 

The idea that T2 scouts (specifically BLCs and clusters/rockets) do "so much more damage" than a strike fighter's weapons (typically HLCs + ions and concussions/protorps) is an inaccuracy of perception. I can't expect everyone to read the tooltips (from which you can figure most of this out), but as I said in a previous reply, BLCs are basically the laser shotguns of GSF. They do a high amount of damage only at the shortest ranges, and drain an incredible amount of power per shot such that most ships can sustain far fewer shots on full energy than with HLCs/quads/ions. BLCs are for most purposes defensive; it's just the T2 scouts that can use them offensively as a result of their speed and maneuverability. At the same sub-3000m ranges the BLCs do more damage per shot than any other laser cannon, but since their energy draw is so high the number of BLC shots you can fire on a full power charge is far less than the number of shots available on other laser cannons. So all told the total damage done by BLCs on a single full power charge is probably similar to that done by HLCs, but since they only need to fire a few shots (i.e. take less time) to do this, their DPS is going to be much higher at their effective range, which would be perceived by newer pilots as "so much more damage." Mathematically this is incorrect; the more accurate statement would be "BLCs do the same or similar damage over fewer shots and less time," which is the same as saying "BLCs have high DPS."

 

T2 scouts do in fact maintain sustained fire in order to destroy their targets, but this also includes a barrage of missiles/rockets in addition to primary weapons. A good pilot can spread out/delay and reduce the damage that a scout would otherwise do (by maneuvering well, strike fighter pilots can also extend the range of an engagement, thereby reducing scout weapon efficacy, and more easily capitalize on any mistakes a scout pilot might make); in such a case, if backup is not forthcoming, the scout pilot will only be able to defeat the strike fighter pilot precisely because the scout outmaneuvered the strike and maintained enough damage/fire discipline to destroy the strike fighter. The reason why many pilots are destroyed very quickly by T2 scouts is because they failed to draw out the engagement, didn't capitalize on the scout's weapon/engine drain, and the T2 scout pilot was able to land many hits in succession (i.e. the target pilot didn't maneuver well/enough), not because the T2 scout does so much more damage than a strike fighter.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Eldarion_Velator

[Eldarion_Velator]

Even with your almost 6000+ matches, I think the definition of scout is lost on you. There is a difference between "Battlescout" and "scout".

 

Unjustified personal attack aside (and FYI I said 5557 matches, which is not "almost 6000+" but rather "almost 5600" or "almost 6000" if you're going to overgeneralize; I made no specific judgment about your experience of lack thereof), your gripe that "battlescouts shouldn't be a thing and fit no realistic meta ever" is restrictive/inflexible, untrue (if you've ever heard of a "recon in force" you'd understand; and yes, I realize that a recon in force usually means a bolstering by increased numbers/personnel than usual rather than any strengthening of a normal-sized scouting group, but the effect comparison is the same), and basically amounts to you presuming - whether or not that was your intention - to tell the devs and other pilots what they should and shouldn't be doing.

 

I've already discussed in another reply about why your distinction between "battlescouts" and scouts and your contention that one has a valid place in a perceived meta and the other is performing outside of the meta are incorrect, but to reiterate: your definition of scout is largely restricted to reconnaissance, which is a major tactical function of scouts, but by no means is this their sole tactical function ("hit-and-run" is also a major tactical function of scouts that are equipped appropriately). An expectation that all things fit your tactical understanding is unrealistic and irrational.

 

Lastly, I should note that you again missed the point and are complaining about T2 scouts instead of talking about ideas regarding how to make strike fighters more capable in the face of specialized ships like gunships, bombers, and the T2 scout (because at the moment, all else being equal, strike fighters just aren't making the grade against the other classes of ships, and we want to tweak strike fighters to make them at least a little more capable than they are now). Your continued insistence on taking things off-topic is not appreciated.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Eldarion_Velator

[Ramalina]

Tooltip and math note:

 

BLCs and HLCs both have the same energy draw per second, so if you fire for the same amount of time at commonly used ranges the BLCs do more total damage as well as more DPS, because the duration of DPS is the same.

 

With respect to clusters, compared to other missiles they do about 3 times the burst DPS and twice the sustained DPS, and if missile breaks are used those margins increase a LOT.

 

So scouts generally will do more damage by any measure, even before you add in things like system abilities.

 

 

Despite all that, the thread topic is the relevant issue. The problem with strikes is much more their weaknesses than it is the strengths of other classes.

[HuaRya]

I'm all for strikes being more competitive in an age where a flashfire/sting are the go to ship.

 

Possible tweaks:

 

1. Faster medium/long range missle lock times for strikes

2. Longer sustain time for evasive maneuver buffs

 

And here is one from my favorite game of all time Star Control

 

3. The ability to turn your ship into a bomb and detonate in proximity to your target. A self sacrificing move that severely damages a radius of ships.

[Lendul]

It' seems that every time this comes up, it ends up in mess. I think it because while everyone agrees with strikes needing improvement. The problem comes from is as strikes get a bigger slice of the pie. Whose part of the pie are they going to cut?

[Eli_Porter]

It' seems that every time this comes up, it ends up in mess. I think it because while everyone agrees with strikes needing improvement. The problem comes from is as strikes get a bigger slice of the pie. Whose part of the pie are they going to cut?

 

Ideally, every other ship class's part of the pie equally. And a missile buff could do just that.

[DownloadStarter]

It' seems that every time this comes up, it ends up in mess. I think it because while everyone agrees with strikes needing improvement. The problem comes from is as strikes get a bigger slice of the pie. Whose part of the pie are they going to cut?

 

You don't speak for me. Kindly keep that in mind going forward.

[Lendul]

You don't speak for me. Kindly keep that in mind going forward.

 

"Strikes need improvement" was my all inclusive sentiment. You disagree?

Edited May 13, 2017 by Lendul

[Ornithopoda]

"Strikes need improvement" was my all inclusive sentiment. You disagree?

 

He considers himself a strike ace. Kind of like Krix with the T2 GS. Just go with it.

[DownloadStarter]

"Strikes need improvement" was my all inclusive sentiment. You disagree?

 

I'm going to say it again - you don't speak for me. If you have a problem with that, ask your higher power for guidance.

[Lendul]

I'm going to say it again - you don't speak for me. If you have a problem with that, ask your higher power for guidance.

 

I have decided I am going to speak for you anyway. Thanks for your concern.

[Jotan_Horn]

Just for background's sake, I've played this game since Beta, Collector's Edition, and GSF since it's inception. I have dueled with Drakolich on Bastion for years and we have had a blast playing against eachother....

 

I play nothing but strikes.... I have mastered all of my strike fighters, but I normally play Pike/Clarion because as someone said earlier in the thread, strikes aren't really meant in their current inception to be solo superwarriors. They are game managers, multi-role ships which can assist other ships in several different ways. Strikes are DESIGNED to not be specialist glass cannons or snipers... They are designed to mix it up with everything out there.

 

But the thing I would like to point out is that everyone here so far has been saying strikes can't do damage or are worthless against the other ship types.... so I submit the following:

 

It is not on the class of ship so much as it is the skill of the pilot and knowing what equipment he has, his missiles, cannons, abilities, and most importantly, the co-pilot.

 

I fly a pike with Rusk because he gives me faster secondary reload times, and his ability is a DoT if I hit an enemy ship with lasers.... this allows me to reach out and touch people much faster and if they decide to run, give them a going away present that may/may not kill them.

 

If you wanted to buff Strike fighters, I would say give them an increase in missile range or missile lock-on time. For the range buff, it has to be measured to each type of missile (my proton torps hit at 11km, my concussion missiles at 7.5km) so they don't become so powerful that I can snipe a gunship with proton torps and he can't nail me. it has to be competitive and fun/challenging...

[Lavaar]

I have dueled with Drakolich on Bastion for years and we have had a blast playing against eachother....

 

I play nothing but strikes....

 

Ah, now I see where his 95% win percentage over 1000 games comes from

Edited May 15, 2017 by Lavaar

[DownloadStarter]

I have decided I am going to speak for you anyway. Thanks for your concern.

 

I've decided you can't.