Jump to content

I really hate swappable components.


LordFell

Recommended Posts

I disagree with you there.

As previously stated, you do your main damage against hull with rockets.

So having 2 lasers is redunant on that kind of ship.

You do not get the hard disable that sniper ships get with their ion cannon either.

In a heated fight you won't even really get in a situation where you have the time to fully utilize the approach you stated above. It's kind of a 1% niche that nobody I've ever seen in gsf uses.

Cheers! :rak_03:

 

I like that someone who doesn't understand the synergy of blaster-swapping is assuming 99% of people are equally....oblivious, to the obvious utility and differences between a long-range weapon and a short-range one. I realize the numbers and weapon stats can be cumbersome and confusing, but long story short, Heavy Lasers are too slow-firing and inaccurate for close-in dogfighting compared to rapid-firing, wide-arc blasters.

Edited by HeatRacer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said, having 2 primary weapons on other ships is kind of senseless.

Not gonna fly a Rycer or whatever its called with 2 different lasers because here you use your main laser against the shields and the rockets againt the hull. It' really a waste of an ability there.

I disagree with you there.

As previously stated, you do your main damage against hull with rockets.

So having 2 lasers is redunant on that kind of ship.

You do not get the hard disable that sniper ships get with their ion cannon either.

In a heated fight you won't even really get in a situation where you have the time to fully utilize the approach you stated above. It's kind of a 1% niche that nobody I've ever seen in gsf uses.

Cheers! :rak_03:

 

I don't know what rockets you speak of, but the only secondary ordnance available on a T1F that is easily spammable on a target with its shields down during a close quarters fight are cluster missiles. Clusters do not ignore armor (damage reduction), but they do pierce shields, so having a primary blaster that does ignore enemy damage reduction (like HLC or RFL) synergizes just fine with them, and in some cases (like against a charged plating target or a directional shields target) is superior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're planning to rely on "rockets" (secondaries) and sticking with one blaster, why not use a Pike/Quell? I don't see the point of even taking a Starguard/Rycer if you're never going to swap primaries.

 

IMO it's worth picking the T1 Strike just for retro thrusters. The instant shield regen from turbo reactor is nice too.

 

I do think ion blasters can be really strong when paired with RFL and clusters/concussions but I personally dislike that playstyle. HLC are just so good now that it feels like they are almost always the correct choice except for the situation Despon described where you'd want to switch to RFL. It sucks getting hit with EMP and locked out of HLC though.

Edited by RickDagles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO it's worth picking the T1 Strike just for retro thrusters. The instant shield regen from turbo reactor is nice too.

 

Sensible, but I was responding to the guy's comment that "you do your main damage against hull with rockets". Dubious premise, but if that's truly his game plan, retros aren't likely to be a major part of the agenda. Blasters are apparently an afterthought, and at least a Pike/Quell gives him more "rockets" to play with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Zuck

 

Thinking about missiles as a primary source of hull damage does make some sense from a lower skilled player's perspective.

 

People with less experience are notorious for having terrible accuracy with blasters. If they learn how missiles work though, they can become at least modestly proficient fairly quickly even without instruction or using tutorials.

 

If you're effectively spamming torpedoes or concussions it probably takes on the order of 15% or so accuracy on the scoreboard for something like HLCs at max range to pull even with missile spam. There's also the issue that since the missiles do their hull damage in big chunks, it's very easy to see the hull damage they're doing compared to the smaller amounts per hit from cannons. As a result the perception of how much hull damage the different weapons are doing could be a bit skewed in favor of the missiles.

 

Seen from there, having two blasters that you don't use effectively isn't much better than having one blaster that you don't use effectively.

 

All the answers have been coming from people who both know that the maximum damage potential of Primary Weapons is vastly greater than the maximum damage potential from missiles, and have the gunnery skills to take advantage of that difference.

 

 

The swap isn't redundant at all, but it's also not an asset until a pilot has developed their shooting skills and tactical knowledge to take advantage of the swap.

 

It requires a willingness to spend time and effort on improving shooting skills. Plus some experience in matches to get a feel for the timing.

Edited by Ramalina
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...