Jump to content

Yndras

Members
  • Posts

    698
  • Joined

Reputation

10 Good

2 Followers

  1. Yndras

    Ranked PVP Quiters

    Im glad we agree. its impossible to generate any kind of win streak when every match starts with a moment of holding your breath hoping to get that last player, and then getting him, only to see him afk in the spawn zone or quit after a first round loss.
  2. That's not how it works. You lose the same amount for quitting as the remaining team members do for losing.
  3. Yndras

    Ranked PVP Quiters

    Bioware, Please do something to address the imbalance of ranked pvp when someone quits. It is unfair to play a match when its 3v4, or 2v4 etc. Also, I lose as much elo as I would if the match was even. How is that fair? It does not reflect my ability compared to other players at all. I had 4 games yesterday, maybe more where people quit the game, and I lost 18 - 25 elo for it. When I lose legitimately I usually lose around 17-22. All I am saying is that when it is poorly matched like this, and the chances of us winning is so low, 3v4 is very hard in ranked, we should not get a loss registered, and the game should be ditched. Or, play the match as a friendly match, with no ranking change, its only fair this way.
  4. The majority of my kills are from RFL. Out of the available options, these options provides more flexibility and damage at all ranges. If you only want to be effective at a certain range then that's fine, personally I cant stand a ship where im bound to one type of lasers. Although I do not agree with all of the above, i'm not going to argue the matter. Purely because we are talking about type one strike fighter weapons and the light laser cannons are not an option so the argument is moot.. Given the option for a new laser type for the type one strike, LLC would not be my preference. I would take burst laser cannons. When given a choice between hull and shield damage, with out native shield piercing, which neither of these weapons have, you waste the +damage as you have to lower the shields first. Against charged plating, shields count for much of the negation to your weapons. You have to be patient and watch for the charged plating to expire before finishing them off, but you can "tap" them to keep recycling the shield regen. Armoured targets don't really matter when your firing Gatling gun speed rounds into them. the extra absorb is negated by the two extra shots you get in.
  5. The above combination is rather poor. Quads are ineffective at close range and in this build you will constantly be out of weapon power due to the high drain of both weapons. So when you get to your kill shot, you'll be scrambling for power. This build offers pilots flexibility. Using the Long range to soften up an approaching pilot forces pilots to engage you up close. When they get up close pepper them with RFL. Despite the chance to miss the rps of these make up for any loss in accuracy in a turning battle. RFL's are second only to burst lasers in a turning battle. Great build. Currently run this combination on my Rycer. Needs support from extra engine power to keep the strike in range, configure to do shield damage on both lasers as shield regen will prevent much of your damage from landing on the hull. Rapid fires give you an option when you run your weapon power pool dry, and suggest using the frequency capacitor to pump up the rps. Compliment the crit ability and increased rps with concentrated fire to give exceedingly great burst on head to heads. I run a combination based on what pilots are playing. I will change up my laser combinations based on what ship types are predominant in the matches. The strike type 1 is in my opinion the most versatile and flexible ship of all the ships available. It has the survivability of a bomber with close to the same if not better manoeuvrability of a scout. You can configure it to play multiple ways, complimenting your different ranges and play styles. Over all the type 1 strike is sorely underrated.
  6. All sarcasm aside, Strikes are actually a very formidable ship in the right hands. Especially imo the type 1 strike fighter. Don't think so?
  7. No no, they said indefinitely. This means for an unlimited or unspecified period of time. Which you can interpret as cancelled. "it has been pushed off of our current roadmap" pretty much solidifies this.
  8. Seriously with the chat bubbles? Id much rather some playable content than a little bubble with "hi" in it. I really don't see chat bubbles as a great use of resources.
  9. Well, That's that then. They give us two new variants of the most op ships in the game, with the least interesting gameplay. I was actually staying subscribed solely for gsf, and waiting for the next starship. Indefinitely, mean indefinitely I have found with Bioware. Another bad decision imo. To say this is the **** end of the stick is an understatement. All this for player housing?? Im absolutely flabbergasted. For the record Eric, GSF is NOT in a good place right now, and it is bleeding players. Queue times are enormous and most of the skilled pilots I used to play against no longer queue. Your idea of a good place is sorely different from a players perspective.
  10. Not to sound negative or anything, but it took three patches to get gunships to a manageable level, and even still they are probably too powerful in n+1 situations. I have never seen a match where n+1 of scouts or strikes was ever unbalanced outside of pilot skill.
  11. I vote we rename it the Bushfire. I propose this to recognise the deaths of all the brave men and women that have died fighting bushfires around the world. See I can make pointless and non relevant suggestions as well.
  12. Bad bad bad Nem. You should know better than to post op builds.
  13. Gunship stacking in Team deathmatch is still a problem. But as Nem put it Phase one was definitely a high point. Its not too bad atm, but imo gunships stacking and bomber stacking is still a problem. Bombers are incredibly hard to crack of a defended position, but I don't necessarily see that as a problem.
  14. If you have just eaten an ion rail, balanced is the most efficient and most practical as Ion Rail attacks all three pools simultaneously. Adding power re-gen to just one pool is pointless as it still has to wait for its recently consumed timer to finish meaning it will not regen any faster than the other two pools anyway.. By adding power to all systems, you recover your ship as a whole quicker as you are pouring equalling into three systems simultaneously as opposed to on system twice as fast, when that system is full, your other systems are still 50% behind.. If you equalise your power, when the timers end all systems get fast initial ticks. You can then change to a priority system depending on your situation. Having it as it is currently(Im certain its bugged) means that neither of the 3 pools are at full power efficiency and that you don't actually know where your power is going, making it well, useless.
  15. Not sure if this is a bug or not, but the shields at default power are green/yellow, it should be green/green Switching this to full power lasers has no effect on the shield strength, which should in essence make them weaker. Changing to full shields will still make the shields go green/blue, but reverting back to even power(f4) drops the shields to 80%(or whatever the number is) or green/yellow COuld we get confirmation of this? Is it effecting the overall shield strength of the clarion? I am Using shield projectors, and there were questions earlier about this not working correctly.
×
×
  • Create New...