I'll miss you N'abi! Wait, I left too... Monk, we see dead people... and pandas...

fun stuff Monk

No, the larger faction will get matches against themselves as well. On BC the imps have less people playing. Nearly 2/3 of matches I play are pub vs. pub. If there are less than 8 imps queued and 16 or more pubs queued, the pubs will play "training" matches repeatedly while the imps wait until they have 8.

Only posting this cuz its my best dmg ever. 53k! Whooo, yeah... thats enough... http://http://i.imgur.com/h6upwr6.jpg

I see your point and for the most part I am in agreement. But looking at the GS records on my server and ones on this forum its pretty much just gunships and scouts for everything but damage taken, medals and defensive points. I don't believe that all scouts and gunships are simply better pilots, thus able to do better. Now you can argue that strike fighters aren't meant to have that role. I can see that. I pretty much never die in my strike fighter, averaging about a death a match and taking a ton of dmg along the way. I have become a more defensive player as result, but like any pvp system those qualities feel a lot less rewarded by the devs. So maybe that is the direction this discussion needs to go. Maybe the differences in ship types would be more accepted if dmg and kills weren't given such a priority in medals and achievements. This same issue is faced by ground pvp tanks (full spec, not hybrid) that keep people alive and guard nodes well, but can't kill anything. They see a leaderboard that give little to no respect to their role in the wz and as result they see imbalance.

I agree, pilot skill will generally win the day, but at the same time in a game like this imbalances will crop up. A good discussion about them is healthy if it remains civil. It will also hopefully lead to a Dev team willing to be more engaged with the players (dream a little dream... ha). Dismissing everything as "scouts are OP! NERF DEM!" doesn't help and throwing the blanket L2P on any complaint isn't any better (well a bit maybe). Neither of those attitudes will lead to anything meaningful just people getting defensive and then nasty after a while.

I see complaints, but the discussions are civil for the most part. That was my point. Not that people don't have concerns and aren't voicing them. These sub forums and the discussions don't strike me as anywhere near the vile negativity or incessant whining that has plagued the general forums or the pvp forums. Sure people make complaints but it hasn't completely broken down into name calling and "look at me" contests. Your post was not negative, beyond the name of the thread which categories any complaint or discussion about star fighter types as a whine, but is nothing that hasn't been said before in dozens of similar threads. Rather than make these posts, why not participate in the existing discussions in a meaningful way that might change peoples minds to your way of thinking. As opposed to making the same thread about knowing roles or L2P that a quick search of the forum would show has been done many times before. Now this same message goes for those voicing their complaints. Why not just consolidate them to one thread for discussion and not post a new one on the hour? People like the OP might not see the forum as just a series of whines if there weren't 15 threads voicing the same issue

I had a guy demand to know how I was using a joystick to achieve "unnatural" moves in my ship two days after launch. He kept asking for the name of the program, he was sure I was using. In the end I had a laugh about it and chatted with the guy a bit about tactics, but I was a bit shocked that some would automatically assume that I was "cheating" to get an edge because I was having success. I have only see one cheat to get to stations before the map starts, but that seems to have been patched up and I had only seen it done a handful of times in that window where it was possible. Simple fact is people will cheat in any game and people will find ways to break the intended rules of the game, but 99/100 it is not understanding what has happened as the OP and others have said.

Whining? A little sure, but mostly its been good discussion on minor tweaks that could be made to bring the ships in line with each other. Everyone is aware of the roles. Some are just finding, especially as ships are fully upgraded, that there are some imbalances. Not huge, but noticeable and to be expected in any multi-player game. Compared to other discussion for other game modes, discussion on these forums has been quite civil and constructive, with a few rants of course (wouldn't be a forum without a few of those).

This may be quite true, but balancing classes by match type doesn't make for great pvp.

You can use the environment to break lock on and every one has a special move to avoid them (with a CD, yes I know, but a pretty short one in a maxed ship). As a strike fighter pilot I am lucky if half of my missiles actually hit a target. If they changed it to what you suggest it would be a third or less. Not saying missiles don't hit hard or aren't a good weapon, just that there are more than enough ways to avoid them as it stands.

I am noticing as player ships get maxed that it is harder to take out the scouts and gunships and easier for them to take me out. I think that changing the last missile upgrade to a lessened lock on time or faster reload would help. I don't agree with changing the scout or gunship. I think that a gunship maxed should take me out if they see me coming and in a dog fight with a scout I should be at a disadvantage, but the strike fighters edge at medium range just isn't there with maxed out ships.

Nice to see some new records being posted, grats to them! Never going to touch those dmg scores and have a looksie at the GS forum post for records, just insane. My poor strike fighter barely tops 40k on my best match. The flash fire is pretty darn good, if only I could use it and not hit stations, walls, girders, the fleet ship one time... (very tired, but yeah... fail)

Alright I will give me two cents on that then I fly a strike fighter and do pretty good overall. For the scouts I try not to dogfight them, they are faster and up close I am not going to get a lock or see a lot of blaster shots hit. I keep my distance and go after them when they are pursuing others. When they are coming for me I try to bait them into a head on attack, all I need is the few seconds for a lock. Using the shield boost and hydro spanner I can absorb their damage, burn their shields with blasters and when I get the lock they are done. Quad lasers and a concussion missile is more than enough fire power. The strike fighters best asset when fighting a scout is the beating it can take along with just a slight edge in firepower. And yes, "scream" might have been a stronger word than the thread warranted.

I am all for balancing and doing it in a timely fashion but I would like to see some kind of data that proves an imbalance. Right now I don't see any class of ship and think "I am screwed", only a few familiar pilots who excel with one ship or another. Not saying that there aren't imbalances to be sorted out, I am sure there are, rather I think we need more than anecdotal evidence to start screaming nerf on anything.