View Single Post

phalczen's Avatar


phalczen
11.13.2017 , 07:38 PM | #5
I agree that part of the problem lies in simultaneous lockouts, and the ease of applying/re-applying. I am not sure what the best answer is, but I think perhaps an increase in the cooldown (or in the case of ordnance, reload time) might help give some windows for counterplay. I'd also like to toss out the idea of removing the shield ability lockout and engine ability lockout from EMPF and EMPM, which going forward I'll just abbreviate the two as EMP. I think system lockout is pretty crippling as is. I would rather see the shield lockout switched to ion missile to help differentiate it from other types of missiles and give ships a meaningful choice between systems or shield abilities. Alternatively, engine dis-ability could be a choice with shield dis-ability for the ion missile. Finally, it could make for some interesting Pike/Quell builds for players who opted to take both control missiles.

I would agree with other posters that EMP is worse than RS in the sense that you can be victim to an AOE effect (perhaps even one originally centered on a deployables or turret) as opposed to being directly targeted. But I think it probably needs to be toned down a bit.

Honestly though, I like this scenario better... where we have multiple components slightly overpowered that need to be nerfed, rather than a handful of good components and the rest junk. Don't nerf these previously junk components back into oblivion, just a sensible nerf.
If you think I've made a good contribution with this post, I kindly ask that you use my Refer a Friend link! Here is more information about the program.