Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

do the dev's read this stuff? or actually play this game? GSF=crap now

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
do the dev's read this stuff? or actually play this game? GSF=crap now

bmharrison's Avatar


bmharrison
02.08.2014 , 01:52 PM | #21
Quote: Originally Posted by silvershadows View Post
Pike with a couple EMP missiles will take care of that in no time.
Here's where I run into difficulty. EMP missiles are supposed to be designed to take out mines, turrets, and drones, but they suffer from some major flaws which hamper their abilities.

1. Range- The range of these missiles is too short to deal with railgun drones. By the time you're in range you've been nailed at least tonce (if not twice) by the can't miss drone, which leaves you vulnerable for a missile/mine/other player kill while you're still lining up your shot.

2. Lock-on time- again, too long considering what the purpose of this missile is. Flying into a mine/dronefield gets you nailed pretty quickly, even if there are no other ships around. The fact that you have to fly straight to get lock-on while drones target you with computer precision doesn't make for a very survivable encounter. And before someone says l2play noob why are you flying toward the dronefield? I'm just trying to use the EMP as intended- to take out an area of missles/drones.

These difficulties, added to the fact that it's harder to target drones until you've been hit by one and many gunships are using mine/dronefields as their new killing area reduce the effectiveness of the EMP missile dramatically, making them marginally useful at best.

Addressing either or both of these issues would make the EMP missle more viable for its intended purpose without making them OP (if used against ships, even fully upgraded, they are a little more than a nuisance). It's a shame because these missiles are supposed to be a balancing factor against creating an impenetrable mine/dronefield, but I often get blown out of the sky before being able to fire even one off. (Again, I'm sure I just need to lurn2plainoob, but I have been playing GSF from the start and have moderate success against all types of player ships, so it's frustrating to be taken down so quickly and consistently by AI-driven obstacles.)

(P.S. I will admit to finding one technique that serves as an occasional workaround- if I can get to a bomber while it's deploying or sometimes immediately after (depending on positioning), I can sometimes take out the mines/drones by targeting the bomber itself and letting the field do the work. This cannot be relied upon, however, as often the bomber has moved away from the field or has retreated into it, forcing you to face the drones and the bomber (and probably a GS or two) to get into range.)

Have I explained my situation correctly? I didn't want to come off as whining, but I probably have. I'm just saying that if you make a weapon that is a specific counter to another weapon, it should be designed in a way that gives it a fair chance to do its job.

silvershadows's Avatar


silvershadows
02.08.2014 , 01:58 PM | #22
Quote: Originally Posted by bmharrison View Post
Here's where I run into difficulty. EMP missiles are supposed to be designed to take out mines, turrets, and drones, but they suffer from some major flaws which hamper their abilities.

1. Range- The range of these missiles is too short to deal with railgun drones. By the time you're in range you've been nailed at least tonce (if not twice) by the can't miss drone, which leaves you vulnerable for a missile/mine/other player kill while you're still lining up your shot.

2. Lock-on time- again, too long considering what the purpose of this missile is. Flying into a mine/dronefield gets you nailed pretty quickly, even if there are no other ships around. The fact that you have to fly straight to get lock-on while drones target you with computer precision doesn't make for a very survivable encounter. And before someone says l2play noob why are you flying toward the dronefield? I'm just trying to use the EMP as intended- to take out an area of missles/drones.

These difficulties, added to the fact that it's harder to target drones until you've been hit by one and many gunships are using mine/dronefields as their new killing area reduce the effectiveness of the EMP missile dramatically, making them marginally useful at best.
My biggest issue with the EMP missile is actually its reload time. Flying my Pike, I put all power to shields, fly in on a fortified satellite, lock onto a defense turret (because they have the most hp and are most likely to still be alive at the end of my lock), let the missile fly, and barrel roll away, letting the rest of my team close in on the satellite while the drones/mines are disabled. Then I will come in again and do the same thing.

Range could be improved some yes, but I find with all power to shields and quick-recharge shields I can get in and out with only minimal damage.

There are a few buffs that the EMP missile could use - range and reload time are the most important ones. I don't have an issue with the lock-on time since I am locking onto a stationary target most of the time, so it isn't like it has a chance to get away from me.

Now see, your post did not come across as whining because you are addressing a legitimate concern regarding the viability of one of two options available for dealing with drones and mines. You present your argument without making demands or expecting bombers to take a nerf - you just want the EMP missile boosted to true viability. You also manage to do all this without threatening to quit, or questioning the intelligence of the game developers.

That isn't a whine. You see the difference?
Avatia
Deception Assassin
<Tave Naefas Lazea>
A Sith endures.

Danylia's Avatar


Danylia
02.08.2014 , 04:05 PM | #23
Quote: Originally Posted by DamascusAdontise View Post
... bombers are the rock to scouts scissors ...
While I generally agree with the statement, everytime I see it I wonder if the poster doesn't actually mean "bombers are the rock to tier 2 scouts scissors.
The tier 1 scout was an underdog before 2.6, and probably continues to be it post 2.6 as well (but I still think it's mostly because there's no game mood where its advantages - Shield to Engines, Sensor Component and Sensor Beacon - would truly shine). It got EMP Field as a weapon against bombers, but I think it's somewhat underwhelming weapon, because:
- it locks Systems component, and is mostly aimed at Domination; in Deathmatch, I'd like to have either Booster Recharge or Targeting Telemetry. Alas, there is only one tier 1 scout, so I cannot have two of them with different loadouts
- the cooldown, even when updated, is too long (though I understand it cannot be shorter due to secondary effects - the ones hitting ships)
- the range is too small - 3500 (when boosted with a tier 4 upgrade). Seeker mines have range of 4000.
Quote: Originally Posted by Rafkin View Post
Last nights group finder was a mess. The short version is that two of the people were really bad but the tank was pretty good. After we called it I asked the tank if he wanted to queue up with me. He said "I'm eleven and I have to go to bed".
The one guy who knew what he was doing was eleven years old.

zaskar's Avatar


zaskar
02.08.2014 , 06:59 PM | #24
The names of these craft are wrong, if you relabel them in your head everything becomes clear.

Scout == it's a light fighter designed to provide intelligence and surgical strikes, it's an F-16

Strike Fighter == Attack Fighter, Think A-10, this is what you use to take objectives.

Gunship == Heavy Fighter, We don't use these today really. This would be like a P-38 Lightning from WWII

Bomber == Gunship, This is the AC130, it provides heavy support to the F-16s and slow moving A-10s via working as a hub for comms and devastating amounts of support fire.

What is missing is an interceptor, Bioware has said we're going to get them. This would be the F-14, the bomber killer. For now the heavy fighter role is doing what the interceptor is for, rather than getting up on the bomber with speed and armor piercing ordnance it's doing it from a range.

MCaliban's Avatar


MCaliban
02.08.2014 , 07:55 PM | #25
Quote: Originally Posted by Danylia View Post
While I generally agree with the statement, everytime I see it I wonder if the poster doesn't actually mean "bombers are the rock to tier 2 scouts scissors.
The tier 1 scout was an underdog before 2.6, and probably continues to be it post 2.6 as well (but I still think it's mostly because there's no game mood where its advantages - Shield to Engines, Sensor Component and Sensor Beacon - would truly shine).
I think the dummy rockets are a liftsaver.

But even if the tier 1 scout isn't as good as the tier 2 scout, it's not an underdog when you compare it to other ships. It's fast, maneuverable, and has decent damage. It's great at hunting down bombers and gunships. It's still useful for grabbing objectives. Because of its speed, it's often just as good at taking drones and mines as a striker.

I'd say that scouts, in general, are right where they ought to be, but strikers still need a bit of a buff.
Better to be the tail of a dragon than the head of a lizard.

HoloGrinder's Avatar


HoloGrinder
02.08.2014 , 08:34 PM | #26
Quote: Originally Posted by Zharik View Post
You deserve a time-out...

Your postings have reached near-spam levels...
In my opinion.
Sounds like a personal problem. This game has something that is breaking it and I am hoping to get it fixed. Deal with it.