Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Fix Gunships, until then i quit.

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
Fix Gunships, until then i quit.

DamascusAdontise's Avatar


DamascusAdontise
08.15.2014 , 09:49 AM | #21
I LOVE dogfighting, its literally my favorite thing in GSF (or any space/flight game)

Despite this I have 0 issues with bombers or gunships.

Gunships can prevent dogfighting, or at least maim any scout caught unawares. Thats why you keep an eye out for them, always be looking / tabbing. Try to take them out of the mix first since they are your biggest threat. Once they are gone work on the other scouts then the strikes etc

For bombers its a similar issue, keep an eye out for them and be sure not to blunder into their fields. If you have to engage do it while they are out in the open on the way to the node etc. If you have to assault a minefield try to draw any supporting fighters away, kill them, then slowly approach the most easily accessible mine and blow it up at max weapon range. Rinse and repeat until there is about 1 mine left then get in close behind the bomber and pop all your offensive cooldowns for the kill.

IMO bombers and gunships are not out of place in this "dogfighting game" . They are tactical additions that add depth to the battlefield. Making it so that a dogfighter has to keep his eyes peeled and not just focus fire targets one after another.
Ahazi Server Refugee (Beta - Shutdown) RIP TIE & Twin Ion
[Circle of Emnity] - Pincer - Ocula Pilot - The Bastion
New to GSF? Look Here!. // And Here!

arkanone's Avatar


arkanone
08.17.2014 , 12:50 PM | #22
Quote: Originally Posted by Icebergy View Post
Gunships are fine, stop flying in a straight line and be aware of your surroundings.
That's ironic. Telling pilots trying to engage a gunship not to fly in a straight line.

Tell me how gunship pilots are "flying" in these engagements.

They're not flying at all. They're sitting perfectly still not doing a damn thing that resembles flying.

Before calling for a nerf to gunships I suggest a large, across the board bonus to missiles against stationary targets. A ship sitting perfectly still should be much easier to lock onto, at much further range and be susceptible to much more damage.

Fractalsponge's Avatar


Fractalsponge
08.17.2014 , 01:47 PM | #23
Quote: Originally Posted by arkanone View Post
That's ironic. Telling pilots trying to engage a gunship not to fly in a straight line.

Tell me how gunship pilots are "flying" in these engagements.

They're not flying at all. They're sitting perfectly still not doing a damn thing that resembles flying.

Before calling for a nerf to gunships I suggest a large, across the board bonus to missiles against stationary targets. A ship sitting perfectly still should be much easier to lock onto, at much further range and be susceptible to much more damage.
Yes yes more useless drivel. Still waiting for that magical screenshot of you kicking *** with a gunship - should be easy right, since it involves "no skill"?

And a ship standing still IS much easier to lock onto. The willing trade of being a total sitting duck for long-range firepower is pretty explicit in the design of gunships as a ship class.
http://fractalsponge.net
Xi'ao - The Shadowlands

Bolo_Yeung's Avatar


Bolo_Yeung
08.17.2014 , 03:42 PM | #24
The problem isn't the gunship playing alone... but 2-3 or more, "gunship wall" tactic with few GS covering each other.

And I agree with one thing - the game would fare much better without gunships or bombers.

Kuciwalker's Avatar


Kuciwalker
08.17.2014 , 05:17 PM | #25
Quote: Originally Posted by arkanone View Post
That's ironic. Telling pilots trying to engage a gunship not to fly in a straight line.

Tell me how gunship pilots are "flying" in these engagements.

They're not flying at all. They're sitting perfectly still not doing a damn thing that resembles flying.

Before calling for a nerf to gunships I suggest a large, across the board bonus to missiles against stationary targets. A ship sitting perfectly still should be much easier to lock onto, at much further range and be susceptible to much more damage.
A ship sitting perfectly still is already much easier to lock on to and is much more susceptible to damage.

Ramalina's Avatar


Ramalina
08.17.2014 , 05:44 PM | #26
Quote: Originally Posted by Fractalsponge View Post
And a ship standing still IS much easier to lock onto. The willing trade of being a total sitting duck for long-range firepower is pretty explicit in the design of gunships as a ship class.
Not really significantly easier in practice. There's that little issue with lock warning tones instantly alerting the gunship to the fact that it's being targeted.

There's the exception for clusters because of their very short lock time, but in general if you want to kill a gunship you don't use a missile at all until after it has blown both it's engine maneuver and distortion field.

Starting a missile lock isn't what you do to shoot a missile at a gunship, it's what you do to encourage the gunship to either run or to start shooting at you.


The problem that MMORPG players have with gunships is that they lack combat flight sim experience and therefore make the mistake of thinking that gunships are starfighters.

Gunships are not starfighters. They are medium range large caliber mobile air/space defense artillery. Treat them as air defense units and they really aren't a problem. For that matter, they aren't even very good air defense units.

However, if you know absolutely nothing about combat flight in places where air defenses might be present, one of the things that you don't know is that ignoring the air defenses to chase other fighters is a really good way to get shot down.

The really brief checklist for how to deal with that situation is:

1) Be paranoid about air defenses
2) Be more paranoid, because you weren't paranoid enough during step 1
3) Make sure you see them before they're close enough to shoot at you
4a) Then stay the **** out of their range or
4b) Use standard SEAD/DEAD techniques to kill the **** out of them before
5) Going off to play at dogfighting with other fighters.

That holds for GSF just as much as it holds for a higher fidelity combat flight sim. The chief difference is that the gunships have a depressingly short respawn time, so you can spend a whole match killing them without really accomplishing much. Of course, in the absence of real combat objectives like bombing a convoy, taking out a command post, or sinking a warship it does give you something to do in a GSF match.

Besides, combat pilots are supposed to hate air defenses with a passion. If people weren't complaining about gunships (medium range air defenses) and bombers (short range air defenses) it would be pretty good evidence of serious over-nerfing of those classes.

Of course, GSF is missing the fundamental core of combat aviation, delivering bombs on target on time. Dogfighting is the cool element in popular imagination, but a truly skilled combat aviator doesn't become an ace by shooting down five enemies with cannons and missiles. They take out whole squadrons by bombing the enemy base in the middle of the night when they're all asleep.
"A padawan's master sets their Jedi trial, Rajivari set mine."

- Zhe Lian, Sage.

Davionix's Avatar


Davionix
08.18.2014 , 06:35 AM | #27
Quote: Originally Posted by Bolo_Yeung View Post
The problem isn't the gunship playing alone... but 2-3 or more, "gunship wall" tactic with few GS covering each other.

And I agree with one thing - the game would fare much better without gunships or bombers.
Mr. Gunship, tear down this wall!
  1. Get 1-2 ion railgun gunships on your own team.
  2. Ion spam on enemy gunship or sentries / bomber
  3. Gunships without weapon pool to shoot & no mines or drones
  4. ??????
  5. Kill


They're on our left,right,in front of us,behind us..they can't get away this time.

Fractalsponge's Avatar


Fractalsponge
08.18.2014 , 10:20 AM | #28
Quote: Originally Posted by Bolo_Yeung View Post
The problem isn't the gunship playing alone... but 2-3 or more, "gunship wall" tactic with few GS covering each other.

And I agree with one thing - the game would fare much better without gunships or bombers.
Right, because everyone taking Stingfires is the recipe for NONSTOP EXCITEMENT. Give me tactical variety any day. Some compositions are harder to break than others, depending on the situation, but it forces people to plan ahead and to react appropriately on the fly. It will ALWAYS disproportionately hurt new players, because they won't have the experience to do either.

Bad players will always complain about something. If it's not getting 2 shot by a railgun from 15km it'll be someone popping a CD and wasting them in 2 shots from up close.

The only thing that actually bothers me in GSF right now is railgun sentry drone, because that is just cheap. As far as I'm concerned, everything else is fair game, though I may hunt people down for annoying me with it *cough* Sabo Probe *cough*.
http://fractalsponge.net
Xi'ao - The Shadowlands

Estiqatsi's Avatar


Estiqatsi
08.18.2014 , 02:43 PM | #29
Gunships have been ruining this game since the start. Bombers just gave it the final blow. They had made it slow paced and boring as hell. Wonder why less and less people play gsf...

Verain's Avatar


Verain
08.19.2014 , 09:13 AM | #30
Quote: Originally Posted by DamascusAdontise View Post
IGunships can prevent dogfighting, or at least maim any scout caught unawares. Thats why you keep an eye out for them, always be looking / tabbing. Try to take them out of the mix first since they are your biggest threat. Once they are gone work on the other scouts then the strikes etc
It's not that they are the biggest threat. It's that, out of all the threats, it's the one that will absolutely devastate you if you ignore it, while doing essentially nothing to you if you chase it. If you ignore a gunship, within the next ten seconds you'll eat a railgun. If you go for him, you likely will not, and neither will the rest of your team.

Quote:
IMO bombers and gunships are not out of place in this "dogfighting game" . They are tactical additions that add depth to the battlefield. Making it so that a dogfighter has to keep his eyes peeled and not just focus fire targets one after another.
Totally agree. If the gunships and bombers were GOOD at dogfighting while also bringing new strategy and tactics, I would be very displeased. As it is, I think that they are solid additions that define the area.

Quote:
Tell me how gunship pilots are "flying" in these engagements.

They're not flying at all. They're sitting perfectly still not doing a damn thing that resembles flying.
A stationary target is extraordinarily vulnerable, especially to quads and pods, but honestly to anything. Gunships spend a lot of time flying and managing their resources- much more so than scouts, whose very efficient boosting is a massive aid to their play.


Quote:
And I agree with one thing - the game would fare much better without gunships or bombers.
Lol. Deleting half the classes in the game would make it super shallow. You have a hard time choosing anything but the type 2 scout now, could you picture in a world without bombers?


Quote:
The problem that MMORPG players have with gunships is that they lack combat flight sim experience and therefore make the mistake of thinking that gunships are starfighters.

Gunships are not starfighters. They are medium range large caliber mobile air/space defense artillery. Treat them as air defense units and they really aren't a problem. For that matter, they aren't even very good air defense units.
Nailed it.



Quote:
The only thing that actually bothers me in GSF right now is railgun sentry drone, because that is just cheap.
You aren't alone in despising this. I love this drone- I think it's great. But Stasie and others dislike that this thing always is doing hull damage if you are within range and LOS of it, and it whittles you down, even if you can outfly the entire enemy team. My opinion is, it's good that something serves that role- the ability to outfly enemies should ultimately have some meaningful check that doesn't care about how much distortion you stacked and how skilled you are. At some point, the numbers of enemies should weigh against you meaningfully, and I think the railgun sentry drone nails that pretty perfectly.


Quote:
They had made it slow paced and boring as hell. Wonder why less and less people play gsf...
I'm not sure if less people do. But if they do, it's being countered by interesting ships like bombers and gunships, and caused by lack of maps and modes. The real thing is that many MMO players are shockingly awful at this game, and I think the devs routinely forget how derp much of their audience can be. I mean, I've seen bad players in WoW battlegrounds and even SWTOR warzones who, while terrible, still have hit points, still have cooldowns, and still can meaningfully understand and use their surroundings. Meanwhile, a new pilot can just get waxed SO HARD. The ships are meant to be evasive, and one not boosting will just die in less than three seconds, something your fresh max level WoW guy won't do. It's like, I mean, it's honestly surprising how terrible a new player can be. The skill floor is MUCH higher in GSF than in the groundgame or elsewhere. If anything else, that's the contributor.


The best thing for GSF would be some solid PvE missions. Which is essentially asking for a new X-Wing game to be put inside this game, so I don't think it would happen. But understand that the SCOPE and FRESHNESS of the game normally determine who plays the game, and for how long. If the game was really just "gunships are gods" like some baddies think, but otherwise super compelling to everyone naturally, then you'd just see the game constantly be queues popping into eight gunship games- everyone would play it, but in this example, the balance issue would be visible in what ships get picked. Instead, we see moderate participation with a reasonable set of ships. Given how cheap this game was to make, I'm sure they are pretty pleased with the results.

But I'm so tired of "everyone quit because of MY pet peeve, which happens to be class balance (always)". Games with class balance issues as a driver of player participation don't look like this one.
"The most despicable person on the GSF forum."