I have mastered ships of each type and I recently (well, over the last year) have dabbled in a "rail-gunless gunship". I chose the Jurgoran, and instead of a railgun I gave it interdiction missiles and cluster missiles.

Now that the ship is almost maxed out, I'm really enjoying it. I have to watch my thrusters pretty closely, but I feel pretty durable and I love the quick one-two punch of the missiles. I also feel like there's a bit of a "surprise" factor, since most people don't expect a gunship to come charging at them, guns blazing.

If you do this you'll want to max out your turn speed as soon as you can, otherwise you'll get chewed to bits pretty quickly. I suspect some folks will think I'm a dolt for skipping out on a core feature of the ship, which is why I don't talk about this stuff in matches. But it's fun to fly and I feel like I top the charts in my Jurogan as much as I do in any of my other ships. Currently I'm running a Sting for kills, a Bloodmark for healing/combat command, a Razorwire for support, I'm training up a new bomber, and the Jurogan has taken a heavy/defensive fighter role.

Is anyone else using a similar build?

Double missile type 3 gunship is a popular "fun" build for sure. It generally seems pretty good at the Pike's job, enjoying distortion, burst laser cannon, and two short range missiles on different cooldowns. The weaknesses it has are mostly due to the gunship frame's general frailty.

It's definitely a fun build, but the build is obviously improved by dropping one of the missiles for a railgun, the standard build.

Heh, If you're not flying a missile Jurg, your flying your jurg wrong!

I kid, everyone should fly whatever they like. That said, I do use this build, it is my "CQB" strike and I really enjoy flying it. I think there are probably a few others who fly their Jurgs similarly but not sure.

Heh, If you're not flying a missile Jurg, your flying your jurg wrong!

 

I kid, everyone should fly whatever they like. That said, I do use this build, it is my "CQB" strike and I really enjoy flying it. I think there are probably a few others who fly their Jurgs similarly but not sure.

I sure do... THe only Gunship I fly that ever used a railgun past their first 20 games is my T1. Torpedoes and Missiles Boats FMT (for max trolling)

I sure do... THe only Gunship I fly that ever used a railgun past their first 20 games is my T1. Torpedoes and Missiles Boats FMT (for max trolling)

lol, I was going to refer directly to you (well, amy I guess) - you were the first person to bring this build to my attention, and I do pull it out every now and then. It's a fun one, for sure. Sub-optimal, probably, but certainly an entertaining choice if it's not a "super serious" type of match.

I play my Jurgoran on imperial side Bastion with the two missiles I'm closing on 100 games with it. ( I think I'm at 95 at the moment)

I call the ship/build "Still better then a Strike Fighter".

I myself use Retro thrusters with the turning upgrade and Regenration Thrusters for the minor. Helps with the awful energy management the Gunship frame has. I am currently using Munitions Capacity Extender with this build, as I feel I actually run out of missiles, this also lets me use Jaesa Willsaam as my offensive crew member for the accuracy and extra arc for all those missiles.

This build is super fun to play, I just love locking a cluster swaping locking an interdiction swaping again locking a cluster and sometimes that alone with no blasters kills the target.

From a competitive perspective I find it to be strictly inferior to any of the "good-ish" strike builds. That's from both a flying it perspective and a shooting it down perspective (It keeps company with the double missile T2 gunship in the, "easy to deal with gunship" category).

However, in games where there isn't strong opposition it is stupidly fun, especially around domination objectives with good cover.

Interdiction missile really makes the build. It's my favorite snare from a gameplay perspective on either side of the play. Easy enough to be useable, but the range, single target nature and rate of fire restrict it enough to be tolerable for those being fired at. The cat-and-mouse of, "is this one a cluster or an interdiction," gives some really great play/counter play scenarios.

If the T2 strike had interdiction missile, I'd probably never fly the T3 gunship, but as long as interdiction is exclusive to the condor/jurgoran it's sort of crazy not to have one unlocked as a double missile build.

If you want to be laughing the entire match, the double missile T3 gunship is definitely the ship do it in.

I also use this. I think I have just a little under 300 games on it, split about evenly between a pub and a imp on JC. Tried a bunch of different builds, but ultimately settled on kind of a weird one. I felt like I had to max out turning to deal with scouts. So then I dumped retros and took power dive to help with the awful mobility. When I'm in that ship, I'm practically power diving on cool down, just to move around.

I also ended up switching to feedback shield from DF. This actually works pretty well against scouts. Well, DF is going to be stronger, of course. But I find feedback to be tremendously entertaining, as scouts frequently voluntarily remove their forward shields. Baiting your opponent and timing the Feedback is critical to getting this to work. Although, I really hate trying to bait a blc/pod build into shooting me. Even with power to shields, it's too much burst, delivered too unevenly to predict when to pop the Feedback. You don't want to eat more than one BLC shot, and you don't want to eat a bunch of pods waiting for them to shoot. And if you pop it too soon, the better pilots will reconsider their approach.

Anyway, it's kind of a quirky build. It's not top tier. But I've flown it in competitive games against good scout pilots, and it's not terrible. It's pretty good under a satellite, and deals with individual bombers well. It does not do well if the node has multiple bombers set up on it. It also does poorly against GS from range, due to the lack of evasion and any sort of long or medium range weapon.

I tried EMP/Interdiction and EMP/Cluster builds with the idea of making something that could assault an entrenched satellite that wasn't a CP minelayer. But I wasn't very effective with these, and switched back to cluster/interdiction.

As far as the missiles, I usually open with cluster/interdiction/cluster, as the first missile usually misses. Although, I will change it up, depending on who I'm shooting at.

Anyway, it's a fun ship to play and it can be quite effective in certain limited circumstances.

It's definitely a fun build, but the build is obviously improved by dropping one of the missiles for a railgun, the standard build.

This statement proves just how far a Quell/Pike needs to be buffed before it would ever be worth playing.

Even with the Gunship's crappy chassis, the Jurgoran/Condor is a better missile-boat. It gets a better selection of missiles, it gets a better selection of Shields (Distortion and Feedback would both be amazing for Strikes!), it gets a better short range laser, it gets better engine components.

And yet with all this stacked in its favor--making it perhaps the best "Strike" in the game, the missile-Jurgoran is still the "gimp" build of its class, because a Slug Railgun is always better than a second missile.

A Quell/Pike will never have a railgun. But if it's ever going to be worth playing, it needs to have almost all the other perks the Jurgoran gets + a significantly buffed Strike chassis.

Even the Rycer/Starguard is in danger of being outclassed by a missile-boat Jurgoran/Condor. HLC's and Ion Cannons at least give the Rycer/Starguard a little unique capability, but in terms of overall effectiveness, I honestly think the missile-boat Jurgoran/Condor wins out.

The only reason the Imperium/Clarion doesn't fall into the same category is because Repair Probes gives it a unique role.

This statement proves just how far a Quell/Pike needs to be buffed before it would ever be worth playing.

No, not at all. The fact that strikes are crap is what proves that.

Simply put, railguns aren't meant to be drop in replacements for missiles. You can tell this because only one ship class has access to railguns, and it pays for it in stats. Even if the Pike was fixed, my statement would still be true. The type 3 gunship doesn't have access to the shield, hull, turning radius, or max speed of the strike fighters. You would absolutely expect it to need access to the railgun to be good- by being a gunship it has "paid" for the railgun.

That the double missile type 3 gunship is better than any build available on the type 2 strike isn't because the double missile type 3 gunship is too good, it's because the type 2 strike is so weak.

Even with the Gunship's crappy chassis, the Jurgoran/Condor is a better missile-boat.

Exactly. Obviously you'd improve almost any ship that doesn't have a railgun by adding one, just as you would likely improve a gunship by making the 1 button into "switch between slug railgun and seismic mine". It really seems that the strike frame pays way too much for the stats that it has.

It gets a better selection of missiles, it gets a better selection of Shields (Distortion and Feedback would both be amazing for Strikes!), it gets a better short range laser, it gets better engine components.

I dispute the engine component statement, to a degree. I think that of your top tier components, you have Barrel Roll, Retro Thruster, and Power Dive. The twin turns have uses, but I think they are a little more niche. The other components are way weaker in general. The Pike has access to barrel roll, but lacks access to power dive and retro (and it could REALLY use retro, as lining up missiles is its big thing). The type 3 gunship would be improved with a barrel roll option, but the lack of it makes it very distinct compared to the other two gunships (and the presence of power dive gives it a playstyle versus melee that the Pike can't choose).

Meanwhile, interdiction missile is mysteriously missing from the Pike, despite it being an obvious inclusion.

And yet with all this stacked in its favor--making it perhaps the best "Strike" in the game, the missile-Jurgoran is still the "gimp" build of its class, because a Slug Railgun is always better than a second missile.

And that part is fine. As long as the devs charge a lot for being able to load a railgun on your ship, you would expect that you'd benefit from doing exactly that. Don't try to make this somehow some gunship QQ- it's offtopic enough to turn a double missile type 3 gunship thread into strike tears, but at least the strikes are unambiguously weaker than they should be- and it's because they are missing components and likely base stats.

But could we cry about strikes in like, all the OTHER threads?

Not QQing about Gunships at all.

Just pointing out that this "for fun" build is the best Strike in the game, and that is part of the reason why it is fun.

But I would even say that if you took an optimal Jurgoran with Clusters and a Railgun, but then prohibited it from using its Railgun and force it to just melee with Clusters and BLC, it would still be superior to any Strike, including the Rycer.

Is the Jurgoran chassis slightly weaker than the Rycer's? Sure. Less Evasion, very slightly lesser shields, and a little bit more sluggish. But BLC and Feedback Shields make up for any turning deficiency, since they let you attack at high deflection, and make the Jurgoran far more dangerous to Scouts and Bombers than other Strikes are. Again, not even considering the railgun, which is an axis of gameplay the Strikes can't even compete on.

And with Power Dive, the Jurgostrike is far more resilient to the Rycer's chief bogeyman, the Ion Railgun.

Again, my point here is not to say that Gunships are OP. But rather to say that for me to equip a Rycer in my hangar, at the bare minimum it would need to compete with a Jurgoran that ONLY uses Cluster Missiles! To say nothing of competing with a double missile Jurgoran, or a Jurgoran that uses its railgun.

And without adding components like BLC, DF, or Feedback, the only way to do that is to give the Strike chassis some truly unique and desirable capabilities. Repair Probes is the only reason anyone flies a T3. T1 and T2 need something that vital. Just increasing Strike turning radius or afterburner efficiency would not be enough to make it better than a Jurgostrike (or a Sledgehammer for that matter). It either needs a lot more top-tier components or some new unique ones.

I dispute the engine component statement, to a degree. I think that of your top tier components, you have Barrel Roll, Retro Thruster, and Power Dive. The twin turns have uses, but I think they are a little more niche. The other components are way weaker in general. The Pike has access to barrel roll, but lacks access to power dive and retro (and it could REALLY use retro, as lining up missiles is its big thing). The type 3 gunship would be improved with a barrel roll option, but the lack of it makes it very distinct compared to the other two gunships (and the presence of power dive gives it a playstyle versus melee that the Pike can't choose).

Seriously?

Barrel Roll is far more niche than the turns, IMO. The cost and CD are ridiculously high and make it probably the worst engine manoeuvre, and I have trouble seeing how that's even arguable. Having a sudden speed burst is helpful, but if you use it for that you can't really save it for missile locks—and if you save it for missile locks, you have to keep more engine power on hand, gimping your mobility. That's really niche compared to being able to regularly break missile locks and execute some manoeuvre.

The only thing I agree with you on here is that adding the option of BR to a ship without taking anything away would be an overall improvement, adding more niche utility (especially for a ship with DF).

Just pointing out that this "for fun" build is the best Strike in the gam, and that is part of the reason why it is fun.

Not sure about that...the Decimus/Sledgehammer has a claim to being the "best strike" too!

The type 3 bomber is better at the "medium range" supposed niche, because not only does it have heavy lasers and solid missile options, the mine/drone is simply far better at pushing an enemy ship away than anything the strikes have. And the bomber frame is a lot less useful in a dogfight than a scout, strike- or even a gunship. Even with those limits, the type 3 bomber has (IMO) a much better time in a dogfight than the dogfighter strikes.

The type 3 gunship that is being discussed here has three short range options, plus disto missile break. This allows the ship to really capitalize on any situation where it can get the enemy to even fly past it, something strikes are pretty poor at. The other piece is being able to switch between FAST lockon missiles means that you are almost always able to threaten a missile, something that the Pike very much lacks.

I would very much dispute barrel as a poor engine maneuver. The big deal is that it crosses serious distance, and a lot of the game is positional based. If barrel gets you a DO, it is worth quite a bit, right? If it gets you to a node to hold it neutral, what about that? Obviously it is worse in a dogfight.

I would very much dispute barrel as a poor engine maneuver. The big deal is that it crosses serious distance, and a lot of the game is positional based. If barrel gets you a DO, it is worth quite a bit, right? If it gets you to a node to hold it neutral, what about that? Obviously it is worse in a dogfight.

Power Dive + skill beats Barrel Roll. You can cross almost the same distance with the same engine, a lower CD and be way harder to hit. And still get your DO if you plan your run. Additionally, Power Dive can basicly makes you unkillable in 1vs1 and even 2/3vs1. It counters Ion railgun quite well. It's almost impossible to get a lock on missile through Power Dive. Barrel Roll is only better in one specific situation. When reaching a certain position isn't an engine challenge but a time challenge. Power Dive is better in every single other situation.

Oh not the "skill" argument again. Power Dive makes you put yourself in different places than barrel roll would let you, a power dive for distance is nowhere close to a barrel and also requires more setup (meaning it's nowhere comparable on speed), and there's just a lot of "red paths" that end with you exploding compared to barrel.

Yes, power dive is probably (in general and assuming a high level of skill with both) the better component. It brings you a nice distance, moves you out of LOS much faster than barrel roll, and has half the cooldown and zero energy cost. Those are all great things about it, but the claim that power dive is wholly better (especially dismissing the ability to cross distances rapidly, which barrel roll is unparallelled at) is not a fair assessment.

The type 3 bomber is better at the "medium range" supposed niche, because not only does it have heavy lasers and solid missile options, the mine/drone is simply far better at pushing an enemy ship away than anything the strikes have. And the bomber frame is a lot less useful in a dogfight than a scout, strike- or even a gunship. Even with those limits, the type 3 bomber has (IMO) a much better time in a dogfight than the dogfighter strikes.

 

The type 3 gunship that is being discussed here has three short range options, plus disto missile break. This allows the ship to really capitalize on any situation where it can get the enemy to even fly past it, something strikes are pretty poor at. The other piece is being able to switch between FAST lockon missiles means that you are almost always able to threaten a missile, something that the Pike very much lacks.

No question the T3 GS is a better dogfighter than the T3 Bomber, but the latter is the best at the midrange engagements that are the nearest thing strike fighters have to a niche. I really am not sure which of the two is better overall, but I'm certain they both outperform "real" strikes for their roles.

I would very much dispute barrel as a poor engine maneuver. The big deal is that it crosses serious distance, and a lot of the game is positional based. If barrel gets you a DO, it is worth quite a bit, right? If it gets you to a node to hold it neutral, what about that? Obviously it is worse in a dogfight.

That is why it is "niche" rather than "useless". It is massively inferior in all other ways, including overall mobility (two Power Dives will take you further and leave you with much more power than one Barrel Roll) but it gives you a burst of forward speed unmatched over a couple of seconds so it's not entirely without merit. It has a niche. Notice that I didn't say it's worse overall, but its niche is far more restricted than the turns (notably because it's more or less useless in Domination, where a T3 scout will sprint faster than any BR-capable ship).

Still, I feel Interdiction Drive is a fairer comparison than PD: BR is better in open space, ID is better on a sat or around a rock, the main function of both is the same (making you move faster than other people). BR is admitedly probably better than ID because you can sometimes break locks with it and the ID snare is too weak, plus ID's CD is just too long. Oh, and another common point is both need to be upgraded or they are utterly garbage.

Oh not the "skill" argument again. Power Dive makes you put yourself in different places than barrel roll would let you, a power dive for distance is nowhere close to a barrel and also requires more setup (meaning it's nowhere comparable on speed), and there's just a lot of "red paths" that end with you exploding compared to barrel.

 

Yes, power dive is probably (in general and assuming a high level of skill with both) the better component. It brings you a nice distance, moves you out of LOS much faster than barrel roll, and has half the cooldown and zero energy cost. Those are all great things about it, but the claim that power dive is wholly better (especially dismissing the ability to cross distances rapidly, which barrel roll is unparallelled at) is not a fair assessment.

Have you read what I said? I said exactly that. The only point going for Barrel Roll is its ability to cross distance when the only factor is time. If the distance is big enough to make engine a factor, Barrel Roll loses to Power Dive.

Barrel Roll is only better in one specific situation. When reaching a certain position isn't an engine challenge but a time challenge.

Yeah.. It sounded better in my head.. Guess I'll have to practice my English some more.....

Some interesting conversations going on in here.

What this is really showing to me is how important the components a ship has are in it's overall balance to other ships/classes. The frames while differing are important but it seems nowhere near as important as the actual components on a ship. As Verain pointed out the Strike frame is nowhere near powerful enough for the awful component choices the Strikes have.

I mean the Bomber Frame gets 50% extra missile ammo for free, why can't we see buff's like this on the Strikes. Someone had mentioned adding free 10% accuracy to all lasers on a Strike that sounded like a neat idea. I'm not usually one to theory craft on what changes could be done so it's definitely not my area to talk about. I'm more of a what's good right now theory crafter.

As for the age old Power Dive vs Barrel Roll I really feel this is a player specific choice, I don't think one is better then the other. I myself choose Barrel Roll over Power Dive on the two ships that have that choice. I'm a Damage Overcharge whore and Barrel makes you win the race to get there every time.

I can be totally honest in saying that if the Jurgoran had both Barrel Roll and Power Dive I would absolutely use Barrel Roll. One of the reasons I don't play this ship in death match (Competitively speaking) is specifically because it lacks Barrel Roll and I always lose the races to the Damage Overcharges.

Just pointing out that this "for fun" build is the best Strike in the game, and that is part of the reason why it is fun.

No. No it is not.

You sir, have made an error in classification.

It is not a pseudo-strike, it is one of the flavors of second rate imitation battlescout. That is to say, basically a battlescout without boost endurance and high burst damage. The T1 strike with Ion, Cluster, turning thrusters, and Quads (or RFLs) is another flavor of second rate imitation battlescout.

Imitation battlescout can be a lot of fun, but it's imitation battlescout not, "best strike."

That's why I definitely wouldn't be a fan of your list of changes to make the T2 strike much more like the T3 gunship double missile build. With two flavors of imitation battlescout already out there, I don't feel any desire for a third. I'd much rather have a viable missile boat.

To have a viable missile boat, you don't need the traits of a good close in dogfighter with low boost and mediocre burst, you need a range of viable missile weapons systems. I'll grant that would take more development effort than an imitation battlescout makeover for the T2 strike, but as long as I'm dreaming impossible dreams I figure I might as well go for the more ambitious ones.

There are components that would be nice on a T2 strike Retros, Interdiction, and Thermite for example. Those are luxuries though, not necessities. What it needs is for missiles in general to work well as a weapon system.

Either that or an option for the second missile to be changed to something useful instead (though chances are that makes it not much of a missile boat playstyle anymore).

The way the other double missile ships become competitive isn't by having better spaceframes, better engine options, or better shield options, it's by ditching the second missile for a weapon that's significantly better than the first missile and that makes the ship play more typically for it's class. The problem with the T2 strike is that the only options it has are missiles that are slightly worse than the first missile or significantly worse than the first missile. I suppose that does make it play more typically for the strike class, but it doesn't do much good for competitiveness.

But I would even say that if you took an optimal Jurgoran with Clusters and a Railgun, but then prohibited it from using its Railgun and force it to just melee with Clusters and BLC, it would still be superior to any Strike, including the Rycer.

All I can say to that is that I have never seen a scary T3 double missile gunship or a scary T3 bomber, and that's bearing in mind that those are usually seen flown by very good pilots who happen to be fooling around. Slippery, a pain to kill, and good at gobbling up foodships, but not scary. I have on the other hand, seen strikes that are scary. Not as scary as those same pilots in scouts or gunships, but still scary.

It is not a pseudo-strike, it is one of the flavors of second rate imitation battlescout. That is to say, basically a battlescout without boost endurance and high burst damage. The T1 strike with Ion, Cluster, turning thrusters, and Quads (or RFLs) is another flavor of second rate imitation battlescout.

 

Imitation battlescout can be a lot of fun, but it's imitation battlescout not, "best strike."

No. The double missile T3 is a strike. It doesn't have the burst and mobility of a scout. It has the range control and defenses of a strike. What is the main tool a Quell has? Cluster - Conc/Protorp. All its playstyle turn around spamming the target with cluster until you can line up a shot, the long range missiles being only there for support. The T3 gunship sacrifice this support for a better control in close range and way better engine dragging it close to the T1. My TrollDor playstyle is an hybrid between my T2 and T1 Strike.

That's why I definitely wouldn't be a fan of your list of changes to make the T2 strike much more like the T3 gunship double missile build. With two flavors of imitation battlescout already out there, I don't feel any desire for a third. I'd much rather have a viable missile boat.

 

To have a viable missile boat, you don't need the traits of a good close in dogfighter with low boost and mediocre burst, you need a range of viable missile weapons systems. I'll grant that would take more development effort than an imitation battlescout makeover for the T2 strike, but as long as I'm dreaming impossible dreams I figure I might as well go for the more ambitious ones.

 

There are components that would be nice on a T2 strike Retros, Interdiction, and Thermite for example. Those are luxuries though, not necessities. What it needs is for missiles in general to work well as a weapon system.

Either that or an option for the second missile to be changed to something useful instead (though chances are that makes it not much of a missile boat playstyle anymore).

Missiles aren't there for the DPS. They are only control tools. You use them to force your target to move like you want it to move until he makes a mistake. The damage they do is only meaningful when they are capitalizing on a mistake... Your goal as a strike/TrollDor/Double Torp is to make your opponent make a mistake than capitalize on it. All 5 ships (and about 7 decent builds) have their own way to force the mistake and win. Unlike gunships, bombers and scouts, strikes cannot win a match if the opponent doesn't make a mistake. All their tools are built toward that. Forcing the mistake.

I can't talk about the T3 bomber.. But the TrollDor and the Double Torp are definately strike as far as playstyle goes. Both capitalize on opponent's misplays.

With the TrollDor, you try to bait the joust by snaring your target and striping his missiles breaker with cluster spam. Then you just destroy them upclose. That's exactly what the T1 strike does. Except that the TrollDor can actually be scary when the opponent refuse to joust whilst the T1 is forced to chase and hope to keep its target in range.

Offensively, it is a strike in that it has vaguely similar turning and such, and can't do any of the scout tricks.

Defensively, it's very different- it's much more fragile than a strike versus unavoidable damage or if being punished for a misplay, and in that regard is scout-like or gunship-like, and also like those classes has the very powerful distortion, allowing for an extra "get out of jail free" card that can be used offensively or defensively.

I feel that the components more than make up for the lack of turning, boost, etc. I really feel distortion is just such an auto-pick if you plan to melee (and honestly, even feedback has some serious power going for it in the scout matchup), and the fact that the ship can strap on three threatening short range options makes it unique. You could argue that it's good that the Pike can't do that, for (some reason?), and that all of its options are "mid range attacks plus X" where X can be "more mid range attacks" "short range attack" or "long range attack". But for that to be ok, the overall strategy of the Pike would just have to be improved.

What the build tells us is this: there's a pretty big gap for a ship that can missile boat at short range, constantly messing with short lock on weapons, and that it actually has the potential to be TOO powerful, if balanced improperly. You can tell this because the overall layout of the ship is actually not a very good one, and it's still playable. If the type 3 gunship lacked a slug railgun entirely (say, replaced with Ion or Concussion, as it already has EMP) it would be a lot weaker, but it would still serve to show this fact.

The strengths of double short lockon are mostly in the game you can play with your opponent- unless he's got power dive, you are probably going to land lockon weapons against him, and even if he has powerdive, you won't unless he wants you to. But choosing WHICH lockons land is still important, and you are absolutely still vulnerable to his weapons, even with distortion available, so it becomes a bit of a chess match. That, I think, is the part about the ship that is good.

But I do feel that we should see this playstyle on a non-gunship- it would be interesting for sure. If this was on a strike frame, that would probably be something that a battle scout would actually have a hard time shutting down.

Offensively, it is a strike in that it has vaguely similar turning and such, and can't do any of the scout tricks.

 

Defensively, it's very different- it's much more fragile than a strike versus unavoidable damage or if being punished for a misplay, and in that regard is scout-like or gunship-like, and also like those classes has the very powerful distortion, allowing for an extra "get out of jail free" card that can be used offensively or defensively.

 

Defensively, whether it is closer to a Strike or Scout depends entirely on the shield you pick. The Jurgoran really has three very different defensive profiles: Distortion Field (like a Scout), Directional (like a Strike), or Feedback (in between, but still closer to a Strike than a Scout).

With Distortion Field, Large Reactor, and Vector, your defensive stats for Sting vs. Jurgoran are:

Sting

Hull 1026

Evasion 24%

DR 0%

Shield 1430

Regen 65.0

Gunship

Hull 1250 (+224)

Evasion 14% (-10%)

DR 5% (+5%)

Shield 1870 (+440)

Regen 85 (+20)

You're actually quite a bit tougher than a Scout when it comes to "unavoidable damage", but much more fragile than any Strike build.

But if you take Directional, your defensive profile is very, very close to a Strike.

With Directional, Large Reactor, and Writch, your defensive stats for a Rycer vs. Jurgoran are:

Strike

Hull 1450

Evasion 5%

DR 5%

Shield 2520

Regen 103.5

Jurgoran

Hull 1250 (-200)

Evasion 0% (-5%)

DR 5%

Shield 2380 (-140)

Regen 97.7 (-5.8)

If the Jurgoran tries to build its defenses like a Strike, it honestly comes pretty close. And it works pretty well. No, you don't have an extra missile break, but you can just eat Cluster Missiles and Seeker Mines all day long, and it is very hard to pull you off a satellite without shield-piercing mines.

In the middle is Feedback Shield, which can't really be compared with any Scout or Strike builds since they can't get it. If you stick with a Large Reactor, you still have Strike-levels of shield capacity... with Feedback/Large/Writch, your defenses are:

Jurgoran w/Feedback+Large

Hull 1250

Evasion 0%

DR 5%

Shield 2210

Regen 97.7

The above still looks quite "Strike-like" in terms of its defensive profile. Of course, the missing datapoint here is that your regen delay is 6 seconds, which you won't find on any Rycer build.

As Verain and others have noted, Turbo + Feedback is quite viable, especially for holding a satellite against several Scouts.

Jurgoran w/Feedback+Turbo

Hull 1250

Evasion 0%

DR 5%

Shield 1870

Regen 97.7

In this case, your shield capacity is quite a bit lower than "Strike like", but it's quite a bit higher than "Scout like". But your shield regen is still very high--close to Strike levels. In this build, your defensive profile is hard to classify. It's unique. Decent capacity, quick and high regen, and the Feedback effect. Combine Feedback with BLC and melee missiles and you have a very solid craft that will own Strikes and be a very difficult target for Scouts--they may take it out, but it won't be fast and it probably won't be without some attrition.

As for how it fares against Bombers, it can eat a few mines to the face and still survive, and it has the maneuverability to quickly down a Bomber with BLC's so that it should only take a single volley of mines.

The above is all before you add a Railgun. That final cherry on top makes the Jurgoran actually fulfill the "generalist" roll that Strikes were possibly meant to fill (at least according to their fluff text). But unlike Strikes, the Jurgoran actually does this job very well. There is no situation in which it is easily hard countered. It can solo-cap a node. It can peel and kill Bombers. It can counter Scouts at range, and it can frustrate and delay them up close (especially with Feedback). And it laughs at other Strikes. It doesn't fare well in duels with other Gunships, but with Power Dive it can either get to cover or charge to short-range, and Ion Railgun does not cripple it.

If I were forced to fly only one ship, in both Domination and Deathmatch, I'd probably choose a Jurgoran, because I'd be guaranteed a high minimum level of impact and effectiveness. I don't think I can say that about any other ship--Sting and Mangler come close, but Sting can be hard-countered by mines a bit more easily than the Jurgoran, and Mangler can be shut down by Scouts or other Gunships.

The above still looks quite "Strike-like" in terms of its defensive profile. Of course, the missing datapoint here is that your regen delay is 6 seconds, which you won't find on any Rycer build.

Not exactly true. A QCS Rycer is quite viable too