On the whole GSF class balance is considerably better than ground PVP. It's less toxic and far more friendly (on DM at least). The match balance is also better than ground pvp - though matchmaker does have some funny days. Right now I think GSF is in a good place, and since 6.0 seems to be more populated too.

However does anything need to be patched? Here are some ideas I think would work well, that most vets I fly with seem to agree on.

Proton Torpedos - remove the DOTs. This would force people to be less reliant on them and stop scouts being one-shot killed by a torp.

Slicing - keep it in the game, but provide an anti-slicer ability. One suggestion was a crew-skill called "Firewall" which blocks the slice, but like slicing has a cooldown. Slicing is the most broken component in the game I think. It needs to be addressed somehow. Perhaps changing the tier options so that it doesn't kill engine power too. There are many ways to fix it.

Matchmaker does need some tweaking - some days its clearly in a mood

Honestly I don't think much else needs to be done, speaking as someone who was a hardore ground PVPer, I really think GSF is nicely balanced for the most part.

If I was to get my dream change - it would be a 3rd map type. I'm not the most creative person with stuff like this. but just off the top of my head, maybe a capture the flag scenario. Two teams start at two bases. The idea is to capture the enemy base, while defending your own. I'm sure others could think of better ideas.

I'd like to add something to the list that I think would be an amazing change. Not a game mechanics change though.

Give us the ability to choose our copilots separately from the copilot ability! There are so many copilots that never get used because their ability just isn't useful. A lot of them have real fun voice acting, would be great to hear them. I for one am quite sick of always hearing the same few copilot voices!

I'd like to add something to the list that I think would be an amazing change. Not a game mechanics change though.

 

Give us the ability to choose our copilots separately from the copilot ability! There are so many copilots that never get used because their ability just isn't useful. A lot of them have real fun voice acting, would be great to hear them. I for one am quite sick of always hearing the same few copilot voices!

My goodness yes this would be awesome! I want so badly to fly with Kira as my co-pilot, but her function is next to useless in this meta.

Here are some ideas I think would work well, that most vets I fly with seem to agree on.

Better bring these "most vets you fly with" around, cause I've never heard of any of this, and most of these ideas are poor. Unless you were just saying this to try to imply a consensus exists- that seems likely, given that your thread title is "minor changes", and all of these are huge and sweeping.

Proton Torpedos - remove the DOTs

No thanks, the dots are the best change we've seen. They buff the damage while giving the user time to react. They also give the user time to understand what has happened in many cases. Given that protons should and do wipe out scouts that put no effort into hit points, the dot communicates this well to new players. "Huh" the new player thinks. "That was really close, I died to the dot, not the initial blast. Maybe I should take Reinforced Hull, lets see if that will let me survive- oh hey, it will! Or maybe I could press hydro spanner when I get hit, and the healing from the hot will let me survive the dot, which wouldn't be true if it was burst damage... oh hey, cool, that works too!"

The only scouts that get one shot by protons are the ones that avidly avoid any hit point boost, instead maximizing offense and evasion. Scouts being able to do this without punishment or motivation to ever do anything different was one of the greatest blights of the old meta. The proton being lethal to specifically just these scouts is perfect.

Slicing - keep it in the game, but provide an anti-slicer ability.

Having a rock-paper-scissors thing with slicing seems odd. Do you play slicing? There's several scenarios where slicing isn't going to accomplish what you want it to do already. What there isn't is a blanket immunity.

I'd like to see an actually minor change here- I'd like to see the engine elimination value come down some. If you instead put slicing in a situation where someone can cast 'firewall', then slicing needs to really wreck almost everyone who doesn't have 'firewall'- it would likely need buffs to make up for the cases where it literally does nothing at all (which is not very great design). The counter to slicing is to keep enough gas in your tank and to not blindly throw yourself towards every clarion that sneaks around, but I do feel it's kind of a big ask given the magnitude of engine power you need to keep around.

Matchmaker does need some tweaking - some days its clearly in a mood

Sure, but this isn't a minor change. Everyone knows matchmaker isn't great.

Honestly I don't think much else needs to be done

We still have the type 3 bomber and the type 2 gunship largely without roles. All bombers seem to scale very oddly- 12v12 veteran match will have a lot of bombers in domination and a few in TDM, but make it 4 veterans plus 8 foodships versus 4 veterans plus 8 foodships and suddenly none of the vets can afford to run a bomber. In matches where people are somewhere around the "pilot" level of play and below, ticking is too optimal, especially to players who are risk averse- whether they hurt or help their team depends entirely on how irrational the opposing team is, and that's not really amazing emergent play. I don't know how much of that is really on the community, and how much could be addressed by a dev team. It just feels odd the way bombers have turned out- they have jobs, but it's crazy how easy they get controlled unless there's a whole team of actually good pilots around to make them feel right.

And of course, your post isn't the only one in here. The second post offers:

Give us the ability to choose our copilots separately from the copilot ability!

I like that the copilots (and the factions) have meaning in some small way. I don't think this would improve anything at all- I think it's way better that if you want a copilot, you get their abilities, and if you want someone else's stuff more, you don't get that copilot.

I want so badly to fly with Kira as my co-pilot, but her function is next to useless in this meta.

Her copilot ability is a lot better than it gets credit for, but if you do feel it's too weak in the current meta, I feel asking for a buff for it would be better than asking to make Kira become a voice you can overlay on another character. Right now, Kira Carson is an actual choice- you can take her and have her ups and downs, or you can avoid her. It feels cheesy to get the perfect combination. Why does every single thing where something has meaning or form have to bend for this endless flavorless lack of choice and meaning? Who defends everything become "player choice" and a mere "skin"? It's so frustrating, every game has these voices and they just never cease their chirping, as they flit from game to game, stripping them of all sense of choice.

It also distracts from the real goal- balance. On offensive characters, there's almost* no situation where you can go without Pinpointing, which delivers accuracy, an extremely important stat. This means that plenty of these offensive crewman can't be used in any way. That's not an issue of "let us have their voice so we can all take have a voice divorced from the rest of the character", it's an issue of everything in this game has been based around having pinpointing since forever, it's not a great choice. That's the angle to talk about

*I've tried running without pinpointing on a type 3 scout with lower cooldown and higher arc, a specialized tensor ship set up to hammer EMPs as often as possible- and even then, I suspect the ship is better with pinpointing- it's just one of the few times where both of those things really give you something you don't have without both, and I don't think I'm currently running that setup at all.

I like that the copilots (and the factions) have meaning in some small way. I don't think this would improve anything at all- I think it's way better that if you want a copilot, you get their abilities, and if you want someone else's stuff more, you don't get that copilot.

I don't want them to change anything about picking the crew based on their abilities. I just want to be able to hear different damn voiceovers from my copilot. Yes going with Kira isn't a horrible choice, suboptimal for sure though. But hey maybe I want to, I don't know, fly with good old sergeant Rusk cheering me on. Not only would I gimp my ship with a truly terrible copilot ability (lingering effect), but I'd also be sacrificing accuracy.

Could I still do relatively well while gimping myself. Sure. But that's besides the point. Flying suboptimal stuff for ***** and giggles can be lots of fun in and of itself. But most of the time I want stuff that actually helps me instead of hindering me. And that means I go with the same damn copilots the vast majority of the time.

I'll reiterate the point that I don't want to freely choose the copilot abilities or any of the crew passives. It's great that we have to choose hard what we want from them and that they're different for the factions. I just want to not have to listen to the same few voices I've been hearing for years.

I don't want them to change anything about picking the crew based on their abilities. I just want to be able to hear different damn voiceovers from my copilot.

Yea, and I don't think you should be able to.

Yes going with Kira isn't a horrible choice, suboptimal for sure though.

See? That's the issue. She's not good enough, so you feel bad running her. That's what we should be asking to fix. Not to make her a "skin" that you apply to any copilot you want, removing all meaning from the decision to run Kira.

But hey maybe I want to, I don't know, fly with good old sergeant Rusk cheering me on. Not only would I gimp my ship with a truly terrible copilot ability (lingering effect), but I'd also be sacrificing accuracy.

Lingering Effect is definitely not terrible. Lingering effect on a low health target can be a kill you otherwise wouldn't have had. Sacrificing accuracy is terrible, which is why I brought it up. The solution here is to make pinpointing not mandatory- which has been talked about for literally years.

But right now, if you want Rusk, that's a choice (and that's good) and you have to give things up (and that's great!). The issue is that what you give up isn't very close to what you get.

And that means I go with the same damn copilots the vast majority of the time.

Sure, it's reasonable that you go with the better ones instead of the worse ones. I think that means that the worse one should be improved- right now nobody uses them, after all. Not that they should just throw their hands in the air and make everyone the exact same, which is what "let me glue Kira's voice on top of Gault" says.

I just want to not have to listen to the same few voices I've been hearing for years.

If you want those same passive and copilot combinations, I personally want you to have to listen to the same few voices you've been hearing for years.

I just think we have some issues with how good certain passives and actives are versus each other.

And I want to reiterate: I'm personally sick of this argument coming in to every game I play, and often eventually winning. It's depressing, and I've been at the point for years now where I will tell you straight up player choice is the enemy of diverse play experiences, along with turning characters into skins removes meaning and choice from every game. Players asking for "skins" to replace deep choices are like children demanding ice cream- just because the devs give in doesn't mean it's good for anyone.

In my opinion, the one change that would make the biggest difference would be to improve the tutorial. The biggest valid complaint about GSF is the steep learning curve, that requires a commitment to flying a lot before you become competitive. An improved tutorial would allow newer pilots to practice their skills without being killed right away. Here are a few of my suggestions to improve the tutorial.

1. Allow players to fly the ships on their hangar bar in the tutorial. This would allow them to use the same controls they would in matches, even on non-standard abilities like railguns, rocket pods, or some of the crew abilities. I think this change would be the best combination of easy to implement and useful for players.

2. Provide a moving target in the tutorial. Maybe have the speed increase after each time the target is killed, or have the target boost for a while until its energy runs out, then move slow until its engine energy refills. It could just fly a simple oval. You see newer players have single digit accuracy on the scoreboard, this would allow them to practice in a somewhat more realistic way.

3. Have a railgun sentry drone in some corner of the map. Give the drone about the same amount of health as a regular gunship, the same time to charge the railgun, and a chance to miss if the target moves laterally from the aim point. This would allow players to practice attacking gunships, using LOS and evasive movement, and improve burst shooting for faster kills. Even if the railgun sentry drone acted exactly like the normal ones in used in matches, it would still help provide more realistic practice.

4. Have a missile sentry drone in another corner of the map. Maybe this could need a missile lock on the same as a regular ship. This would allow players to practice missile lock breaks and LOSing missile locks. Even if the missile sentry drone was exactly like the ones in matches, it would still help practicing against missiles.

If somehow all of these things could be done, it give newer players a way to practice in a more realistic environment without feeling the pressure of a real match with teammates you're afraid of letting down or looking bad in front of other players.

If somehow all of these things could be done, it give newer players a way to practice in a more realistic environment without feeling the pressure of a real match with teammates you're afraid of letting down or looking bad in front of other players.

I like these ideas. Aside from the moving target, they seem to use the existing rudimentary AI. Rail drones or gunships in real matches have multiple targets to choose from, and so one ship approaching the rail drone in the tutorial might be a little unfair for the tutee, but the idea has merit.

Much more needs to be done than just minor changes.

First, strike ships are extremely overpowered.

They are faster than scouts, tankier than bombers and do more damage than gunships. At this point there is literally zero reasons to fly anything other than strike ships especially for new pilots.

Suggested solutions: reduce strike ships engine capacity to 75% of what they have now; also remove DoT from proton torpedoes, these shall make only 800 dmg on initial hit.

Second, most secondary weapons of scouts have no practical use.

Ion missile is just plain weak and deal no danage, especially considering its laughable range and lock time.

Thermite torpedo is even worse, you just CANT kill anything that is not AFK with this. Horrible lock on time makes sure you will be killed 3 times before you launch it. And even if you launch it, you need 3 thermite torpedoes to kill strike or bomber or gunship with fortress shields. Compare to effect of proton torps and cry.

Sabotage probe is another worthless joke of a weapon, it could be good equivalent of RS but with it's range, lock on time and laughable damage it's useless.

But what saddens me the most is the absolute state of Bloodmark Combat Command build. If there is something absolutely useless in GSF hangar, this is it.

Solutions:

1. Give scouts, all scouts, option to have Magazine component, with access to both efficient targeting and munitions extender on players choice.

2. Give Bloodmark (and whatever its pub side equivalent is) heavy laser cannons.

3. Increase range of Sabotage Probe to 8km.

Much more needs to be done than just minor changes.

 

First, strike ships are extremely overpowered.

Oh good here we go.

They are faster than scouts

They are, in fact, not faster than scouts. You can verify this by looking at the base speed of scouts, and noticing that it is higher than that of strikes.

tankier than bombers

This one is more interesting. It's not strictly true, but it can depend on what is going on. The more armor piercing you have, the easier it is to destroy the bomber. The more shield piercing you have, the more you generally hurt the strike. The more you can be disrupted by evasion, the easier the target the bomber becomes. A strike normally combines a good amount of mobility and cooldowns, after all.

and do more damage than gunships

This is interesting. Gunships aren't really a dps class, but they are a damage class, and they work based on burst damage and denial of areas- this can work to disrupt an opponent in many ways. By contrast, scouts and strikes have very high dps, and much more mobility than gunships and bombers. A strike outdamaging a gunship on a scoreboard is generally expected, but it is also map dependent- assuredly, strikes are straight up worse than gunships on Lost Shipyards TDM, for instance.

At this point there is literally zero reasons to fly anything other than strike ships especially for new pilots.

This is simply not true at all. There's plenty of reasons to fly gunships and scouts, and bombers are in an odd place, but they certainly aren't at "literally zero" levels either.

Suggested solutions: reduce strike ships engine capacity to 75% of what they have now

Prior to the current buffed state of strike engines, strikes were largely controlled by almost anything that destroyed engine power. Currently, only a strike without good engine power management is totally erased by a single application of engine destruction abilities.

What bothers me most about these posts is that the "nerf strike" guys never actually get in a debate with the "nerf bombers" guys and the "nerf gunships" guys. We haven't seen the "nerf scouts" posters around for a bit, despite their extreme power in domination maps. But basically, it would be really great if you all got in a pool and splashed each other for awhile, instead of trickling in to tangentially related threads and turning them into class hate threads.

also remove DoT from proton torpedoes, these shall make only 800 dmg on initial hit.

I don't think scouts should have their hull reduced to 800 man, that seems out of line.

I assume that's the paired part of your suggestion, given that we definitely want scouts who don't take some hit point buff to get one shot by protons.

Second, most secondary weapons of scouts have no practical use.

This is gonna be interesting.

Ion missile is just plain weak and deal no danage, especially considering its laughable range and lock time.

Correct, ion missile is not good enough. Ion missile is not a scout weapon, however- it just shows up on a utility scout. Ion missile also shows up on two strikes and one gunship. It could probably be buffed in a few ways. With its current role being a mirror of concussion, it could have a lower cooldown; or it could go the other way and really dig into its role is a control missile and have greater debuff duration and/or magnitude, while keeping its long cooldown.

Thermite torpedo is even worse, you just CANT kill anything that is not AFK with this.

This is incorrect- thermite is definitely not worse than ion missile. Thermite is actually a really good weapon that does a decent amount of damage, applies a very effective vulnerability debuff, and can largely one-shot anything you can strip shields from before the missile hits. Thermite doesn't appear to be a top tier missile when put on a ship with better options (such as proton), but it's by no means a non-useful weapon.

Horrible lock on time makes sure you will be killed 3 times before you launch it.

It's lock on time is the same as the proton that everyone complains about, but in this particular place, applied to a ship that is more maneuverable, more efficient with engine, faster, and, in one case, perfectly capable of locking out engine breaks WHILE becoming immune to missiles. You should not be dying thrice for every thermite launch; that is a serious problem on your end if true or even remotely close to true.

And even if you launch it, you need 3 thermite torpedoes to kill strike or bomber or gunship with fortress shields.

"This anti-hull torpedo does a bad job against fortress shield"

Yea, no crap. By contrast, if you put it on a bomber with charged plating, it disables the plating for the duration, while also making all the shots go through the shield (stacking linearly with the bleedthrough already present on the shield).

Thermite is not supposed to be the only thing you are hitting them with. You can tell, because its main effect is to apply a debuff that turns off their hull damage reduction and grants shield penetration. Try hitting a target with shield stripped and enjoy a +50% damage bonus.

Compare to effect of proton torps and cry.

It's worse than proton, but not terrible ultra worse. As a utility missile that largely signs a death warrant for anything under focus fire, it's a no-joke weapon.

Sabotage probe is another worthless joke of a weapon

Sabotage probe is kind of a joke weapon. It's ok, but it falls short of good.

Would you want sabotage probe to get buffed though? Think about how much players complain about much softer CCs than sabotage probe. Saboprobe's very hard control probably needs the limitations that it has, especially given its absolutely wicked-short flight time on the off chance you actually manage to launch it.

But what saddens me the most is the absolute state of Bloodmark Combat Command build. If there is something absolutely useless in GSF hangar, this is it.

Bloodmark with Combat Command is a fine ship. The issue is that it competes with tensor, and there's no way to apply a second type 3 scout to the bar. This means that unless you are running as a team that can bring tensor, your type 3 scout probably needs to bring it.

But hey, you said most have no purpose. Is that really true?

Two of the scouts have rocket pods. Rocket pods work great.

One of the scouts has cluster missile. Cluster missile is pretty good.

One of the scouts has EMP missile. That's an extremely good missile, and makes for a really amazing addition to the tensor scout. Light laser / EMP missile / tensor / repair probe / dive or snap or even k - this is a really solid type 3 scout. You seem to be under the impression that every single option has to be solid. And that every single scout, even the speed/sensor scout and the support scout, seems to need to be as fighter-like as the strike fighters. We used to have this; everyone playing strikes in that meta was wrong, and the ship archetype was totally dead. There was no use for any strike in any situation back then.

Where are we now? Type 3 scouts are excellent on domination, type 2 scouts are very good on domination, type 1 scouts are decent on domination. In TDM, only type 1 and type 2 scouts can do much of anything, and they can't do a huge amount. If you want to see more scouts in TDM, how can you accomplish this without making the game full of them? The actual thing hurting scouts in that mode isn't strikes or gunships, it's that even a small nest can protect a gunship from a scout, whereas such a nest doesn't offer nearly as serious protection for a strike fighter. In general, a scout's fragility actually matters in TDM, and is much more pronounced than in turnfight-central of domination.

And scouts aren't trash in TDM- Kuat Mesas, in particular, is a fine place, especially for a type 2 scout. Only lost shipyards really punishes scouts (and largely because that one map is all about gunships).

Solutions:

1. Give scouts, all scouts, option to have Magazine component, with access to both efficient targeting and munitions extender on players choice.

No thanks, these things have really helped the two strikes and one bomber that have access to them. Scouts don't need them and shouldn't have them. They don't address the few issues scouts arguably have; they just give them buffs strikes need, and make them to take over for the things strikes are good at.

2. Give Bloodmark (and whatever its pub side equivalent is) heavy laser cannons.

Uh, what? If any scout was going to get HLC, it would be the battlescout. But HLC is definitely not supposed to be a scout weapon.

3. Increase range of Sabotage Probe to 8km.

If you wanted to make it good, it wouldn't need anything over 7k. But do you want to make it good? Are you really sure?

I would like to throw my suggestions in too.

• 
  With regards to remote slicing, rather than create a cleansing ability or reducing the engine drain, reduce the range to use it. It will create a fun interaction whereby the fighter that already has weak engines will have to expand more of its engine pool when chasing a target, but is still potent as defending against enemies coming at it.

• Making bomber more viable -perhaps instead of Ion mine, it would have an EMP mine. It would work the same as EMP field, but without the missile break of course.

• More viable armour selections -make armour penetration not 100%. This should help bombers too.

• Maybe Ion missile could disable shield abilities too.

• Sabotage probe could force the afflicted target to boost for its entire duration instead of holding them in place.
  

If I think of more what the heck changes, I'll be sure to voice them.

I went ahead and read through this thread today so I could drop in a comment. I'll try to hit most of the big points brought up in here.

First up Proton Torpedo

One of the reasons the current meta is just so damned good is we now have a great tool for peeling for teammates. Proton has really changed the game so that if one person is attacking one of your teammates you can start locking one on them and it will force that target to break off it's attack. GSF being a team game this is very important, in the old meta we really only had Bombers able to do this.

Proton needs to be as lethal as it currently is to continue to provide this job, however I do think it's lock on is just a little too fast for that kind of effect.

My proposed change would be too simply make the lock on time on it just a little bit longer. It's current base lockon time is 2.75 I'd simply bump that up to 3 seconds flat, this would give everyone just a little bit more time to get away from the lock on. It would also have the side effect of making Thermite and Proton behave a little differently.

Next up Remote Slicing

This is always a highly talked about ability because of just how much it does. The two big factors however are the lockout debuffs and the engine drain. I personally love Remote Slicing I love what it does for the game on a team basis, you have a ship that's focused on peeling for teammates by giving up some weapons to provide a very powerful control debuff. I do however think the engine drain component on it, is a touch overtuned.

My proposed change for Remote Slicing would be too change the engine drain from 60 on the ability to 45. This would provide more counterplay options for players to pool their engine power. (Which is currently the correct way to play vs it)

Next up the Ship chassis and classes themselves.

There was a post by Krask in this thread that had a lot of misconceptions in it sadly, I saw that Verain addressed them point by point so I'm not going to do that too as I agree pretty much entirely with his assessment of that post.

However I will say, the current balance of the ship classes in GSF is in a fantastic place right now. While Strikes do hold many of the "Jobs" or "Roles" in the meta currently, the other ship classes that are designed for specific jobs still excel in those specific jobs. For example a T2 Scout (Sting/Flashfire) is still an absolute beast in Domination currently because of it's extreme dps in can put out on a Node without having to leave it. While Gunships are still one of the best ways of using constant controls, burst damage or Shield piercing kills in the game at the moment. The Gunships are however very fragile now, so if you're team is leaving you out to dry you likely are going to need to swap too a different ship, since they are now more of a Support ship. Bombers are still great at making nests, however they are suffering from the influx of EMP AOE effects in Domination meaning you don't want to stack them like crazy anymore.

I'd definitely say Bombers came out the worst in the balance patch of 5.5, however they aren't anywhere near "useless"

Sabotage Probe

I didn't think I'd be talking much about Sabotage probe on the forums, since most players seem to dislike CC in GSF. Even though I love CC effects in it, I'd never ever want to play a meta where Sabotage probe was the defining missile. Can you imagine a buffed Sabotage probe that became the meta defining missile the way Proton is now, you'd literally get Sabotage probed constantly and just have to sit there and watch your ship die over and over. Even for Scouts Proton Torps have a ton of counter play built, you wouldn't want a premade of 4 EMP Sabotage Probe Scouts running around locking everyone at 8k range.

ThutmoseV's Tutorial Suggestions

I mean there's not much to say here, we've been campaigning for new tutorial stuff since the first year of GSF. I'd absolutely love some added stuff for people to be able to practice on, however I will say the Custom game lobby had done absolute wonders for new players that do use it. It's also been by far the greatest teaching tool, they've added.

Those are my thoughts on the minor changes I'd add for GSF, this seriously is by far the greatest meta the game has ever had though, I'm still just absolutely loving it.

Much more needs to be done than just minor changes.

 

First, strike ships are extremely overpowered.

They are faster than scouts, tankier than bombers and do more damage than gunships. At this point there is literally zero reasons to fly anything other than strike ships especially for new pilots.

Suggested solutions: reduce strike ships engine capacity to 75% of what they have now; also remove DoT from proton torpedoes, these shall make only 800 dmg on initial hit.

 

Second, most secondary weapons of scouts have no practical use.

Ion missile is just plain weak and deal no danage, especially considering its laughable range and lock time.

Thermite torpedo is even worse, you just CANT kill anything that is not AFK with this. Horrible lock on time makes sure you will be killed 3 times before you launch it. And even if you launch it, you need 3 thermite torpedoes to kill strike or bomber or gunship with fortress shields. Compare to effect of proton torps and cry.

Sabotage probe is another worthless joke of a weapon, it could be good equivalent of RS but with it's range, lock on time and laughable damage it's useless.

But what saddens me the most is the absolute state of Bloodmark Combat Command build. If there is something absolutely useless in GSF hangar, this is it.

Solutions:

1. Give scouts, all scouts, option to have Magazine component, with access to both efficient targeting and munitions extender on players choice.

2. Give Bloodmark (and whatever its pub side equivalent is) heavy laser cannons.

3. Increase range of Sabotage Probe to 8km.[/quote

 

Can't say I agree with reducing Strike's engine capacity. By which I assume you mean reduce the regen of QCS, since without QCS Strikes are very limited on engines anyway. We are flying Star Wars Strike fighters! The equivalent of an X-Wing! If we remove the ability to zoom around too much it removes the emersion too. Buff Scouts by all means, but leave Strikes alone.

 

First up Proton Torpedo

 

One of the reasons the current meta is just so damned good is we now have a great tool for peeling for teammates. Proton has really changed the game so that if one person is attacking one of your teammates you can start locking one on them and it will force that target to break off it's attack. GSF being a team game this is very important, in the old meta we really only had Bombers able to do this.

 

Proton needs to be as lethal as it currently is to continue to provide this job, however I do think it's lock on is just a little too fast for that kind of effect.

 

My proposed change would be too simply make the lock on time on it just a little bit longer. It's current base lockon time is 2.75 I'd simply bump that up to 3 seconds flat, this would give everyone just a little bit more time to get away from the lock on. It would also have the side effect of making Thermite and Proton behave a little differently.

 

 

Next up Remote Slicing

 

This is always a highly talked about ability because of just how much it does. The two big factors however are the lockout debuffs and the engine drain. I personally love Remote Slicing I love what it does for the game on a team basis, you have a ship that's focused on peeling for teammates by giving up some weapons to provide a very powerful control debuff. I do however think the engine drain component on it, is a touch overtuned.

 

My proposed change for Remote Slicing would be too change the engine drain from 60 on the ability to 45. This would provide more counterplay options for players to pool their engine power. (Which is currently the correct way to play vs it)

These ideas work for me. I just feel something needs to change with regards to Protons and Slicing. People are far too reliant on them and this stops them being bothered to learn advanced skills like actually shooting at a ship with your primaries. If removing the DOTs isn't widely agreed upon, then extending the lock on time works just as well. Would certainly help Scout pilots get one-shot less often too, and would force use of other missiles like Thermite, which could perhaps have slightly reduced lock-on time. Literally like 0.2 of a second. All that said I 100% agree with the way they serve the meta as a threat, and I think this needs to be kept in tact. Even with a slightly longer lock-on time, you are still going to break off an attack run at the threat of being hit by one. So all good. Nice ideas.

My issue with Slicing is the lack of skill required to execute it. I don't like that guy, so i'll just fly close and disable his ship, knowing that even if I'm not good enough to then shoot him down, someone else will. Your idea is a good start. Personally I would remove the engine debuff altogether, and that would be enough to fix it. I'd be happy to not go with the "firewall" idea if that was done. Or perhaps make it a targeted weapon. This is what sets slicing apart from Ion rail. Ion rail has similar effects (you can't use evade if your engines are dead) but unlike Slicing, Ion rail has to be aimed. So when you get hit with it, you at least appreciate the skill of the GS pilot to have hit you. So perhaps make slicing a targeted ability that needs to be aimed. And just in case anyone feels like mentioning EMP - again EMP is different because it doesn't shut down your engines.

This is the major problem with slicing. Shuts down evade, engines AND doesn't need to be aimed. Its too OP and apart from one or two high-skilled players who are fond of it but have proven themselves in a variety of ships, its mostly people who can't shoot worth a damn who use it to make up for their complete lack of talent.

Well Ion rails have:

• A range of 15km

• Take down its target's shield quickly

• Can splash its damage as well as an engine/weapon drain to nearby targets

• Has a cool down of about 3s.

• Can be relentlessly chained and stacked by a single source

Compared to ion rails, Remote Slicing:

• Has a range of 10km less than Ion rail

• Can only affect one ship at a time

• Does not drain its target's shields like ion rail does

• Can temporarily reduce weapon power capacity, but not drain its pool

• Cannot be stacked from a single source due to its cool down exceeding the duration of its effects

In exchange remote slicing can be used without aiming and disable its target's engine and systems ability. Both abilities perform a similar function, but brings a different utility.

I think Remote Slicing is great in that "people who can't shoot worth a damn who use it to make up for their complete lack of talent". It enables players to mitigate the gap in skill and contribute to their team. It is a great tool for levelling the playing field. As highlighted, it is less potent when used by weaker players -this should not be a problem; it should be a feature.

Proton needs to be as lethal as it currently is to continue to provide this job, however I do think it's lock on is just a little too fast for that kind of effect.

Apparently someone plays with a below average ping. I play with a pretty steady 60MS and I get pilots that start lock ons with longer timers than my clusters and firing them before my cluster is ready to fire. Server response times seem to "favor" others over some. Going head to head against another pilot I'll start a cluster lock on at near max range (max range is another issue that needs cleared up) the other pilot will start his lock on as well. My lock on will drop when the other pilot is about 4-500M in front of me yet we'll pass through each other and he/she is given another 1-2 secs to lock and fire their missile. I've taken countless trips to the capital ship for reincarnation in situations like this.

Now to max range, I get the excuse "it's lag" all the time when I bring it up. But even with "lag" the server should eventually realize my position in relation to my target, yet, I can sit in my GS for 15-20secs with a defense turret targeting at 14900m and it never gets "in range" to fire upon. I'll target other GS sitting at 15000 and they are never in range for me to fire on yet I get fired on by the very same GS. This isn't a "lag" problem if it was simple lag the server would eventually "see" I'm in range and allow me to fire.

I've put in ticket after ticket over the range problem and all I get in return is some canned response about "repairing" the game or doing complete reinstalls.

Apparently someone plays with a below average ping. I play with a pretty steady 60MS and I get pilots that start lock ons with longer timers than my clusters and firing them before my cluster is ready to fire. Server response times seem to "favor" others over some. Going head to head against another pilot I'll start a cluster lock on at near max range (max range is another issue that needs cleared up) the other pilot will start his lock on as well. My lock on will drop when the other pilot is about 4-500M in front of me yet we'll pass through each other and he/she is given another 1-2 secs to lock and fire their missile. I've taken countless trips to the capital ship for reincarnation in situations like this.

Alright so this is a really hard question to answer, I've answered it a couple of other times in my Ask me Anything thread but I'll try to go over it again here for ya. Real quick I do play with a 40 ms ping, I was blessed with such a ping when they moved all the servers to the East coast, my teammates however got screwed in that move and they all have higher pings now then they used too, so while yes I do have a slightly better ping then you do, my teammates actually have worse.

First of all the way missiles lock on in this game is really rough on latency, so here's what happens theres 3 "states" going on.

There is what you can see, what your opponent sees and where you guys actually are on the map. THESE ARE ALL DIFFERENT.

So when you try to lock on a missile, you see a target and try to keep him within your firing arc and range for the duration of the lock on, during this time the game is checking to make sure they are both in your firing and range on the screen YOU see and that they are there in the actual game, this part you don't see. If they leave the firing arc or range on either screen the lock on will stop. This is how players with really high latency get frustrated with missiles because even though the target is in range and arc on their screen the enemy actually isn't there in game so the lock drops.

Alright so now that we know that let's analyze your anecdote.

You have 2 players charging each both locking missiles, you see the target pass by you, your opponent still sees you in front of him because he's laging so things are a little behind for him. Now on your screen you saw him go past you, however he might actually still be in front of you in the games logs because your screen is extrapolating based on the speed you're seeing him move and what not. So for you he's still in front of you in game, but on your screen he's behind you, so your lock drops, but for him you're still in front of him in both the games logs and on his screen so his missiles keeps locking on.

I KNOW it's really complicated way to explain how it works but that is the general idea. Now from your anecdote you might think someone laging has an advantage in missiles, but they really don't. They do generally have an advantage in Jousts, which is why Jousts are so dangerous! Don't do them it's not worth it!

Now to max range, I get the excuse "it's lag" all the time when I bring it up. But even with "lag" the server should eventually realize my position in relation to my target, yet, I can sit in my GS for 15-20secs with a defense turret targeting at 14900m and it never gets "in range" to fire upon. I'll target other GS sitting at 15000 and they are never in range for me to fire on yet I get fired on by the very same GS. This isn't a "lag" problem if it was simple lag the server would eventually "see" I'm in range and allow me to fire.

Ok so for this one, there's actually a bunch of factors that might do this, that actually don't have anything to do with lag.

First up 14900m range, this annoying mecanic was really explored when we had a bunch of Gunship chess games in the old meta.

So if we're both sitting at 15000m range for example staring at each straight on, we'll never be able to hit each other, because our range isn't actually 15000m, it's 14999. Now if I turn my ship sideways we still can't hit each other but afterwards I swing my reticule towards you, if I'm right on the edge of our ranges the angle is gonna light you up as "in range" as I swing my ship back, this let's me get a shot off when it seems like there's no way I should be in range.

Different "camera angles" lead to different ranges and line of sight in GSF, it's how one player can shoot another seemingly through a rock, because his camera angle has line of sight but you don't have it too him.

Next up, what I call the shoot and scoot technique. So same scenario we're both sitting at 15000m range looking straight at each other. If I point my cursor just to the left of you and then strafe to the right, after a few seconds it's going to put me at 14900m range from you and I'll be able to fire, as this happens I immediately strafe back out of range and if you don't fire at the exact split second I do, I'll be out of range again. (If you're the Killingtyme, that plays on Starforge all the time btw, I've done this to do you a bunch sorry! ^^ )

Alright and finally if 2 targets are stacked up right on top of each in your hud, your lasers and railguns always try to fire at the furthest one away. So if there's a Gunship at 14900m and another at 25000m right on top of each other your Railgun shot will always try to hit the 25000m one and miss. The same thing happens with Defense turrets, for example if you try to shoot one and the other on the other side of the Satellite is exactly lined up, even though you don't have line of sight to the other damn turret, the game is trying to hit that turret so you miss every time. If you try to shoot a turret and there's a ship on the other side of the satellite lined up with it, your railgun will try to shoot the ship instead and you'll just miss.

Now there are lag involved shots with Railguns that look like they shoot past the 15k mark, but almost exclusively it's when one Gunship fires at a fast moving target and the shot fires a little late because of lag and the target dies at say 15400m or something like that. I've never seen a lag railgun shot shoot past range when both were sitting in place.

I hope that helps, I really struggle to explain the missile lock on stuff in text here, so if you still don't understand I'd be happy to get in voice chat with you sometime and do my best that way.

Well Ion rails have:

• A range of 15km

• Take down its target's shield quickly

• Can splash its damage as well as an engine/weapon drain to nearby targets

• Has a cool down of about 3s.

• Can be relentlessly chained and stacked by a single source

Ion railguns seem really overpowered, they can fully drain your shields, weapons and engine with two shots, and reduce your energy regeneration on top of that with the right T5 upgrade. I feel engine power drain is way more powerful than weapons/shield drain, and generally should be lowered. Also applies to Remote slicing, though that's a bit less spamable. 12 seconds of being unable to use your engine ability seems a tad too long as well, though probably less of an issue if the engine power drain is reduced.

So when you try to lock on a missile, you see a target and try to keep him within your firing arc and range for the duration of the lock on, during this time the game is checking to make sure they are both in your firing and range on the screen YOU see and that they are there in the actual game, this part you don't see. If they leave the firing arc or range on either screen the lock on will stop. This is how players with really high latency get frustrated with missiles because even though the target is in range and arc on their screen the enemy actually isn't there in game so the lock drops.

I play with a steady ~140 latency and this happens to me all the time, especially at medium range (say 4-5 km). I feel increasing the lock on time on protorps would make this an even more miserable experience. I would be in favor of lowering the lock on time on Thermite Torpedoes a tiny bit, though. Mostly because they are a bit harder to use correctly than proton torpedoes, which are a relatively simple affair.

Alright and finally if 2 targets are stacked up right on top of each in your hud, your lasers and railguns always try to fire at the furthest one away. So if there's a Gunship at 14900m and another at 25000m right on top of each other your Railgun shot will always try to hit the 25000m one and miss. The same thing happens with Defense turrets, for example if you try to shoot one and the other on the other side of the Satellite is exactly lined up, even though you don't have line of sight to the other damn turret, the game is trying to hit that turret so you miss every time. If you try to shoot a turret and there's a ship on the other side of the satellite lined up with it, your railgun will try to shoot the ship instead and you'll just miss.

This might explain why sometimes bombers seem unhitable when latched on a satellite and protected by very close range mines/drones.

Some stuff I'd like to see:

• Missile lock sounds not being drowned by blaster fire
  
• Better handling of latency and missile locks
  
• The ability to create a solo custom game, without having to bother 3 other people. Bonus points if you can choose to add some AI controlled targets to try out stuff.
  

I hope that helps, I really struggle to explain the missile lock on stuff in text here, so if you still don't understand I'd be happy to get in voice chat with you sometime and do my best that way.

Yeah It does help a bit, doesn't make it any less annoying though Very frustrating that I have lock ons drop while target is still in range and centered for no obvious reason (missile breaks, etc).

Yes allllllllllll those killing tyme 1-20s are me.