Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Let's talk about Strike Fighters

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
Let's talk about Strike Fighters
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

JasonSzeremi's Avatar


JasonSzeremi
07.19.2015 , 06:13 AM | #511
A scout can press two buttons (cool downs) and suddenly be nearly invulnerable and deadly, even come to a complete stop in-front of enemy guns (stacked evasion with distortion field, targeting telemetry with the defensive buff)
Can a strike fighter do this? It could have if it's components worked. Charged plating is supposed to provide a damage reduction during it's up period, it's a cool down so the excuse scouts give 'well it's not all the time' applies too. But armor piercing is too common, it's available even on weapons that should not have armor piercing and it's 100% so anything with armor as a defense is naked before them. Anything that does high dps is already armor piercing even if it shouldn't be like: burst lasers, a weapon supposedly using multiple small energy pulses.... is armor piercing when that is the opposite of a dense co-inherent penetrating weapon. (Shotguns typically don't piercing armor plates.... but low tech polish lances can and in fact did.)

So armor and armored targets becomes virtually useless to anyone using one of these high dps weapons.. if you want to bring back armor into the light, some of these weapons, especially the ones used by light weight fighting vehicles should get less.... perhaps only 75.... 50.... or 25 percent armor piercing. If that happens bombers will suddenly come off the floor as being tough enough to take the abuse scouts can dish out, and strikes, with their torpedoes and missiles (weapons most bombers can't even dodge) might have a role engaging them.... not to mention strikes with armor (not the T1 unless the damage reduction of charged plating becomes a non-armor factor since it can't stack it with an armor comp) will be more of a factor in the game.

Rail-guns do have the right physics for armor piercing.... but if you want more game balance perhaps they should also only get 75 or 50 percent armor penetration.... then someone with charged plating who's getting hit by a gunship won't be surprised to find out their super damage resistance cool down, doesn't resist damage dealt by gunships. Who knows, perhaps the T2 gunship with it's proton torps might get new life as it will need to lob those torps at bombers and strikes, and gunship walls might become less of a fixture of the battle field

(since when was stationary fighters firing away at range ever seen in any star wars movie?)

tommmsunb's Avatar


tommmsunb
07.19.2015 , 04:29 PM | #512
You have to be either delusional or incredibly bad as to not to be able to hit a scout that's popped its cooldowns but is sitting still. Seriously.
twitch.tv/tomeateejedota
Xi'ao'prime - Ebon Hawk / Bastion, Tomoya - Jung Ma
Otoshimono - Shadowlands/Progenitor formerly known as: Tomeateeje/Yuuko-San/Rumina/Friendlygurl/Tensai-Hikoushi/Taisetsuna/Yorimoyoi

RickDagles's Avatar


RickDagles
07.19.2015 , 05:57 PM | #513
Quote: Originally Posted by JasonSzeremi View Post
A scout can press two buttons (cool downs) and suddenly be nearly invulnerable and deadly, even come to a complete stop in-front of enemy guns (stacked evasion with distortion field, targeting telemetry with the defensive buff)
Can a strike fighter do this? It could have if it's components worked. Charged plating is supposed to provide a damage reduction during it's up period, it's a cool down so the excuse scouts give 'well it's not all the time' applies too. But armor piercing is too common, it's available even on weapons that should not have armor piercing and it's 100% so anything with armor as a defense is naked before them. Anything that does high dps is already armor piercing even if it shouldn't be like: burst lasers, a weapon supposedly using multiple small energy pulses.... is armor piercing when that is the opposite of a dense co-inherent penetrating weapon. (Shotguns typically don't piercing armor plates.... but low tech polish lances can and in fact did.)

So armor and armored targets becomes virtually useless to anyone using one of these high dps weapons.. if you want to bring back armor into the light, some of these weapons, especially the ones used by light weight fighting vehicles should get less.... perhaps only 75.... 50.... or 25 percent armor piercing. If that happens bombers will suddenly come off the floor as being tough enough to take the abuse scouts can dish out, and strikes, with their torpedoes and missiles (weapons most bombers can't even dodge) might have a role engaging them.... not to mention strikes with armor (not the T1 unless the damage reduction of charged plating becomes a non-armor factor since it can't stack it with an armor comp) will be more of a factor in the game.

Rail-guns do have the right physics for armor piercing.... but if you want more game balance perhaps they should also only get 75 or 50 percent armor penetration.... then someone with charged plating who's getting hit by a gunship won't be surprised to find out their super damage resistance cool down, doesn't resist damage dealt by gunships. Who knows, perhaps the T2 gunship with it's proton torps might get new life as it will need to lob those torps at bombers and strikes, and gunship walls might become less of a fixture of the battle field

(since when was stationary fighters firing away at range ever seen in any star wars movie?)
Charged plating is meant primarily as a counter against mines. The fact that it works against some of the lasers and missiles is a bonus. The Rampart/Razorwire with charged plating is an extremely effective build.

Danalon's Avatar


Danalon
07.20.2015 , 03:55 AM | #514
Quote: Originally Posted by JasonSzeremi View Post
incidentally, could we get credit for 'participating' for _FIRING_ missiles? I got kicked from a match because none of my torps hit, but I locked and fired them contiously... I was participating, I was making the other guys blow their missile evasions hot and heavy. I would have gotten more credit if I had fired on a mine or drone, which is kinda crazy.

What strikes need.... is burst damage around the 1500 mark that gunships do with a single shot. They would have to be in the 10k-0 range band, preferably around 8-4k but damage should not decline with closer range.... they are strike fighters not archers (that would be the gunships who could possibly use a damage nerf under 6k? just saying...)
Strikes have blasters too. There is no reason to change participating mechanics. If you don't hit with torpedos, try closing in as you lock on. Or choose better targets. Good targets are bombers (except the T3) and gunships that are under pressure and have used at least one of ther breaks.

We don't need more burst in this game, scouts have burst, gunships have burst, bomber mines can be placed to detonate at the same time and burst. If strikes get their damage buffed, then either they should get a bonus to blaster damage to increase their sustained damage or they should get a mechanic bonus to missiles (shorter relaod, shorter lockon or something). A shorter missile lock on would actually make them a bit burstier, but ther would be a warning before the burst, it might turn out ok.


Quote: Originally Posted by JasonSzeremi View Post
(since when was stationary fighters firing away at range ever seen in any star wars movie?)
I'm relatively sure the reason we don't see stationary fighters in the movies is because it would be boring to watch. Stationary things need a lot of guns to be exciting, like star destroyers. Or they need to be really big with an even bigger gun, like the death star.

JasonSzeremi's Avatar


JasonSzeremi
07.20.2015 , 04:25 AM | #515
Quote: Originally Posted by RickDagles View Post
Charged plating is meant primarily as a counter against mines. The fact that it works against some of the lasers and missiles is a bonus. The Rampart/Razorwire with charged plating is an extremely effective build.
You mean it's mostly effective against mines in the current meta. It is also effective against weapons that don't have 100% armor piercing. what is intended and what is a bonus is a matter of opinion, is it better that light weight weapons like burst lasers ARE 100% armor piercing? Do gunships NEED 100% armor piercing or rather does the game need gunship walls and stationary fighters? I think less armor piercing would help strikes.
This is one advantage they could have had over scouts that is nerfed because of the high armor piercing on the highest dps weapons (burst lasers, rail guns).
The counter argument I have heard is that lower armor piercing would make bombers harder to kill (for scouts)
but if strikes gain more firepower and have armor piercing weapons like heavy lasers, they may be needed for engaging bombers that scouts can't handle.
(course that also means rocket pods might become more popular but without an armor piercing laser not sure it would make a difference)


As for not being able to 'hit' a scout that has maxed light weight armor, popped distortion field, is using an evasion boosting crew member and targeting telemetry's defensive buff. Perhaps it's not as much that I can't hit such a scout at all, as the damage I can do with my strike when they park right in-front of my guns doesn't amount to much, but the damage they deal kills me quickly. So perhaps it is not so much that they are completely invulnerable but that their burst damage is completely unbalanced compared to mine. Why else would they park in-front of enemy strike fighters and gunships and win. This isn't just a pilot skill thing or the good pilots who select scouts would be doing the same thing with strike fighters, they know this and don't necessarily want strikes to become more competitive because it would make them have to change their tactics or take up flying strike fighters
The point of the forum is to make strike fighters a viable option, if they become a logical choice for some missions then that would be success on our part. At the same time, we don't want to make scouts useless, but as long as they are faster, quicker to nodes, and possibly turn better (although the T1 strike could use that turning radius and not threaten the scouts recon mission)

there are videos on the web of scouts coming to a complete stop and wailing away at other craft, sometimes in-front of their guns

Many of the good pilots avoid strike fighters now because experience has told them they are better off in the strike scout: Flash fire, sting. Other scouts remain on the battle field because being faster, more agile, and more versatile are real advantages still. Now if you want to talk supposed to the T2 scouts are 'supposed to' be second best to the T1 strike in dog-fighting and firepower. We know that's not the case in the current meta and that argument seems to have no weight, it's an opinion that was posted in text files that describe the craft but isn't supported by code.

CrazyOldMystic's Avatar


CrazyOldMystic
07.20.2015 , 05:16 AM | #516
While I am not going to write a whole long page on this, I will get to the point, and that is speed. The gunships make new pilots lives a living hell, and as a result drive them away, because no one likes to get blown out of the sky suddenly at extreme range.

So what area to look into, as I move from bomber to strike fighter, I would have to say its speed and distance. To counter the gunships I would have to say the strike fighter needs to be able to get to its target, with at least half of its speed boost left in the tank, and then use what its got left to get back to friendly lines. There is a whole slew of other issues I could point out but you asked for one, and so there it is.

RickDagles's Avatar


RickDagles
07.20.2015 , 09:34 AM | #517
Quote: Originally Posted by JasonSzeremi View Post
You mean it's mostly effective against mines in the current meta. It is also effective against weapons that don't have 100% armor piercing. what is intended and what is a bonus is a matter of opinion, is it better that light weight weapons like burst lasers ARE 100% armor piercing? Do gunships NEED 100% armor piercing or rather does the game need gunship walls and stationary fighters? I think less armor piercing would help strikes.
This is one advantage they could have had over scouts that is nerfed because of the high armor piercing on the highest dps weapons (burst lasers, rail guns).
The counter argument I have heard is that lower armor piercing would make bombers harder to kill (for scouts)
but if strikes gain more firepower and have armor piercing weapons like heavy lasers, they may be needed for engaging bombers that scouts can't handle.
(course that also means rocket pods might become more popular but without an armor piercing laser not sure it would make a difference)


As for not being able to 'hit' a scout that has maxed light weight armor, popped distortion field, is using an evasion boosting crew member and targeting telemetry's defensive buff. Perhaps it's not as much that I can't hit such a scout at all, as the damage I can do with my strike when they park right in-front of my guns doesn't amount to much, but the damage they deal kills me quickly. So perhaps it is not so much that they are completely invulnerable but that their burst damage is completely unbalanced compared to mine. Why else would they park in-front of enemy strike fighters and gunships and win. This isn't just a pilot skill thing or the good pilots who select scouts would be doing the same thing with strike fighters, they know this and don't necessarily want strikes to become more competitive because it would make them have to change their tactics or take up flying strike fighters
The point of the forum is to make strike fighters a viable option, if they become a logical choice for some missions then that would be success on our part. At the same time, we don't want to make scouts useless, but as long as they are faster, quicker to nodes, and possibly turn better (although the T1 strike could use that turning radius and not threaten the scouts recon mission)

there are videos on the web of scouts coming to a complete stop and wailing away at other craft, sometimes in-front of their guns

Many of the good pilots avoid strike fighters now because experience has told them they are better off in the strike scout: Flash fire, sting. Other scouts remain on the battle field because being faster, more agile, and more versatile are real advantages still. Now if you want to talk supposed to the T2 scouts are 'supposed to' be second best to the T1 strike in dog-fighting and firepower. We know that's not the case in the current meta and that argument seems to have no weight, it's an opinion that was posted in text files that describe the craft but isn't supported by code.
I agree with what you're saying. But buffing charged plating and/or nerfing armor piercing is not the solution. The game is already perfectly balanced between the Charged plating Rampart, Ion GS, and T2 Scout. If you start making changes to their components, it throws off that delicate balance. They just need to find another way to make Strikes more relevant.

It would have been really cool if they could have balanced out Strikes with charged plating in the beginning, but it's too late in the game now to be tinkering with builds that people already love to fly. I guess they could make Strike CP different than Bomber CP. Maybe Strike CP works against BLCs and bomber CP doesn't. But that's kinda sloppy.

Nethgilne's Avatar


Nethgilne
07.20.2015 , 02:08 PM | #518
Quote: Originally Posted by Danalon View Post
All blasters as well as railguns and rocketpods hit instantly. The only weapons with travel time are missiles. Travel time for blasters and pods is simulated by having a lead indicator.
Huh, good point. How would rail guns be affected if they too had to aim for a lead indicator instead of the ship itself? It'll probably only make it a little harder to hit.

ALaggyGrunt's Avatar


ALaggyGrunt
07.20.2015 , 02:58 PM | #519
The reason so many aces just pop TT/DF and facetank things from a dead stop is: it works, especially with BLC. The killzone on those is so shallow it's hard to stay there doing anything else-the footwork is very touchy, and usually takes more time than doing it properly. I used to do it quite a bit, and still do when I'm out of other options (tick bomber).

If most of the ships had a gun choice with serious accuracy as its special stat, that wouldn't work against just about everything not-a-scout.

That, and lag makes snap shots with any short-range gun at boost speeds iffy at best. At boost speeds, I'll have a scout lock clusters on me from 7km, and not be able to lock on 4km, range talent or no.

JasonSzeremi's Avatar


JasonSzeremi
07.21.2015 , 06:36 AM | #520
Quote: Originally Posted by RickDagles View Post
I agree with what you're saying. But buffing charged plating and/or nerfing armor piercing is not the solution. The game is already perfectly balanced between the Charged plating Rampart, Ion GS, and T2 Scout. If you start making changes to their components, it throws off that delicate balance. They just need to find another way to make Strikes more relevant.

It would have been really cool if they could have balanced out Strikes with charged plating in the beginning, but it's too late in the game now to be tinkering with builds that people already love to fly. I guess they could make Strike CP different than Bomber CP. Maybe Strike CP works against BLCs and bomber CP doesn't. But that's kinda sloppy.
Honestly, do you think scouts deserve armor piercing lasers? If BLC didn't have armor piercing it would make bombers harder for scouts to kill, which would open the door for other platforms to be bomber busters.... say platforms with heavier shields and hull and or charged plating themselves. Or can you think of a better way to go about this? I know you're happy with having a high damage and armor piercing point blank shot gun weapon on your scout and if at all possible, improvements to the strike fighter should be done without nerfing someone else.

My hope is to increase the firepower of strike fighters... say perhaps a new high dps mid range laser, and faser locking, reloading, and higher ammo missiles...
I'm imagining the starguard and rycer could use better turning... it's not like they have as much armor as scouts
but if they also got the engine capacity boost one pilot has asked for would that be overkill? Or would scouts still have a role? That the current scout pilots can live with?
Perhaps the engine capacity boost could go to the T2 and T3 strikes only? or would it be best if the Starguard and Rycer turn no better then now, but get the long legs to hit and run?