Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Domination on The Ebon Hawk is now a farce

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
Domination on The Ebon Hawk is now a farce

Verain's Avatar


Verain
04.15.2014 , 11:30 PM | #111
Quote: Originally Posted by Gerfaut View Post
Considering how weak charged plating already is against non-bombers, making it vulnerable against bombers would mean that there would be no reason whatsoever to use charged plating in any build anymore. If your proposed change ever went live, I would immediately stop using charged plating on my minelayer and switch to Nem's build.
Ok, that's fine, but that wouldn't make it bad. If you chose to do that, you'd gain traction over bombers that used seeker mines... which currently none of them do. Seeker mines, which lack shield piercing, would actually be a good meta call, but they wouldn't be able to eliminate most ships with the same power as the shield ignoring ones.

Kuciwalker's Avatar


Kuciwalker
04.15.2014 , 11:42 PM | #112
Quote: Originally Posted by Gerfaut View Post
stuff
I agree 100% that the massive weaknesses of damage reduction are a serious problem in the meta, and the strength of seismic/interdiction is a byproduct of that.

Quote:
One way to encourage the use of charged plating would be to force gunships to choose between shield pierce and armor pierce on slugs as a T4 choice, instead of automatically getting both. Strike fighters with charged plating are the only strikes that can currently be 1-shot by a gunship because of the combined effect of bleedthrough, shield pierce, and armor pierce on slug railgun (yes, I am aware that this requires a bypass crit and doesn't happen often, but it still helps illustrate why strikes don't use charged plating).
Better answer: every weapon in the game that has 100% armor piercing is reduced to 50% armor piercing (with the exception of protons because they're not all that good anyway).

Altheran's Avatar


Altheran
04.16.2014 , 12:09 AM | #113
Quote: Originally Posted by Kuciwalker View Post
Better answer: every weapon in the game that has 100% armor piercing is reduced to 50% armor piercing (with the exception of protons because they're not all that good anyway).
Or exception made of T5 upgrades so that armor piercing upgrades are similar to other upgrades (armor damage 8% -> 16% if T5, weapon damage 5% -> 10% if T5)

Kuciwalker's Avatar


Kuciwalker
04.16.2014 , 12:13 AM | #114
Tier is irrelevant because maxed ships. 100% armor piercing is toxic on any tier.

Altheran's Avatar


Altheran
04.16.2014 , 12:19 AM | #115
Quote: Originally Posted by Kuciwalker View Post
Tier is irrelevant because maxed ships. 100% armor piercing is toxic on any tier.
But only one weapon (Concussion Missile) has armor piercing as a T5 upgrade. All others -> 50%.

It makes no sense that this kind of upgrade remains the only one without "half version" for lower tiers upgrade.

Verain's Avatar


Verain
04.16.2014 , 12:31 AM | #116
Some weapons probably should have full armor penetration. These weapons should have other disadvantages.

Good example: Proton torpedo.

Some weapons probably should have a high degree of armor penetration. These weapons should have smaller disadvantages.

Example: Slug Railgun, Heavy Laser

Other weapons should probably have less armor penetration.


It shouldn't really relate to the talent tier though.

Kuciwalker's Avatar


Kuciwalker
04.16.2014 , 08:24 AM | #117
Some weapons should have no armor penetration because even without it they are easily the best weapon in the game.

Example: BLC.

dailus's Avatar


dailus
04.16.2014 , 09:01 AM | #118
Its a rock, paper, scissors kind of balance. I still dont see the problem. Everything has a counter its just a matter of people using the countering builds and ships to balance out the use of the FOTM builds theat some are currently using.
Its team play and a variety of builds are needed. A team full of all-star quarter backs would not fair well against a well rounded team. If more people had well rounded hangers and picked their ship based on how they could help their team and not better their own personal score board we would see a lot less of the problems being discussed.
DAILUS: MEMBER
PAXIMPERIUS
Website | Recruitment Thread

Kuciwalker's Avatar


Kuciwalker
04.16.2014 , 10:22 AM | #119
Quote: Originally Posted by dailus View Post
Its a rock, paper, scissors kind of balance. I still dont see the problem.
The problem is that RPS is a ****** game and RPS balance is lazy and bad design. The outcome of a fight should depend more on what you actually do during the fight and less on which ship you picked at the launch screen.

(Note that that doesn't suggest ship choices should be meaningless, not at all, but that ship choice should determine what you have to do to win a fight, rather than determining whether you win a fight at all.)

Altheran's Avatar


Altheran
04.16.2014 , 10:30 AM | #120
Quote: Originally Posted by dailus View Post
Its a rock, paper, scissors kind of balance. I still dont see the problem.
Question : where's the Strike Fighter in your rock-paper-scissors ?