Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

How to improve strikes


Neflarion's Avatar


Neflarion
05.06.2017 , 01:43 PM | #11
Well Greetz in this case the phrase "Rock is fine. Nerf scissors." -Paper. Really does apply. Strikes are not weak, battlescouts are just OP. Your first clue to this fact? They are called battlescouts. 1v1 a scout shouldn't beat a strike because it can do more damage easier then a strike. A scout should win because its a more agile class of ship. When in a strike, a class of ship that is supposed to be a stronger class of ship, do you really think its appropriate that any scout should be able to take a strike from full hp/sp to dead in a matter of 3-4 shots. Cause I sure as hell don't.

DownloadStarter's Avatar


DownloadStarter
05.06.2017 , 02:01 PM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by Greezt View Post
snip
Guess I'll see you up there then.

Oh, and don't worry about your current angry attitude. Most people shed that after their 20s.

keetrazor's Avatar


keetrazor
05.06.2017 , 02:29 PM | #13
Honestly I'm not sure how much revamping strike fighters need. If they are upgraded and used properly, they are beasts. I've always been a scout and gunship person myself, but I have fought pilots that are highly skilled in the strike fighters, and as a result very difficult to kill. Can't really think of anything they needs to bolster. Idk why I've always gravitated towards scout and gunships, I guess I just like two shotting/one shotting people, or decimating them with cluster missiles and burst cannons.
"Speak softly, and drive a big tank!" - Hondo Ohnaka

click http://www.swtor.com/r/RPdrpb for free stuff pretty please with a rakghoul on top

Greezt's Avatar


Greezt
05.07.2017 , 06:31 AM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by Neflarion View Post
Well Greetz in this case the phrase "Rock is fine. Nerf scissors." -Paper. Really does apply. Strikes are not weak, battlescouts are just OP. Your first clue to this fact? They are called battlescouts. 1v1 a scout shouldn't beat a strike because it can do more damage easier then a strike. A scout should win because its a more agile class of ship. When in a strike, a class of ship that is supposed to be a stronger class of ship, do you really think its appropriate that any scout should be able to take a strike from full hp/sp to dead in a matter of 3-4 shots. Cause I sure as hell don't.
Battle scouts are not OP, they are the only ship in the game with hard counters - railgun drones and mines. Gunships and bombers can do their job from range our out of LoS, scouts cannot. In low-level matches scouts can do well, but it's quite easy to render scouts useless - 2-3 bombers on a team will force any scout to either swap ships or die repeatedly.

It's fine, every one of the three useful ship classes has been called OP at some time or other here. It goes to show, it's all a matter of perspective.

Quote: Originally Posted by DownloadStarter View Post
Guess I'll see you up there then.

Oh, and don't worry about your current angry attitude. Most people shed that after their 20s.
Thanks for making your point relevant to the discussion at hand and not personal. It makes you more convincing that way. Did I make an angry impression? I'm not. Either way, this discussion seems to have gone off the actual topic (if it ever was on it), so I'll leave it at that.

Ornithopoda's Avatar


Ornithopoda
05.07.2017 , 06:50 AM | #15
Quote: Originally Posted by DownloadStarter View Post
...um, actually, I regularly attract double/triple teams in a strike. If you don't, you will lose because there are very, VERY few people who can beat me one-on-one.

I'm not saying this to boast. I'm saying it because it's true, and if you're ever interested in testing me on that, I'll be more than happy to acquiesce.

I can be found on Harbinger during the mornings, usually. My strike pilot is named Dainan, Repside.
Lol Dainan, I killed you 1v1 just the other morning, despite the fact that every time you were nearing death you just ran away to take cover behind your teams gunship fire. Once we were away from the interference of teammates, you could barely land a shot on me, and to be fare I'm really only an intermediate GSF pilot.
Laynč - Guardian Láyne - Sorcerer
Layne Michael - Scoundrel
Satele Shan

Eli_Porter's Avatar


Eli_Porter
05.08.2017 , 07:06 AM | #16
Straight-up making them tankier and increasing missile range + reducing lock time would go a long way.

I don't think we need any complex mechanics like the OP suggests, because T1 strikes are part of the newbie package and should be newbie friendly.

DownloadStarter's Avatar


DownloadStarter
05.09.2017 , 08:28 AM | #17
Quote: Originally Posted by Ornithopoda View Post
Lol Dainan, I killed you 1v1 just the other morning, despite the fact that every time you were nearing death you just ran away to take cover behind your teams gunship fire. Once we were away from the interference of teammates, you could barely land a shot on me, and to be fare I'm really only an intermediate GSF pilot.
I'll have to take your word for it, I guess. Good job?

DownloadStarter's Avatar


DownloadStarter
05.09.2017 , 08:35 AM | #18
Quote: Originally Posted by Greezt View Post
Thanks for making your point relevant to the discussion at hand and not personal. It makes you more convincing that way. Did I make an angry impression? I'm not. Either way, this discussion seems to have gone off the actual topic (if it ever was on it), so I'll leave it at that.
Oh. Okay. See, it was things like this that threw me off:

Quote: Originally Posted by Greezt
Which server do you fly on? I've been around a bit and never met a strike ace. Scout aces, gunship aces, sure. Even bomber aces. Not strike aces. I have met many players who claim that scouts and gunships are "OP", and that without them strikes would be fine... you know, like they phrase "rock is fine, nerf scissors. --paper".

In short, I do not think you are a threat in a strike and I do not think you should be afraid of what you'll achieve in one if they were buffed.
Quote: Originally Posted by Greezt
What does this mean? That two or three players chase you? That's not because you're good, that's because you're food. Notice the 'f' instead of 'g' there.
Quote: Originally Posted by Greezt
I see now. You meant to say that you lose when not in a strike, and that causes your team to be frustrated. That's believable. What isn't is that you would win under the same circumstances while in a strike. However, I'd love to be proven wrong. I can be found under Close shave-srw mostly on Harbinger pubside. Let me know if you can show me the error of my ways.
...physician, you're on line one with a bit of rectal pain? Might want to heal thyself.

(Just mail Dainan with a time/date/whatever, if you don't mind. My calendar's pretty much open. I have no idea about yours. Thanks!)

Stellarcrusade's Avatar


Stellarcrusade
05.09.2017 , 09:14 AM | #19
Quote: Originally Posted by Neflarion View Post
Well Greetz in this case the phrase "Rock is fine. Nerf scissors." -Paper. Really does apply. Strikes are not weak, battlescouts are just OP. Your first clue to this fact? They are called battlescouts. 1v1 a scout shouldn't beat a strike because it can do more damage easier then a strike. A scout should win because its a more agile class of ship. When in a strike, a class of ship that is supposed to be a stronger class of ship, do you really think its appropriate that any scout should be able to take a strike from full hp/sp to dead in a matter of 3-4 shots. Cause I sure as hell don't.
Yes this is exactly true. As I posted elsewhere battle-scouts shouldn't be a thing. Nor should fighters be so weak and rarely used by veterans. Since both fighters and scouts are the dog-fighters, the only way to make fighters viable is to even out with the scouts. If we take BLC away from scouts and give to fighters it would do it. It is way too easy for a scout to get into close range on an opponent, and out maneuver many of them to get behind them. Its childs play really, zip in, press 2 mouse buttons for a second or 2, dead.

I would love it if veterans had a 50/50 choice between a fighter for its raw firepower if you can get close (harder to do with a fighter) or the range/speed manuverability of a scout. Imagine if 2 veterans would have an even battle dogfighting between the two. Realistically any solution to make fighters a choice has to involve balancing the scout also, if you just make fighters super powered and leave scouts alone it makes gunships and bombers useless.

Eldarion_Velator's Avatar


Eldarion_Velator
05.10.2017 , 07:18 AM | #20
1) I would like to remind everyone that this is a thread about improving strikes, not nerfing any other class or taking personal potshots at other pilots. Posters, especially newer pilots (in my mind "new" pilots have fewer than 250 matches across their legacy and/or fewer than 100 matches on any single toon; "newer" pilots have fewer than 1000 matches across their legacy and/or fewer than 250 matches on any single toon; for reference, as of this posting, I have 5557 matches across my legacy on every single one of my 24 toons, and my most-played toon, Tae-gun, has 1200 of those matches), should be aware that their experience relative to other veteran pilots is quite limited; numerically-speaking, their data set and therefore the statistical power of their analysis is far weaker than those of veteran pilots and therefore less statistically valid. As a result, making sweeping generalizations ("gunships are OP; battlescouts shouldn't be a thing; etc. etc.") on these weaker data sets is not recommended and will likely be dismissed by those with far greater experience and more intimate knowledge of how GSF actually works. Everyone is entitled to their opinion; but until that opinion can be backed up with statistical strength, it remains just an unfounded opinion.

2) Other posters have already discussed in other threads why gunships and T2 scouts are not OP, and their role in the meta. This sort of thing should not have to be regularly repeated, but in short, gunships are your long-range artillery and your scouts, especially the T2s, are spearheads/shock ships. While they are strong ships in their own right (gunships even more so because of their short-range defenses, which can be very effective in the hands of a skilled pilot), their real role is in support of each other and their bombers/nodes, as well as countering the opposing team's bombers and intercepting opposing bomber support. Both the T1 gunship and the T2 scout, with the right builds, are superior choices for these roles, but a good pilot can still do well in these roles with other gunships/scouts and non-meta builds (and many do so, for the sake of fun and variety, on a frequent basis - the Condor/Jurgoran being the most notable and frequently-used off-meta gunship). Regardless of how effective these ships are at these roles, they can still be countered effectively, but doing so will often require skill/experience and team support, especially if these ships are piloted by skilled pilots.

3) Speaking of the meta, the major reason why strikes just aren't viable now (doesn't mean there aren't good strike pilots out there having a lot of success - but I am certain that their success is a result of their experience/skill and not from any advantage of the strike fighter; timing and knowing your target's power/shield/engine status is more important for strike pilots because those things will affect a strike fighter's efficacy against a target) except in the hands of good pilots is because of the way the numbers work out, and because their main tactical role - bomber escort and defensive combat flight - are better-handled by gunships and scouts at the present (to some extent because of the small size of GSF maps). More committed pilots than I have worked out that evading damage some of the time is superior to mitigating damage all of the time, and that in GSF it's the high burst damage that tends to kill pilots; thus you're more likely to survive by evading that burst damage than by trying to mitigate it. Scouts in general have high evasion and therefore are much harder to hit before they get into range to unload their payload of weaponry - even then, a T2 scout has to unload basically everything it has in one head-on fly-by (retros can be used very effectively to extend the duration of this fly-by, though stronger pilots are able to achieve success using other methods such as flanking or hitting targets from behind, where the scout's maneuverability can be fully employed to its advantage) to notch a kill on a resistant target. Strikes, on the other hand, aren't as maneuverable, are slower, have lower evasion, and are therefore much easier to hit - while the range of strike fighter weapons and the toughness of strike fighters are superior to those of any scout, the fact that the strike fighter's weaker flight characteristics (compared to scouts) means it has to try to mitigate damage most of the time also means it is actually less likely than a well-equipped T2 scout with a good pilot to survive an encounter successfully. The reason why many pilots have suggested just beefing up the strike fighter is to increase the amount of damage a strike can take (and therefore extend the period of time a strike has to fire/launch its weapons) such that at its lower DPS, the overall damage done by a strike can at least be comparable to that done by a T2 scout, which can also be achieved by faster secondary lock and reload times.

4) Strikes and scouts should not be a one-for-one equivalent; tactically they have very different roles. As I mentioned in the previous point, scouts are supposed to be solo operators, advance parties, and movement spearheads. They don't have staying power (compared to the other ship classes), but they hit hard, fast, and are meant to pierce opposition defenses and cause shock and confusion in opposing formations. They are in-and-out ships, and must deliver their damage in a short amount of time to avoid getting destroyed in the process. To achieve these objectives they need to be hard to hit, have respectable offensive capability, and have high speed/maneuverability. Both the T1 and T2 scout are actually well-suited to this tactical role, though the T2 scout's strengths (slightly beefier, stronger close-range weapons) help it to outshine the T1 scout most of the time. Strikes, on the other hand, are escort and defensive fighters; they are meant to protect nodes, escort bombers, and intercept other ships attempting to pierce their defenses. Adjustments to strike fighters should reflect this role (e.g. longer range to weapons, less susceptibility to damage/interference effects, improved short-term maneuverability/engine power, and so on), not try to make the strike a T2 scout re-skin. With currently-available upgrades, strike fighters can be crafted to be better at this role than scouts; the only component I thought was truly missing was resistance to damage/interference effects. Some people say "just beef up the strike," which in light of its role is a reasonable suggestion; I lean more towards increasing the strike's resistance to interference, since in my opinion trying to beef up against burst damage is an exercise in diminishing returns.
Primary characters (on the Shadowlands):
Tae-gun Jiinara Dal-ben Nyo-jin

Itania Vydan Marevia Tal'narus