Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

No Thrusters for Gunships/Bombers

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
No Thrusters for Gunships/Bombers

Korithras's Avatar


Korithras
02.22.2014 , 02:25 AM | #1
These are heavy craft, they have more firepower than they do engines. To make them more fair, they should have no thrusters so they can't fly away quickly, and no evasive abilities to break missile lock. The idea of these craft should be to provide support but not be in the thick of fighting. In exchange, give them armor and shields to compensate so that they're harder to kill by the sheer damage they can take.

Some of you will say this is just another rant but it's not. I'm sick of it. I'm sick of every single game where one side has the majority of bombers and gunships wins virtually every time. Scouts and strike fighters simply cannot withstand the firepower these things put out. They hit too hard, too fast and in the case of gunships, from too far away. Something has to give. There needs to be a tradeoff for that firepower. The fact that they have such big guns should indicate that it taxes their engines so that they can't fly fast or turn easily.

mighty_joe's Avatar


mighty_joe
02.22.2014 , 03:21 AM | #2
curious, to me this sounds pretty much exactly like a rant.

i can assure you, as someone exclusively flying strike fighter, that everything can be killed. if you or your teammates can't you need to do something different. i can't tell you what exactly, since i don't know you, but trying to sneak up on gunships using cover would be a start. taking out a bomber, how about you talk to someone and you 2man the bomber for a start. if that fails, try something different...
Happily Smiles
Senate Special Order
The Red Eclipse
The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less.

Markviper's Avatar


Markviper
02.22.2014 , 03:35 AM | #3
I'm ok with them having boosts, engine abilities, and lock breakers. Their power drains pretty quickly anyways, but they do need to remove barrel roll from these craft or greatly increase it's cost and cooldown for them. A ship that large should not be able to cover that large of a distance in that short of a time with almost no engine cost. Barrel roll (as it currently works) should be exclusively a scout and strike engine, any others are ok though.
Markviper Guardian tank
Marthaviper Shadow tank
Headbash Commando
Peterwigin Gunslinger
Herpderpsmash Sentinel
Lilandriakin Sage
Projectbeta Powertech tank

Sangrar's Avatar


Sangrar
02.22.2014 , 10:39 AM | #4
Quote: Originally Posted by Korithras View Post
These are heavy craft, they have more firepower than they do engines. To make them more fair, they should have no thrusters so they can't fly away quickly, and no evasive abilities to break missile lock. The idea of these craft should be to provide support but not be in the thick of fighting. In exchange, give them armor and shields to compensate so that they're harder to kill by the sheer damage they can take.

Some of you will say this is just another rant but it's not. I'm sick of it. I'm sick of every single game where one side has the majority of bombers and gunships wins virtually every time. Scouts and strike fighters simply cannot withstand the firepower these things put out. They hit too hard, too fast and in the case of gunships, from too far away. Something has to give. There needs to be a tradeoff for that firepower. The fact that they have such big guns should indicate that it taxes their engines so that they can't fly fast or turn easily.
no thrusters is a terrible idea. They would pretty much have to crawl to the battlefield, I don't know if you have even tried to pilot a bomber before, it takes longer than any other ship to go anywhere, it takes a while just to get from a spawn to a node already, and it has no missile lock breaks already. Also, adding armor to supposedly balance it, no, without thrusters they move very slowly, any scout or strike would easily take them out before they even got close to a node to do anything. Your idea of a tradeoff pretty much makes the gunships and bombers sitting ducks, especially bad for gunships since they are definitely not built for close quarters combat. Please, this idea of a nerf makes these ships almost completely useless. Ship BALANCE, not nerf it so now the other ships are more powerful. If you think its a good idea to make a ship only about to go 100 meters per second to nodes usually a minimum of 30,000-50,000 meters away (the closest ones anyway, the side ones are a lot further, the number is an educated guess based off my gunship scope it may be further than that) while the other ships would easily be able to take it out before it even did anything, no just no. If you use the excuse of "ship balance" that is just trying to turning the tables toward the opposite end. Lastly, the current afk system would mark the ships as afk or not contributing if they had to spend most of the whole match traveling to nodes, that would effectively kill gunships/bombers, I get it, you want balance, but that is a horrible direction to go in.
Click this REFFERAL LINK for free character transfer, free inventory slot, and one week free sub time for preferred and subscribed accounts! You can read more about it HERE

Docmal's Avatar


Docmal
02.22.2014 , 11:19 AM | #5
FYI many of the abilities of bombers use their engine power as a resource. Also, their boost is not very fast. These two things effectively reduce the effectiveness of boost as a combat tool for bombers. Rarely do bombers have the boost available to do anything of consequence in battle. And since they have no access to maneuvers it really is their only, albeit crappy, escape tool.
Feeling Parsecseh?
<Redemption> @ The Shadowlands
Handrew - Shadow Tank Drewbacca - Guardian DPS
& 13 more...

Verain's Avatar


Verain
02.22.2014 , 02:40 PM | #6
So first, gunships don't have thruster components. They have (sensor/reactor/capacitor/magazine) for the Type 2, and (sensor/reactor/armor/magazine) for the type 1.


Second, the OP actually wants gunships to not have engines.


That's fantastic.



Also, you know how almost every scout or strike takes barrel roll, and the few that don't have a choice between several other missile breaks? Gunships do not. Their engine components are barrel roll, interdiction, weapon power, and rotational. Even if barrel roll wasn't the best component in the game, you'd still have to take it because the others are only useful if the opponents are playing with apple mice and can't right click.

CaliJoe's Avatar


CaliJoe
02.22.2014 , 02:59 PM | #7
Gunships and Bombers can't take a fire-fight on with 1 strike or scout. Gunships can at least break missile lock with barrel roll. Bombers currently have no way of doing so I have to eat a missile everytime. Shield regens are under performing at zero or 1 rank vs a master scout/strike gun level.

The thing I have hated about bombers is how long it takes me to get to battle space, then get singled out, perish, respawn. The PUGS I fly with know not how to protect bombers. Farting mines only does so much now that people know how to target them within a second or two of launch.

Having zero thrusters is a bad idea which makes the lack of maneuverability even more so. When the battle space is in open territory, I'm toast.
Wild speculation on forums? When does that happen? The Harbinger - Fumanshu Legacy
Repub: Jafaean(Arms), Zelgen(Artifice), Espellah(Cyber), Jabender(Synthweave)
Imp: Vindrock(Armor), Antshell(BioChem), Li'Larish, Kenevil

okiobe's Avatar


okiobe
02.22.2014 , 03:25 PM | #8
It sounds like you are more frustrated with the power scaling from multiple bombers than their ability to use boost. Actually I like it when they boost away because they usually boost away from their mines and drones which are the only things that can give them an advantage in a dogfight.

Also if as a strike or scout you are running out of engine power running after a bomber (w/o engine power-up) you need to work on your power management.
The HarbingerThe First Order
Okiobe 55 Commando Mirque 55 Operative
The Ebon Hawk - Mujo
www.twitch.tv/okiobe

NathanielStarr's Avatar


NathanielStarr
02.22.2014 , 07:04 PM | #9
I do agree that gunships with their barrel roll seem too fast for their design. They should have to rely on getting the kill or another player covering them for them to easily escape.

Usually if you are a scout or striker you have to use most of your engines getting to them since they are already far away (15000m) and then they just barrel roll again.

Philmors's Avatar


Philmors
02.22.2014 , 07:11 PM | #10
Quote: Originally Posted by Korithras View Post
These are heavy craft, they have more firepower than they do engines. To make them more fair, they should have no thrusters so they can't fly away quickly, and no evasive abilities to break missile lock. The idea of these craft should be to provide support but not be in the thick of fighting. In exchange, give them armor and shields to compensate so that they're harder to kill by the sheer damage they can take.

Some of you will say this is just another rant but it's not. I'm sick of it. I'm sick of every single game where one side has the majority of bombers and gunships wins virtually every time. Scouts and strike fighters simply cannot withstand the firepower these things put out. They hit too hard, too fast and in the case of gunships, from too far away. Something has to give. There needs to be a tradeoff for that firepower. The fact that they have such big guns should indicate that it taxes their engines so that they can't fly fast or turn easily.
Nah, removing their afterburners would just be stupid. A better option would be to lower the hp and shields of bombers and gunships. They should be between strike fighters and scouts in hp and shields in my opinion.