Last time BioWare did a GSF Twitch Stream, we made a list of questions in a forum thread, and pretty much all of them were asked and answered (thanks Eric!).

 

They are having another GSF stream tomorrow. So let's try it again!

 

 

(A) Ship Balance Questions

 

A1) The last two weeks, The Ebon Hawk has held a "Strike only" night on Monday. It's been a big success. A lot of people seem to like the longer time-to-kill, due largely to the absence of high-burst damage components like Burst Laser Cannons, Blaster Overcharge, Targeting Telemetry, Slug Railgun and Seismic Mines. Are there any plans to do a pass to reduce burst damage and increase time-to-kill throughout the game?

 

***Balance pass coming. BLC's mentioned several times. Explicit mention of combininig various burst damage contributors (like Scout OCD's and Concentrated Fire), and how that is the kind of thing they want to balance. Couldn't get an answer on other components.***

 

A2) Strikes are a joy to fly, and their extra shields and hull are treasured, but the general consensus is that they are the weakest ship class, offering little tactically compared to combination of area denial, long range, and burst damage, usually in combination with multiple missile breaks enjoyed by other ships. Are you guys happy with Strikes?

 

***Not specifically discussed, but a balance pass is coming.***

 

A3) Some feel that stacking Bombers on nodes in Domination has reduced the fun of GSF. Others feel a buff to EMP Missile could improve this. Are you happy with where Bombers and Bomber-counters are?

 

***Generally yes, they are happy with the current situation.***

 

A4) Formations of Gunships and/or Bombers in TDM matches tend to have a snowballing effect; the more you pile on, the tougher the Gunship/Bomber ball becomes--especially against new pilots in T1 Scouts/Strikes. Any plans to address this?

 

***General answer indicating they look at metrics and forum posts and are keeping a close eye on balance.***

 

(B) Component Balance Questions

 

B1) Of all the topics discussed in the GSF forums, the greatest consensus seems to be that Burst Laser Cannons on Scouts are at least somewhat overpowered. Reasons include: extreme synergy with Blaster Overcharge and Targeting Telemetry, powerful offensive upgrade options at every tier, big damage-per-shot, easy armor piercing for Scouts, very forgiving tracking penalty. No one ever chooses Light Laser Cannons on a ship that can take Burst Laser Cannons instead. Can you take another look at this weapon?

 

***Balance pass coming. BLC's mentioned several times. Explicit mention of combininig various burst damage contributors (like Scout OCD's and Concentrated Fire), and how that is the kind of thing they want to balance.***

 

B2) Are you concerned that with the addition of Interdiction Missile and the buff to Ion Railgun's snare, GSF is about to become too snare-heavy? Especially when many snares seem to stack and make a ship unable to move.

 

***Confirmation that snares do stack. Lobos is keeping an eye on Interdiction Missile to make sure it's not too overpowered. He thinks engine-breaks will be a decent counter to it.***

 

B3) Rapid-Fire Lasers, Plasma Railgun, Ion Missile and Ion Mine are universally derided in the forums because they are not competitive with other weapons in their slots. Are there any plans to make these components worthwhile?

 

***These components (except for Plasma Railgun, briefly) were not specifically discussed, but talk about Plasma led to reminder that a balance pass is coming.***

 

B4) Are you happy with hyperspace beacon behavior, particularly when an entire team is rolling them in Domination, which makes clearing a node very difficult?

 

***Bit of a non-answer here, and confusion that the question was about Deathmatch, when it was actually about Domination.***

 

B5) The new Bomber variant has Charged Plating, but no Armor component. This makes Charged Plating very dangerous to use, even when it's active. What's the thinking behind this?

 

<<<tried, but couldn't get an answer>>>

 

B6) Crewmember passive and active abilities are drastically varied in their favorability and use. Some are viewed as "must have" while others are viewed as "never take". Additionally, there are tactically significant differences between available combinations in Empire vs. Republic. Any plans to tune these?

 

***Apart from Concetrated Fire as part of burst combos, crew members were not discussed. But they may be part of the balance pass.***

 

© Game-Mode Scoring and Requisition Questions

 

C1) In Deathmatch, some players grief their own team by self-destructing over and over to give the enemy team points. Can we get a quick fix so that self-destructing does not reward the enemy team points if the ship that self-destructed had not yet damaged or been damaged by an enemy? This would also offer some grace for new pilots still learning about engine abilities.

 

***Interesting suggestion. Eric will pass it on. Should be fixable. Lobos suggested having self-destructs that occur within a specific timeframe after spawning not give enemy team points.***

 

C2) Is there any possibility for pilots to get some objective points for holding a satellite neutral (white) in a domination match? Simply delaying the enemy from completing a capture can be a huge part of winning in Domination.

 

***Interesting suggestion. Eric will pass it on.***

 

C3) Would you consider adding a second daily mission, like ground PvP gets?

 

***They will pass on the suggestion.***

 

 

(D) Future GSF Content Questions

 

D1) Can we expect a Denon Deathmatch map any time soon?

 

***Eric would not talk about upcoming content.***

 

D2) Can we expect any new map environments or gametypes this year?

 

***Eric would not talk about upcoming content.***

 

D3) Last Twitch stream, Chris coyly hinted that something might be in the works regarding class ships in GSF. Is that still a dream we can cling to?

 

***More discussion of difference in scale being prohibitive. No coy hints this time.***

 

D4) Now that GSF grants a fleet commendations bonus, do you plan on adding to the in game vendor with vanity or other items for GSF? (I for one would be excited to see: exclusive housing items, mounts, armor, schems, more mats etc)

 

***Eric didn't know.***

 

D5) Will there be any more Cartel Market alternate ship models in the near-future?

 

***Eric didn't know.***

 

D6) Any chance soon seeing additional paint-jobs/decals/logos for GSF ships like flames, shark teeth, etc? Some of us whales are ready to spend CC on GSF.

 

***Eric didn't know.***

 

D7) Can we look forward to new components on old ships? When thermite got buffed and added to the Comet Breaker it really added a lot to that ship.

 

<<<unasked>>>

 

D8) Is Galactic Strongholds going to integrate at all with Galactic Starfighter?

 

<<<asked, but no answer>>

D9) Are there any plans for a PVE part of this game, no matter how small? A way to fly around the fleet collecting power-ups or small amounts of req while we wait for a queue to pop?

 

***No.***

 

D10) Can you tell us 3 features/fixes near the top of the GSF backlog of work?

 

***Eric couldn't name content, but he did confirm a balance pass is coming.***

 

(E) Questions around Attracting/Helping New GSF Players

 

E1) Any plans to make the Tutorial more robust, or at least more discoverable? Many new players never click on the (?) hidden in the upper right corner of the Hangar UI.

 

***Eric called out that first-time pilots are given a pop-up which points them at this tutorial.***

 

E2) Any plans to guide more players toward discovering GSF? Even those who hear about it and want to try it sometimes have a hard time finding the Hangar.

 

<<<unasked>>>

 

E3) Any chance you might create a starter mission which requires doing the GSF tutorial? This mission could reward a substantial amount of fleet requisition, to enable new pilots to get the components they want.

 

<<<unasked>>>

 

 

(F) Quality of Life Questions

 

F1) Any chance we can mess with our hangars and ship upgrades up until the queue pops? We can spend a long time in queue or it can pop instantly, and when you first zone out you normally want to requeue promptly so as to not lose your spot- leaving no time to change a component without risking missing a game.

 

***While this question was not asked, a variation was--"Can we mess with ships not on our readied bar while queued?" The answer to that was "No, due to Hangar implementation complexity." Granted, that answer doesn't have a ton to do with this question.***

 

F2) Any plans to reduce the minimum number of ships required to hold a match in order to facilitate more flexible matchmaking?

 

***No. They feel like 8v8 is the minimum required for iconic Star Wars feel and given the map sizes.***

 

F3) Is there any possibility to be able to target your allies or otherwise get some sort of context clues as to their status (range, shield, and health most importantly)? This would be particularly important to command strikes, scouts, and dronelayers so they could determine where their assistance would be useful, and even if their buffs would even be in range.

 

***No plans. Lobos feels green reticles are sufficient.***

 

F4) Our hangars are at five ships. This doesn’t really force a hard decision like a two ship hangar would, but nor does it allow for the player freedom that a seven or nine ship hangar would. What determines a good hangar size? Why was five chosen? Was it because there were originally going to be 5 major ship classes?

 

***They feel like five is a good number.***

 

 

THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION

 

Who do we need to write letters to in order to get cross-server queue development funded? That one feature would single-handedly revitalize GSF, Warzones, and Ranked Arenas.

 

Right now, the biggest problem in GSF is matchmaking. Many GSF matches are decided the moment the match is made, because veterans end up fighting against new players and/or premades end up fighting against solos.

The solution is cross-server queues--this would give veterans/premades better competition, and it would make the game more accessible for newer pilots, thus increasing overall participation. We know it's difficult and expensive, but nothing is impossible in software with enough resources devoted to it.

 

So again, what can we players, who are passionate about all forms of PvP in SWTOR, do to get this funded? Frustration is growing and patience is running out. "We cannot do it" is simply not an answer we will ever accept.

 

 

***Eric said this may potentially happen someday, and they are aware of the broad pleas for it, with regard to both GSF and PvP. That being said, it is not on the near-term roadmap. I'd say this was a softer answer than we usually get.***

Edited June 5, 2014 by Nemarus

These are all excellent questions, thanks for consolidating them all! I'll tap Verain and see if he has anything else to add.

 

The one I'm definitely most interested in hearing an answer for is #2. Instagibs practically are the meta. Oh, and if they're actually working on anything at all for GSF. lol.

Edited June 4, 2014 by TrinityLyre

Thx for putting this up, I have a couple things to add (if you agree that is)

 

 

12.) Now that GSF grants a fleet commendations bonus, do you plan on adding to the in game vendor with vanity or other items for GSF? (I for one would be excited to see: exclusive housing items, mounts, armor, schems, more mats etc)

 

13.) Would you consider adding a second daily mission, like ground PvP gets?

 

14.) Would you consider a "cadet bonus" to grant additional requisition gain to new players for x matches (it is especially key to get into the components you want, which can cost 10k + this can be hard to get as a newbie)

Also a small addition to:

 

2) The last two weeks, The Ebon Hawk has held a "Strike only" night on Monday. It's been a big success. A lot of people seem to like the longer time-to-kill. Are there any plans to do a pass to reduce burst damage and increase time-to-kill throughout the game? Blaster Overcharge and Targeting Telemetry especially when used with concentrated fire are the biggest culprits

Edited June 5, 2014 by DamascusAdontise

Oh I'll have a go.

 

1. The GSF experience currently is horrifically bad for just about anyone not playing in a premade. It's pretty much a certainty that if you are in a premade you will have an overwhelming win loss ratio.

 

A. Are you the developers aware of this ?

B. Was this as intended ?

C. If this is as intended do you think this is appropriate when the bulk of players solo queue.

D. If this is not as intended are there any plans to address the experience for people that solo queue ?

E. It is widely thought that groups get faster Q pops than solo players. Is this correct and if so is it appropriate ?

 

2. GSF rewards/Unit time are roughly 1/3 what pve activities are not including drop gear mats and comms. Are there any plans to cease penalizing people for playing GSF ?

 

3. There are two maps that favor the Republic greatly. The lost shipyards map, and the Kuat Mesas, both give the republic either shorter and or easier paths to get to fortified positions on the map. Are there any plans to flip these maps around or otherwise randomize the advantage ?

 

4. The game has a fog of war feature that is built into the sensor system choices and the map. People playing in a common VOIP channel can circumvent this. Are there any plans to address the fact that this design decision is being bypassed by a portion of the player base ?

 

5. Earlier it was expressed that GSF WAS "Healthy", there are already servers where the queues don't pop 60%-75% of the day. Is this a concern ? Are there any plans to boost long term interest in the game especially on these servers. If there are no plans to boost the popularity of GSF on these servers, do you have any plans to allow players with characters on these servers reduced price transfers to more populous servers ?

 

6. Lag, A player with a high latency connection can become impossible to hit with direct fire weapons (lasers/ions) and warp out of range of lock on weapons (missiles) are you aware of this problem and is there any solution in the pipeline for this.

Edited June 5, 2014 by General_Brass

We could use somewhat more constructive questions/commentary in here, General.

 

Something more like:

*) While we realize it is resource intensive, is there any possibility of a cross server queue to assist in lowering queue times and balancing matches?

- might be a bit more constructive. Though my concern with that would it would have a negative effect on more thriving server communities who can identify each other.

 

My questions (May be more as I think of it - most of my concerns have been addressed):

15) Is there any possibility to be able to target your allies or otherwise get some sort of context clues as to their status (range, shield, and health most importantly)?

 

This would be particularly important to command strikes, scouts, and dronelayers so they could determine where their assistance would be useful, and even if their buffs would even be in range.

 

16) Is there any possibility for pilots to get some objective points for holding a satellite neutral in a domination match?

 

One pilot keeping half the enemy team from capturing a satellite is almost unarguably assisting his team more than someone who is defending a satellite that is not being assaulted. And pilots attempting to capture said satellite are also aiding their team even if they can't dislodge an evasive defender. Currently they are given no credit for assisting their team in this manner.

 

I also echo Gerfaut's post below that we could use some tweaks to non-contributor and fixes to griefing pilots in TDM. I suppose my questions could be cut down to be less wordy by omitting the extrapolation of the question that I use to clarify my question.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Luneward

Are there any plans to adjust the "non-contributor" system? There are issues with the current system in both game modes.

a) In TDM, players who intentionally and repeatedly self-destruct on their own capital ship can sabotage the game for their team but there is no way to vote them out because they are still considered "contributing." On the other hand, a player who is flying defensively while being chased by multiple enemies will eventually be marked inactive. Similarly, a player who is chasing a very evasive scout (for instance trying to tie up an enemy ace) will eventually be marked inactive if he doesn't manage to actually hit the enemy ship. The trigger for being flagged as inactive should not depend on factors outside a player's control such as RNG or the enemy ship's build (evasion, distorsion field) or the enemy player's skill at not being hit.

b) In Domination, a player who actually goes afk for the entire game at a satellite held by his team is considered contributing, but a player preventing multiple enemies from capturing a neutral satellite will eventually be marked as non-contributing unless he manages to hit one of his opponents while trying to fly defensively and stay alive. Being penalized for preventing the enemy from capturing a satellite makes absolutely no sense.

 

Here is an actual example to illustrate this issue (in case the devs read this post):

 

I was recently in a very disputed game on the Denon map. At one point, about half-way through the game, the enemy team had the lead. My team held A, the opposing team held C, and I was keeping B neutral on my own against 4 enemies (after a failed capping attempt), while the other 7 members of my team were trying to take C from the remaining 4 enemies. Eventually I was marked inactive, at which point I left B and barrel-rolled/boosted to A to reset my inactivity timer, letting the enemy take B. As soon as they took B, two of them went to C and got there just in time to prevent my team from finally taking the node. Somehow we still won that game by a few points but me having to leave B to the enemy in order to reset my timer at a friendly satellite almost cost us the game.

 

By holding the satellite neutral for over 2 minutes, I was accomplishing two things for my team: I was preventing the enemy team from getting an even bigger lead (if they had held 2 satellites instead of 1 during that time, they would have won) and I was tying up 4 people who otherwise would have been either defending C or possibly attacking A. I should not have to choose between losing a large amount of requisition due to the inactivity timer or letting the enemy potentially win the game.

1. Do you guys plan to offer any rewards in future for gsf like the rancor in ground pvp? Would love to see gsf pilot uniform gear.

 

2. Any chance soon seeing decals/logos for gsf ships like flames, shark teeth, etc?

 

3. Are you guys going to address the dropped charge issue with railguns that happen randomly?

 

4. Will plasma railgun's overall damage be increased so it becomes a useful option for gunships to take?

 

5. Could it be possibly made so you can transfer mastered ship req over to other ships so it doesn't become wasted req gained?

 

6. Any chance of seeing teams killing each other's flag ship as a goal of a match in the near future?

 

7. Any chance of us seeing a space operation in the near future?

Edited June 5, 2014 by wvwraith

We could use somewhat more constructive questions/commentary in here, General.

 

I'll edit some questions into this space when I get a few minutes. Though looks like most of my concerns are handled.

 

I just came from a game where it turns out the lead developer didn't realize there had been no matchmaking in PvP for a year and a half. Directness goes a long way

General Brass, we're trying to come up with actual questions to ask the devs. I think it's fair to say if your experience is "horrifically bad" you are in a minority.

 

Edit: Nemarus got SOME of my questions in his top post, but not all. I've put the missing ones in enhanced mode:

 

1)- There’s a lot of talk about alternate game modes. Often this is brought up with an ulterior motive- but ignoring those, there really could be some depth of play brought up by having variant rulesets within the same map, such as altering the attributes of turrets, limiting sensor range, reducing or increasing damage dealt, harming shields, changing details about powerups, or allowing satellites to repair craft. Are there any plans for ANY variants, great or small?

 

2)- I see many, many “two-shippers”. Since getting news ships doesn’t take THAT long, are these all new players, or do some just not know how to buy new ships? Can we count on these “two-shippers” to keep playing? Are they “hooking” and graduating to pilots at the rates you are hoping for?

 

3)- It’s been brought up before, but I feel targeting telemetry and blaster overcharge make for very short time to kill, especially if the pilot and the target both have a bit more latency than average. Are you comfortable with the extremely fast time to kill during cooldown stack? I’m not trying to bait an answer, the build has legitimate difficulties versus mobile opponents.

 

4)- We don’t have access to a component based breakdown of damage- similar to what recount or TOR parse would generate- but presumably you guys do. Are you happy with the damage per round dealt by protons, thermites, concussions, and clusters? (Nemarus already handled the Ion / EMP missile question).

 

5)- Obviously you guys aren’t happy with some individual class details- interdiction mines, for instance- but are you overall happy with the meta?

 

 

Nemarus compressed these two into one:

- The crew passives, especially in the “offense” and “engineering” sections seem very one-sided. No one is interested in Andronikus or Risha, as they lose the efficiency passives that are superior to the mild capacity increase, for instance, and the 6% accuracy is so frustrating to play without, and mathematically superior to the other options. While copilot abilities can add a bit of depth here, each faction only has two good engineering companions, and this is because of the psasives.

 

- The power delta on the copilot ability seems very strange. Hydrospanner is very, very weak, for instance, especially compared to healing abilities found on ships, while Running Interference and Wingman are very reasonable compared to similar class buffs. Can we look forward to changes to the weaker of the copilot abilities, variable cooldowns on copilot abilities, or anything like that?

 

 

And the following are repeated above:

 

- Our hangars are at five ships. This doesn’t really force a hard decision like a two ship hangar would, but nor does it allow for the player freedom that a seven or nine ship hangar would. What determines a good hangar size? Why was five chosen?

 

- Are there any plans for a pve part of this game, no matter how small? A way to fly around the fleet collecting powerups for reasons while we wait for a queue to pop?

 

- Can we look forward to new components on old ships? When thermite got buffed and added to the Comet Breaker it really added a lot to that ship. I’d love to see new laser cannons, and a fourth railgun would be really super.

 

- Strikes are a joy to fly, and their extra shields and hull are treasured, but the general consensus is that they are the weakest ship class, offering little tactically compared to combination of area denial, long range, and burst damage, usually in combination with multiple missile breaks. Are you guys happy with strikes?

 

- Any chance we can mess with our hangars and ship upgrades up until the queue pops? We can spend a long time in queue or it can pop instantly, and when you first zone out you normally want to requeue promptly so as to not lose your spot- leaving no time to change a component without risking missing a game, or having contemplation time.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Verain

General Brass, we're trying to come up with actual questions to ask the devs. I think it's fair to say if your experience is "horrifically bad" you are in a minority.

.

 

I believe you have well established you don't represent the majority of players. I'd suggest you pick a new server and the non dominant faction on that server and try playing there for a day as a solo player and come back with how wonderful the game is.

 

Most of the people I see try the game drop it like a hot potatoe. It would be nice if people like yourself that fly premades against two ship pugs for hours and hours at a time took a little responsibility for contributing to the lack of the games growth.

 

It would also be nice to see you grow up, and stop complaining that anything that would balance out sides or teams in any way counterbalancing *******es in premades from beating on noobs is "Punishing the best players".

Edited June 5, 2014 by General_Brass

I believe you have well established you don't represent the majority of players. I'd suggest you pick a new server and the non dominant faction on that server and try playing there for a day as a solo player and come back with how wonderful the game is.

 

I already KNOW how to enjoy the game. You're the one who can't stand it. Why on earth would I take advice from you?

 

You're someone who insults the playerbase, yells at the devs, whines, and turns every thread into some kind of "please make me never have to play against people with friends" political soapbox. You don't seem to be very happy, I guess is my point.

I already KNOW how to enjoy the game. You're the one who can't stand it. Why on earth would I take advice from you?

 

Son that's not advice it's a challenge, and I was pretty damn certain you were the type who would never actually test their assumptions.

 

You're someone who insults the playerbase, yells at the devs, whines, and turns every thread into some kind of "please make me never have to play against people with friends" political soapbox. You don't seem to be very happy, I guess is my point.

 

I didn't expect you to be quite so explicit that you though you and your friends were all the playerbase and everyone else in your eyes didn't count for crap.

This rancor isn't very productive. Let's get the thread back on track.

General Brass, we're trying to come up with actual questions to ask the devs. I think it's fair to say if your experience is "horrifically bad" you are in a minority.

 

Adorable. Cute fallacy. Post here mainly very active players who are very satisfied with the current state of "matchmaking". FTP and preferred players from missing a matchmaking are most affected can not write here.

From the trends in the Forum to include here on majorities and minorities is somewhat shortened.

On topic:

29) How do you feel about Rapid Fire Laser Cannons? The general consensus on the forums seems to be that their damage is way too to be useful. Are there any plans to look into them?

 

P.S. Nemarus I think it would be best if you could compile all the questions into your opening post so they're all in 1 place and the devs don't have to read through all that crying.

 

 

I didn't expect you to be quite so explicit that you though you and your friends were all the playerbase and everyone else in your eyes didn't count for crap.

 

Well, I have no idea who Verain is and didn't really bother remembering what server he plays on and you're insulting me (and the people i play with) as well.

 

Adorable. Cute fallacy. Post here mainly very active players who are very satisfied with the current state of "matchmaking". FTP and preferred players from missing a matchmaking are most affected can not write here.

From the trends in the Forum to include here on majorities and minorities is somewhat shortened.

 

In GSF, there is no difference between F2P and subs, they only gain reduced req and that can be solved by buying passes which are quite cheap (on ToFN 7-day pass was 300-350K, on Progenitor 30-day was around 800K when I was buying them).

 

And why the hell did this become another "kmeee I have no friends" from Brass thread?

Edited June 5, 2014 by Asbetos

Ditto, probably be a good idea to compile all the questions at the top if Nemarus wouldn't mind doing that.

29 (I think)) Abilities which affect how your systems work, or more specifically make them not work, like Sabotage Probe and EMP field, are very prevalent in the game. It may just be me, but I think they don't really offer much of an opportunity for counterplay, and therefore aren't very 'fun' to fight against; can we expect anything to change in this regard?

 

30) Horizontal v Vertical progression; at the moment, the game's progressing horizontally, as more ships and components are added- changing the way you play, but not offering direct increases in power. Are we likely to see vertical progression at any point?

 

31) Component upgrade choices; at the moment, the main forms of horizontal progression being added are new ships and new components. Are we likely to see more upgrade choices at any point in time, as well (for example, a third option on the final tier choice)?

 

32) Crewmember passives/actives; some combinations are available on one faction while not available on the other. For example, T7-01 has +Blaster+Blaster+Hydrospanner as an Engineering option, which irks me somewhat when I play Rycer because it is impossible to get the same range of passives+active which I can get on my StarGuard. While it's not quite significant, it is a difference- Are we likely to see any effort to balance out these differences?

Edited June 5, 2014 by LilSaihah

I've gone through replies and added/consolidated questions. We've got 25 at this point, plus the final bonus question about cross-server queues.

 

I don't want to add any more unless something really vital comes up at this point. The twitch stream has limited time, and I want them to answer questions that have broad and immediate impact to a large number of players.

 

Verain, I incorporated some of your questions, but some were a bit too esoteric for the stream I think.

 

General, I incorporated some of your questions into the cross-server queue question, but I'm not going to include the rest which are, to be honest, pretty hostile toward the devs.

 

Clerise, while questions about new directions of progression are interesting, I don't think they are at the forefront of most people's minds right now. If anything, the amount of vertical progression already in GSF is a big problem (geared ships vs. ungeared ships).

I don't think questions about crewmember and copilot balance are "esoteric" at all, and I didn't really think the two-ship question was out of line. I just think they aren't YOUR pet balance issues, so you'd like the devs to spend more time talking about, say, strikes and bombers. Edited June 5, 2014 by Verain

I'll start with some of my own, and I'll update this original post as others reply with questions below:

 

1) Of all the topics discussed in the GSF forums, the greatest consensus seems to be that Burst Laser Cannons are at least somewhat overpowered. Are there any plans to evaluate them in the near term? Biggest issues are their damage-per-hit (slow rate of fire) and the fact that they give Scouts easy armor-piercing.

 

2) The last two weeks, The Ebon Hawk has held a "Strike only" night on Monday. It's been a big success. A lot of people seem to like the longer time-to-kill. Are there any plans to do a pass to reduce burst damage and increase time-to-kill throughout the game? Blaster Overcharge and Targeting Telemetry are the biggest culprits.

 

In my opinion, the cause you name are not the real causes of the issues.

 

I know I'm probably the only one thinking the problem are lying elsewhere, and that I've already made my point in other threads... but seeing the question potentially asked this way worries me that the Devs would go in that direction, which I think is wrong. So I'll write down my opinion.

 

1) BLC is too good, because at short range (where every cannon is the best at), BLC suddenly becomes the best at EVERYTHING. Rate of fire, armor piercing, are a glass of water in the ocean... Remove them, BLC will be "less good", but still the best at everything.

For me the the two biggest issues are, in order of priority :

• Their odd damage profile. Making a cannon that is better at close range than others doesn't make sense considering that every other weapon are also "best if used at close range". In the end, it only make the particular weapon "best weapon" since they all should be used in similar conditions. Solution : make BLC have a regular damage profile, much like LLC, but accounting for the lower tracking penalties.
  
• BLC's over-offensive upgrade tree. Every other cannon packs a few that are more "neutral", with at least one mandatory (extra range or reduced cost). This one has none, only offensive ones. Solution : mild the upgrade tree.
  

Once these two points are sorted, things like shield/armor piercing or low rate of fire are merely becoming flavoring.

 

2) These are not the main culprit of anything. They are personal offensive cooldowns, they do what they're supposed to do.

The problem is that TTK is short, even in a Strike vs Strike... Three seconds, that's approximately what it takes for my Starguard to kill another Strike, Clarion included.

Anything that shortens this TTK makes it mind boggling fast... and that also includes (to some varying extents) :

• scout mobility (improved likeliness to attack at very close range which increase blaster damage)
  
• Gunships' (often) un-noticed alpha-strike
  
• Bombers' field preparation (also a prepared alpha-strike).
  

But Strikes have none of those particularities.

If you want a longer TTK in GSF -in general-, tweaking these two systems abilities will have little effect. I'm not trying to say they are absolutely fine, I'm open on all possibilities. But my point is that pointing these two is pointless. (Many points here) It's much deeper.

 

Otherwise, I think these questions are good... just not the cause you're pointing. So, if you could just not post these conclusions, but just the questions themselves, I'll be grateful.

 

I also think that the shortest and simplest the question will be on twitch chat, more likely they'll answer.

And from experience, questions packed with an "answer" (like the comments I'd like gone) are usually not well received... When asked a question like these, you may feel forced answer a specific way. If they feel it that way, they'll consider ignoring it more that they'd normally do.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Altheran

I think if we wanna have a thread about BLC balance we should probably make a thread about BLC balance. Should just keep this thread to the bare minimum; enough relevant information to give the questions context.

 

And yeah, fair enough, Nem. I usually try to keep my questions around expectations for future development rather than balance- if I don't pretend to be an expert on balance, I can't get called out . I imagine they're reading the thread anyway.

 

Also didn't notice that Verain had asked what was basically the same question as I did, but oh well.

My "Questions" are more about class stacking and having to play with silly pugs who don't know a hydrospanner from a flux capacitor.

 

33) Gunship walls are ridiculously difficult to overcome in TDM. If against this wall, your pug'd pilots will continue to stupidly fly in and attack the wall over and over, feeding the opposition. When you have 5-8 Gunships in a small area popping off AOE Ions and slugs, similar to the Battle of Normandy. The way the allies overcame that was sheer numbers continually pressing, but in a TDM we're limited to 50 deaths. Since the only way to win a TDM is kill more opposition than your team dies, it's tough to compete in that circumstance. If you've played laser tag, you'd know that moving between a group of 6 people who're close together and all aiming in unison is a ***** to overcome. In those circumstances, I'm unsure what can really be done, and I don't think it's something that the devs can do much about but it is something that detracts from queuing with pugs.

 

34) Bombers in Dominations - here we go (gonna try and be as balanced as I can with this). So, in a domination match, these dudes are a nightmare to remove from the node. The hyperspace beacon ability is too powerful an ability to hold a node. Bombers already require a great deal of effort to get off the node, and having an ability that allows for additional player to die and come back directly at a node seems a little unfair - it pretty much requires that the other team have a bomber with a hyperspace beacon to compensate. Take into account multiple bombers running hyperspace beacons and it becomes almost impossible to remove them because the time to kill is too great to actually capture a node, and by the point you manage to clear 1 node, it's already going to be a loss. Any consideration to remove hyperspace beacons to prevent exploiting a bomber stack?

 

The potential to exploit both bomber and GS stacking is something that I think should be considered, unless we have someway to queue only with premade vs premade ( a la ranked) to avoid playing with pilots that would be a detriment. The cost for this would be longer queue times (unless X-server is implemented, and even then it's still not assured, or we have smaller sided games that're more arena-styled).

 

Can anyone help me (CONSTRUCTIVELY) come up with a way to phrase these into actual questions? These are my observations, but I'd like to see them addressed to the devs in more condensed question-formats that still retain the essence of the message. These are too long to actually ask in chat and receive a realistic answer for.

 

**On a side not (not to derail, just a thought) - the people who are preferred and F2P can't post on the forums and more than likely don't read them (at least in my uneducated belief), so their viewpoints may not be reflected. That being said, change never happens by sitting down, so if they were really concerned with the meta / their issues, they have the option to sub, or to participate in the stream (though again, what's the likelihood that they even know about it).

33) Gunships in TDM matches tend to have a snowballing effect; the more gunships you pile on, the tougher the gunship ball becomes. Any plans to address this?

 

34) Are you happy with hyperspace beacon behavior, particularly when an entire team is rolling them, which makes death meaningless?

 

Can anyone help me (CONSTRUCTIVELY) come up with a way to phrase these into actual questions? These are my observations, but I'd like to see them addressed to the devs in more condensed question-formats that still retain the essence of the message. These are too long to actually ask in chat and receive a realistic answer for.

 

How'd I do?

Edited June 5, 2014 by LilSaihah

I think if we wanna have a thread about BLC balance we should probably make a thread about BLC balance. Should just keep this thread to the bare minimum; enough relevant information to give the questions context.

 

I think his BLC question is polite and concise, but I don't think we should talk about them more than that. The last time it got brought up, the devs were like "yea, we're ok with BLC". At that time, the forums had folks who were absolutely SCREAMING to get them nerfed, after all. Are the devs happy with how BLCs are represented still? Maybe they are. I'd like to know. Obviously any balance discussions can make players upset.

How'd I do?

 

You are a saint and a scholar Thank you!!!