Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

I think there's a bit too much CC.

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
I think there's a bit too much CC.

Verain's Avatar


Verain
11.13.2017 , 11:41 AM | #1
I think that there's a bit too much CC.

It's still pretty early in this patch, and I don't think that the meta that this is crafting is unhealthy, but I think there are too many lockouts, too frequently, and for too long. I'll go into the three CCs we are seeing quite a bit of:

1- EMP Field
EMP Field seems to do a great job of making a node safer to assault. It does good job of buffing allies and debuffing enemies and clearing mines, all of which are its jobs. I think that its duration of 13 and its cooldown of 25 represent too much lockout. The prior version of this was too weak, with range bugs and a 45 second cooldown. Because EMP field gets stronger the more frequently you press it (a version with halved cooldown and duration would be stronger), I think the cooldown should come up a bit, to like 30 or even 35 seconds. I'm not sure what the correct number is, but we moved into a mode where you never really recover from the first EMP before the second hits you.

2- EMP Missile
This has a pending aoe player damage nerf, which should help anyone who spends time on nodes, especially bombers. I think it could also use an aoe control nerf, such as halving the lockout durations aoe player targets. EMP Missile serves as a "priming missile", an easier to land missile that makes locks easier on your target, and that seems fine, but the penalty for being caught in the aoe feels overly punishing for being near an objective or ally who couldn't avoid the missile. Unlike EMP field, where you have data available to you about what is going on (the EMP field ship moving into range), EMP missile only gives you a warning when you are the target.

3- Remote Slicing
Unlike the other two, this move only seems to come out in TDM. Like EMP field, you can see it coming, and unlike both of the EMP effects, it deals no damage at all and is always single target. I think its uptime is a bit too high though, and its engine drain also seems to be really aggressive. I think the duration of the debuffs should probably come down by a couple seconds- to 9 or 10 from 12. I also think that the 60 engine power drain could be less as well, because it is pretty punishing as so much engine is hard to recover from. The addition of an engine power drain, however, is a big part of why the move is useful compared to its old, useless format.


Of the three, EMP Missile and EMP Field seem to have reasonable common usage on all maps, whereas Remote Slicing does not have such universal application- plenty of TDMs will have no remote slicers at all, and it is a rare build in domination.

I think that the CC in the game is good, but I do think you get more of it sort of incidentally. The direct CC ability of remote slicing requiring giving up more is fine, but it is still a move with a lot of synergy as long as it keeps its low cooldown and engine lockout, which I think it should.


My disclaimer is that we are all still early enough into the patch that we don't have a mature meta yet under this ruleset, so my ideas could be out of place.
"The most despicable person on the GSF forum."

Nasja's Avatar


Nasja
11.13.2017 , 05:15 PM | #2
At first, there was the ion rail spamming gun which people (including you) defended. Now there are more options to kinda like the same effect which we all now use and some would say it's overpowered.

The chance that the devs will nerf this as you suggested may be (hopefully) minimal because you can't get everyone satisfied.

Suggestion: Hold back when you are ahead + when you have what you think to be overpowered equipment but use it to fuil extend when you are behind and are carrying the fight.
Traesha Anasja Secforce'hawk Trashya

Jedi Covenant

Verain's Avatar


Verain
11.13.2017 , 05:26 PM | #3
Quote: Originally Posted by Nasja View Post
At first, there was the ion rail spamming gun which people (including you) defended.
I was in favor of mild nerfs to ion railgun for quite awhile. I like the current version of ion railgun better than the last.

Quote:
Now there are more options to kinda like the same effect which we all now use and some would say it's overpowered.
To be meaningfully controlled by an ion rail required someone to succeed at a hit roll on top of aiming at you. The EMP control effects are aoe in nature.

Quote:
The chance that the devs will nerf this as you suggested may be (hopefully) minimal because you can't get everyone satisfied.
I have no idea what the chances of a nerf are. Do you like the current levels of control in the game? Do you think it's still too early to call for a nerf? I think these effects are spread too easily and force players to respond right away, and your play can be impacted by an allied player nearby who doesn't know how to avoid a missile, for instance.

Quote:
Suggestion: Hold back when you are ahead + when you have what you think to be overpowered equipment but use it to fuil extend when you are behind and are carrying the fight.
I don't understand this at all. Why would you hold back? How would holding back help you win?
"The most despicable person on the GSF forum."

caederon's Avatar


caederon
11.13.2017 , 05:41 PM | #4
Quote: Originally Posted by Nasja View Post
At first, there was the ion rail spamming gun which people (including you) defended. Now there are more options to kinda like the same effect which we all now use and some would say it's overpowered.
These are not comparable scenarios. It is not useful to attempt to relate them.

Pre 5.5, Ion Railgun was the only thing in the game capable of sufficiently disrupting Bomber spam, and even then it was only effective at beating it with adequate team support. In the absence of any other changes to the pre-5.5 environment, diminishing Ion Railgun would have led to what was largely in place anyway which was Bomber Spam: The Game.

Post 5.5, Ion Railgun is not an issue that anyone has to complain about. Few people are even bothering to run it, because with better Strikes, Gunships cannot stay in position to maintain fire nearly as long and the ships that are coming to get them are tougher and more potent offensively. It's almost as if it wasn't an Ion Railgun problem at all, and was actually a problem with underpowered Strike Fighters. Not that the GS didn't have a natural predator in the T2S anyway, but somehow as Bomber Spam proliferated people lost the will and/or drive to excel in T2S aside from the handful of people who stuck with the ship and could kill Gunships quite effectively.

Incidentally there are actual counters that clear Ion Railgun debuffs now, too, which few people use because it's really not so much a problem anymore. And even pre-5.5, Power Dive was a direct counter to Ion snares.

The lockout issue stems from bad design in that it removes people's agency without a counter other than 'don't get caught in AoE and/or don't let someone get close enough to land RS.'

Quote: Originally Posted by Nasja View Post
Suggestion: Hold back when you are ahead + when you have what you think to be overpowered equipment but use it to fuil extend when you are behind and are carrying the fight.
Let's say they do this.

Let's also say that some other group who does not frequent the forums and does not care to engage in GSF Chat or interact with players outside their group figures out 'hey this stuff is powerful' and they go on to use it very effectively. The same problem still exists.

Trying to get players to 'hold back,' 'play nice,' or self-regulate in any way is doomed to failure and really has no place in a competitive game. These are issues that need to be addressed on a game design level. If you are playing a game where the goal is to win, serious players will pursue that goal to the best of their abilities, and will use any tools they have available to do so. In my opinion, it's not sensible to ask them to do otherwise or expect that they will.

- Despon

phalczen's Avatar


phalczen
11.13.2017 , 07:38 PM | #5
I agree that part of the problem lies in simultaneous lockouts, and the ease of applying/re-applying. I am not sure what the best answer is, but I think perhaps an increase in the cooldown (or in the case of ordnance, reload time) might help give some windows for counterplay. I'd also like to toss out the idea of removing the shield ability lockout and engine ability lockout from EMPF and EMPM, which going forward I'll just abbreviate the two as EMP. I think system lockout is pretty crippling as is. I would rather see the shield lockout switched to ion missile to help differentiate it from other types of missiles and give ships a meaningful choice between systems or shield abilities. Alternatively, engine dis-ability could be a choice with shield dis-ability for the ion missile. Finally, it could make for some interesting Pike/Quell builds for players who opted to take both control missiles.

I would agree with other posters that EMP is worse than RS in the sense that you can be victim to an AOE effect (perhaps even one originally centered on a deployables or turret) as opposed to being directly targeted. But I think it probably needs to be toned down a bit.

Honestly though, I like this scenario better... where we have multiple components slightly overpowered that need to be nerfed, rather than a handful of good components and the rest junk. Don't nerf these previously junk components back into oblivion, just a sensible nerf.
If you think I've made a good contribution with this post, I kindly ask that you use my Refer a Friend link! Here is more information about the program.

ALaggyGrunt's Avatar


ALaggyGrunt
11.13.2017 , 07:45 PM | #6
EMP missiles (and, to a degree, fields) can be countered by flying away from the sat when something hostile with an EMP weapon is approaching. Missile flies/field goes off, and you can get back on the sat without a debuff. Sometimes.

In TDM there are no sats to be distracting targets for EMP.

HeatRacer's Avatar


HeatRacer
11.13.2017 , 07:46 PM | #7
Would an acceptable compromise, in the case of EMP missiles, be for the lockout effect to only effect the originally targeted ship, while surrounding ships only take the damage (or maybe the System lockout only)?
Quote: Originally Posted by battlebug
can you make sword in box light sword so sword come out when opened? then if sword is back after sword, use light saber on box, and saber will be boxed after sword is out.

HeatRacer's Avatar


HeatRacer
11.14.2017 , 12:25 AM | #8
Just got out of a 50-5 TDM against Drako's premade, and yeah, the EMP/Slicing spam is ridiculous. Pretty much locked down immediately by one person or another and then missile spammed to death. The lockouts at least should not stack.
Quote: Originally Posted by battlebug
can you make sword in box light sword so sword come out when opened? then if sword is back after sword, use light saber on box, and saber will be boxed after sword is out.

Verain's Avatar


Verain
11.14.2017 , 02:24 AM | #9
Quote: Originally Posted by HeatRacer View Post
Just got out of a 50-5 TDM against Drako's premade, and yeah, the EMP/Slicing spam is ridiculous. Pretty much locked down immediately by one person or another and then missile spammed to death. The lockouts at least should not stack.
If we went 50-5 in a match, I don't think there's a lot of component balance details you can get out of that. In a match that onesided, you'll get lit up by pretty much anything.

The effects don't really "stack". Stacking is like "50% turning reduction" and "50% turning reduction" becoming either 100% turning reduction or 25% turning reduction. With EMP effects, each one just causes a lockout independent from the others. If ones are from the same source, the newer will overwrite the older.
"The most despicable person on the GSF forum."

Nasja's Avatar


Nasja
11.14.2017 , 02:32 AM | #10
Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
To be meaningfully controlled by an ion rail required someone to succeed at a hit roll on top of aiming at you. The EMP control effects are aoe in nature.
I have been hit in a lot of matches by ion spam while sitting behind a sat and the gs pilot spamming on a defense turret.

Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
I have no idea what the chances of a nerf are. Do you like the current levels of control in the game? Do you think it's still too early to call for a nerf? I think these effects are spread too easily and force players to respond right away, and your play can be impacted by an allied player nearby who doesn't know how to avoid a missile, for instance.
I never said "things are fine", what worries me most however is when things are being nerfed so soon while we just got a new update after several years of getting nothing. I rather have the devs think about how to make gsf more fun which I think is done by making every ship competative.
About "my play can be impacted by an allied player nearby who doesn't know how to avoid a missile", I assume you mean the aoe effect will then hit me like it does to the pilots who didn't know how to avoid a missile. Well, the fun thing is... if the same pilot doesn't know how emp field works and surprisingly he hits it while I am in the area... then my play is impacted in a positive way
Other then that, the defense turret doesn't avoid a missile anyways, nor does the bomber deployed drone

Quote: Originally Posted by Verain View Post
I don't understand this at all. Why would you hold back? How would holding back help you win?
Well, for example... if you want to continue playing this game. Remember that a large portion of players who do gsf play it incidentally. They don't know the difference between a t1 and t2 scout but they do make gsf possible because they queue.
If you crush gsf for these people by not holding back a bit and make your goal to win 50-0 or 1000-0, guess what happens? Yep, they don't queue again and the waiting time will be long.
Traesha Anasja Secforce'hawk Trashya

Jedi Covenant