If GSF is really going to be in a "healthy state" then something must be done about Burst Laser Cannons. I think of all the topics on this forum, there is almost universal consensus that BLC's are at least slightly too good.

Let's take a look at BLC's strengths compared to other primary weapons:

* Tied for biggest firing arc

* Lowest tracking penalty

* Lowest rate of fire (highest damage per shot)

* One of few weapons with Inherent crit chance

* One of few weapons with armor piercing or shield piercing

Now I suspect the original premise of BLC's was: Make a short-range space shotgun that does really good burst damage at close range, but you have to get really close for it to be effective. That requirement to get really close is a decent balancing factor for T1 Gunships, and it would be a decent balancing factor if Strikes had BLC's.

But "you must get really close" is not a balancing factor for Scouts, nor will it be a balancing factor for T3 Gunships using Interdiction Missiles. Both will have no trouble getting close to targets, and thus both will be able to make full use of the BLC's many perks.

It seems like every shooter ends up falling into this trap. They make a shotgun or melee weapon that's super powerful at close range, and then place too much faith in the short range being a weakness to balance the weapon. In the end, it always just causes a ranged combat game to become a sprint-and-stab game. It's why everyone goes for the Energy Sword in Halo, and why Gears of War multiplayer (where everyone rolls around using shotguns) is nothing like Gears of War single player (covered based stop-and-pop).

GSF has become much the same thing. Battle Scouts sprinting around with BLC's. I suspect the metrics show that BLC's have more kills than any other primary weapon, by a huge margin.

I think it's high time we at least try some tweaks to BLC's. Here are some suggestions on how to make BLC's still interesting, but not so obviously superior to every other short range primary weapon (in priority order):

1) Increase rate of fire to be close to Medium Laser Cannons (but maintain same DPS) -- This would make BLC's less "space shotgun" (which I think is stupid) and more like a traditional Star Wars "pew-pew-pew" weapon. More importantly it would make their burst damage potential less extreme.

2) Reduce firing arc and increase tracking penalty to be less than Light Laser Cannons -- BLC's shouldn't be better at wide-angle shots (i.e. easier to hit with) than Rapids. If you want to make it truly shotgun-like, keep the firing arc relatively narrow but the tracking penalty relatively low.

3) Remove armor piercing -- no need for this; since when are BLC's supposed to be an objective assault weapon?

4) Remove inherent crit chance -- why does the burstiest weapon have crit chance, which would further accentuate its burstiness?

Obviously these are all nerfs, and it'd be good to have at least some mild counter-buff to make up for their severity. Reducing the accuracy and damage drop off over range would be a first step. You don't have to make them the same as Rapids or Lights, but they don't need to be so dramatically different like they are now. Either way, they'll still be a slow rate of fire, low tracking penalty burst fire weapon. They just don't need to be as extreme as they are currently.

I think it's high time we at least try some tweaks to BLC's. Here are some suggestions on how to make BLC's still interesting, but not so obviously superior to every other short range primary weapon (in priority order):

 

1) Increase rate of fire to be close to Medium Laser Cannons (but maintain same DPS) -- This would make BLC's less "space shotgun" (which I think is stupid) and more like a traditional Star Wars "pew-pew-pew" weapon. More importantly it would make their burst damage potential less extreme.

 

2) Reduce firing arc and increase tracking penalty to be less than Light Laser Cannons -- BLC's shouldn't be better at wide-angle shots (i.e. easier to hit with) than Rapids. If you want to make it truly shotgun-like, keep the firing arc relatively narrow but the tracking penalty relatively low.

 

3) Remove armor piercing -- no need for this; since when are BLC's supposed to be an objective assault weapon?

 

4) Remove inherent crit chance -- why does the burstiest weapon have crit chance, which would further accentuate its burstiness?

 

Obviously these are all nerfs, and it'd be good to have at least some mild counter-buff to make up for their severity. Reducing the accuracy and damage drop off over range would be a first step. You don't have to make them the same as Rapids or Lights, but they don't need to be so dramatically different like they are now. Either way, they'll still be a slow rate of fire, low tracking penalty burst fire weapon. They just don't need to be as extreme as they are currently.

All of those suggestions would help balance BLCs, but a few don't pass the realism test. What weapon would you want in a close quarter fight? A shotgun would be high on that list I am sure, but ask yourself why that is? Shotguns have a much more forgiving aiming requirement than a rifle would, especially at close range. But the flaw in this logic is that a hit is always deadly instead of a grazing shot.

So I'd suggest lowering the damage per shot fairly significantly, about 1/3 but boost its crit chance to about 50%. This way you have a 50% chance to do about the damage that they do now, but a 50% chance to get a less effective "glancing hit".

*** If they could tie an increase to the crit chance based on tracking penalty, then they could get that full effect blast with skill. ***

Getting rid of armor penetration makes total sense to me as well, as that would make higher DR builds a lot more viable but not immune to Strike's HLCs and GS's slugs (as well as most missiles directly), also this would boost Thermites and Plasma rail guns ability to debuff them.

Keeping their "best in slot" tracking penalty and firing arc makes more sense to me as a "shotgun" weapon, though if you think my above suggestions are not quite enough, maybe a higher energy draw to make them use a little more care in aiming before having to "reload". Honestly, BLCs have enough of a charge to destroy any 2 ships at close range before running out of "ammo", where as some other weapons can only barely kill 1.

If you need to tweak, find a way to tweak scouts only por favor!

This was actually my concern as well. It's clear that battle scouts are too powerful, with far too many good/OP/perfect storm component choices. Fixes should not be unique to BLC battle scouts. Nerfing BLC won't fix battle scouts as a whole, their problems stretch far more than a single component. Evasion-stacking is still the best form of defense by a wide margin, type 2 scouts have the highest burst and long-term damage potential through systems and have the highest damage component options. They come with multiple missile breaks (I realize there's another thread for DF), the list could go on a while. Tweaks need to be done on multiple fronts, but I'd suggest altering systems like TT/BO before moving elsewhere. BLC isn't overpowered on a gunship (and really, do they need to be nerfed even more?) and with heavily reduced systems components scouts (both the BLC and quad/pod variant) wouldn't be able to literally instagib opponents.

What, exactly, was the original design goal behind scouts? Because as of this coming patch they're about to become the best choice for... well, just about everything. Coming from someone who also plays scouts (but actually enjoys playing other ship types): Congratulations cattlescout forums, you've already achieved your primary main objective.

This was actually my concern as well. It's clear that battle scouts are too powerful, with far too many good/OP/perfect storm component choices. Fixes should not be unique to BLC battle scouts. Nerfing BLC won't fix battle scouts as a whole, their problems stretch far more than a single component. Evasion-stacking is still the best form of defense by a wide margin, type 2 scouts have the highest burst and long-term damage potential through systems and have the highest damage component options. They come with multiple missile breaks (I realize there's another thread for DF), the list could go on a while. Tweaks need to be done on multiple fronts, but I'd suggest altering systems like TT/BO before moving elsewhere. BLC isn't overpowered on a gunship (and really, do they need to be nerfed even more?) and with heavily reduced systems components scouts (both the BLC and quad/pod variant) wouldn't be able to literally instagib opponents.

 

What, exactly, was the original design goal behind scouts? Because as of this coming patch they're about to become the best choice for... well, just about everything. Coming from someone who also plays scouts (but actually enjoys playing other ship types): Congratulations cattlescout forums, you've already achieved your primary main objective.

If a type 1 GS got HLCs would you be happy?

If a type 1 GS got HLCs would you be happy?

I don't see how that would stop cattlescouts from reigning supreme. HLCs are a great component, but type 1 gunships definitely don't need more support in the ranged damage department. As Verain said in another thread: Scout vs. (insert just about anything here): Scout wins. That's the real problem, and nerfing BLC doesn't address that well enough.

In a game of rock, paper, scissors (or GS/bomber/strike) if an ICBM defeated all three options, why play anything but an ICBM? That's my concern.

If a type 1 GS got HLCs would you be happy?

No, not at all. If I want to kill armored things, I'd use a slug. I use burst to deal primarily with scouts or strikes that got too close after a slug already hit them pretty hard. HLCS have a lot less of an appeal in terms of a shotgun, especially for a GS who's using BLCs kinda like a "crap they got to close" chance to survive.

Also, I've noticed evasion scouts avoid me a lot less when I use wingman. Instead of missing 5 shots, I may miss 1, which is a lot better (just saying cuz it was brought up that their evasion is still too high, but with Wingman, it seems to be mitigated)

This would absolutely ruin them.

I guess I'd have to practice my quad firing skills, then...

Please leave BLCs on a Gunship alone!!! With Light Lasers being the alternative, I really don't want to fire and do absolutely nothing when I'm forced to engage close range. If you need to tweak, find a way to tweak scouts only por favor!

It's an interesting dynamic. The 2 most controversial components in the game in the "Overpowered?" category(BLC and DF) are exclusive to BOTH GS and Scouts. Many changes we want to see to these components seem to balance 1 class and hurt another, it certainly is a sticky dynamic.

Sammy in response to your words I feel they apply better to the Type 1 GS. As the Tyoe 3 is also getting BLC, but this ship is better designed for close quarters combat. Since we give everything a nickname(eg speed scout) I propose GStrike for the Type 3 GS because it's basically built like a Strike Fighter with a rail gun. So this is how I see it break down. BLC on:

T1 GS: powerful but in a necessary way to allow close quarters survival. BLC nerfs on this ship come down to the question. "How much close quarters capability does this ship deserve?" TBH I think this class could survive a BLC nerf, QoL goes down but your Rail guns are your real weapon are they not?

GStrike: BLC is probably only ever so slightly overpowered on this class, if it was the only ship with BLC we could leave it alone and probably sleep at night. As Nemarus say BLC is short ranged and you penalty is that you must close to use it. GStrike will have to work hard to close to BLC range.

Battle Scout: Where BLC is overpowered as Nemarus says. Whether or not QLC is more popular it does not chanfge the fact that BLC Scouts do kill too fast and are too effective against bombers the one class that is effectively countering Battle scouts these days. Scouts are winning Head-Head all the time an many players agree that they should not be doing that. BLC(and DF) are a big part of the reason scouts can do this.

So there you go BLC is balanced on on 1 ship and OP on 2. We talk about filter nerfing only one class but that does not seem like work BioWare wants to do. I for one am under the impression it would require a major overhaul of GSF code, and I would rather see T1 GS lose QC abilities while BW releases more maps and game modes.

Lets be fair GS and Scouts are the ones consistently piling up big kill numbers, they wouldn't be getting kicked while they are down.

I don't see how that would stop cattlescouts from reigning supreme. HLCs are a great component, but type 1 gunships definitely don't need more support in the ranged damage department. As Verain said in another thread: Scout vs. (insert just about anything here): Scout wins. That's the real problem, and nerfing BLC doesn't address that well enough.

 

In a game of rock, paper, scissors (or GS/bomber/strike) if an ICBM defeated all three options, why play anything but an ICBM? That's my concern.

It would be a start. I agree HLC on T1 GS is pointless and in no way replaces BLC even if their upgrade tree is copy-paste.

Battle Scout: Where BLC is overpowered as Nemarus says. Whether or not QLC is more popular it does not chanfge the fact that BLC Scouts do kill too fast and are too effective against bombers the one class that is effectively countering Battle scouts these days. Scouts are winning Head-Head all the time an many players agree that they should not be doing that.

You brought up some good points, but there's one important realization here:

BLC does not kill targets quickly in and of itself (otherwise gunships would just farm scouts all day long). BLC kills quickly when combined with TT/BO and a solid secondary weapon. The same goes for Quads/Pods. If you nerf BLC burst capability, scouts can easily switch to Quads/Pods and still do ridiculously well for a minimal investment of skill/time (instagibbing practically any target) because TT/BO was unaltered. These systems are what give them a huge boost in both long-term damage and short-term burst capability. If I were to touch anything, I would look here first...

Unless, you know, instantly (and regularly) dying to burst damage is part of their intended design, in which case... nevermind! I don't think that's the case, though, since Bypass/Slug got nerfed early on and Seismic/Interdiction is about to receive the same treatment.

BLC does not kill targets quickly in and of itself. BLC kills quickly when combined with TT/BO and a solid secondary weapon. The same goes for Quads/Pods. If you nerf BLC burst capability, scouts can easily switch to Quads/Pods and still do ridiculously well for a minimal investment of skill/time (instagibbing practically any target) because TT/BO was unaltered. These systems are what give them a huge boost in both long-term damage and burst capability. If I were to touch anything, I would look here first...

Your right it's a 2 phase problem, BLC and QLC take big advantage from TT/BO, though Grunty one of the first players to use a Battle Scout to super burst people claims he actually equips Booster overcharge, I know for sure he always got me(Strike) with a BLC/Cluster missile combo. The problem with nerfing the Systems slot is RFL and LLC are not all that powerful with TT/BO. So I have trouble stultifying nerfing system slot for this reason.

I've always thought the solution was DF Double Blind(Scout loses accuracy) with a BLC nerf.

Aside from objective discrepancies in the magnitude of effects that components give, I think the common thread in overly powerful GSF ship builds has been lack of tradeoffs.

That is, builds are a problem when they have a lot of component slots where they gain a substantial benefit, but at basically no cost in terms of trading away something else that's valuable to that build to get it.

So for example, a gunship that wants to use BLC's is going to have to trade position and possibly engine pool for close range damage from a (functionally) secondary weapon. The scout gets the damage without having to sacrifice position or any more engine energy than they would be using in any case. It's not an exact equivalence because the BLCs are the scouts primary damage source, but they don't make that much of a tradeoff on their secondary weapons either.

That lack of tradeoff is also what produces cookie-cutter builds. With tradeoffs what you loose with one component you gain in another area with the other options. Without meaningful tradeoffs you're just reducing your ship's total power rather than reallocating where the power is.

Should be pointed out though, that overall balance isn't all that bad right now.

I think that BLC is too strong, but RfLC and some other cannons has also their share of problems too, and there's the whole scout have a too high damage&survivability ratio...

So I think that it's the whole cannon system that need a rework.

I am almost writing an essay for that... well, it may be one already.

Because you brought the BLC point, I'll give a preview :

Preview :

- Simplification of the damage and accuracy profiles : linear from 0m to max range.

- No weak/strong cannons. Ship capacities (speed, turning, thrusters availabilty...) determines their damage capacity. No need to gimp strikes with a weak RfLC or to glorify scouts with a strong BLC.

Overview :

=> "Dead center" type cannons (heaviest tracking penalties per range) all have the same minimum damage capacity and accuracy at their respective max range (around 630 DPS and 95%). Then shorter the max range is, greater maximum damage and accuracy at point blank become. The accuracy variation is aimed to be around 100% at 3000m for all range type. Current damage profile of HLC is taken as a corner stone for QLC and LLC.

=> Normalization of damage profiles for cannons w/ same range capacity then differenciation according to tracking penalties with a damage tax so that average damage of both weapons is even in the following conditions : accuracy 100%, no evasion, half-way to firing arcs. Tracking penalties are kept untouched from their current values. QLC and LLC are cornerstones for other cannons w/ same range, except BLC which takes RfLC as a cornerstone.

=> Re-evaluation of power draws. Burst damage being almost only beneficial, rate of fire (unchanged) determines how hard the power draw will be, w/ RfLC as the least drawning, and BLC/HLC being the most drawning.

Special notes :

* BLC's upgrades being looked at. Not decieded which talents should be changed or not. Will probably result in an hybrid between HLC and LLC/RfLC trees.

* As Ion's shield damage is currently a carbon-copy of LC (no typo it's Laser Cannons) multiplied w/ a factor of 2 but without the 5000m range, suggesting Ion to become a real carbon-copy of LC, with damages factored by 2 (in both ways, x2 for shields, /2 for hull), but range included (like Ion missile got his concussion-like range back)

BLC does not kill targets quickly in and of itself (otherwise gunships would just farm scouts all day long). BLC kills quickly when combined with TT/BO and a solid secondary weapon. The same goes for Quads/Pods. If you nerf BLC burst capability, scouts can easily switch to Quads/Pods and still do ridiculously well for a minimal investment of skill/time (instagibbing practically any target) because TT/BO was unaltered. These systems are what give them a huge boost in both long-term damage and short-term burst capability. If I were to touch anything, I would look here first....

I agree withy this. BLC in and of themselves have never been a problem, the only change I would ever make to BLC is remove the passive crit chance, because having a 1 in 20 chance to blow someone's head off, and a 19 in 20 chance to be balanced is kinda stupid.

Nearly every single problem that ever arose with cattlescouts is related to their ability to stack offensive cooldowns. I've never heard of anyone complaining about booster recharge scouts.

On a side note can BW please buff RFL, I would like more options other than BLC or Quads'n'pods

1) Increase rate of fire to be close to Medium Laser Cannons (but maintain same DPS) -- This would make BLC's less "space shotgun" (which I think is stupid) and more like a traditional Star Wars "pew-pew-pew" weapon. More importantly it would make their burst damage potential less extreme.

The name is literally "Burst" Laser Cannon.

2) Reduce firing arc and increase tracking penalty to be less than Light Laser Cannons -- BLC's shouldn't be better at wide-angle shots (i.e. easier to hit with) than Rapids. If you want to make it truly shotgun-like, keep the firing arc relatively narrow but the tracking penalty relatively low.

No. Low tracking penalties are absolutely necessary for weapons intended to be used at short range because of the basic geometry of the situation.

3) Remove armor piercing -- no need for this; since when are BLC's supposed to be an objective assault weapon?

Yes. I predict that just doing this could be enough, as it would create classes of targets that BLC scouts would have far more difficulty dealing with.

4) Remove inherent crit chance -- why does the burstiest weapon have crit chance, which would further accentuate its burstiness?

Meh. Crit chance is thematically appropriate (represents all of the shots hitting) and as above, BLC is suppost to be bursty.

While you are tweaking things remove the queue solo button. Because this is what this is really about. Battlescouts are currently the only ship that gives the solo player who is up against premades a chance of enjoying the game. Strikefighters while they pack a punch are far to vulnerable to running out of gas and once they do they are floating pinatas. Bombers unless they are in groups are easy to deal with. Gunships can be powerful but only as long as the rest of the team is running interference for them (not the in game ability)

It would be far far better for the game to make the type 2 scout one of the two starter ships instead of having people hate the game.

The name is literally "Burst" Laser Cannon.

 

 

 

No. Low tracking penalties are absolutely necessary for weapons intended to be used at short range because of the basic geometry of the situation.

 

 

 

Yes. I predict that just doing this could be enough, as it would create classes of targets that BLC scouts would have far more difficulty dealing with.

 

 

 

Meh. Crit chance is thematically appropriate (represents all of the shots hitting) and as above, BLC is suppost to be bursty.

If you do anything more than remove armor pierce, then it'll ruin BLC. Just remove armor pierce, and cattle scouts can't take a sat. Then you have a glaring weakness.

If you do anything more than remove armor pierce, then it'll ruin BLC. Just remove armor pierce, and cattle scouts can't take a sat. Then you have a glaring weakness.

50% armor pierce no more.

Also remove passive crit chance, as I said in another thread, having a 1 in 20 chance to blow somebodies head off, and a 19 in 20 chance to be balanced is dumb. In fact RNG mechanics in general are dumb.

Distortion Field is overpowered because it has missile break. It makes other shield choices irrelevant, and ruins the balance of the game.

I agree! Battle scouts have distortion field, one reason they are overpowered right now. We should change distortion field to help kill 2 birds with one stone.

No! Don't ruin distortion field or you ruin the GS!

--------------------------------------

Burst Laser Cannons are overpowered because they have high accuracy/crit with armor piercing and kill things too fast. They are too bursty, and are beginning to ruin the balance of the game.

I agree! Battle scouts have BLCs! This is one reason they are overpowered, we should change BLCs to kill 2 birds with one stone!

No! Don't ruin BLC or you ruin the GS!

***Meanwhile in GSF, Battle scouts and Gunships continue to wreak havoc and mayhem***

Take away a GSs BLCs and you cripple them BEYOND play. Sorry, but LLCs don't cut close range defense BY A LOT. You'll leave a GS defenseless in close quarters. How's that for combat?

Are you talking to me? All I did was point out the irony of these forums the last few days. In no way am I suggesting we remove BLC from a GS. Maybe you thought I made the GS statement red because it was wrong? No, just different colors to stand out. I was intending all of them to sound fickle and simple-minded.

Any ship piloted by a good pilot has potential to wreak mayhem

Wise words. Let's not make any more changes to GSF, ever, because of this statement.

Take away a GSs BLCs and you cripple them BEYOND play. Sorry, but LLCs don't cut close range defense BY A LOT. You'll leave a GS defenseless in close quarters. How's that for combat? Also, play with Tom on a SF. Any ship piloted by a good pilot has potential to wreak mayhem

So here's my question. T1 GS has 2 rail guns and generally speaking the highest kills/match are done by them consistently.

Do T1 GS truly deserve a strong CQ weapon?

Standard disclaimer: I'm a Strike Pilot generally the contest between me and a GS is outside BLC range anyway. Mostly because they high tail it after my first missile lock as they probably should.