Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Looking for feedback on aggregated Strike suggestions, and big thread is too crowded

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Galactic Starfighter
Looking for feedback on aggregated Strike suggestions, and big thread is too crowded

Ramalina's Avatar


Ramalina
06.01.2015 , 04:42 PM | #21
It's a very good list Nem. It mostly solves almost all of the problems that I feel current missile break mechanics inflict on strikes without touching missiles or distortion. Well enough that I think I'd be happy with it.

As far as engine energy management goes, I'd prefer reducing the current efficiency gap with scouts by about 50%, but also boosting regen a healthy amount. This is just a flavor matter though. Something to differentiate between the efficiency that allows scouts to run for a very long time without stopping vs. a Strike style of shorter sprints with short pauses to catch one's breath. In the end overall boost endurance is overall boost endurance, but if it could be a bit different in how it plays for the two dogfighting classes I'd like that.


Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post

My goal is that Strikes, just like Gunships and Scouts, must be noticed and dealt with BEFORE they start shooting at you from their optimal range. If you allow one to get into its favored position and to start shooting at you, then you need to suffer damage or potentially die. Just like how if you ignore a Scout or Gunship, you risk suffering surprise burst damage.

Right now, you don't need to take any preemptive action against a Strike. You only need react (and not even immediately) to avoid letting it kill you. If that remains true, then Scouts and Gunships will always remain superior offensive choices.
Agree 100%. Maybe I'll go out and find some extra % just so I can agree more.

For the components I'd like to see some sort of defensive buff to the T2. Armor => Reactor or else make DF available to it. Even with the nice additions in Retro and Interdiction, I don't think it gets enough offensive punch to justify giving it glass cannon style weakness in survivability. So make the Shield slot and Defensive minor slot ones that work well together. Shield + shield or evasion + evasion, go for positive interactions.

For the T3 more offensive punch might be nice, but the existing design is sort of biased in favor of the short range game. I could see going with Clusters instead of Concussion in order to preserve that tendency, and either leaving the blasters alone or giving it Ion Cannon or BLCs. It has builds that do fairly well hanging out on the node with bombers, and I'd sort of like to see that enhanced rather than making it a typical strike that has component options that suggest mid-range strength is a specialty. The type 3s are all supposed to be a bit atypical for their classes.

For those worrying about the magnitude of the flat offensive output buffs, keep in mind how the mechanics work. To create the sort of ability to peel or pressure that you get from primaries + secondaries + system or from railguns, or from a minefield you have to give a very large buff to strike primary sustained DPS if you're not really doing anything to increase their on demand burst capability. If primaries are what strikes get, then strike primaries need to be very, very good.

A big boost to secondary damage does worry me a bit with regards to cluster missile, especially if strikes get the engine endurance to start running down any ships but the longest legged scouts. Clusters don't need that extra damage, and the other missiles have more trouble with hit rate, and rate of fire than with damage per hit (though I suppose torpedoes could stand to do a bit more damage). If Clusters on any ship are going to be doing significantly more damage than Concussions do on live, then they shouldn't be getting fired at a much faster rate than Concussions currently do. I don't want cluster to be as mandatory as it would be at 150-200% of its current damage. It's already overtuned, it doesn't need to get even worse.
"A padawan's master sets their Jedi trial, Rajivari set mine."
- Zhe Lian, Sage.

Twitch

havokhead's Avatar


havokhead
06.01.2015 , 05:04 PM | #22
T3 Strikes aren't bad as they are but I think adding HLCs would be helpful for clearing satellites and a little more punch in general. Also buff the ranges of combat command & remote slicing to make them more viable options to repair probe.
-J'exx [Nova Squadron]

-Stiletto[Eclipse Squadron]

havokhead's Avatar


havokhead
06.01.2015 , 05:47 PM | #23
Agree 100% that T2 Strikes need retro thrusters!! The added time on target will help land more missile hits, especially since a lot of scouts simply turn into you to escape missile lock if they already blew 1 or 2 missile breaks. It would also give the T2 some more engine power to help it fight or flee, something the T2 is sorely lacking atm. Having engine boost from retros would also allow the T2 strike to grab turning thrusters which helps a lot in landing missiles. Cutting engines & turning tightly makes a huge difference with keeping foes in your target reticule but then you gimp your mobility for maneuverability and often find yourself engine power starved.

The T2 Strike should definitely have rocket pods. It's sorely lacking an "ambush" weapon that can deal good initial damage without "announcing" itself with missile lock tone. You don't need TT for it, Wingman helps. An opening volley of rockets followed up by clusters would be pretty powerful. It would also help in gunship hunting and be effective against bombers or even taking out defence turrets.

You could also swap capacitors for shield components. I'd rather have better shields that help me survive then better guns on a missile boat.
-J'exx [Nova Squadron]

-Stiletto[Eclipse Squadron]

Nemarus's Avatar


Nemarus
06.01.2015 , 06:00 PM | #24
Quote: Originally Posted by havokhead View Post
Agree 100% that T2 Strikes need retro thrusters!! The added time on target will help land more missile hits, especially since a lot of scouts simply turn into you to escape missile lock if they already blew 1 or 2 missile breaks. It would also give the T2 some more engine power to help it fight or flee, something the T2 is sorely lacking atm. Having engine boost from retros would also allow the T2 strike to grab turning thrusters which helps a lot in landing missiles. Cutting engines & turning tightly makes a huge difference with keeping foes in your target reticule but then you gimp your mobility for maneuverability and often find yourself engine power starved.

The T2 Strike should definitely have rocket pods. It's sorely lacking an "ambush" weapon that can deal good initial damage without "announcing" itself with missile lock tone. You don't need TT for it, Wingman helps. An opening volley of rockets followed up by clusters would be pretty powerful. It would also help in gunship hunting and be effective against bombers or even taking out defence turrets.
You also don't need TT for Rocket Pods if you've got the damage and accuracy buffs proposed in the first section.
Shayd / Callem / RK-4X / "Trynt" - Leader of <Eclipse Squadron>, The Ebon Hawk
http://EclipseSquadron.enjin.com Imperial GSF-focused guild

"Serve the Emperor above all others."

Linuxizer's Avatar


Linuxizer
06.01.2015 , 07:55 PM | #25
Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
1) Make Strike after burner activation/sustain cost equal to Scouts.
2) Give Strikes a flat damage boost to both primaries and secondaries, to make ignoring a Strike a dangerous proposition, at any range.
3) Give Strikes a significant Range boost to both primary and secondary weapons.
4) Give Strikes a significant Accuracy boost to primary and secondary weapons.
5) Remove Charged Plating from the Star Guard and replace it with Feedback Shield.
6) Give the Star Guard Burst Laser Cannons.
7) Give the Pike Retro Thrusters.
8) Give the Pike Interdiction Missile.
9) Give the Clarion Concussion Missile.
10) Give the Clarion Heavy Laser Cannons.
This is a solid list. I think it is a bit too strong and I have some thoughts about this. First, one big change is enough to get things going, and the original request said only pick one section to buff.

2) Give Strikes a flat damage boost to both primaries and secondaries --> Still agree with primaries, no longer agree with secondaries.

Additional changes I consider as bonus improvements, not as significant but are good ideas and will be welcomed, if Bioware has the extra resources to do:

7) Give the Pike Retro Thrusters. --> Agree
8) Give the Pike Interdiction Missile. --> Agree
9) Give the Clarion Concussion Missile. --> Agree
10) Give the Clarion Heavy Laser Cannons. --> Agree

I would also add:

11A) Increase Ion Cannon range to 5000m
12A) Something for Rapid Laser Cannon and Ion Missiles

Now I will explain.

1) 3) 4) One big damage increase is enough and (may) keep things simpler for implementation and testing. These other changes combined will make the Strikes too good. Here I have a philosophical difference with Dres and Etrii, who want smaller improvements to multiple areas.

2) I've dropped the damage increase to secondaries because a gun-centric flight/space-sim is generally more engaging than a missile-centric one. Rise of Flight and Il-2 are fun largely because those planes don't have missiles. Missiles are interesting in Falcon 4 and DCS World for reasons not applicable to GSF, and I would still make guns-only scenarios at times. The X-wing series games also used missiles sparingly.

5) I expect the improved Strikes will largely displace Scouts. Removing Charged Plating is fine but adding Feedback Shield will hurt Scouts too much. Edit: I think Feedback Shield will also be buffed by the +50% damage to primaries.

6) In isolation, BLC on the T1 Strike is a great idea. Combined with +50% damage is too much. One-shot kill of a Scout with a critical hit would be possible and undesirable. It would also make the T1 Strike substantially better than the T2 and T3 Strikes, regardless if we buff the missiles or not. And later, if we try to fix the other weak ships (T2 gunship, T3 scout, T3 bomber), it would be harder to fix them, and it would be hard to justify not adding BLC on all of them.
The Lightsaber-jerk

Referral link: http://www.swtor.com/r/jBHrWL

lwiggles's Avatar


lwiggles
06.01.2015 , 09:32 PM | #26
Hi Nem. my feedback as follows:

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
1) Make Strike after burner activation/sustain cost equal to Scouts.
Don't like. I'm worried additional mobility for strikes will put too much pressure on gunships

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
2) Give Strikes a flat damage boost to both primaries and secondaries
Half like. Like damage boost to missiles. I'm worried blaster damage buff harsh on scouts.

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
3) Give Strikes a significant Range boost to both primary and secondary weapons
Don't like, I'm worried blaster range buff too harsh all round. Prefer to lower lock-on times and cool-downs of missiles, supporting mid-range.

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
4) Give Strikes a significant Accuracy boost to primary and secondary weapons
Half like. Like damage boost to missiles. As above for blaster changes.

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
5) Remove Charged Plating from the Star Guard and replace it with Feedback Shield.
Like

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
6) Give the Star Guard Burst Laser Cannons.
Like

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
7) Give the Pike Retro Thrusters.
Like

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
8) Give the Pike Interdiction Missile
Like

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
9) Give the Clarion Concussion Missile
Like

Quote: Originally Posted by Nemarus View Post
10) Give the Clarion Heavy Laser Cannons
Like

Hope it helps and cheers
Purple-font <Porkins Revenge> The Harbinger
Slash-No <Gone Sithing> The Harbinger

"That's how we say hi in GSF"

ipikki_oukami's Avatar


ipikki_oukami
06.01.2015 , 10:31 PM | #27
The Reason i don't choose the strike fighter is because it is easily out maneuvered by the scout and can't enter the combat arena to any objective in fast enough time to engage the enemy when they are taking my teams nodes. Honestly that is why i think so many people go for the gunship so they don't have to make the huge trek to objectives. The scout is the only option in a pinch where your team is dropping and needs you back in the action fast. If we had arenas that played more to the type of combat the Strike needs then we may choose it more often. Fighter combat like battle front 2. Kill static ship deffence points to destroy the ship. ie shields communications, turbo lasers, hanger bay, each one with a buff that the deffending team looses when they get destroyed. basically we want better more realistic star fighter options. There is no point for us to take those current nodes. They really don't help in the long run for any real purpose. If I am playing a star fighter simulator a simple king of the hill style fight is not what I am looking for. I want to feel like i am doing something useful. Take the rail star ship missions add our star fighters to the scene and we now have an interesting battle ground. Defend this station from the waves of enemy fighters(those fighters being the opposing team). Kill that opposing fleet before they jump to hyperspace and escape. maybe involve guild ships vs star fighters or even make a battle front mode where you board guild ships and take them over for the match. honestly it took me 5 minutes to come up with a few ways to make star fighter more engaging and interesting. Bioware I know your a great company but you really need to take our feedback and what we all know you want to see in the game as well to heart and tell EA it needs to happen. For this game to survive we need new exciting content and I for one do not want to loose my beloved Star Wars The Old Republic.

~Dezz'Revas~
The Revas Colonial Alliance
Begeren Colony West Coast RP server
"Fear is the mind killer"

Etrii's Avatar


Etrii
06.02.2015 , 03:12 AM | #28
Hmmm...i was really thinking about the t3 strike. Mainly....why many think it`s almoest good.

Maybe its the mobility?

Yes, only scout than can go places, not constantly be "going places"

Maybe its the ability to tank a lot of damage?

Both CP and Directional builds offer a lot of utility. From tanking Slug Shoots to eating seismics. A repair probe negates bleedthrough quite well. Actually. IT`S THE ONLY SHIP THAT CAN TANK DAMAGE. T2 bomber or t3 scout, cant do it. Drones can be destroyed and limit mobility. so That is a unique value on that ship.

What about killing power?

It`s mehish.

But it`s the best ship to look at guns without strong secondary missiles.

Quads...why are they better on a scout? systems? Speed?

TT/BO is riduculsy powerfull with having terrible guns...BUT LC on mobility T1 scout are still good.

Sure you can deliver some nice damage if you deliver a thermite first. Which is unlikely.

T3 is used often as an example of nagating ion railgun...ok...but so what now?you hide your shilds, powerdived, are ready to kick some ion spaming ***. you even got in to 5-6k range...you shoot...and a GS is running. So you are starting a chase. And you are chasing...and chasing...and chasing. and then you are peeled of target. If you were able to land a kill it depends on Gunships misplay.

Ok, so maybe the tankish ability will help vs scouts? pod jousters maybe? You start to joust...and podsters have TT/BO and or pods...more efective dmg in the same range. What about BLC scouts? AH ok i have you now! my weapons better in that 2,5 k range difference frame it`s my window of oportunity....errr where did the window went?

Basicly that 2,5k is closed in less then a 2 seconds. less if scouts uses booster. Strikes speed is 740+ m/s and scouts 780+ m/s so its its less then 1,5 second without boosters. With less efective accuracy evasion balance. Even if RNG blessed you can deliver 1401 dmg in that time frime. with only passive evasion scout evasion its 911. It`s not enough do any signifact damage.


My point is that ability to deliver its damage vs a scout or a gunship is lacking. Not the damage itself, but DAMAGE IN EFECTIVE TIME FRAME.

Now lets add some range, some damage, and some accuracy [2km, 10%, 8%]

Now that encouter takes almoest 3 seconds so the scout entering its "danger zone" ate on avrage 1850 dmg sure that number could be negated by disto`s time, TT evasion , RI.

So what we need is to incressed strike "kill window range/time" But looking at It it`s easy to over tune it.

havokhead's Avatar


havokhead
06.02.2015 , 04:39 AM | #29
Mobility itself for Strikes isn't the issue, it's the fact that strike pilots have to make a choice between mobility and survivability meanwhile scouts get both. Strikes can be very mobile, in fact, they can have equivalent mobility to scouts if Quick Charge Shield, Retro Thrusters & Regen or Power Engines are chosen components. You get virtually unlimited boost this way. The problem now is, you have weaker shields and less maneuvering so getting in and out of fights isn't the problem, it's staying in the fight. If you go the other route and take directional shields, turning thrusters etc then you can fight a lot better but now you're always engine starved and because you can't move then you can't pursue targets to finish them off, you can't escape when pressured, you're much slower in general so you're an easier target for gunships etc. So it's a HUGE trade-off of choices that strikes have to make, which, scouts don't.

The second real issue that rolls into the mobility vrs survivability topic is the fact that the T1 & T2 strikes cannot survive sustained pressure because they lack the distortion field crutch which scouts & gunships rely on so heavily to survive and escape OR survive and keep fighting. This is also the main issue with T2 gunships, they cannot survive sustained pressure. Strikes are tough enough to take 2 big hits but because they can't move or have only 1 missile break they're often left floating helplessly in space. The T3 strike can often tank and/or repair this damage and power dive to safety so it survives the sustained pressure.

Lately, I've been playing my T1 & T2 strikes more like scouts with more firepower & less survivability & I've been much happier. I can engage and disengage fights at will and kill things regularly, what's still frustrating is the inability to survive while dog-fighting. The minute my strike fighter takes a hit or I feel sustained pressure I have to retreat to safety. That's why so many aces don't /can't use strike fighters, you simply can't survive the focus on you like you could in a T2 scout.

Truthfully, the simplest solution to these problems would be to just give T1 & T2 strikes distortion field and power dive (and wouldn't hurt T2 gunships either). Bioware could pop these on and wash their hands of it after that. Personally, I'd love to see some other more imaginative solutions to these problems. As has been stated above, giving Feedback Shield a missile break and giving it to T1/2 Strikes would be a boost. Knocking the shield de-buff off of Quick Charge Shields would make it more viable to strikes while not really affecting scouts as they already have weaker shields. Or take it a step further and turn the right-side tier 3 of Quick Charge Shields into a missile break instead of a cooldown buff which would add 3 buffs to defence - better shields, better mobility and a missile break.

I don't think Strike Fighters are really that far off, they are meant to be dog-fighters so give them the tools to engage and stay in the fight. Don't leave' em dead in space. Before some game sweeping changes are made, maybe re-arrange some components that could potentially improve strike fighter play and game-test it for a week or two.
-J'exx [Nova Squadron]

-Stiletto[Eclipse Squadron]

Etrii's Avatar


Etrii
06.02.2015 , 10:18 AM | #30
Giving strikes distortion field would just turn them i to quad/cluster scouts with less mobility and less options