Just throwing my two cents in here.

 

While I agree with a lot of people saying that certain things about scouts/gunships could be toned down a little bit, I feel that the real issue is simply that the strike fighter needs a little bump.

 

I mastered my strike fighter as my first ship earlier on this month and enjoyed it/did well competitively with it, but after having maxed a sting out it's painfully obvious which one is the superior dog fighter.

 

Realistically, slightly reduced lock on times for missiles with strike fighters (maybe like a -10% or -20% lock on time) would bring them back in line. Their missiles are one of the few things that really set them apart and they hit fairly hard as is. Allowing strike fighters to lock on slightly faster to scouts before they leave the targeting reticle or gunships before they charge/fire their rail would probably be enough to tip the balance back.

 

I know people get awfully heated over all of this but I was thinking about it today and just sort of realized that this seems (to me) to be an easy and viable solution.

 

-Shadow

I still think it's too early for people to be acting like they know all the ins and outs of GS, and so aren't qualified to be suggesting buffs/nerfs. Seriously, people think they're experts in a couple weeks, playing against mostly complete noobs?

On the plus side, throwing around buffs generates fewer moans than hitting things with nerfs.

 

Personally I think things are fine.

Given the strike fighter's stated role a a multitasker I'm hoping that it will shine more in other game modes which we haven't seen yet. I can imagine that it will be the ship of choice for attack runs on heavily defended, relatively stationary capitol ship targets.

I seem to do fine in my Pike.

 

I don't play for huge numbers, I play for objectives - and my job in Domination is to soak up damage with my insane shield regen while taking shots at people attacking my teammates so that they can cap the satellite. Alternatively, I deny cap to the enemy team because it can take forever to take me down.

 

We really need to be waiting for other game modes in which the strike fighter might shine before we buff/nerf things - early access still!

I am noticing as player ships get maxed that it is harder to take out the scouts and gunships and easier for them to take me out. I think that changing the last missile upgrade to a lessened lock on time or faster reload would help. I don't agree with changing the scout or gunship. I think that a gunship maxed should take me out if they see me coming and in a dog fight with a scout I should be at a disadvantage, but the strike fighters edge at medium range just isn't there with maxed out ships.

I still think it's too early for people to be acting like they know all the ins and outs of GS, and so aren't qualified to be suggesting buffs/nerfs. Seriously, people think they're experts in a couple weeks, playing against mostly complete noobs?

 

It's not that really, but discussing buffs/nerfs can be productive. Look at how the gunship issues thread has gotten a lot more people trying those (possibly) overpowered tactics, which will shine a brighter light on them, so that they can be adjusted more quickly (if it turns out that they need to be).

 

Also, I will be pleasantly surprised if we aren't "playing against mostly complete noobs" for however long we play this game mode. Look at the quality of play in Huttball - it's not really much (if any) higher than it was back in beta.

 

And I hope the developers plan to balance the ships for each game mode rather than letting scouts dominate one mode, strike fighters dominate another, ect...it will be boring if everyone ends up flying the same ships on a given map.

I feel like the strikers have gotten the short end of the stick, at least for solo queues... Granted there are some pilots that do great in them, but I feel that they could use some love. The reduced lock-on time idea seems sound to me. Hopefully they will shine in other game modes at least.

 

I want to fly my strikers more but they feel so sluggish after my scouts... I wish there was something more distinctive about them somehow. Maybe if type A's had an "alpha strike" special that enabled them to fire both weapons simultaneously (massive damage but also massive energy cost), and the type B's had the faster lock-on time? Dunno...

 

That been said, I still see most people flying strikers rather than scouts at least on my server... Maybe the scouts feel too fast or erratic for their playstyles

Strike fighters dont need any buffs at all. With a good pilot behind the helm, they are very VERY deadly.

I agree with the op. I play mainly scouts and I always see strike fighters as easy targets compared to other scouts. Even gunships are easy pickings if they aren't backed up by a second gunship.

Agreed with OP.

I want to fly my strikers more but they feel so sluggish after my scouts...

 

My Pike actually goes far faster than a base scout does that's not counting for upgrades to the scout or anything, but still!

Realistically, slightly reduced lock on times for missiles with strike fighters (maybe like a -10% or -20% lock on time) would bring them back in line. Their missiles are one of the few things that really set them apart and they hit fairly hard as is. Allowing strike fighters to lock on slightly faster to scouts before they leave the targeting reticle or gunships before they charge/fire their rail would probably be enough to tip the balance back.

 

I kinda have mixed feelings about strikers needing a buff, flying my Star Guard it already feels pretty darn powerful and I think any more offensive power and it might start exceeding the scout/flashfire in the role of space superiority (which would be bad since the flashfire, not star guard, is meant to perform that role). Even though I know a buff to missiles would help my Star Guard I nevertheless would object to a buff that is exclusively to the missile capabilities of strikers. Primarily because that would buff the Pike (Tier 2 striker) that can equip 2 missile types at a time more than the Star Guard (Tier 1 striker) that can only equip 1 type at a time. That would no doubt increase the lethality of striker missiles but it could also create an inbalance between the two strike models because the buff would benefit one model more than the other. IMO the models should be equally balanced and it be a matter of playstyle choice (Star Guard if you prefer classic Star Wars WWII based dogfighting with blasters, Pike if you prefer the Star Wars take on modern fighter combat).

 

Personally I think what needs to be done is work on making the roles of scouts and strikers more distinguishable. To put things in X-Wing series game terms on paper the scout is clearly supposed to be performing the roles of an A-Wing and the striker is supposed to perform the roles of an X-Wing. Obviously when it comes to dogfighting the scout has an advantage over a striker, primarily due to mobility, much like an A-Wing would have a slight advantage over an X-Wing in a dogfight and that's fair. But when it comes to versatility where strikers/X-Wings are supposed to shine as miles better than an A-Wing it doesn't seem to work out that way in practice. In the current game modes I've really not found that there's any offensive role I can do in my striker that I can't do equally well in a scout. That seems at least in part because 1)the defensive abilities of the scout are so good they allow them to perform with striker like versatility 2)things like turrets are so weak they don't present an opportunity for strikers to demonstrate their superior versatility to scouts or 3) some combination of 1 & 2.

 

Now granted in the current game modes the only thing we have to kill other than enemy fighters is turrets which can hardly replace the difficulty of attacking a corvette or capital ship. Nevertheless until more difficult AI targets are added on other maps they're the only thing out there that could possibly require the versatility of a striker class ship to destroy (otherwise it'd just be a straight team death match where the ships with the best dogfighting capability wins, and that's obviously the realm of a scout's space superiority role, not the multirole starfighter job of strikers). It seems bothersome that on the current maps the supposed versatility advantage strikers have over scouts doesn't actually play out in practice. At least this is my impression from in game and the forums.

 

If they add things like corvettes I'd assume that strikers will shine because of their ability to equip weapons like torps but like someone else said I don't think it's a good idea if one map type heavily favors one ship class while another map type favors another ship class. That would just make it less fun since you'd know, whether you like ship class X or not, you'd have to use that ship type on this map to benefit to your team. I think regardless of map type scouts and strikers should be better balanced so the striker is far superior to a scout when it comes to versatility the same way the scout is vastly superior to a striker if you're looking for speed and agility in a dogfight.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Gavin_Kelvar

I think Strikers could use a survivability buff, and they also need to be a little closer to Scouts than Gunships in terms of maneuverability. Otherwise, they're perfectly playable and perfectly lethal.

My Pike actually goes far faster than a base scout does that's not counting for upgrades to the scout or anything, but still!

 

Nice! How's your turning rate though? I think you'd have to sacrifice some for being a speed demon

I think the Strike Fighter needs a buff.

 

It's possible, but unlikely, that the strikes are perfectly balanced now. But, if this is really supposed to be the "X-Wing" of this game, I'd expect to see them in equal or greater numbers than the other ships.

 

The problem is that the scouts have mostly the same job, and are better at it. The scouts can maneuver super well, are much faster, and also inexplicably have a dps cooldown (a serious one, and stackable) where the other ship types get to change their blaster type, missile type, or railgun type.

 

This means that the only possible weakness you have is if you are trying to dodge multiple bandits- I think we all agree that a scout has an edge over a fighter, but I also think that three scouts have an edge over three fighters. The strikes need peels just like gunships do.

 

In exchange for all these weaknesses, they gain some very powerful missiles, with commensurately long lock-on times, and they gain more hull and shield.

 

 

I think that the buff should work towards making these things better. For instance, a strike fighter could have a passive power where they regenerate hull slowly, giving them a serious edge in a longer fight (strike fighters would respond much better to the presence of repair drones), or they could have some way to stop the sheer amount of crap that bypasses shields (though that's probably a bypass problem, not a strike problem).

Nice! How's your turning rate though? I think you'd have to sacrifice some for being a speed demon

 

It's not TOO bad - taking speed thrusters over turning thrusters definitely hurts my yaw rate, but the additional speed means pitching up/down not only gives me a good chance to avoid a missile lock, but often carries me out of lock range completely with a tap to my afterburners.

 

I can also reach satellites very quickly using my speed and barrel roll, which means the enemy scouts that show up afterward then have a pretty hard time taking me out with all power to shields and my quick-regen shield regenning while I'm taking damage. I can deny caps for a very very long time and stand a decent chance of shooting down one or two bandits and possibly taking it if I'm solo, or living long enough for my teammates to pick them off me if I have a wingman or two.

Edited December 22, 2013 by silvershadows

It's not TOO bad - taking speed thrusters over turning thrusters definitely hurts my yaw rate, but the additional speed means pitching up/down not only gives me a good chance to avoid a missile lock, but often carries me out of lock range completely with a tap to my afterburners.

 

I can also reach satellites very quickly using my speed and barrel roll, which means the enemy scouts that show up afterward then have a pretty hard time taking me out with all power to shields and my quick-regen shield regenning while I'm taking damage. I can deny caps for a very very long time and stand a decent chance of shooting down one or two bandits and possibly taking it if I'm solo, or living long enough for my teammates to pick them off me if I have a wingman or two.

 

True, the increased speed does compensate quite a bit for slow turning. And you're definitely at an advantage vs a scout when denying sat access as the increased maneuverability is not as prominent in such close quarters (especially since you don't want to stray too far from the node). I'm thinking of upgrading my type 1 for turning rate and my type 2 for speed.

as a strike fighter pilot, and a good one at that, with a mastered starguard here's my over all thoughts.

 

the GENERAL BALANCE is solid, with strike fighters trading some speed and manuverability for missiles and extra survivability. in practice however the balance isn't qutie right right now. the added speed and manuvability of a scout is so much greater then a Striker the edge is perhaps a bit too hard in the direction of the scout. this is ESPECIALLY the case where right now there's so much armor or sheild peircing that the additional defences are minimal use.

 

fact is a strike fighter has to invest every point he has in turning upgrades just to be able to MATCH a stock scout in turning. and I'm pretty sure a gunship can keep up with us in speed and manuverability.

 

basicly the strike fighter could use just a little more speed and a little better turning on it's stock base. the striker certinly works right now, but I'd definatly say it's the weakest of the "classes" (granted as the "average generalist" class I was expecting it to be so)

 

also one thing worth addressing, burst lasers, flashfires and gunships get these but strikers don't. I certinly understand why these ren't on everyship, but I think they should be a starguard option.

I don't think strike fighter needs a buff, the problem is the ship is totaly uninteresting.

 

People that like to stay out of the main fight and sniping use gunboat, people that like speed and dog fights use scout. The fighter is the middle ship and thus have no specialty, making it very bland and boring.

After thinking about it some more, I think the observation about missile scaling is right on.

 

Rapid-fire/Light Laser Cannon-

T1 - 5% Damage

T2 - 10% Power Cost

T3 - 8% Rate of Fire

T4 - 8% Crit Chance (or Firing Arc/Tracking Penalty)

T5 - 18% damage to shields (or 16% to hull)

Rough Total Damage Increase: 29% (1.05*1.08*1.04*1.09)

 

Cluster Missile-

T1 - 14% lock on time

T2 - 10% shield piercing

T3 - 5% damage

T4 - 5% range (or 4 ammo capacity)

T5 - 15% damage over 5 seconds (or 30% damage with 1/2 ammo capacity)

Rough Total Damage Increase: 21% (1.05*1.15)

 

Obviously, the quicker lock on time, shield piercing, and range/ammo are nice to have for the missiles, but they don't really make up for the extra damage blasters get. For one thing, while you're making it easier to lock your missiles, everyone else is making it easier for them to break missiles locks (quicker engine maneuvers, T3 Distortion Shield, ect).

 

Aside from the missile scaling, another issue is that, while scouts are stacking their primary weapon upgrades on top of their Targeting Telemetry, Blaster Overcharge, or even Sensor Beacon, Strike Fighters are paying for upgrades to maintain the same level of versatility. Having two different primary or secondary weapons maxed out is great, but the advantage the weapon swap provides (versatility) is exactly the same as it is with the base ship. Upgrading both weapons doesn't add to the versatility. On the other hand, scout systems give stacking, percent-based bonuses. As scouts upgrade their primary weapons, the bonuses provided from their systems get better (and vice-versa).

 

EDIT: Granted, some of the utility upgrades do add value to the weapon swap (kinda), but is it enough? I would say no.

Edited December 22, 2013 by Lymain

The main selling points of the strike are the missiles, the ability to switch weapons, and the strongest defenses.

 

The missiles are quite underwhelming, they give ample warnings to the opponent, they're easy to nullify, and even if you manage to get a hit their damage is often pathetic. And the range isn't that good either. They're not even useful for taking out turrets, it's just faster to attack them with lasers.

Conversely, they are still threatening enough that nobody really wants to use an engine that doesn't have an evade ability, because then that would just be free damage, no matter how little.

Also, I think I've never managed to run out of missiles, making ammo capacity upgrades dubious.

 

The ability to switch weapons brings some versatility, but it doesn't translate into an increase in power. Especially, with the cooldown on weapon switching, it's a waste of time and damage to switch primary weapons in the middle of a fight. Switching secondaries works better because it means bypassing the cooldown of each type of missile.

 

As for the defenses, they don't mean that much when everything can punch through shields and armor, while scouts (and even gunships of all things...) get evasion. In the old x-wing games there was no evasion, a hit was a hit, and the only thing that could (very partially) bypass shields were missiles. I really think most things that bypass shields should be replaced by increased damage to shields, and armor penetration should not systematically be 100%. And the concept of "evading" attacks while sitting still in the void of space is laughable.

Also, the only shield type that is exclusive to strikers is terribad and you should feel bad for including it in the game.

 

I also get the impression that scout and gunship upgrades and exclusive components give a lot more utility and... downright bullsith effects, where the components available to strike fighters are saddled with slight increases to damage, range and defense.

The ability to switch weapons brings some versatility, but it doesn't translate into an increase in power. Especially, with the cooldown on weapon switching, it's a waste of time and damage to switch primary weapons in the middle of a fight. Switching secondaries works better because it means bypassing the cooldown of each type of missile.

 

This is why I brought up a potential "alpha strike" ability before regarding Rycers/Starguards... The ability to fire both primaries simultaneously. It would deal massive damage but also eat up blaster energy very fast, meaning it would be a huge burst of damage but highly inefficient. It could work either as a) The "power to blasters" option (F1) - meaning that strikers have less efficient but very deadly firepower on demand, b) a third toggle from the strikers switch primary weapons ability, or c) as a control module or something that replaces missiles and makes right-click fire all the primaries. And the game could allow for Strikers to equip the same weapon type as primary and secondary. And they could always add accuracy debuffs, lowered regeneration/higher consumption and other such things to balance it out if needed.

 

I'm not sure what could be done for the Pike/Quell though... Smaller lock-on times + greater range by default on these ships? An entirely new and unique missile - maybe even manually guided? Can't think of something atm...

I'd have to theory-craft, or someone would, to be sure on this but I think that this is partly a matter of how important burst damage is in MMORPG style PvP mechanics and the fact that the damage system in GS is a very much a MMORPG system and not a combat flight sim style system.

 

Strike fighters are quite survivable if they have hydrospanner from a crewmember, but they lack built in burst damage options. Scouts and gunships get very heavy burst damage built into the ship itself via upgrades. For Strikers the available burst is purely from an active crew ability, and it's not all that impressive. It makes it a lot harder to actually finish opponents off. It shows up on scoreboards where for the same amount of damage done it's not unusual for scouts or gunships to have 3 to 4 times as many kills as a striker for the same amount of damage done.

 

The strengths of strike fighters are survivability, Proton torpedoes (assuming that: a) you actually get a lock and b) the target doesn't evade), and long range primary weapons.

 

For the current available game mode though, these add up too: can achieve both kills and objectives better in other ships.

 

I like flying the strike flyers, perhaps mostly for X-wing related sentimental reasons, but if I seriously want performance I pick a gunship or scout depending on how I want to optimize performance.

 

Optimizations available

Scouts:

Quick response/recon

Interceptor/space superiority dogfighter

 

Gunship

Long range kills/node defense kills

 

Striker:

Getting shot multiple times/Failing to lock onto anything with Proton torps. (These can help with objective based play, but gunships and scouts can achieve the same objective based play and get lots of kills at the same time with less effort expended).

The strengths of strike fighters are survivability, Proton torpedoes (assuming that: a) you actually get a lock and b) the target doesn't evade), and long range primary weapons.

 

This is the problem. Lock on times for proton torpedoes are good for tagging noobs. That's it. The lock on time is so long that any half decent player WILL prevent you from getting a lock on them. This is why most high-end strike pilots resort to concussion. The lock times are more reasonable.

 

I should add that in addition to this, it's still a challenge getting concussion locks on highly skilled players. Hence my suggestion to tone down lock time a little bit for strikers. It will bring them in line with the rest.

Edited December 22, 2013 by -Shadowfist-