I want less synergy grind. Old grind was bad, but this is a hundred times worse.
As a lisence holder I should be earning 20-30k synergy a match, not 2-3k.
In which case: why not old weapons?
Im a realist. Rollback to old weapons wont happen. 
Also, I support Jasans wish.
I’ve got Blue modules in warehouse that are restricted by loyalty level? What happened? They did not change subfaction affiliation of those, did they? Or am I missing a huge chunk of loyalty compared to pre 0.9?
Yeah, I also had a bunch of those and still do, but this comes from before the ship role revamp when some ships, for… some miracle of life, got bumped up a Tier.
I want less synergy grind. Old grind was bad, but this is a hundred times worse.
As a lisence holder I should be earning 20-30k synergy a match, not 2-3k.
No. Definitely not 30k. I’m ok with 15-20k, actually.
faster progress please
Rollback to old weapons is best option.
The new system was - in all honesty - sloppily implemented and not thoroughly thought out.
I don’t see why the developers had to completely overhaul a system that seemingly everyone was okay with. The weapons still needed some tweaking, but offered us a wide variety of options to choose from when kitting out our ship. If you want to stop stabilised rail spam, make shield tanking actually viable. As in: raise the efficiency of all damage-reducing passive modules for shields by five or so points. That way, you’ll have people stacking EM and Thermal resists on their shields and their phase set to kinetic. Stab rails will instantly become a lot less effective against Jericho Guards, as their shield will reduce the damage they take by 57%. Combine that with an emergency shield booster and kinetic weapons will have to switch to thermal to do any real damage.
Example :
Jericho Guard Shield Resists
Using: 2 Thermal Modulators, 2 EM diffusors, and an Adaptive Shield. All Mark 3. Phase Shield set to Kinetic.
Thermal: 102
Kinetic: 130
EM: 72
EDIT: As a small bonus, can we have the option to manually set (in the hangar) what damage the phase shield is set to when we enter battle? Double tapping ‘F’ all the time will become fairly tedious.
Im a bit unsure here:
On the one hand I really loved the old weapons and there are quite a lot that I really miss (assault rails, stab rails, heavy rails… damn Im a rail addict). Most weapons on the Inty feel way inferior to the old ones.
On the Other hand: Giving all ship classes an unique set of weapons is nice in terms of balancing. They are lacking variety though. Why are 3/4 weapons on inty short-range? Why does the fighters/frigates have no real SR Weapon?
Im a bit unsure here:
On the one hand I really loved the old weapons and there are quite a lot that I really miss (assault rails, stab rails, heavy rails… damn Im a rail addict). Most weapons on the Inty feel way inferior to the old ones.
On the Other hand: Giving all ship classes a unique set of weapons is nice in terms of balancing. They are lacking variety though. Why are 3/4 weapons on inty short-range? Why does the fighters/frigates have no real SR Weapon?
My point is that the devs have basically forced us to play in specific ways. Now not everyone wanted to stray from the general norm but some people did.
You want to be a mid/long range inty? Too bad: your hail plasma and stab rails are gone and you have an assault plasma cannon for mid-range.
You want to be a short/long range fighter? Too bad: you’re stuck with mid-range weapons. Fortunately you have the BBB, so it’s okay. You can floor everything with it.
You want to be a mid/short range frigate? Too bad: the coil mortar is the only thing resembling a mid-range weapon and it also has stupid backlash on anything closer than 500m.
This was not a good decision.
I know.
And thats the reason why they should implement more weapons for each class.
It wasnt able to balance the old ones, since all classes were able to use them.
This restart brings the hope of a better balancing… (hopefully, in a distant future).
There is still a chance to see new weapons in the future, but first we want to balance the weapons we have now.
Interceptors are usually close range ships, while Frigates/Fighters are always a mix of close/mid/long range.
ok thx Error… But srsly pl0x
Faster progress would be REALLY nice …
Personally, I kind of like the idea of tying ship size to weapon power.
By that I mean that Interceptors simply cannot mount long-range guns. Ever. Their mid-range should also be lackluster; more harassment than kill-shot weapons. In short, if an Interceptor wants a kill it has to get up close and violent. Their short-range missile, rocket and mine payloads support this style of play.
Fighters can fill almost any role. Their up-close guns pack a bigger hit than those of an Interceptor, they can mount mid-range guns reasonably well, and they can sport weak long-range guns that are good for assisting for harassment, but not so much for kills. Their medium-range missile payloads are wasted point-blank (they miss) and aren’t ideal for long range.
Frigates, packing huge amounts of power, can mount the awesomely big guns we know and love. Frigate weapons should either be very powerful mid-range guns (Coil Mortar) or mid-power long range guns. They don’t do short range; they are too vulnerable at those distances. Their ordnance favours long-range to encourage them to stay back.
Im a bit unsure here:
On the one hand I really loved the old weapons and there are quite a lot that I really miss (assault rails, stab rails, heavy rails… damn Im a rail addict). Most weapons on the Inty feel way inferior to the old ones.
On the Other hand: Giving all ship classes an unique set of weapons is nice in terms of balancing. They are lacking variety though. Why are 3/4 weapons on inty short-range? Why does the fighters/frigates have no real SR Weapon?
maybe. … if weapon are good and give a decent variety.
As an interceprot pilot atm u can chose betwheen :
a) Short Range or Very Short range.
b) Crap weapon worst than what u had before patch or totally usless weapon.
Simply put, intys are forced to CQC for specific reason: with their speed and maneurability long range weapon will allow certain strategy - to dance at your max range effectively avoiding enemy fire (more range - more time to react) and possibly staying out of close-range abilities (pulsar)/weapons. Now they are forced to get close and stay in blind spot and look out for pulsars/mines. Frigates on other hand specificaly deprived of close range weapons to give intys a chance. Now frigate must deal with inty before it gets too close, otherwise rely on pulsar mines to force him out of CQC. At least that’s how it wass planned I think.
I’m under a heavy impression that the BBBs damage isn’t affected by resistance.
Has anyone tested that?
I’m under a heavy impression that the BBBs damage isn’t affected by resistance.
Has anyone tested that?
There is a theory that if BBall hits enemy for 3k with 1k shield left then after applying shields resistances to 3k dmg (in most cases 0 or even negative) and reducing shields to zero, 2k dmg that are remaining are applied to hull without recalculating resistances (they were calculated vs shield).
upd, plus BB Gun deals massive dmg per shot, so direct resistances are less effective against it.
Personally, I kind of like the idea of tying ship size to weapon power.
By that I mean that Interceptors simply cannot mount long-range guns. Ever. Their mid-range should also be lackluster; more harassment than kill-shot weapons. In short, if an Interceptor wants a kill it has to get up close and violent. Their short-range missile, rocket and mine payloads support this style of play.
Fighters can fill almost any role. Their up-close guns pack a bigger hit than those of an Interceptor, they can mount mid-range guns reasonably well, and they can sport weak long-range guns that are good for assisting for harassment, but not so much for kills. Their medium-range missile payloads are wasted point-blank (they miss) and aren’t ideal for long range.
Frigates, packing huge amounts of power, can mount the awesomely big guns we know and love. Frigate weapons should either be very powerful mid-range guns (Coil Mortar) or mid-power long range guns. They don’t do short range; they are too vulnerable at those distances. Their ordnance favours long-range to encourage them to stay back.
“Long” Range maybe… medium range for sure. And a serious medium range not a plasma assoult gun with 2cm /sec proiectile speed… couse u need to stand if u wanna use that weapon… and a ceptor just can’t stand.
Than… i will never understadnd why some guys think the most squishy class in game should be the one has to fight closer… it’s just a nosense.
Than again… “Glass Cannon” rule says " U die in 3 hit, u kill in 3 hit" … interceptor atm are glass for sure… but cannon is missing. (exept ecm… ecm are a different strory).
Rollback to old weapons is best option.
make shield tanking actually viable. As in: raise the efficiency of all damage-reducing passive modules for shields by five or so points. That way, you’ll have people stacking EM and Thermal resists on their shields and their phase set to kinetic. Stab rails will instantly become a lot less effective
Try and post that in the midst of all the immortal ship heals hate … why is it ok to suggest things like this now?
because finally damage and heals are closer to becoming ok now? wonder what brought that about …
Simply put, intys are forced to CQC for specific reason: with their speed and maneurability long range weapon will allow certain strategy - to dance at your max range effectively avoiding enemy fire (more range - more time to react) and possibly staying out of close-range abilities (pulsar)/weapons. Now they are forced to get close and stay in blind spot and look out for pulsars/mines. Frigates on other hand specificaly deprived of close range weapons to give intys a chance. Now frigate must deal with inty before it gets too close, otherwise rely on pulsar mines to force him out of CQC. At least that’s how it wass planned I think.
I just hope u are kidding. Speed an agility means NOTHING in a world dominated from guided missiles and area weapons. Plus u can dance as u want but if 5 people are shoothing on you probably some bullet hits the target. And as a cov op u die in 3 hits in t4/5.
There is a theory that if BBall hits enemy for 3k with 1k shield left then after applying shields resistances to 3k dmg (in most cases 0 or even negative) and reducing shields to zero, 2k dmg that are remaining are applied to hull without recalculating resistances (they were calculated vs shield).
No, someone took down ~20k hull with 100+ EM resistance of my frigate in a few secs (that means 40k damage in let say, 6 secs => 6.67k DPS), which even a kinetic weapon can’t do.
Or was he using over drive, is it possible for over drive to allow an EM weapon to take down 20k hull in a few secs?
Back to interceptors.
So, a t5 ful blue/gold COV Ops dies in 3~4 hits or 2 missiles.
U need long time to kill most of other ships (i could say every ships exept others interceptors) … and u have to stay so close to ur target a$s that u can sniff the bad smell.
Let me know how should i play it as it is presumed to be flown.
Now with infinite missiles many play them as suicide bombers. Run in, spam missiles as you do so, plasma arc as you get in close, self-destruct, rinse-repeat. It’s a rather common sight in T2 (= T1-T3) arcade battles.
Highly annoying. Cooldowns (and not just missiles) really need to carry over when you respawn. Although I guess it’s a selling argument for premium ships - due to lack of repair costs they make the optimal nuke spammers.
I’m under a heavy impression that the BBBs damage isn’t affected by resistance.
Has anyone tested that?
When you use it you get much lower numbers popping up when you start hitting hull, so sure it’s affected.