Quote AlexModny Quote: Originally Posted by Howdy Flygirls and Flyboys!



I’ll be blunt. Strike Fighters need lots of love. The original design is that they are the Jack-of-All and Master-of-None but they have filled out this role too well and because of it are rarely a compelling option. We want to talk about how Strike Fighters can be made into a good option to bring in any match, by any skill level. We have some ideas of what we want to do with them but because this community is always very impressive with communication and feedback we want to get your thoughts on what you think is the best course of action. We know there are some fantastic threads and posts aplenty that already covered this information but we want to consolidate and create a focused discussion.



We want to set expectations though. This is just about gathering feedback and creating a focused discussion on which to possibly make changes based off of. Just a heads up and Musco made me say it



So! What are your pet peeves about Strike Fighters? If you could only pick one section to buff would you choose to improve their Maneuverability, Secondary Weapons, Primary Weapons or Defense? Or something different? What would make them more effective in both game modes?



Looking forward to hearing everyone’s thoughts!



Way I see it, the type of ship classes are broken down like this:



Scouts : Maneuverability and Speed. They are meant to cap satellites fast and be the first to spot the enemy. Their light armor is balanced by it's firepower in close quarters and its ability to be difficult to shoot down.



Gunships: Range and Tactical. With its powerful cannon types, it can pick off enemies from afar as it guards a location or disable a ship for their allies to take out. It's like a moderate glass cannon, but with a bit more armor than the scout. Great when the enemy is hundreds of meters away, not so great in a dogfight.



Bombers: Defense and Support. When a bomber starts fortifying a satellite or an area, that's a clear sign that you either take it down before it can finish setting up its mines and turrets or get the heck out of there. Personally, I think it's a bit OP, since the mines and turrets stay spawned even after we vape the bomber. Now, I don't know if you guys have changed that since last I played GSF, but if it still is that way, you might want to make where all mines and turrets spawned by the bomber are automatically destroyed upon the ships destruction or a shortened spawn period. You literally need a third of your squadron to take out all the mines from a afar and focus fire on the bomber. It's difficult to take out a bomber in a dogfight, since it can deploy turrets or mines to blow us up. I'm sure many would agree that Bombers are the heart of the problem in terms of balanced game play in GSF.



Strikers: Balanced all around. Honestly, when I play on my striker on the Republic side, I think of it as an X-Wing. Meaning good shields, good armor, and impressive maneuverability (but not as good as an A-wing). Problem here is exactly what you said-- it's too well rounded. When I think of Strikers as a ratio of what ships players use in the squadron, I think of it as being close to a majority; with Scouts and Gunships tying second, while Bombers should come last.



I say, increase it's weapon and engine power pool and decrease the lock on time on proton torpedoes for that particular starfighter. The problem is that the power pool for weapons and engines are consumed too quickly and makes the Striker become a dead duck in space/air. Scouts run circles around them and make it difficult to lock on to them; Gunships just pick them off unless you find good cover to get closer (Scouts are actually better at doing that, because of their speed); Bombers make a joke of them when in a dogfight. The bombers just lay a mine or turret and then blows the Striker out of the sky.



Strikers need to be the bulk of a squadron. If anything, increasing the weapon and engine power pool, significantly, will help. Adding the decreased lock-on time on the proton torpedoes would be a plus. They should be the muscle that can take out a bomber and not the other way around.



That's just my opinion.





So you all know where I'm coming from, I play on my Scout (Flashfire) and Striker the most, but if I had to choose which of the two to go into a dogfight with, I'd choose my Scout, because it packs a decent punch and can duck out of a losing fight like no other. That and it's the only class that can have a shotgun-like laser cannon and fast lock-on cluster missiles.



I use my Scout for taking out Gunships, but I completely avoid Bombers, because they're the hardest starfighters to take down unless you're using a Gunship from afar. Scouts and Strikers get owned unless it's a 2v1 against the Bomber. And I'm saying that because of those blasted mines and turrets that can be spawned in mid-fight. Maybe if there was a channeling for those deployables that you can interrupt by shooting at the bomber, that would make it an even fight. Otherwise, the Bomber has the tactical advantage for any average player in a 1v1 fight, unless you're a Gunship shooting from afar. Finally!Way I see it, the type of ship classes are broken down like this:Maneuverability and Speed. They are meant to cap satellites fast and be the first to spot the enemy. Their light armor is balanced by it's firepower in close quarters and its ability to be difficult to shoot down.Range and Tactical. With its powerful cannon types, it can pick off enemies from afar as it guards a location or disable a ship for their allies to take out. It's like a moderate glass cannon, but with a bit more armor than the scout. Great when the enemy is hundreds of meters away, not so great in a dogfight.Defense and Support. When a bomber starts fortifying a satellite or an area, that's a clear sign that you either take it down before it can finish setting up its mines and turrets or get the heck out of there. Personally, I think it's a bit OP, since the mines and turrets stay spawned even after we vape the bomber. Now, I don't know if you guys have changed that since last I played GSF, but if it still is that way, you might want to make where all mines and turrets spawned by the bomber are automatically destroyed upon the ships destruction or a shortened spawn period. You literally need a third of your squadron to take out all the mines from a afar and focus fire on the bomber. It's difficult to take out a bomber in a dogfight, since it can deploy turrets or mines to blow us up. I'm sure many would agree that Bombers are the heart of the problem in terms of balanced game play in GSF.Balanced all around. Honestly, when I play on my striker on the Republic side, I think of it as an X-Wing. Meaning good shields, good armor, and impressive maneuverability (but not as good as an A-wing). Problem here is exactly what you said-- it's too well rounded. When I think of Strikers as a ratio of what ships players use in the squadron, I think of it as being close to a majority; with Scouts and Gunships tying second, while Bombers should come last.I say, increase it's weapon and engine power pool and decrease the lock on time on proton torpedoes for that particular starfighter. The problem is that the power pool for weapons and engines are consumed too quickly and makes the Striker become a dead duck in space/air. Scouts run circles around them and make it difficult to lock on to them; Gunships just pick them off unless you find good cover to get closer (Scouts are actually better at doing that, because of their speed); Bombers make a joke of them when in a dogfight. The bombers just lay a mine or turret and then blows the Striker out of the sky.Strikers need to be the bulk of a squadron. If anything, increasing the weapon and engine power pool, significantly, will help. Adding the decreased lock-on time on the proton torpedoes would be a plus. They should be the muscle that can take out a bomber and not the other way around.That's just my opinion.So you all know where I'm coming from, I play on my Scout (Flashfire) and Striker the most, but if I had to choose which of the two to go into a dogfight with, I'd choose my Scout, because it packs a decent punch and can duck out of a losing fight like no other. That and it's the only class that can have a shotgun-like laser cannon and fast lock-on cluster missiles.I use my Scout for taking out Gunships, but I completely avoid Bombers, because they're the hardest starfighters to take down unless you're using a Gunship from afar. Scouts and Strikers get owned unless it's a 2v1 against the Bomber. And I'm saying that because of those blasted mines and turrets that can be spawned in mid-fight. Maybe if there was a channeling for those deployables that you can interrupt by shooting at the bomber, that would make it an even fight. Otherwise, the Bomber has the tactical advantage for any average player in a 1v1 fight, unless you're a Gunship shooting from afar. We hide in plain sight--behind every key figure and every battle. You will never see us coming when it is our time to strike. You stopped our leader, but not our movement. While you fall, we will rise....

Are you a new or returning player? Do you want free, cool stuff?

Then help fund the Revanite movement use my code! Refer : http://www.swtor.com/r/WmtHFk



Here's a link at what you get for using my refer code: Are you a new or returning player? Do you want free, cool stuff?Then help fund themovement use my code!Here's a link at what you get for using my refer code: http://www.swtor.com/info/friends