PSA - THIS is why AX Pilots ALWAYS use gauss cannons

[galahad2069]

To you and me maybe. You would be surprised to know how many people don't listen to that kind of argumentation and need to be taught either by trying themselves or actually showing them. Having been an AXI mentor for 6 months I have seen both types, people who suck up information like a sponge and go on to implement it well as well as people who are stone set in their ways and want to kill a hydra in a T10 using just AX multicannons. The AXI homepage has this to say about weapons:

"Due to the current state of Anti-Xeno weapons, the Guardian Gauss Cannon is a clear winner and the only recommended weapon for AX combat. The damage-per-second, armour penetration, hitscan, precision and range makes this a significantly superior weapon to all other Anti-Xeno weapons which currently suffer severe drawbacks that make them sub-optimal and very difficult to use."

Short and concise and you would think it would suffice as explanation. Alas, for many, it doesn't and we find ourselves explaining this over and over. Sometimes it is like hitting your head against the wall. Having a video with actual gameplay showcasing the different weapons certainly helps.

I'd also argue that burst lasers are the easiest-to-use fixed weapon due to the lack of charge-up time.

I was simply replying to a comment claiming videos in general to be better/more convenient/efficient way of delivering information than written text, which is clearly not true.
For example, if videos had been the only way to study medicine (instead of the many thousands pages' worth of written text), I would still be sitting there watching endless videos till the end of my (or my grandchildren's) life.

I get that I might not be the target audience of the thread - the problem is that neither the title nor the opening post made it obvious.
I'm a PvPer, not a diehard AX player, but if one of the dedicated AXI pilots creates a thread on "why Gauss cannons are the best", then that might make me genuinely curious about what they have to say about it. So (IMO) it would have been much more convenient to type 2 lines of text reading "due to the current state of Anti-Xeno weapons, etc etc blah blah", followed by "for starters, this is how we are doing it: <video link>".

BTW, if someone still needs explanation on basic things like weapon stats or how to use railguns, then maybe they are not yet ready for endgame/high level PvE content like Thargoid interceptors. It's basically the same thing when a new player is still struggling to kill NPC's and cannot tell apart a prismo from a biweave, then maybe they are not yet ready to register for PvP League wingfights in the San Tu rings.

PS: you don't need to argue on burst lasers because I did not say that railguns were the easiest hitscan weapons. I only compared fixed hitscan to other (non-hitscan) fixed weapons.

 

[Katie Byrne]

I was simply replying to a comment claiming videos in general to be better/more convenient/efficient way of delivering information than written text, which is clearly not true.
For example, if videos had been the only way to study medicine (instead of the many thousands pages' worth of written text), I would still be sitting there watching endless videos till the end of my (or my grandchildren's) life.

I get that I might not be the target audience of the thread - the problem is that neither the title nor the opening post made it obvious.
I'm a PvPer, not a diehard AX player, but if one of the dedicated AXI pilots creates a thread on "why Gauss cannons are the best", then that might make me genuinely curious about what they have to say about it. So (IMO) it would have been much more convenient to type 2 lines of text reading "due to the current state of Anti-Xeno weapons, etc etc blah blah", followed by "for starters, this is how we are doing it: <video link>"[/].

BTW, if someone still needs explanation on basic things like weapon stats or how to use railguns, then maybe they are not yet ready for endgame/high level PvE content like Thargoid interceptors. It's basically the same thing when a new player is still struggling to kill NPC's and canot tell apart a prismo from a biweave, then maybe they are not yet ready to register for PvP League wingfights in the San Tu rings.

PS: you don't need to argue on burst lasers because I did not say that railguns were the easiest hitscan weapons. I only compared fixed hitscan to other (non-hitscan) fixed weapons.

again i'd say it depends on the individual right? i tihnk what we've learned here the past few days is that my video threads are not for everyone and those that prefer text should just ignore them

you curate your own experience online - there's no need to subject yourself to content you dont like - i know i wouldnt

 

[ZAKALWEINC8876]

But then they wouldn't be able to nit pick and, most importantly mooooooan! Lmao.

 

[Several Puffins]

I feel like a fun option to reverse the Gauss meta would be to make plasma launchers actually improve damage with higher hull hardness (sumthin' sumthin' energy dissipation). It could also bring them out as a niche bomber weapon against the largest human ships.

We could see a situation in which cyclopses are still best dealt with by the Gauss, but plasmas become better for exertion (though probably still hard for sniping) once you're murdering any larger flowers.

 

[Katie Byrne]

I feel like a fun option to reverse the Gauss meta would be to make plasma launchers actually improve damage with higher hull hardness (sumthin' sumthin' energy dissipation). It could also bring them out as a niche bomber weapon against the largest human ships.

We could see a situation in which cyclopses are still best dealt with by the Gauss, but plasmas become better for exertion (though probably still hard for sniping) once you're murdering any larger flowers.

that is an interesting suggestion definately

One that I always thought was kind of an interesting idea too was if Plasma Chargers were made to have an effect on thargoid hull regeneration - maybe a temporary halt or debuff?

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

I was simply replying to a comment claiming videos in general to be better/more convenient/efficient way of delivering information than written text, which is clearly not true.
For example, if videos had been the only way to study medicine (instead of the many thousands pages' worth of written text), I would still be sitting there watching endless videos till the end of my (or my grandchildren's) life.

This makes absolutely no sense. When you say "clearly not true", can you back that up with something? Also videos take less of your time because they illustrate, not more of it.

Having something described for you by another has it's uses to be sure. But seeing it for yourself with your own eyes? That's crucial for many things, and the fact that you and others wants to dismiss that is just so weird to me.

 

[Katie Byrne]

This makes absolutely no sense. When you say "clearly not true", can you back that up with something? Also videos take less of your time because they illustrate, not more of it.

Having something described for you by another has it's uses to be sure. But seeing it for yourself with your own eyes? That's crucial for many things, and the fact that you and others wants to dismiss that is just so weird to me.

honestly i tihnk that at this poitn we are close to a resolution on this

We've established that different people prefer different media - some like text and soem like video - and that those that prefer text would just be better off ignoring threads that are video

When I come across a thread that starts with just a wall of text for example - I just click away - no fuss,just one click and i'm on to someithng else


it's a reasonable outcome and i dont see any benefit to drawing this out

 

[galahad2069]

This makes absolutely no sense. When you say "clearly not true", can you back that up with something? Also videos take less of your time because they illustrate, not more of it.

Having something described for you by another has it's uses to be sure. But seeing it for yourself with your own eyes? That's crucial for many things, and the fact that you and others wants to dismiss that is just so weird to me.

I've already backed it up. You even quoted it, lmao.

But let me back it up for you once again:
"Due to the current state of Anti-Xeno weapons, the Guardian Gauss Cannon is a clear winner and the only recommended weapon for AX combat. The damage-per-second, armour penetration, hitscan, precision and range makes this a significantly superior weapon to all other Anti-Xeno weapons which currently suffer severe drawbacks that make them sub-optimal and very difficult to use."

^That is why AX pilots use Gauss cannons
If it took you more than a couple of seconds to read, then it must be a really severe case of dyslexia.
For comparison: the video in the opening post is 15 minutes long.

 

[Several Puffins]

that is an interesting suggestion definately

One that I always thought was kind of an interesting idea too was if Plasma Chargers were made to have an effect on thargoid hull regeneration - maybe a temporary halt or debuff?

Also good. Actually I really like the idea of giving them a debuff role rather than a damage one, be that regen (say a pause to regen and thus a longer exertion time too), or to speed/handling (for a go-to anti-basi weapon for slower ships).

As it stands they don't add that much tactical variety even overlooking their poor DPS.

 

[Katie Byrne]

Also good. Actually I really like the idea of giving them a debuff role rather than a damage one, be that regen (say a pause to regen and thus a longer exertion time too), or to speed/handling (for a go-to anti-basi weapon for slower ships).

As it stands they don't add that much tactical variety even overlooking their poor DPS.

haha i have no doubt that an anti-basi speed weapon would be popular

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

I've already backed it up. You even quoted it, lmao.

But let me back it up for you once again:
"Due to the current state of Anti-Xeno weapons, the Guardian Gauss Cannon is a clear winner and the only recommended weapon for AX combat. The damage-per-second, armour penetration, hitscan, precision and range makes this a significantly superior weapon to all other Anti-Xeno weapons which currently suffer severe drawbacks that make them sub-optimal and very difficult to use."

^That is why AX pilots use Gauss cannons
If it took you more than a couple of seconds to read, then it must be a really severe case of dyslexia.
For comparison: the video in the opening post is 15 minutes long.

I believe the OP has politely asked me to drop this point, so I'll respect her wishes. But you clearly just don't 'get it' on this subject and that's ok.

In creative writing (ironically) we learned a key phrase: show don't tell. Video's show. It's not that her video took longer than your little blurb to digest. It's that she's SHOWING us the difference, whereas I just have to take your word for it that what you say is true and verified. You haven't even described those "drawbacks", I'm supposed to take it on faith I guess? Her video SHOWS me those. Seeing is believing bub.

I also love that all you people whining about the "15 minutes" length are clearly spending far more time than 15 minutes on this thread complaining about the 15 minute video and how it's wasting your time, but hey, that's your prerogative.

 

[Kissamies]

Had a strange thought last night: A quick and dirty fix for the all-gauss meta might be removing the hardness from Thargoid hulls completely and compensating by multiplying HP and regen speed.

 

[Several Puffins]

Had a strange thought last night: A quick and dirty fix for the all-gauss meta might be removing the hardness from Thargoid hulls completely and compensating by multiplying HP and regen speed.

Honestly I find the concept of ax damage a bit arcadey. I wish regular weapon ineffectiveness was only a matter of hardness and AX weapons were just overkill on human ships, doing moderate damage with insane penetration. But, it is what it is and we have it now!

 

[Katie Byrne]

Honestly I find the concept of ax damage a bit arcadey. I wish regular weapon ineffectiveness was only a matter of hardness and AX weapons were just overkill on human ships, doing moderate damage with insane penetration. But, it is what it is and we have it now!

I can see the reasoning there defiantely but I personalyl would take things the opposite direction if it were down to that kind of decision:

I'm speculating a little here but I have often suspected that The Plasma Charger is as weak as it is to prevent it being overpowered for PVP

I tihnk maybe another way tro go to rebalance these weapons but not have them affect the 'outside' of AX would be to have them do no damage to human ships at all and balance them soley for AX - again the PVP theory is speculation but someithng i have pondered

 

[Several Puffins]

I can see the reasoning there defiantely but I personalyl would take things the opposite direction if it were down to that kind of decision:

I'm speculating a little here but I have often suspected that The Plasma Charger is as weak as it is to prevent it being overpowered for PVP

I tihnk maybe another way tro go to rebalance these weapons but not have them affect the 'outside' of AX would be to have them do no damage to human ships at all and balance them soley for AX - again the PVP theory is speculation but someithng i have pondered

I'm not convinced by that argument. Sustained DPS on a charger is handily beaten by an efficient PA of the same size, that's not even the META for the weapon and we're ignoring that all important class 4 slot for the big ships and FdLs. I could see the plasma charger becoming a meme weapon, especially for multicrew given the turreted version, but not something that upsets the balance!

 

[Katie Byrne]

I'm not convinced by that argument. Sustained DPS on a charger is handily beaten by an efficient PA of the same size, that's not even the META for the weapon and we're ignoring that all important class 4 slot for the big ships and FdLs. I could see the plasma charger becoming a meme weapon, especially for multicrew given the turreted version, but not something that upsets the balance!

haha well as I said it was pure speculation ,and i'm not a PVP'r so certainly do not know their meta

I do think that of all the Guardian weapons the PC is most in need of rebalancing - it is a lot of fun to use and looks great when the shots land - they just need to be more effective to make it worthwhile

 

[Several Puffins]

haha well as I said it was pure speculation ,and i'm not a PVP'r so certainly do not know their meta

I do think that of all the Guardian weapons the PC is most in need of rebalancing - it is a lot of fun to use and looks great when the shots land - they just need to be more effective to make it worthwhile

There we are in complete agreement!

 

[galahad2069]

Now you're just being absurd.

Can you back it up somehow?

In creative writing (ironically) we learned a key phrase: show don't tell. Video's show. It's not that her video took longer than your little blurb to digest.

It took you more than 15 minutes to digest 8 lines of text? Seriously?

It's that she's SHOWING us the difference, whereas I just have to take your word for it that what you say is true and verified. You haven't even described those "drawbacks", I'm supposed to take it on faith I guess? Her video SHOWS me those. Seeing is believing bub.

Katie is a good AX pilot, but there is literally zero new information in that video for anyone who is not a complete noob. There is absolutely no need to show a couple of Gauss shots and multicannon rounds to anyone who ever tried to use railguns and fixed multicannons. I, for one, need absolutely no proof that it's possible to hit, or she's capable of hitting Thargoid interceptors with Gauss cannons and multicannons. Ofc it is and ofc she is.

Yeah video shows - but 95% of it is unnecessary/redundant information. Background noise. At the end of the day, her answer to the question is the exact same thing that Orodruin summarized in no more than 3 lines.

There is absolutely no problem with "basic tutorial for noobs" kind of videos, but as I've already said:

I get that I might not be the target audience of the thread - the problem is that neither the title nor the opening post made it obvious.
I'm a PvPer, not a diehard AX player, but if one of the dedicated AXI pilots creates a thread on "why Gauss cannons are the best", then that might make me genuinely curious about what they have to say about it. So (IMO) it would have been much more convenient to type 2 lines of text reading "due to the current state of Anti-Xeno weapons, etc etc blah blah", followed by "for starters, this is how we are doing it: <video link>".

By the way:

I also love that all you people whining about the "15 minutes" length are clearly spending far more time than 15 minutes on this thread complaining about the 15 minute video and how it's wasting your time, but hey, that's your prerogative.

It's none of your business what I'm wasting my time on, bub.
FYI, I did not come here to complain about anything, I just corrected a false statement on a public forum, that's all.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

It took you more than 15 minutes to digest 8 lines of text? Seriously?

Not sure if trolling with this...but I'm just done with this. Enjoy your AM/FM radio, your Hi-Fi 8-Track player, and your 8mm reel to reel home movies.

You win, I'm getting off your lawl lol.

 

[RyuStaar]

Not sure if trolling with this...but I'm just done with this. Enjoy your AM/FM radio, your Hi-Fi 8-Track player, and your 8mm reel to reel home movies.

You win, I'm getting off your lawl lol.

Have you heard of Ad Hominem logical fallacy? Case and point everyone. Can't refute the argument so he makes fun of him