Field Test 5 looking real cool! Just one gripe:
I see that ranged weapons still have very short ranges, which makes their automatic fire underwhelming.
It's something that bothered me in Starfinder 1ed too, and it seems at least from this example that you are doubling down on very short ranges.
This sees completely at odd with the statement included in Field Test 5 about how you want to give more relevance to wide maps and ranged fights... right ?
If you tell me that's what the ranges need to be in order to balanced, I would say it feels bad: please rework it so that they are balanced with longer ranges.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would have to agree. Since the top range from the weapon in Play Test #1 is 60ft. So, a melee focused player can reach the ranged player in 2-Actions. Then still has an attack action, which probably will do more damage than the ranged weapon.
Let's just look at the scatter gun (real life shotgun). It has a comfortable hunting range of 40 yards, which is 120ft. A melee character would not be able to reach the range player in 1 round. In Field Test #1 the scatter gun has a range of 15ft, or 5yds, which puts you in reach with a single stride action, and has the unwieldy trait. So, unless you take the feat it is just 1 attack for 2-actions. Unless the enemy has an ability that is activated by being adjacent to its allies. Would say you are only going to get a single enemy in the effected area. You might get more damage from taking the multiple attack penalty and make two melee strikes.
If the focus is going to be on ranged weapons. Think the ranged weapons need to have an effective range to keep melee based characters at bay and do more damage on average than a strength based melee attack on a hit.
Another question, in PF2e attacks of opportunity is a class feature or feat. Is that going to be the case in SF2e or will the ranged character still get the attack of opportunity as the melee character moves to engage?
It is important to keep in mind exactly what weapons we got in FT1.
Both the laser pistol and scattergun are simple weapons, meaning they are caster-facing weapons. Anyone who uses a gun as their main weapon will use martial weapons or sometimes advanced. The scattergun is even bad for casters, so it is literally irrelevant. In any case, neither can be taken as a serious indicator of actual weapon ranges.
The rotolaser and stellar cannon are both aoe weapons, primarily intended to be used by Soldiers. I think that makes the starting 50ft (and growing) range of the stellar cannon (grenade launcher, really) very reasonable. The rotolaser on the other hand is indeed a serious problem. A 15 or 20ft aoeas your main weapon in a ranged meta - and with a slow character like the Soldier - is is a very bad idea outside of ship corridors and the like or swarming enemies.
A much better indicator is the about equally old sniper rifle the team used - range increment 150ft and I think that was upgraded to 180ft via something. That was at level 5, so far from the final range, given that range increments increase with the "tier" of your weapon. That is about the maximum that even large non-physical maps can reasonably accommodate, so that seems completely fine to me.
If the focus is going to be on ranged weapons. Think the ranged weapons need to have an effective range to keep melee based characters at bay and do more damage on average than a strength based melee attack on a hit.
Maps are never large enough to play keep-away for more than a round or two at most without the worst of terrain. So something with more than 100-150 ft on longer-ranged weapons is of very limited use. Additionally, STR melee damage is already forming the upper bounds of damage intended by the math, so the only viable way to reach your conclusion is to nerf melee damage. Given that damage is the only real advantage of melee weapons, the result would just be that nobody uses melee weapons.
The meta is only intended to favor ranged combat, like the PF2 meta favors melee. It is not to make melee characters useless, which this very much would. There are much better ways, such as offering bigger, more open maps and a diverse range of ranged options. The natural convenience of ranged weapons will do the rest.
Another question, in PF2e attacks of opportunity is a class feature or feat. Is that going to be the case in SF2e or will the ranged character still get the attack of opportunity as the melee character moves to engage?
The Solarian can take Reactive Strike (the new name for AoO) as a 6th level feat, just like many PF2 martials. None of the SF2 classes have it as a feature, afaik, though one of the Soldier subclasses might retain Punitive Strike. We have no info on ranged versions.
Glad to see I am not the only one with this opinion.
I really hope they are going to make good on their promise to put more emphasis on ranged action and DECIDEDLY buff those ranges.
In my opinion, the melee option should NOT be the optimal choice in every situation. It should be advantageous when the battle scenario is cramped, like tight starship corridors, or a thick jungle forest, because of cover. The presence of strong and abundant cover makes ranged combat harder (as it should), and thus gives an advantage to people who can move to bypass cover and strike in melee using their cool melee oriented actions (reactive strikes, free steps, whatever you might have). On the contrary, in a wide open field, ranged weapons should be king. Melee only combatants should feel ad a disadvantage for having to make up the distance. This should be achieved by increasing weapon ranges.
Please devs take this into consideration, thank you!
I agree that we need better ranges (the guns we've gotten so far are pretty pathetic in general), but remember you CAN shoot beyond your weapon's normal range, just at a -2 per increment. So, if a weapon has a range of 30 feet, and you try to shoot something 100 feet away, you'd take a -6 to the roll (-2 past 30 feet, -4 past 60 feet, -6 past 90 feet).
This does not apply to auto fire, sadly. Maybe you could take an equivalent penalty to class DC? Or would being able to spray the entire map be too strong?
I agree that we need better ranges (the guns we've gotten so far are pretty pathetic in general), but remember you CAN shoot beyond your weapon's normal range, just at a -2 per increment. So, if a weapon has a range of 30 feet, and you try to shoot something 100 feet away, you'd take a -6 to the roll (-2 past 30 feet, -4 past 60 feet, -6 past 90 feet).
This does not apply to auto fire, sadly. Maybe you could take an equivalent penalty to class DC? Or would being able to spray the entire map be too strong?
I'd rather have automatic fire range be independent of regular range or something, for example how the area trait works. Anything that results in a minimum of 30ft cones. Because anything below that might as well not exist in many environments.
A range increment penalty would be the wrong approach imo, because that is just punishing the player for wanting to use their weapon. It doesn't actually fix the problem, having a 40ft cone with a -2 to your DC is still absolutely terrible. And with enemy saves being as brutal as they are, you cannot afford a -2, much less -4 or -6.
The Free RPG Day's laser rifle was probably a much better indication of "normal" ranges than what we got in FT1. 100ft at level 2, so you can expect that to increase further.