|
Sard posted:Is it a bad opinion to think that shield cell banks as implemented are dumb and should be limited to one per ship, or is this a defensible thing to want? Shield cell banks are dumb but they're a symptom of the problem instead of the cause, IMO. The cause is that multirole ships, especially the larger ones, often have less shielding than ships with 1/10th the volume. The only way to bridge this gulf is by allowing these ships to recharge their shields mid-flight with their bountiful cell banks. If you limit them to one per ship or remove them entirely, you'll pretty much stop seeing things larger than Vultures or Couriers in PVP. A real fix would be to just give the larger ships a ton more shields, or rework recharge rates, possibly both.
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
Chrysophylax posted:Gonna suggest an alternate to Paramemetic's thruster abuse. I'm gonna contradict myself here and say that FA-on turn boosting is much easier and accomplishes the same. I made a video illustrating both the 180º turn drift issue and how boost-turning solves it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMAz8gGiBcM
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
LCL-Dead posted:Color codes, I demand them. <MatrixRed> 0.21, 0.28, 0.93 </MatrixRed> <MatrixGreen> 0, 1, 0 </MatrixGreen> <MatrixBlue> 1, 1, 1 </MatrixBlue> Hud website It has a big problem tho: 'mission target' text is jet black and nigh invisible. It's its only drawback tho.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Adult Sword Owner posted:What's their 5 year plan for ships? Is this going to be some Eve poo poo where there's a bunch of different classes that are effective against certain classes and not really at all against others? Giant battleships that can't hit missile boast but they hold a dozen NPC and player controlled fighters that are dispatched to take out smaller targets/intercept incoming fire? Anything like that or is it going to be the same stratified content it is now where once you cross certain price thresholds you dominate below you but have to punch upwards until you can get better mounts? It's only stratified up to a point, right now. Past the Vulture Gulf every ship is capable of performing more or less the same roles, except for the FDL. Some might be better at others, like the python which p much excels at all roles, but for the most part you don't need to punch up any more. This is part of the reason why I hate the grind the game puts you through. Once you get a Vulture, you're already at the endgame, pretty much, but they put all of the grind past that. Then you get there and realize you weren't really missing anything.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Slashrat posted:I thought they nerfed module selling to only give 90% as well a while back. Did they change their mind? That change was always intended to be the default state - getting 100% back was a bug. IIRC they fixed it and literally everyone complained that that would just kill people trying poo poo out to see if it fit their style, or if it works with their ship. FDev apparently wanted you to just keep multiple copies of ships instead of letting you refit without cost 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
CQC owns and is fun forever The thing to realize tho, is that ranking isn't a measure of skill but at best experience. The matchmaker ignores ranking and goes for a hidden Elo system. When you're level 0, you have an Elo that doesn't reflect your actual skill and may be set quite high, but should rapidly stabilize. Everyone should play more CQC.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
sincx posted:so I figure once I get a python I can at least double that to 5-6 MCr/hr. Still haven't found anything that beats that. Can confirm up to 7, with some luck with rolled missions. You can probably do more with a more optimized build - mine was low on the cargo, in favor of a big shield.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
Turtle Dad 420 posted:So... After quite some time away from the game I started playing again. Try appealing to FDev. Open a ticket, and maybe they'll take pity on you. Otherwise yes, you're back on square one.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:So with builds where the batteries are outright disabled, I assume the plan is that you power up a single battery, drain it, and then use the next one? That's almost exactly my build. You can power a 4b and a 3b at once, it owns, although you lose quite a bit of sustainability by sacrificing that size 6 slot. Good enough for PVP tho.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
More clipper pile: 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Tom Guycot posted:This is how the game used to work prior to 1.3. Your shields instantly recharged in supercruise. It was really handy in an anaconda with shields that take a year to turn back on. They need to have some faster way of shields recharging while not in combat. I stopped flying an anaconda for anything other than trading because its shields going meant you had to fart around waiting until you could fight again for ages, like you're playing everquest and getting your mana back. Gonna piggyback on this and mention that if you turn off your shield boosters, your shield comes back up much much faster. You can then turn them back on and recharge using shield cells. It's still way too slow by a factor of 10 but...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2015 12:37
|
|
|
Shine posted:A moment of silence please for Literally Kermit, who exploded in a HazRES after an excitable wingman rammed his Courier with a Vulture. Shameful, to be quite honest Sankis posted:I preordered horizon on the frontier site but before doing it I didn't even bother to check if it'd be compatible with my steam version. Does anyone know the answer? I couldn't find a mention on the store page at all. Zaardvark posted:I'm sure it'll be fine. Maybe someone else can confirm, but I understand the Steam launcher just launches the Frontier launcher. It launches the Frontier launcher and keeps the game up to date. But you login with your Frontier account, not the steam one. So pre-ordering from their website is fine. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Nov 4, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2015 09:08
|
|
|
Doctor Soup posted:Oh god, I was a space kidnapper all along. How does it feel to sell a fellow Pilot's Federation member to slavery, you monster
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
amazeballs posted:Some people were running around talking about diminishing returns and having to build rep with multiple minor factions but I'm pretty sure that got debunked. Can confirm as debunked. The entire faction ranking thing is one big invisible xp bar, and doesn't care about anything except missions you've run for empire/fed factions. Some missions give more XP than others - donations the least, combat ones the most.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
timn posted:What if the tracking rates for gimbal and turret weapons got progressively slower the larger the class? You can have your C4 turreted death beams, they're just going to have a hard time consistently hitting anything smaller than a clipper or python. That would add some more utility to the small and medium hardpoints as well. You'd need those to efficiently deal with small opponents. Without them you're bait for the nearest Vulture. I don't think big ships need to have weaknesses like this. Why shouldn't big guns on a big ship dunk on ships that cost thousands of times less than it? This isn't even the sort of tryhard PVP game where 'balance' is any sort of issue. This is an honest question. timn posted:My personal impression about the lack of C4 weapons was that it was meant as a balancing mechanic. God, I hope not. The C4 weapons that do exist are borderline useless, except in some gimmick PVP builds, or for those really hoping to put those 100 cannon/plasma rounds to good use. This would mean they don't really understand the way people play their game, since for the most part, the optimal gun to put on a C4 slot is a C3 pulse laser. Seriously, the ~luxury~ bounty hunting vessel is made obsolete by most other ships on offer around (and some below) its price range because there aren't good C4 guns to use there. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Nov 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
Sard posted:The lack of variety for the huge mount seems like the least of the FDLs concerns. It'd help somewhat with the issue of the power supply, but it won't address the absolutely terrible interstellar travel ability or scarcity of internal space. I think it suffers because it was a ship designed to excel in an environment where players were expected to only have four or five injections to their shields, so a weapon that can tear huge chunks off and a high capacity of shield energy would be ideal. Instead we have the current setup where people don't have to decide between blowing one of their limited supply of shield cells early or betting against a second C4 plasma hitting them before they've recovered more defense. I should've added that I meant what I said for PVE. I don't consider PVP as a viable activity in this game. I agree 100% about what you said tho. For PVE (imo 99% of the game), you'd need a c4 laser of some sort to offset the 4 other medium guns damage reduction vs large ships. A laser specifically because it is a hitscan weapon that doesn't suffer from having a tiny ammo pool. This is why I consider it a worse choice for pirate hunting than even the Vulture. quote:Gun size chat We're gonna have to agree to disagree. Edit: Sard posted:we really need more incredibly expensive small and medium ships so that people can stop saying a big (expensive) ship should unequivocally win fights against smaller (cheaper) ships by default. I knew I was gonna walk into a landmine when I said that  If you've flown the Anaconda, or even better, the Python, you know it's not even particularly hard to keep any ship, no matter what size or how agile, in your sights, especially if you use FA off. Like, it is so easy, that I think the fact that it is easy proves the point that guns don't need additional nerfs on top of the swiveling or double chaff - to properly implement this, you'd need to nerf ship mobility in general along with it. They don't need it because the ships weren't meant to be balanced vs smaller ones. This is why I disagree with the gun size chat. Most of you think only about gimbals/turrets, but those guns aren't even required to hit small ships, they're just convenient. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Nov 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
Astroniomix posted:Just ignore him, he starts spewing this bullshit any time someone brings up the anaconda. I'm not sure what I did to you, and I'm fairly sure this is the first time I've talked about this subject anywhere
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
timn posted:Go try busting up a wing of eagles in a Conda with only fixed lasers and see how much fun that actually is. It's doable, and not at all a  Sard posted:I don't know how well it would go in PVP, but I don't have much trouble landing C3 plasma shots on Cobra- and Asp-sized targets moving a kilometer away. In some ways, it's even easier, since the AI manages to evade your fire really well. IME in a 4V4 situation, you're either primary and trying to tank your way through fire, or you're firing on a primary, which isn't moving specifically to evade your fire, making them a sitting duck from your perspective. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Nov 10, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
Adult Sword Owner posted:Because it would be totally unrealistic garbage, and any SpaceNavy would just stock large unkillable ships We kinda went over this already but I firmly believe the entire game is balanced around the large ships being untouchable but by other large ships, since there isn't anything in the game mechanics that prevents them from getting their guns on target, fixed or not. I mean I don't disagree that ideally things would have tradeoffs like these, but the fact remains that this game doesn't have them. In addition, PVP in this game is almost entirely consensual and so sparse that I just don't think it's even a consideration on Frontier's radar that good players in eagles can't beat slightly less good players in Anacondas. So the only thing a poopsocker is poopsocking for is, for about 99% of the game, ships to better beat on NPCs with. Also lol realism in a video game, who cares Edit: They really seem to have given CQC some real balancing attempts, tho, even if it's by constraining the base hulls or what have you. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Nov 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
I disagree, since it entirely depends on where you draw the line as to where your immersion breaks. I just happen to draw it at 'it's a video game'. Otherwise I'd be stuck at instant repairs, visible laser beams, maximum speeds, instant loading of cargo, instant repairs, hyperdrives or what have you.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Adult Sword Owner posted:Yeh, but throwing realism out the window for...actually, what's the benefit of the biggest ships instantly popping anything smaller again? That doesn't sound like a lot of fun to play if you are instantly outclassed by someone who poopsocked harder. There's no benefit, but there also isn't a drawback - again, I don't believe they balanced the ships/guns thinking about how people would use them against other people. If this were an actual MMO instead of a 'let's try to get in the same instance as our enemy' game I'd agree with you. But this being (IMO) a co-op PVE game, they just went with the 'bigger is better is more expensive' school. Edit: pretty much how the older Elites were too, which I guess can be seen as another way that Elite:Dangerous hasn't gotten with the times Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Nov 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
timn posted:The pseudo-realism in Elite is useful to gameplay because it helps you use your natural intuition to engage with the game and feel rewarded for it. E.g. really big weapon hardpoints that have limited use against small oponents is something that makes natural sense, and it feels good to recognize that intutively and take advantage of that understanding. I see your point. I guess what we disagree on is the ways in which pseudo-realism hinders or enhances one's gameplay expperience.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
quote:Another change we are testing in the 1.5 beta is to how shield cell banks operate. It comes in two parts, the first is increasing the heat cost when you use a shield cell bank. This increases the risk of using these as the sudden heat build up can cause module damage, using two or more in rapid succession can even cause hull damage – so making these a defence of last resort rather.. The second part is there is now a delay when these are powered up. These delays also apply to a range other modules. We’re looking forward to seeing the feedback on these and the other changes in the 1.5 build.  I know I'm pretty ardent against PVP in this game, but this change will make PVE slightly harder for the sole reason of spiting people who PVP. Another band-aid solution for a much deeper problem.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
I meant solely about SCBs. Armor won't be viable in PVE until you can repair it in space or you get so many hitpoints that repair won't matter, IMO. But I I'll need to wait and see how the changes actually are before dooming and glooming
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Toplowtech posted:Armor still don't protect modules, does it? It does in a rather indirect fashion. The more armor it has the less of a chance any shot has to penetrate and hit the module behind it. So the more depleted the armor, the higher the chance a shot has to penetrate, and the more base armor, the smaller the chance. timn posted:Making PVE less of a faceroll isnt necessarily a bad thing, either. Hazres as it is feels pretty safe in a loaded Python unless you pick a fight with a wing of Condas or something. And even those kinds of odds are surmountable with the right tactics. The risk factor needs a boost yet at that level to keep things interesting, imo. IMO it is a bad thing because they've made the game ultra grindy and with small payouts for almost any activity. So NPC farming is essentially an activity that revolves a shooting gallery of NPCs for very long periods of time, one NPC after another. With this change, they've made ships be less sustainable, which, depending on how severe the windup time tax is for a new SCB activation, might make your efforts pay less over time. For no reason other than to spite PVPers. As Ursine said, the 'proper' fix would be to make AIs harder, better pilots, and actually pay good money, and leave you limping after a fight, instead of cakewalks that are hardly challenging 90% of the time. While I'm at it, the real fix for SCBs that would also make armor relevant would be to just make shields recharge near instantly after going down and not taking fire for x amount of time, say, 1 to 2 minutes. If you bit off more that you could chew, you'd have to fall back on your armor to keep you alive, and would also fix the Anaconda's (and every other ship's) ridiculous 25 minute shield recharge tax. Right now tho, SCBs perform an essential role in avoiding the recharge time tax, which is why I'm p much against any nerf to the way they work right now. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Nov 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Don't get me wrong, I don't like SCBs, I just accept them as a necessary evil. I just think there's a difference between appreciating the role they play and how nerfing them doesn't solve the underlying problem and saying SCBs are fine and you just need to Git Gud scrub.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Bushiz posted:If you're finding yourself in enough trouble in PvE to need to pop off multiple SCBs at once, you're already hosed up pretty gratuitously That's not the only way to use multiple banks, tho. The setup I use on my Clipper uses two sets of C4 and C3 banks because I put a scoop on the C6 slot. Individually the banks are pretty lame but together they reup like half the shield in one go - A7 Clipper with 4 boosters gets like 550MJ of capacity, so it's about the only fast way to reup them. As a tradeoff you get like only 8 total reups, so you lose sustainability. I also don't really use it to save my rear end and more between fights 
Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Nov 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:They're not spiting PvP players, they're addressing a mechanic that comes close to breaking PvP because of how stupidly good stacked SCBs are. This is a good change for people who like PvP. The fact that a stupid mechanic compensates for another stupid mechanic in one context doesn't mean the solution is to maintain the tenuous balance of bad design decisions. I used the word 'spite' because I think PVP is a really bad joke in this game and balancing around an activity only the most hardcore of players even have the patience to engage in is a waste of development time and resources. This whole thing seems motivated by the few people who got hit by a pirate encounter and said things like 'my Type-6 should have a chance against that pirate Python, if only it wasn't for cells  !!!!', unironically. That's a paraphrase of a thing a person said, not hyperbole. In turn, this seems to have started a lot of armchair discussion by people who've never PVP'd but wanted those damned SCBs gone right now, because my skills on the stick ought to determine victory !!! without actually ever addressing why they're needed in the first place. This has been brewing for months, and seems to have ramped up during the Hutton CG, which stressed the game a lot between bad instancing, pointing out to anyone and everyone just how helpless the Types and trade fit ships in general are, and how nothing can really survive or fight on a 4v1 and hope to win - the game isn't/wasn't balanced around PVP and this CG showed everyone that. This SCB change will mostly only affect the 20 persons still doing PVP.I'm glad to hear that it's only a 20 second wind-up, tho, it's shorter than I thought it'd be and won't penalize PVE too much. By the way, here's a very large compiled QA about 1.5 and Horizons features, including SCBs. It seems they really want to kill big ships in PVP, and just changing their King-of-the-Hill status otherwise. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Nov 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:You aren't actually addressing that either though, or at least only in the most vague way. This is what I feel the real fix to SCBs is. Chrysophylax posted:While I'm at it, the real fix for SCBs that would also make armor relevant would be to just make shields recharge near instantly after going down and not taking fire for x amount of time, say, 1 to 2 minutes. If you bit off more that you could chew, you'd have to fall back on your armor to keep you alive, and would also fix the Anaconda's (and every other ship's) ridiculous 25 minute shield recharge tax. Right now tho, SCBs perform an essential role in avoiding the recharge time tax, which is why I'm p much against any nerf to the way they work right now. Essentially, I believe the problem to be the fixed 1MW recharge rate. It seems they made it this way so people doing combat would have something else to micromanage during combat, using SCBs, instead of a Halo-like shields on/off switch. You can manage PVE without SCBs just fine, if you stick to certain patterns of flying or certain ships. Even on a Python at a CZ, if you manage your distributor Pips properly and know when to run you'll hardly need cells. But you do need them eventually - because this game's methods of making money by fighting all rely on staying there for very long periods and penalize you with a 10-20 minute tax on shield recharge if you ever let your shields go down. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Nov 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
FDev posted:Good poo poo Almost exactly everything I ever wanted re: shield mechanics, goddamn FDev 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
Someone on reddit had a great idea re: missiles and torpedoes: instead of being a hardpoint weapon, they could make them like in the older games, where each ship had a set number of pylons you could mount them at. Wouldn't exactly solve the too-low damage or ammo but they wouldn't take up precious hardpoints.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
So I burned out on Robigo runs and found out about this one system, Arexe, that spawns a ton of combat missions to one of its neighbours, Orrere. Hit Orrere's RES and finish 40 missions in one go. It's surprisingly good money (not on the level of Robigo, and Orrere being an Anarchy means no bounties) and probably the least boring way to rank up for the Federation. Took me around 170 missions in total to go from Lieutenant to Lt. Commander.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
Sard posted:Based on what others have posted about ranking up fast from super smuggler missions, I'm assuming that the higher the reward for a mission the more it impacts your rank, and missions that target civilians pay a lot more than those targeting pirates (and are easier to boot), so if someone could find a system like Arexe that mostly gives trader targets in a single neighboring system, that'd be the holy grail of this stuff. The problem I have with that is the fact that you can complete like 10 pirate missions (including the time it takes to reroll that many) in the time it takes for you to complete a single assassination one, especially if the target is uncooperative in showing up; I seriously doubt that assassination missions have 10x the impact. Not saying you're wrong tho, I think you're absolutely right, but like donation missions before this, the time you spend doing this is, I believe, lower than the alternative. Reddit has found the Empire equivalent of Arexe, HIP 7916 which spawns combat missions to the system HR 466. Unlike Arexe tho, there's only a single Empire faction, so it'll make rerolling more tedious. Keep an eye on this thread as they may suggest more systems. Edit: I misread a word somehow Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Nov 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
Sekenr posted:Why exactly did goons adopt Diamond Frogs again? i kind of missed the transition and never moved my stuff from Beta-1 It wasn't so much an adoption as it was us getting a faction with the description and ethos we wanted into the game. There was a call by the devs to interested groups to do so.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Danknificent posted:Gross. I'll optimistically choose to believe that someday they'll see the light and get some paint in game. It varies with what you like to do and how long you spend doing it. Realistically and without exploiting flavor of the week bugs or mechanics, upper end for shooting rats for an hour may get you 2-5 million depending on what kind of spawns you get and how fast you can kill them. Unlike trading, you don't need enormous cargo holds to do this and you can do this almost right off the bat. With trading you can get slightly more to a lot more with the higher end ships, scaling linearly with hold size. Those 2-5 million are kind of the cap without exploiting the game. Otherwise you can get somewhere between 15-25 million an hour with a mid-tier ship doing long range hauling with the occasional smuggling. Tl;dr it is pretty slow overall
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
AndyElusive posted:These are questions I wonder myself as well since I'm a fellow newbie to the world of Elite: Dangerous. This thread seems to be just for the veterans though so I'm wondering if there's a good website or something that can help answer questions like this and others that I might have as someone starting out and who just upgraded to an Adder. As someone else suggested, come join us on IRC! We're glad to answer any questions. Don't be afraid to ask here, either. The game has a lot of arcane knowledge we've accumulated that we're glad to share.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
Naturally Selected posted:Wait I thought the Clipper was basically a better-defended truck due to the ridiculous wing weapon mounts? It's not the best PVE shootmans ship in terms of raw damage, but it's the premier boom-n-zoomer in PVP (acts as a ram) and can dictate any engagement with its speed. The wing mounts thing just makes it so you have to use gimbals, it doesn't make it worthless or anything. Also, not only does it carry more than the Type-7, it does so in safety - can carry a shield, power it AND guns, and goes really drat fast. It's a hell of a ship, one of the best in the game IMO Edit: It does all of that if you spend quite a bit of money tho, more than you would on a Type-7. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 04:21
|
|
Not like I can afford one yet or anything.
|
tooterfish posted:People don't use SCBs when their shields are full though. They (generally) use them when they're already at risk of getting knocked offline, so in most cases all this weapon does is make fighting SCB users the same as fighting none SCB users. It's not like they can use it to instantly destroy your fully charged shields, unless you're into spamming the SCB button as soon as you come under fire. The cutter can have roughly 2000MJ shielding and the ability to SCB back 1500. That 500MJ remainder represents more shielding than most of the other ships in game have total, and the railgun instapopping them would make that weapon's effective damage for that one shot 4x as high as the next highest weapon - the 4A Plasma Accelerator. If you think this won't make big ships totally useless (e: for pvp) I don't know what to tell you vOv Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Apr 28, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
Yeah I totally mangled that sentence. I'll reserve further judgement when we actually know how it works. I'm hoping there's at least the opportunity cost mentioned earlier, and that they won't work like the heal beams - beams that know what action to perform, instead of just performing either of the actions.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 22:32 |
|
|
Ultimately my problem is that I don't trust Frontier to introduce that sort of nuance. E: tooterfish posted:Or you could just not use your SCB and you'll still have your "more shielding than most of the other ships have in game total", because no one's actually taking that away from you. Using SCBs becomes an actual decision, instead of a no brainer. Do you risk it or not. Except once the shield goes down that ship is a sitting duck with very fragile and exposed internals. We tested hybrid or full armor builds on these and it simply doesn't work. You either bring the tank including the regen that SCBs bring or almost any other ship is a better choice. It's already iffy right now. tooterfish posted:Also, most small ships get an inherent damage penalty against large hulls by stint of not having large weapons. There's also a limit to the amount of pilots in an instance, meaning outnumbering larger ships with smaller ones isn't really a viable strategy. This weapon isn't making large ships totally useless for pvp, it's making small ships not totally useless for pvp. That damage penalty doesn't apply to shields. I guess what we're arguing about is whether we want to see fewer large ships in combat or more small ones. I'd rather have more choices rather than fewer. Chrysophylax fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Apr 28, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2016 16:08
|
|