Nerf crowd about to ruin the game again

[defekt]

It is also patently clear that a simple nerf to scb is not the right way to go.

It's the first step along the path of 'the right way to go'. FD aren't going to junk a mechanic until they've explored every possible avenue to see if it can be made to function. I doubt this is about ego and more about a graduated approach to balancing, nudging and tweaking bit by bit toward a sweet spot. I expect FD know full well that SCBs don't do their job well, and may never do what they were supposed to do, and one day they may well be pulled - but not before every last possible tweak has been made.

I will sing from the hump of my Explorer when SCBs become a mechanical thing of the past, and I make no bones about that, but I'm also reasonably content to let FD reach that same conclusion in their own, gradual, way.

 

[Thebadmf]

Yeah, you're not paying attention I'm afraid. It's already been clearly explained as to why SCB are as much of a problem for pve as for pvp. Surprisingly the game wasn't like Space Invaders before scb were implemented, but it actually took skill and judgement to take on a larger ship, both in pve and pvp. You've been here long enough, by your join date, you ought to remember that unless you are being disingenuous.

It is also patently clear that a simple nerf to scb is not the right way to go. If, for example, they completely removed scb but reworked recharge rates to scale with base shields then it would not disadvantage larger ships. They would still have a significant defensive advantage. You need to step back from the paradigm which has been created by the security blanket of cell boosters and look at it from a neutral standpoint.

I paid attention, I just don't agree with you. Again, I don't care about the SCB rubbish. I care about the OP; that whiners keep crying nerf adding white noise to the forum reducing the Devs focus from producing quality PVE content.

 

[INSTG8R]

Shield boosters carry a significant power cost. OA booster costs 1.20 mj, for a 20% increase. An A6 shield gen costs 4.34 which is 27% of the power cost. A 6A SCB costs 2.48mj. One booster draws 48% of a A6 SCB's power usage, for that static 20%, while the SCB can refill the shields 4 times. I think boosters are well balanced for their benefit.

Actually that might BE the solution, You can currently shut them down making them "free" until you want to use them. Well maybe don't allow them to be powered down so they have to energy managed so you really couldn't fill your hold with them and use them without consequences they would have to be part of power management.

 

[Defacto]

I paid attention, I just don't agree with you. Again, I don't care about the SCB rubbish. I care about the OP; that whiners keep crying nerf adding white noise to the forum reducing the Devs focus from producing quality PVE content.

The nerfs already happened, months ago, most solutions mentioned are no nerfs but complete reworks.
I do not see the crying you mention, only people who whine about others whining.

 

[Vasious]

I see we are moving to:

I disagree with assertion X
So I shall call all debate about assertion X "whining", thus claiming any and all discussion about assertion X is invalid, irrelevant and pointless and should be discarded.
If you disagree with me I shall call that whining too, and consider it invalid, irrelevant and pointless and should be discarded
My point of view is all that remains
I am right by default.

 

[Frenotx]

Actually that might BE the solution, You can currently shut them down making them "free" until you want to use them. Well maybe don't allow them to be powered down so they have to energy managed so you really couldn't fill your hold with them and use them without consequences they would have to be part of power management.

In my proposal (linked in signature) I suggest having SCBs charge from the sys capacitor, and lose all of their charge if powered down. You can switch them off if you want, but you won't have a shield recharge available for a while after you turn them back on.

 

[xslam]

In my proposal (linked in signature) I suggest having SCBs charge from the sys capacitor, and lose all of their charge if powered down. You can switch them off if you want, but you won't have a shield recharge available for a while after you turn them back on.

This won't solve "barge with guns" ship problem. The side who turn it's energy into damage and shield better wins, thus no need for maneuvers.

 

[Renegade Roach]

I paid attention, I just don't agree with you. Again, I don't care about the SCB rubbish. I care about the OP; that whiners keep crying nerf adding white noise to the forum reducing the Devs focus from producing quality PVE content.

Wait, so you don't care about 'scb rubbish', yet you disagree with me and made a point as to why they should not be changed? Anyway, you can disagree all you like but you're still wrong, it isn't a 'pvp' issue

And do you really think that forum threads are distracting devs from 'producing quality PVE content'?

 

[FuzzySpider]

For me there is no SCB debate because IMO they are fine. I would rather have more PVE content (which all I listed are) rather than wasting time focusing on PVP balance.

You're wrong about SCBs being fine. Let me quote this excellent point someone made further up...

That slow moving python or anaconda should not be popped by a lone vulture, you should have to work for your kill. You should have to coordinate your attacks to break through the defences.

See? This guy understands!

He understands that this Anaconda:

http://www.edshipyard.com/#/L=706,7...69Y7_CgCg8I,7Vs0AA0AA0AA08c08c08c07207207203w

With a price tag of nearly 500 million and a 24.5 million rebuy cost would be utterly shredded by this Asp:

http://www.edshipyard.com/#/L=70g,0...5Rr5Rr,2-7_7_7_6u6Q8S8I,7UI7iM9rs7fE7fE7dg7dg

Which has a puny 48 million price tag and a rebuy of only 2.5 million.

Why? Because the Anaconda, despite having a shield generator which alone costs more than the entire Asp and all its modules, still has only half the shield capacity. The (by comparison) tiny Asp can be built to out-tank an Anaconda. That kills both PvE and PvP gametypes.

 

[xslam]

Why? Because the Anaconda, despite having a shield generator which alone costs more than the entire Asp and all its modules

Compare price of US and a nuclear bomb. PVP is player vs player, not FVP (Farmer vs Farmer)

 

[Vasious]

But it also should not be an "I win" button either.
No one should be taking on group content in SSS as a solo players because the SCBs make them invincible.

Group content should require that 1 special thing in ED.... an actual group of players.

When 1 bit of equipment can completely invalidate part of the game, it is broken.

Dear FD,

I'm getting really tired of this.

Now they're talking about killing SCBs, and those are a critical part of PvE.

.

You know SSS were never designed for wings, there is no and should never be wing specific content in ED, its just that if you find them hard you may need a wing or partial to help.

My take on SBC are not essential to PvE but choosing you're engagements carefully is

Sidewinder lacking Shield Boosters and shield cell banks in a strong signal source alone

https://youtu.be/WilfPoQPngk

Really that different from a RES or CZ? Even a 100 K in bounties from it.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Compare price of US and a nuclear bomb. PVP is player vs player, not FVP (Farmer vs Farmer)

I don't know what your point is but you appear to have missed mine entirely.

Try reading an entire post, understanding the entire post, and responding to the actual points another person raises. Try to avoid extracting a single comment, taking that out of the context of the rest of the post, and making a point about a point the other person did not, in fact, make at all. This will enable you to avoid posting so redundantly.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

I paid attention, I just don't agree with you. Again, I don't care about the SCB rubbish. I care about the OP; that whiners keep crying nerf adding white noise to the forum reducing the Devs focus from producing quality PVE content.

Because any other way of playing the game than how you choose to play it is just noise?
|
Gotchya.

 

[Jockey79]

My take on SBC are not essential to PvE but choosing you're engagements carefully is

Sidewinder lacking Shield Boosters and shield cell banks in a strong signal source alone

https://youtu.be/WilfPoQPngk

Really that different from a RES or CZ? Even a 100 K in bounties from it.

That is the weakest SSS I've ever seen, with the cheapest ships in it ever!
Not sure if you got lucky, or unlucky to be honest.

Every SSS I've ever been in has has at least 3 Anacondas with a mix of support ships, not a Sidey or Eagle to be seen.
So I have no idea how you found one with so many small ships in it and no large ships at all. I didn't even see a medium pad sized ship.

 

[Xanador]

Compare price of US and a nuclear bomb. PVP is player vs player, not FVP (Farmer vs Farmer)

Isn't that exactly what CQC is for? I mean, if you completly outbalance the ships in Open/Solo mode this would be boring as hell!

 

[xslam]

Isn't that exactly what CQC is for? I mean, if you completly outbalance the ships in Open/Solo mode this would be boring as hell!

I have no idea how they will balance CQC ships. But our community expect 2nd nerf of chaffs. (reason - they hard to deal with using gamepad). And it is passible that guns in CQC will do x3 to x10 damage (following the example of other arcade space arenas)

Overall CQC appears to be a sink for PVP activity in this game.

 

[Privata]

To be fair I never use them because the AI is so easy there no point. and I have been lucky to fight players who did not have any on them.
however I do think they should stay in game maybe add ionised rounds that counter them or something?

 

[Don_Von_Hulio]

Look man. Ever since FD approached player interaction in the way that they have... they essentially killed the idea of having cool and awesome weapons. Now it all has to be balanced for the sake of PvP before PvE. Not only does this take more effort, but its often counter intuitive since its a never ending cycle. You cannot balance and please everyone in a shooter that allows you to choose a loadout before conflict. As soon as you adjust one thing, several others are now the better choice and its going to continue until the devs simply stop re-adjusting items or they remove/change PvP out in the open as we know it.

 

[Crash1099]

No. Just no. Shooting things is not the only facet of Elite and even then 'your' complaint is just that you can't pop someone like this is counter strike take away SCB's and we may as well just play space invaders. SCB's provide a way to have 'tanks' and that is a good thing. That slow moving python or anaconda should not be popped by a lone vulture, you should have to work for your kill. You should have to coordinate your attacks to break through the defences. Especially in the case of the Annie, it's often described as a flying fortress and nerfing SCB's would dilute that.

My concern is when nerfs are continually made for 'PVP balance'. I don't give a flying (you know what) about PVP and frankly, it's inclusion is destroying a great series of games because the vocal minority of their players are just concerned about the FOTM OP before they move on to the next thing. Devs need to spent some time on features, pick some from FFE and work them into this game, for example:

• Spy missions to photograph an installation
• 'Base' destruction missions
• Passenger missions where assassins would come after you
• Proper branching missions or sequences
• Multiple styles of assassination mission where you have to be at a certain place, at the correct time to pick up the marks trail.
• Chargeable Ship transport
• Module storage
• Have ships not spawn like a fountain when you jump into an area - make there be believable routines for the NPC's to follow.
• Actual space battles near stations

I'm sure I can think of more but you get my point.

PS Elite has always been a grind, but a grind with many, complex paths and there's nothing wrong with that.

I agree with you and have some rep. It should require wings to take down big ships. Not some lone vulture or viper. I consider this game pve and want to see more content like planetary landings and walking on my ship. I even pay to drink beer at the starport bar and talk to a couple of commanders.

 

[askavir]

I agree with you and have some rep. It should require wings to take down big ships. Not some lone vulture or viper. I consider this game pve and want to see more content like planetary landings and walking on my ship. I even pay to drink beer at the starport bar and talk to a couple of commanders.

Yeah, except that it actually goes precisely the other way around. SCBs are being used so weaker ships can easily wreck stronger / large numbers of ships.

The people defending the SCB Magic Shield Potions are actually people in under-outfitted / less powerful ships that claim that they NEED SCBs in order easily take on hordes of bigger ships (just read the OP's posts), so there goes your (and THEBADMF's) argument...

Everyone would hate SCBs (especially the ones who now defend them) the moment that NPCs would start having piles of magic shield potions too.