This is a good point. My viper has 1 scb I think - how does this work out for smaller ships?
Why is the FDL irrelevant?
The SCB (Shield Cell Bank) Thread
- Thread starter OnePercent
- Start date
This is a good point. My viper has 1 scb I think - how does this work out for smaller ships?
Why is the FDL irrelevant?
To be fair, as I understand it, they did improve the NPC combat AI a lot, although there currently are some problems.
I'm a bit worried, though. If the NPC's start using SCB spam, I might have to as well, if I want to stand a reasonable chance. Either that, or just pick on Cobras and Vipers.
SCB's are in a position where they are of paramount significance in balance, while also acting in a destabilizing manner in some circumstances. Also, they're poorly thought out and pretty boring. I think we've discussed this before.
Last edited:
You don't get it. The fact that Frontier is refusing to fix SCB's and instead just using them to cover up other problems with the game, like the poor AI, is a huge problem for the game. It has nothing to do with "Be prepared" "Git Gud" or "Stop Crying" and everything to do with "Fix your crap, Frontier, we're tired of telling you is broken".
I've just given you three reasons that dismantle this argument. If you consider preparation pretty boring, you might want to stick to SSBM fox only final destination.
You don't get it. They're not broken. This is like saying that chaff launchers are broken. Take a freaking fixed weapon.
Last edited:
Yes, they improve it, and then they dumb it down again. They improve it, and then make it worse. They improve it again, and then change it back. We've never stuck at the high water mark.
OK then, it requires no more skill to do the task. If harder = longer in your mind then yes, it's harder
Did you just ignore everything but the first line of this quote? Change load out, change in approach, change in strategy, making decisions about these things require skill and makes the game harder, not longer.
It's only longer if you continue to beat that wall with a brick. A smart player will use a torch. An idiot uses the brick.
Question: Would you take a sidewinder to a CZ, die, then complain the game is impossible? No? Then don't take a pulse laser to an SCB and complain it takes too long. It is literally this simple.
Last edited:
I agree that going into Haz-Res and on Assassination missions takes some fore-thought but in response to SCBs this update, by your advice, has reduced weapon choice to Frag Canons, Beams and Heat-sinks?
So any player simply playing the game, and not obsessed with being a virtual hotshot, who doesn't have this Holy Trinity can look forward to yet another tedious engagement with the A.I.
You want to talk about One Dimensional?
In-game I mostly avoid combat now, as stated there's no real challenege and I simply cb@ with it, so very little of this thread applies to me; nor will it until I see a real improvement in the A.I. FD however need to realise that, however shabby the A.I is it needs to be balanced for players of any and all ability, not simply the gobby hotshots posting on the forums about how fantastic the A.I. is now that their Combat specced Pythons/FDLs/Condas are taking hull damage!1/1!
The fact that I can compete in Haz-Res/Assassination whatever in a 4 x MC DBS without S(C) is immaterial, the A.I needs to be balanced to the player-base as a whole, not the Hotshot spikes on the graph.
Last edited:
What reasons? Please, not the ''preparation'' tirade. Did you mean something else?
I think chaff launchers are pretty interesting. There's a certain dynamic you get that don't exist for any other utility items. I don't think SCB's work well, and this has been discussed and documented previously. They usually make combat play out pretty crappily, subjective of course. Still, I think it's pretty clear that they have a negative influence. Suggestions have been made on how to improve them.
Also, since you go on about how large ships ''deserve to survive for long'' or whatever, how does this work with SCB's? If you have a ship that deserves to ''survive for a long time'' and you then pack on 8 Banks and 2 shield boosters, things become unsustainable, at least with how the SCB's work right now. Some suggestions I've seen would remove the spammability of SCB's while still keeping the strength of the item itself.
SCB's are broken, they're fit in the wrong slot, they're not counterbalanced in their fitting, they favor multi-role ships, and the amount they restore has never been balanced to begin with.
I use fixed weapons exclusively, thank you. Might want to take up this argument with someone who hasn't found just about every trick in the book for beating down SCB spammers, including ramming.
Example number three I gave has the luxury of supporting any player of any skill level in any ship with any load out. Please read the entirety of my posts before commenting.
Should a majestic interdictor fall in 30 seconds? Well think of an anaconda as a mini majestic interdictor.
And what do you do when you can't beat a majestic interdictor? You run away. This is not a fight for you. Get used to losing in this way, because it's pretty fundamental to the play experience.
Can some of the variables of SCBs be adjusted? Sure, that's true for just about every aspect of the game. Are they mechanically flawed? No more than pulse lasers are.
Please support your arguments, else you will be easily dismissed.
Please use the search button to find the entire Encyclopedia on this subject that has already been written in the forums. It doesn't need to be repeated in every single thread that mentions the topic.
The problem is I don't know who you are. I've seen all the arguments in the book, finding yours among the rest of the dishwater is the issue. Do not expect people to make the effort to read what you have to say, if you do not make the effort to post.
No, the issue is that your argument was never relevant, and your refusal to understand that given the reams of information that has been collected over almost a year means I can't be bothered. Either review what has already been repeated ad infinitum and accept that, or stop berating people just to fulfill your overweening sense of superiority.
I couldn't care less about whether SCB's add 5 seconds onto a kill or 5 minutes. I do care that they completely destroy the game balance and reduce the variety of play down to nil. If you were such an austere authority on the subject as you claim, I wouldn't even need to say this.
How does changing your loadout make the game harder? It makes it longer.
Taking the wrong loadout would make it harder then, wouldn't it as it would take longer to kill your opponent with worse weapons.
There is no "skill" in choosing your loadout - you choose whatever is best for the job you want.
Tell me, if your enemy has no weapons but one has SCB's and one doesn't, does that make it harder to kill the one that does?
I think we're arguing two different things here. You're saying it's harder to kill because it takes more time. Yes, in that instance, more scb's make the opponent harder.
What others are saying is that they don't want a longer fight, they want more challenge, they want to have a fight where the enemy fights back.
Now I think that you are avoiding! Or maybe I just don't make clear what I mean. In any case, I will clarify:
You have used this ''large expensive ships should have a long TTK'' in many different posts, and in a tone that I think implies you are using it to support the current state in which SCB's are. So, I asked you that question in the previous post. I would like you to defend that, or clarify if you meant something else.
Also, you're going on about adapting again. I don't care about winning/loosing against SCB users (well that's not entirely true, I guess I do care). I think that they make the game worse, because the way they interact with other elements of the game worsens the quality of some other experiences in the game. They can be changed so that they are still usefull, while also not being poor.
