I hope we're not suggesting that to counteract SCBs, we'll start ramming other players. I'm not too big into bumper car rides and if ED was reduced to be that in combat, that would be pretty lame, IMHO...
The SCB (Shield Cell Bank) Thread
- Thread starter OnePercent
- Start date
I hope we're not suggesting that to counteract SCBs, we'll start ramming other players. I'm not too big into bumper car rides and if ED was reduced to be that in combat, that would be pretty lame, IMHO...
Pro SCB: Be a better pilot
Anti SCB: I'm landing every shot, still can't beat this conda/python
Pro SCB: What do you expect, they spent 20x more money on it
Anti SCB: Actually my ships was worth about 75% as much as his.
Pro SCB: Pfft, then be a better pilot
Seriously, you guys seem to have just two arguments, one involves presuming everyone is worse than you (Narcissist) and the other involves a power = cost equation (Elitist).
Meanwhile we're making arguments based on what's more fun, what allows the all important mid range players to be effective and what we can do to make sure no game assets are wasted (that's the balance bit).
Anti SCB: I'm landing every shot, still can't beat this conda/python
Pro SCB: What do you expect, they spent 20x more money on it
Anti SCB: Actually my ships was worth about 75% as much as his.
Pro SCB: Pfft, then be a better pilot
Seriously, you guys seem to have just two arguments, one involves presuming everyone is worse than you (Narcissist) and the other involves a power = cost equation (Elitist).
Meanwhile we're making arguments based on what's more fun, what allows the all important mid range players to be effective and what we can do to make sure no game assets are wasted (that's the balance bit).
A lot of people have been doing that to take SCBs completely out of the equation for awhile now.
None of this mattered in the fight. What mattered was that he had 10,000MJ of SCBs, increasing the "balanced" shield values of the Anaconda by 10x.
Yes the anaconda should be hard to kill. That's why the devs gave it the strongest shields in the game, the strongest weapons in the game, the best masslock and the most utility slots.
However once you increase these already awesome values by 10x or more with SCBs, you get absurd results
(BTW you can get these results in a conda with only 180 mill, with a discount. For reference, my FAS costs upwards of 120 million)
Last edited:
Maybe this has been suggested before. I think every ship should have a dedicated slot for SCB's. One slot only. You can upgrade that SCB to increase its capacity, or downgrade or keep the slot empty to save weight. This SCB will not have ammunition. It will charge off the Sys capacitor. when you fire it, it will send whatever charge you have to your shields. If it is empty, nothing happens. Military grade ships (Vulture, FdL, FAS some examples) should have a larger SCB capacity than multi-purpose ships like Python, Annie, Clipper, etc. Which in turn should have a better one than trade ships (T9, T7, etc)
this one is very good
No to dedicated slot, just make them work like Shild Gen. and Refinery buy 1 then trying to buy another rersult's in "Module Type Limit Exceded" message.
That would work also, but I also wanted to work it in to give combat oriented ships a leg up on multipurpose vessels. This still benefits multi's more that have larger internals.
That's why I repped your post. Your idea gives exclusivity to combat vessels without altering the existing framework per se. The other just tries to exploit it in the obvious favor of multiroles. To move away from that, we need to use a different system that rightfully puts the combat vessels ahead of the multirole and dedicated non combat vessels, or there's no point.
Personally, I still say they need to add in the Military Gear for Combat ships, and combat ships only.
Last edited:
You don't ram someone to counter SCBs. You do so to counter the shield that is being healed by SCBs.
I don't actually ram all that often. But if you are going to take a 50 mil ship and pit against a 400 mil+ battle cruiser (a fight that is over before it begins, to be fair) being polite and a gentleman won't cut it.
If a 40-50 mil ship can pew-pew a 400 million ship to pieces, without a great deal of strategy and or assistance - the game is busted and no one will ever bother to own such a vessel.
Some battles are asymmetric. But to do so is a bit more than just tossing a low-weapon count vessel against a cruiser.
Last edited:
Solid point. Though honestly i don't mind if Multis have slightly better SCBs, just mowhere near the 4x+ they have now. The power of combat specialists is agility and sweet weapon placement. Multis have always been more tanky, even before SCBs.
- - - Updated - - -
As Grape pointed out this situation can occur with a 120mil ship vs a 180 mil conda. You sure don't need to A-rate it to make it tough.
Dedicated slot is interesting, but now you have another slot that can't be used for anything else.
I don't think marginalising Python, which can be a 'conda killer, is the answer. Making any expensive ship less versatile reduces their use, to narrow edge cases.
Python and Anaconda are multi-role. That includes combat. The first casualty and thing to do always seems to be make generalists ships less generalist, by immediately taking away their use as a combat vessel.
That is never the answer. I'm sorry if this offends. It really doesn't improve anything. It just means less variety in ships and uses.
Improve the mechanic, don't sacrifice entire ship purposes in the process. We've had quite enough of that already.
Last edited:
What are you going to shoot at if no-one is driving a generalist ship, because the military boys in a 50-60 mil ship can easily destroy several hundred million worth of generalist vessel.
What is the point of owning anything above a FAS or FDL if some punk can just roll up and destroy you with very little effort?
SCBs need a rethink. Lets not make this various shades of "a combat vessel should always win".
Not too bad though. Like other's pointed out Conda and Python lean heavily to being a combat ship, but limiting them to 1 SCB ballances them out(I've tested it). I can compete against a Conda with one SCB in my hull tanking Gunship with no SCb's without resorting to the raming mentioned above. My Conda killer loadout is 4 Rail Gun's, 1 large pulse or burst laser, and leave the 2 small beam laser's on and can do enough DPS that I wear one SCB fast enough to let our hull's decide the fight.
My suggestion does not take that role away, nor marginalize it. If anything, I feel it puts combat specialists on more equal footing. Basically I'm taking away SCB stacking, components that need ammo, and replacing it with one module, unlimited use, that relies more on available power and power management. You're telling me in a 'conda or Python you couldn't cope with that?
Last edited:
He obviously doesn't want that, all his post's clearly point that out.
Last edited:
I didn't check his post history, but thanks for the heads up.
I've said much the same thing. As long as a generalist combat vessel has a fighting chance, works for me.
You can't really call a Python or anaconda purely a freighter. They are supposed to be able to be at least partly self sufficient (one on one; a wing of A rated combat ships is entirely a different beast).
It's just when I read comments that suggest a (single) 40 mil ship should be able to take on a 400 mil combat fitted ship and more or less be able to win, just by shooting at it a lot, I question what problem that actually solves.
Like anything it requires balance. Combat vessels may need more love. But that's a pretty different conversation. To improve those, you then have to consider the impact on non-role-specific ships. It strikes me that finding a more sensible way to handle SCBs actually solves a lot of knock-on issues as well.
Is actually agree with a lot of what you've said; I may just believe the execution of those ideas could be different. I've even suggested that SCBs could be a charged resource that runs through the distributor.
Lastly, I have a FAS and Python. Also a clipper. So it's not like I am some trader squealing about his profits. I spend most of my time hunting (mostly in FAS and clipper). Enough to know that sometimes I will be confronted with a situation where my opponent happens to outclass me, and to pick a fight means I could if very lucky make out without watching my ship explode.
That's ok. Reward is always sweeter when there is risk.
My Python used to have 2 small SCBs. Now it's fitted for mining. Not everyone drives a Python that's an energiser rabbit, and I'm not even sure I could claim that it ever was.
Last edited:
To be fair to him, I'm exagerating a bit. He does seem to deffend the Python and (more importantly)Conda alot as being "well ballanced with SCB's" alot to me though.
SCBs resolve the linear shield regen. Do they resolve it well, no? No they do not. Not even close.
I'm for balance and finding ways to improve a mechanic; not just ripping entire elements out of the game, in isolation, assuming this will somehow solve the issue (hint: it absolutely never has). Also play the ball, not the person.
I don't agree with some viewpoints. But I can understand where they come from and can respect that point-of-view.
Last edited: