I don't consider chaffs as broken but a toggle to switch the weapons to fixed/aiming assisted would make ALOt of sense to me.
Another request to balance chaff units
- Thread starter NeilF
- Start date
Basically. I have one 0E SB though
Haha well in that case you don't have more! My point scales
Duane Dibbley
Banned
Remove gimbals...simples
Yes, it's a bit annoying when ships spam Chaff. Thing is, though, there is a skill in using fixed weapons. Personally I couldn't hit a sausage when I started playing and Gimbals were all-but essential. Now I use fixed and I'm (by no means a good fighter!) sufficiently competent to hit my target without gimbals. Plus, fixed weapons do more damage for their energy cost. So there is an advantage to being a skilled pilot (more damage at less cost), which Chaff makes a lot better. My advice to every commander is to practice with them, a couple of hours in CQC will really improve you as a pilot and combatier.
Okay. SO who uses Gimbals? - well, it's people who can't shoot straight, or people who are flying ships that have trouble dogfighting (Freighters, in other words) who generally have more utility mounts and can benefit greatly from Chaff as they're running away from Combat (which is what it's sensible to do, in either case). SO nerfing Chaff is probably bad for the people who need it most.
My advice to anyone who is finding it hard to hit ships that pop chaff is to get fixed weapons and learn to use them. If you can't use them effectively on your ship, get a more manoeuvrable ship, or try to lighten your existing ship and upgrade the thrusters. If you still can't, then be thankful for your adequate supplies of chaff.......
In Summary.....
Fixed Weapons - for Combat pilots, intended to attack other ships with.
Gimballed Weapons - dual-purpose weapons for newbie pilots, or small transport ships.
Turret Weapons - for traders in larger ships to defend themselves whilst trying to escape.
SO - who needs to Nerf Chaff, then? It's most effective when used against the very vessels that need it most...
Okay. SO who uses Gimbals? - well, it's people who can't shoot straight, or people who are flying ships that have trouble dogfighting (Freighters, in other words) who generally have more utility mounts and can benefit greatly from Chaff as they're running away from Combat (which is what it's sensible to do, in either case). SO nerfing Chaff is probably bad for the people who need it most.
My advice to anyone who is finding it hard to hit ships that pop chaff is to get fixed weapons and learn to use them. If you can't use them effectively on your ship, get a more manoeuvrable ship, or try to lighten your existing ship and upgrade the thrusters. If you still can't, then be thankful for your adequate supplies of chaff.......
In Summary.....
Fixed Weapons - for Combat pilots, intended to attack other ships with.
Gimballed Weapons - dual-purpose weapons for newbie pilots, or small transport ships.
Turret Weapons - for traders in larger ships to defend themselves whilst trying to escape.
SO - who needs to Nerf Chaff, then? It's most effective when used against the very vessels that need it most...
Last edited:
You can do that yourself, so indeed, simples.
Well, if you consider how 2+ chaff units are so common in PvP, follow that through to NPCs too then, and see how the majority of players (in PvE) suddenly let out a huge groan as gimbals mostly only work "fixed", and turrets mostly don't work at all
...So no thoughts, consideration, musing on the matter... Just a whine/personal attack! Nicely done!
eg? Incase I'm overlooking something important?
You know! I wish we didn't have two weapon types! I think it's cause more problems and compromises than benefits IMHO.
I think it would be a nice improvement too.
Last edited:
I agree 100% There is a simple answer to chaffs and its called fixed weapons.
Nerfing chaffs is only going to punish smaller ships. Quit with the nerf requests already!
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Do you play PvP often?
Last edited:
Two simple changes achieve a perfect solution for this...
1: make gimbals honor the "turret firing mode" - like turrets, they operate as fixed when "forward only" is selected, in either "my target" or "fire at will" mode, gimbals behave as they currently do. (for extra neatness, but not essential, disable the "fire at will" mode if no turrets are fitted)
2: make a new keybind to toggle between those modes. Going to the UI, selecting the correct pane and then toggling the modes takes way longer than I want to be heads-down in my controls if somebody is shooting at me, whether in PVE or PVP.
This would remove any need to mess with chaff as it currently stands, because you could always lock down your gimbals or turrets to fixed firing without losing target lock
So let's follow that train of throught. If NPCs were allowed to behave like CMDRs, and many more started employing numerous chaff units, what would the outcome be?
Why have FD not chosen to do that if there's no balancing issue at large?
Agreed... Possibly...
Quit with the strawmen. I'm suggesting a rebalance to address an issue. By all means agree or disagree or debate...
I think that would certainly help... It may well be you want to fire at something different to your turrets (fire at will), but it seems a perfectly reasonable limitation that a "fire forwards" option affects gimbals and turrets alike IMHO.
Why in ALL games i play offensive is more important than defensive, WHY?
All fps games are focused that way, yesterday after some frustrating gaming in SW Battlefront (what a spoiled opportunity of making a good game) i switched to Elite, was in a hazardous site and some player in his FAS shot down my full A Fitted DBS in less than 10 seconds, i didn't have any opportunity to run, to defend my self, anything, so this nice guy had his cheap and easy victory and me, who was not bothering anyone, well, quit playing, and then i thought about all that people that write post and posts and posts about nerfing shield cell banks, chaffs and buff weapons.. why i feel sometimes i'm going completely in the wrong direction?
Players who play in a , let's say , legal way should be protected against this type of behaviours with good defensive ways
Players who want to lay as bad guys should need an EXTRA effort for accomplish their goals
Seriously, the frustration of someone who lost his ship is much way bigger than the frustration of somebody who couldn't destroy the ship of somebody else, really the day all games work better in their defensive strategies will make the offensive more creative, and in general the gaming experience will be better than just the kill/die kill/die nobody cares to kill/die experience we actually have
All fps games are focused that way, yesterday after some frustrating gaming in SW Battlefront (what a spoiled opportunity of making a good game) i switched to Elite, was in a hazardous site and some player in his FAS shot down my full A Fitted DBS in less than 10 seconds, i didn't have any opportunity to run, to defend my self, anything, so this nice guy had his cheap and easy victory and me, who was not bothering anyone, well, quit playing, and then i thought about all that people that write post and posts and posts about nerfing shield cell banks, chaffs and buff weapons.. why i feel sometimes i'm going completely in the wrong direction?
Players who play in a , let's say , legal way should be protected against this type of behaviours with good defensive ways
Players who want to lay as bad guys should need an EXTRA effort for accomplish their goals
Seriously, the frustration of someone who lost his ship is much way bigger than the frustration of somebody who couldn't destroy the ship of somebody else, really the day all games work better in their defensive strategies will make the offensive more creative, and in general the gaming experience will be better than just the kill/die kill/die nobody cares to kill/die experience we actually have
Last edited:
Getting close, detargeting, timing your attacks, switching to forward fire, or just staying in the fight to outlasting your opponent's chaff or drain their SYS capacitor.
Also, chaff gets less effective the large the vessel gets. It's not some OP thing stacked to infinity like SCB's. There's also opportunity cost involved with heatsinks and shield boosters.
Another thing to consider is that useless modules will eventually compete for the same spot as chaff when missiles get another balance look and more calibers of torpedoes are introduced to the game.
Gimbals are about fine where they are in relation to other weapons and countermeasures. Gimbals also offer a noticeable advantage when it comes to module targeting and knife-fighting. ThoughI admit Turrets could use a bit of a look at. I think they underperform for their cost when compared to gimbaled and fixed. Whether to go gimbaled, go fixed, or take a mix of both, I'm always considering. Chaff doesn't ruin that balance at all. Especially since there are ways to counter-play it and weapons which negate chaff entirely.
Compare chaff to SCB's. chaff can be played against. As of now, there's no module or weapon which can counter-play an SCB (except in CQC: the heat beam). Since there are ways to make chaff less effective and counter it entirely, it's "balanced" relative to the other options in-game, as strategies can be developed to counter its use.
Here's a video explaining what I mean:
[video=youtube;e31OSVZF77w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e31OSVZF77w[/video]
Last edited:
Right - if both gimbals and turrets are fitted, selecting "fire at will" would release your turrets to autonomous fire on nearby threats while your gimbals would track as they do now. However, I deliberately suggested a single setting affecting both types of tracking weapons because it provides a subtle disincentive to overspam chaff... You're getting hit by somebody with gimbals while his turrets are busy on other targets... you chaff.. he locks down the tracking and fires at you in fixed mode... and now you're getting the attention from not just his gimbals but his turrets too, since they are ALL now firing in fixed mode.
Fair points....
Can't help but think that the default loadout of anyone hunting other CMDRs is typically fixed and with multiple chaffs is demonstrating something!
Consider your average player in the game, where most likely they will not have this, as NPCs do not play "by the same rules".
This just seems a bit odd to me, and invariably means when Mr PvP CMDR interdicts Mr OPEN CMDR, Mr OPEN CMDR is most likely at a disadvantage. And when the default comeback (as demonstrated on this very thread) is simply, "go fixed" (or the like), to me that is not an answer, it's highlighting a flaw!
Last edited:
Wow, look at all the small ship guys throwing a tantrum over someone wanting to nerf their never ending near invulnerability potions. What a shock. They were singing a different tune when it was all about nerfing big ship potions.
De-selecting the target when it chaffs is fine until you see the poor weapon convergence on most big ships (python most notable exception). It's often more efficient to just wait the chaff out, since you'll miss with half your weaps even with good aim due to the poor weap convergence. Someone said just stay behind him and get closer...obviously someone who has never flown anything bigger than a Vulture.
Taking a page from others complaining about needing to nerf SCB's..
Lets just limit it to one chaff bank per ship.
Limit how often you can use chaff.
Make using chaff damage the ship some how.
Increase the power needed for chaff.
Restore turrets to ignoring chaff.
Of course none of that is going to happen, so no need to worry.
De-selecting the target when it chaffs is fine until you see the poor weapon convergence on most big ships (python most notable exception). It's often more efficient to just wait the chaff out, since you'll miss with half your weaps even with good aim due to the poor weap convergence. Someone said just stay behind him and get closer...obviously someone who has never flown anything bigger than a Vulture.
Taking a page from others complaining about needing to nerf SCB's..
Lets just limit it to one chaff bank per ship.
Limit how often you can use chaff.
Make using chaff damage the ship some how.
Increase the power needed for chaff.
Restore turrets to ignoring chaff.
Of course none of that is going to happen, so no need to worry.
In my experience truly bad weapon convergence is mostly a factor on imperial ships with their heaviest firepower mounted way out on wing pods, but at the same time in ANY fixed-weapon configuration there's going to be "bad zone" for engagement range that varies with what ship you're targeting. Beyond the further limit of that "bad zone" your weapons converge well enough for you hit with all of them, you just have to be a very accurate shot, particularly on smaller targets. Within the inner limit of the "bad zone" you are close enough to your target that even a small ship will occupy a wide enough angle in your view that they will still all hit. It's only between those limits that all your weapons cannot converge on your target.
This simple fact of geometry has been a factor in the thinking of aircraft armorers ever since WW1.
Unless there's ships where the optimal convergence range (which coincides with the outer limit of the "bad zone") is beyond effective weapon range (haven't actually noticed that myself but haven't been looking for it much either) AND your target is so small that you'll have rammed it before you get close enough that it subtends a large enough view angle that all your weapons strike home then you should always be able to get all your weapons on target. If closing the range doesn't work, opening it should.
This is, of course, provided their targeting arcs overlap at all. (the FDL's huge hardpoint is a case where its firing arc does not overlap that of the other fitted hardpoints, for example)