And if that's the case, I'm sure FD would have no problem nerfing the hell out of dedicated COMBAT ships to do the same, no?
Yeah, I thought not.
TL;DR = Why do combat ships NOT have to compromise?
Last edited:
Modes Elite Dangerous PvE vs PvP and who needs a Solo play if you had PvE server
- Thread starter digitalblade
- Start date
And if that's the case, I'm sure FD would have no problem nerfing the hell out of dedicated COMBAT ships to do the same, no?
Yeah, I thought not.
TL;DR = Why do combat ships NOT have to compromise?
Deleted member 115407
D
Yes. Having a shield is what they call compromise. Tossing an MRP/HRP combo into the 3 slots would be a compromise, too, because god forbid you lose 16 tons of cargo space. I mean, between the loss of the 5-3-3 slots, that would take you down from like 300T to 256T... heaven forbid.
When you combat-fit a ship for PvP, you compromise on hauling capability (and often times jump capability as well). You don't see a lot of PvP ready ships running around with SRV bays, cargo racks, and Surface scanners.
And they're not gimped. As Algomatic has demonstrated, and I explained in my previous post. They are perfectly capable of survival as long as you aren't greedy.
Last edited by a moderator:
That isn't compromise, jesus it's so you can pull ships over to pew pew them, get a grip, oh, and I'll take your diversion as reading 'no, I don't have an answer to your simple question'.
Oh how wrong you are, every ship I have is compromised for survival whether they are a trader, miner, passenger ship, explorer or multi, and I do mean survival in open not against NPC's, I don't mind compromise as long as the playing field is levelled somewhat and some special snowflakes have to make the same choices and not think they are exempt from it for 'reasons'. Every ship should have a shield, every ship should have the ability to jump from one system to another and every ship should be viable. How does that saying go about assumptions and all that pal............?
Last edited:
Deleted member 115407
D
So, basically what would be "fair" to you is if the explorers and traders could get max capabilities with their jump and cargo, and still be comparable in defense to combat ships. What you really want is for them to be more capable than the combat ships?
Oh my god, what a lovely man of straw you have constructed there......
It really is simple, every ship should be viable, every trader and explorer should have a shielded ship at the very least, maybe even some hull/shield boosts - how is that me wanting explorers and traders to 'max' anything? - Every PVP ship should have the ability to jump from one system to another without being 'summoned' because they couldn't jump a puddle.
I'm asking for a bit more balance across the board, not the current 'we don't count 'cuz we PVP's' scenario, which one is more balanced and fair in your humble opinion?
I am answering you: you dont compromise anything, having a shield is not a compromise its a must for any trader, its one slot, what else do you compromise?
Read my post above, it's more far reaching than that - or should be, and even if it was only one slot for one shield it's still bloody more compromise than you currently make or are even willing to consider.
Your trader is not gimped. The type 7 and type 9 are monster hulltanks with good shields.
As I demonstrated for exactly those types of statements, 1 engineered shield and 3 engineered boosters is enough to survive ANYTHING. I did not loose my shields NOT EVEN ONCE.
One thing though, you have to engineer, you cant fight engineered weapons with stock shields, simple, but this is not the players fault, its fdev who gave the abilities for massive builds, so take it up with them if you dont like engineering. Thats the "depth" in ED according to the developers.
I have news for you, without shields you will die to any ship, it doesn't need to be PVP outfitted, NPCs will kill you.
Again, why is it COMBAT ships don't have to "compromise"?
Why would that be news to me???? I'm proposing that every ship should be shielded, I'm proposing that every ship should be viable to not only survive but get around the galaxy.
You still haven't actually answered the question, why should a tiny minority not have to compromise their builds in any way for their preferred playstyle but the majority should?
Because thats how FDEv designed the game, combat ships can inflict damage to other ships, while a trader/explorer cant which means they need to take an additional step to protect themselves.
Nice cop-out. Is that why combat ships don't need to make compromises then? "Because that's how FDEv designed the game...?"
What do you really want? you want to buy a combat ship and nurf yourself for fun, be my guest. How is it related to me in any way?
I have a ship dedicated for exploration, i have a trader T7, I have a PVP conda and a PVP FAS, every ship have their roles, not sure what you want to compromise in a combat ship, you want me to put an FSD? for what? just for kicks? I dont jump anywhere, I bring it to the CG, stay there for a week and move to the next CG, where should my FAS jump? to Sag A?
That's all I really needed to know. Thanks for proving the point.
Which is why it's a good thing they don't have to face PvP boats and can opt for other modes.
Brings balance to the force.
Deleted member 110222
D
To answer the titular question, "who needs Solo if there's Open PvE?"
A few people. As it turns out, some people literally can't play with others because of ISP. A very good friend of mine had been finding himself getting kicked out of Open/PG instantly.
Turns out, after some discussion he had with support, the nature of his ISP means he can't connect to other players.
He's in the process of seeking a refund. However, to say all people in his situation should seek a refund, would be horribly arrogant. They do, after all, just want to play. I suspect some of those are quite content with being effectively locked into Solo due to technical misfortune.
Take away Solo though... You basically take away the entire game from them. Like it or not, Frontier has decided to accommodate players with horrible connections, and that's a decision we as normal players will never change.
A few people. As it turns out, some people literally can't play with others because of ISP. A very good friend of mine had been finding himself getting kicked out of Open/PG instantly.
Turns out, after some discussion he had with support, the nature of his ISP means he can't connect to other players.
He's in the process of seeking a refund. However, to say all people in his situation should seek a refund, would be horribly arrogant. They do, after all, just want to play. I suspect some of those are quite content with being effectively locked into Solo due to technical misfortune.
Take away Solo though... You basically take away the entire game from them. Like it or not, Frontier has decided to accommodate players with horrible connections, and that's a decision we as normal players will never change.
A max-engineered PVP build increases success vs other Cmdrs in combat, but decreases it for most everything else.
A max-engineered trade/explo build increases success vs the environment (including NPCs), but is "no bueno" against one thing: PVP-specific combat ships.
Trader/Explorer says, "Why should I compromise my most efficient loadout to deal with encounters with PVP builds?"
PVPer says, "I gave up trading, mining, exploring, planetary landings, salvage missions, assassination missions in neighboring systems, literally every other game activity to have a PVP vessel. That's my compromise."
The irony is that, in order to afford a maxed-out FdL, and to gather the materials & travel the distances needed for engineering to the max, the PVPer at one point needed (and still needs) a non-PVP ship to run missions & jump some distance. And it was probably all done in Solo.
A max-engineered trade/explo build increases success vs the environment (including NPCs), but is "no bueno" against one thing: PVP-specific combat ships.
Trader/Explorer says, "Why should I compromise my most efficient loadout to deal with encounters with PVP builds?"
PVPer says, "I gave up trading, mining, exploring, planetary landings, salvage missions, assassination missions in neighboring systems, literally every other game activity to have a PVP vessel. That's my compromise."
The irony is that, in order to afford a maxed-out FdL, and to gather the materials & travel the distances needed for engineering to the max, the PVPer at one point needed (and still needs) a non-PVP ship to run missions & jump some distance. And it was probably all done in Solo.
Last edited:
I never thought I'd find myself doing this, but on this one issue, I actually agree with AL. If you play in Open, equipping a cargo ship as a blockade runner makes a lot of sense, and you sacrifice almost nothing to do so, at most one light year of jump range, before any FSD modifications. Shields, even "navigation" ones, are just common sense, and everything else involves fully utilizing every module location on your ship.
For losing a single light year if jump range, which might cost you, at most, 45 seconds of time on a trip, you end up with a ship that can soak up a lot of damage. It's the difference between flying an armored car, and a cardboard box.
That having been said, I think anyone in Open who sees a cardboard box and thinks "free kill," rather than, "someone in need of an education," is being a jerk. Here's hoping the upcoming C&P changes reduces the amount of jerkish behavior, or at least gives potential jerks a momentary pause.
For losing a single light year if jump range, which might cost you, at most, 45 seconds of time on a trip, you end up with a ship that can soak up a lot of damage. It's the difference between flying an armored car, and a cardboard box.
That having been said, I think anyone in Open who sees a cardboard box and thinks "free kill," rather than, "someone in need of an education," is being a jerk. Here's hoping the upcoming C&P changes reduces the amount of jerkish behavior, or at least gives potential jerks a momentary pause.
