Responce to Yamiks Shield Video.

I always find it funny that people are quick to call Reverb Cas Torps, a gimmick. But I think 5kMJ is just as cheesy.

My cutter has 4.5kMJ and I've never lost em in PvP or PvE. The only way someone in a small or medium ship could take em down is with sustained accurate use of feedback cascade over the course of 30/40 minutes, while popping (poormans) grom bombs, PA's and probably having to synth half way through. Failing that Reverb Cas Mines or Torps. That's it.

As a hull tanker generally, players have a myriad of ways to mess up my plans. Super Pen Rails, Missiles to drives, Cannons to modules, Pulse Laser experimentals. It's hardly balanced.

That said, I think better than nerfing would be to add alternatives similar to Feedback Cas. Those flack launchers, if they did more reliable damage could possibly work, though that could easily be OP, since most shield tanks OC the PP and forgo integrity mods.

This is definitely a topic for debate. (I know its been debated, but that is no excuse to not further debate it.)

o7

An alternative way to describe this is - my Cutter (only used for trade) has a 5A thermal g5 standard shield (no god roll, old engineering system) - and I have only 1.3kMJ.
And no, I don't ever use it in a CZ or doing massacre missions or anything like that.
The only threat is I get regularly interdicted when running missions or fortifying for my Mega-CEO.

Nowadays predominantly by Anacondas, FDLs or Type-10 Defenders. My shields usually go down one or two rings but never lost so far.

So even with low Cutter shields in PvE the shields are strong enough.
I have no illusion about how I would end up in PvP of course however that's not what that ship build is used for.
 
Someone wants to mess with mega-shields again?

Let me remind you that we, mega-shield owners and admirers, brought down in flames both FD's attempts to nerf our shields. First was in 2.2.03, second was in 2.3. We are always on watch for the third.

Hands. Off. Our. Shields!

LOL
 
So even with low Cutter shields in PvE the shields are strong enough.
I have no illusion about how I would end up in PvP of course however that's not what that ship build is used for.

Fully agree. I don't own a cutter (yet), but with my last type-10 and corvette builds for haz-res farming, I just stick with 750-1000MJ of shielding (no engineering, no SCBs). With that I can stay in a haz-res almost indefinetly if I choose to go with a non-ammo consuming build. The only reason I end up leaving, is because after a 5-6 hour session I usually get a bit wonky and do something stupid like gaining a bounty.

Now this is of course just PvE, not in open-play and engaging a max. of 3 ships at a time. But still...

Let's assume we got rid of shield boosters and engineering altogether. Then it wouldn't matter if we were in open-play or solo. PvE or PvP. The skill would determine combat proficiency once again, and not the "I grinded X-amount of hours and now I can seal-club everyone".
 
Shields are not the real issue, an edge case does not define the entire state of the game. Pvp is never going to be fair in a game like Elite, there is no fair when ganked 4-1, nor fair flying a hauler attacked by a combat ship; fair is an unrealistic pipe dream. All we can hope for is a reasonable level of balance. We don't have player classes, we use ships and weapons of different cost, size, strengths, and weaknesses. If you want fair pvp, go play cqc, join an in game fight club, or play a first person shooter.

A single ship has been used as an example for how overpowered shields are, yet everyone knows the balance of this ship is out of whack, personally I wont use it. Able to mount a much larger effective shield pool, bringing decent firepower to bear, and having the second highest boost speed of the large ships, faster even than the "combat" focused corvette, it is a combination of the three that skews balance. There are numerous ways to address that issue, and hopefully FD get round to much needed re balancing of the Cutter, I am a fan of reducing the size 8 internals to 7's and nerfing turrets, but whatever. FWIW, I have never thought smaller ships should have a real chance against larger ships, except in the hands of vastly different player ability, anything more is a silly notion. I would rather see the firepower disparity between small, medium, and large increase further, perhaps not a popular opinion, but the cost of buying and outfitting a ship should count for something and offer some advantage.

A real issue however, is how ineffective current NPC are, particularity at higher levels, I have not been killed by an NPC since Jan/Feb 2015, and it's not like I am avoiding NPC, my only Elite rank is combat as that's been the focus for most of my play. I can still go to a haz res in a viper or Asp and kill any of the npc there, ironic given my feelings on small v large ships. Most of my ships do not even have engineering, it's simply not needed when I pve; engineered fits I save for open. Unfortunately, we all saw what happened when NPC received what was overall a minor buff. All the folks who had never had to pay attention to combat, or the fit of their ships raged until they wore Frontier down and they were forced to back track.

Sure, there are a wide range of player abilities and interests within the community, but when players are taking on Dangerous, Deadly or Elite ranked missions, flying in Haz res, conflict zones or Anarchy systems there should be an expectation of failure which simply does not exist at present. Although, that would require a re balance of the potential reward for some of these things, it seems too many folks want reward after reward with as little risk or attrition as possible. It is no wonder those same players whine about or boredom or having too many credits with nothing to spend them on.

There are also some problems with the balance between different weapons platforms, as a result some are hardly used expect as novelty fits or simply because they happen to be in the game. But that's for an entirely different thread.
 
Last edited:
AHMAHGURD!
Hard cap shield boosts (not boosters) at ~350% and adjust from there. Draw back resistances to hit diminishing returns faster, with soft cap at 50%. Booster stacking would be resolved without making non-Horizon players excluded from stacking more. Lasers might see a nice uptick, but likely weapons will need to be adjusted regardless (dps creep has been occuring, just hard to notice with HP creep outclassing it).

Who knows, might even see more people using interseting ultra rare items like chaff launchers again.....
 
I'm not doubting your numbers, but using kinetics against shields is a bit daft. It's not what they are for.

Ive won almost all my PVP fights that way. Wat?

OK where to start.
1st off : this is 1st time someone took time to make smth like this - I love it!
2nd : let's go thru your points!

#1 : the fear of me mentioning will get thiungs NERFED.... ok when did I become such authority and do you really think DEVS are so blind or dumb they'll listen to me word for word?
....hmmm actually you might have a partial point here! =}

#2 In this game shields are set in 3 categories more or less : Hull-tank (a ship who has small shields but huge hull HP), Balanced (about equal amount of shield to hull HPs more leaning to hull) and Shield tanks(lot's of shields, low hull) you have to understand which ship is made more for what and generalizing that some are easy to crack means rather little if you are talking about something like FAS!

#3 ....oh man.. what kind of math is this?! So base shield boost is 20% -> engineered G5 boost is 73% now tell me what is the IMPROVEMENT!?
My video stated that ENGINEERING..specifically HEAVY DUTY modification is TOO GOOD!
Take HRP(hull reinforcement package)for example : Heavy duty version will boost it almost 90% , while Shield booster gains >350% !!!
What other engineered upgrades grant you THIS huge of an improvement!?
If it was up to me I'd reduce Shield booster max boost to 80% improvement bringing down the shield booster to 36% boost at max (do you get it?! 20% x 180% = 36% boost) And that would make cutters shields be dropped to 6.3k which still is more than 2x of non-engineered shields (base is 2.4k). So do you think that perhaps would be more fair?!

See while I like the idea of shields and that protection, the fact of the matter is : engineering is NOT balanced at all and even devs know that shields are too strong, but because of this sort of backlash, change is not possible!

I really want to have the choice between shields & hull when it comes to combat and not feel like I miss out if I go full mode on someone!

When I read this. I heard your voice. Dog used a squeaky toy at the same time.

Life is complete.
 
Someone wants to mess with mega-shields again?

Let me remind you that we, mega-shield owners and admirers, brought down in flames both FD's attempts to nerf our shields. First was in 2.2.03, second was in 2.3. We are always on watch for the third.

Hands. Off. Our. Shields!

Lol Mr Biohazard, you won both battles but I'm not so sure about the war...

Based upon my analysis of all Sandro's relevant remarks to date, oh you for sure will keep all your Mj...

And those who play only in Solo, you need fear no NPC (well, unless you drop into optional gank-USS, which hopefully will come with a range of RNGineered ganks)...

But in Open, I think what's coming may look like phasing and feedback cascade combined and given steroids. So, you keep your Mj ... but Mj might not count for much, no more. The 'bypass' nerf.

People have got the Space Loach all wrong. The Loach is a carnivore. This is the guy who gave us the first incarnation of feedback cascade (automatic FULL SHIELD DROP on one single strike during SCB) and weaponised ultra-death heat (the former was not defended - the latter was, for months).

I look forward to seeing what the Murder Loach comes up with next.

But mark my words, folks - TTK in 2019 is going to get quite ... interesting ... I'm betting.
 
Shields are actually fine as they are.

As many others have said, the problem is being able to power both super weapons and super shields at the same time.

Increase power consumption for both, particularly on larger/high damage weapons (class 3&4), and larger shield generators, and SCBs.

Then shield tanking and damage output balance out. You can choice one or the other, or compromise on both.

Hull tanking Vs damage already is a risk due to external module damage.
You'd save on a shed load of power, but your weapons are exposed to direct fire.
 
Imagine how fun it would be to have NPCs using heavy duty skill boosted loadout like that:

[video=youtube;nXCJx8NjirI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXCJx8NjirI&feature=youtu.be[/video]

Amarite...

Shields are actually fine as they are.

As many others have said, the problem is being able to power both super weapons and super shields at the same time.

Increase power consumption for both, particularly on larger/high damage weapons (class 3&4), and larger shield generators, and SCBs.
As many others have proven, the problem comes from shield + shield booster stacking being way too OP.
Increasing the power consumption of weapons will impact every ship laodout, especially small ships and hybrid loadout which don't have any benefits in shield + shields booster stacking.

There is a reason why players swap every utility slots for shield boosters.

2.3 beta 1 was the perfect solution.
 
Last edited:
I think it's worth re-iterating at this point that any engineering imbalance only affects PvP, in PvE those massive shields & huge dps weapons allow the less practiced among us to enjoy the game in their own way. In PvP when I see a tonne of shield Boosters I just think there's someone scared of losing their ship. To persuade FDev that massive shields need to go (and I agree they are OP) there needs to be a compelling benefit to the PvE community, and I don't see it. I'd happily have a meek player able to outfit massive shields, it's having OP weapons (or any weapons) on the same loadout that are a problem. In PvE the game can just chuck more NPCs at the player for balance.

Edge case examples & min/maxing are of limited use in debate, ime you don't build a game based on edge cases (eg low dps weapons vs massive shield). Find a solution that handles that edge case without impacting either the majority of players or the meek & less skilled for the sake of the brave & skilled (who are in a better position to find workarounds).

IMO of course ;)
 
Last edited:
Are you on xbox? Was it a vulture...? *whistles as he walks away*

Tangent: I would like to see a removal of explosive resistances to shields and boosters, a 'natural resistance' of zero baselined across shields entirety, and a rebalance of explosives. Would this solve the issues? No clue, but making explosives worth a crap would be lovely.

Realism is a fleeting mistress in this game. It is there one minute, gone the next. Fun realism of explosives in space might be interesting. Self-oxidizing thermobarics can output >12Mj/kg with tech from the 60's (our time). Consider you can cram 400+kg in a tomohawk cruise missile, and suddenly the damage output of this game's explosives is rated somewhere between a hot fart and a Fourth of July economy pack of sparklers. Might also make some of the engineering effects *cough, high yeild, cough* convert to explosive.

Might make ecm more attractive on large ships, very attractive on small/meds and armor would be a must. Plus it would be fun as hell reading the Salt Lake Discussions when npc's start dozering with dumbfires. Just a thought. Not a solution.

*Laughs* Nah, I'm playing on the PC, and it was an Imperial Clipper. I didn't mind the dying, just the lack of reason rankled, you see... Had I broadcast, "Imperials have tiny genitals!," then, yes, I would have expected a kick up the backside. :) At least some comment would have been nice...

I'm rubbish at physics--how useful would such an explosive weapon be in a vacuum, anyway? No shockwave, after all.

Ladies, gentlemen, I try not to be exceedingly stubborn... I wouldn't mind changes, provided that a) they make sense, b) don't mean that I die within seconds when flying a big ship. Realism is all fine and well, but I can have that in spades when away from the keyboard/HOTAS... :D
 
There are 2000 dps (and much higher) frag cannon builds for pvp. The engineered shields and shield boosters are not op.

Do the math, how long will you last against those frags if you are at 12 k MJ, even with SCBs? Not too long.

Big shields can make you pretty tough to kill in pve - so what. It's PVE.
 
Which is why you just make shield boosters require more power and/or lower the max power output of the ship. Little ships would still be fine. They don't have enough utility slots to stack shield boosters to make power a problem. But when you start looking at the ships with 8 utility slots, should you really be able to put 8A prismatics, 8 shield boosters, the most power hungry weapons possible, SCB's, A rated everything, and still have power to spare? It's kind of dumb. You want to have stupidly OP shields? Sure, but you have to compromise on firepower. Want crazy firepower? Fine, but you have to compromise on shields. Or you could go pretty good on both, but not to crazy OP levels for either.

You shouldn't have enough power available to push EVERY system to the stupidly OP max levels.

Hmmm...
But then that should entail only a nerf of the overcharged power plant.
Cause I run a few armoured ones as well which hardly give enough power already to run everything in parallel, so only by module prioritization it's working.
Would power output be nerfed in general to make overcharged not being able to run everything anymore most likely armoured power plant wouldn't have enough energy for anything anymore.

Which again makes it extremely difficult to take on one side, give on the other, tweak here and there...

But I see the point.

[Poster trying to protect his beloved armoured powerplants...]
 
We also have to think how Premium Ammo ties into it.

Standard weapons have trouble. But Premium does not. And could change the way we build our ships.

With how easy it is to farm and hold onto materials now with the larger storage cap.

Shields are probably pretty weak.

(Talking PVP here) PVE really doesnt matter in this case. Not saying it doesnt. Its just not applicable to this situation. NPC's are used as farming tools. Not engagement tools.
 
Last edited:
There are 2000 dps (and much higher) frag cannon builds for pvp. The engineered shields and shield boosters are not op.

Do the math, how long will you last against those frags if you are at 12 k MJ, even with SCBs? Not too long.

Big shields can make you pretty tough to kill in pve - so what. It's PVE.

Which again begs the question whether game balance changes should be done in favour of a player minority being highly skilled and equipped best-in-class and focussing on PvP or in favour of a lesser skilled and average-equipped player majority who play solo or private and PvE exclusively.

I see all the points but I would assume FDev are aligning the game rather for a paying less-skilled majority even though the combined playing hours of a vocal Elite minority might match the playing hours of the 90-95%.

And to be very honest. Even though I know I'm overpowered it's still fun soloing a 100-kill pirate massacre mission or any other stuff in this great game.
 
There are 2000 dps (and much higher) frag cannon builds for pvp. The engineered shields and shield boosters are not op.

Do the math, how long will you last against those frags if you are at 12 k MJ, even with SCBs? Not too long.

Frags are quite niche and if you are are in a ship large enough to really worry about frag boats, you can make a similarly niche 85%+ kinetic resistance setup that can still resist enough thermic/explosive damage to survive most any encounter with other weapons.

Which again begs the question whether game balance changes should be done in favour of a player minority being highly skilled and equipped best-in-class and focussing on PvP or in favour of a lesser skilled and average-equipped player majority who play solo or private and PvE exclusively.

Balancing for the extremes already balances for everything else. Balancing for the most common cases leaves gameplay full of holes.
 
There are 2000 dps (and much higher) frag cannon builds for pvp. The engineered shields and shield boosters are not op.

Do the math, how long will you last against those frags if you are at 12 k MJ, even with SCBs? Not too long.

Big shields can make you pretty tough to kill in pve - so what. It's PVE.

Have you ever heard about "resist" or "pips" and what happens when you put 4 of them into "sys" ? Maybe think about it and do the math... oh wait

Which again begs the question whether game balance changes should be done in favour of a player minority being highly skilled and equipped best-in-class and focussing on PvP or in favour of a lesser skilled and average-equipped player majority who play solo or private and PvE exclusively.

I see all the points but I would assume FDev are aligning the game rather for a paying less-skilled majority even though the combined playing hours of a vocal Elite minority might match the playing hours of the 90-95%.

And to be very honest. Even though I know I'm overpowered it's still fun soloing a 100-kill pirate massacre mission or any other stuff in this great game.

High skilled end game players most of the time represent a minority and most of the time devs listen to them in favour of the game itself. Balancing shield and shield boosters will not make it impossible to farm 100 brain dead AI but as before it will require a minimum of skill.
How players were doing before 2.1 when there was less powerful weapons and WAY less powerful shields/skill boosters ?
 
Last edited:
There are 2000 dps (and much higher) frag cannon builds for pvp. The engineered shields and shield boosters are not op.

Do the math, how long will you last against those frags if you are at 12 k MJ, even with SCBs? Not too long.

Big shields can make you pretty tough to kill in pve - so what. It's PVE.

Galloping galaxies ... again? Two whole years after I told Frontier that their (newly published) Outfitting stats were misleading about frag DPS? Two years after they said they were looking at a UI change ... and still nothing? AGAIN I have read this 2000 DPS joke?

Buddy I am not critising you, I am saying you have posted in good faith but YOU HAVE BEEN MISLED.

Check out the warning I put in my full DPS tables (in the kinetic spoiler re frags):

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/246086-Official-FDev-Damage-Stats-for-Every-Weapon

Now check out Coriolis. Burst DPS? Lol. That's relevant to a one-shot and ED is an attrition game.

Look at the sustainable DPS, which takes into account reload time. See how for a c3 gimballed frag DPS drops from 215 to ...

... drumroll ...

... 24.

Yes, 24.

A gimballed multi has 18.

A gimballed multi, usable at up to 2k, has fully 75% of the true DPS of a frag usable up to 500m.

Should I start a PSA thread about this? PM Frontier?

Because this 2000 DPS joke is wearing thin after two years.

Now that eyes are open, do the real maths. Work out frag damage per minute. Real damage.

Yes, you can RNG frags. There are ways to reduce even reload. They are good.

But this 2000 DPS fantasy is an abject joke and when I see it used to justify 11300 Mj shields, I know that Frontier are unnecessarily confusing their players.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom