Clearly we have differing opinions of what is or is not an actual problem, or what constitutes punishment.
Engineering Under Threat - Open Letter etc
- Thread starter Gavin786
- Start date
Clearly we have differing opinions of what is or is not an actual problem, or what constitutes punishment.
I too have spent a lot of hours engineering, my two favorite ships, an FDL and a Corvette are both maxed out g5 engineered.
I dont want to see engineering nerfed either, I want to see it removed.
I have quit for months at a time in disgust at the engineering required to either change out engineered modules for other effects or, after buying a new ship, the prospect of engineering modules for it.
If FD wont remove engineering all together and nerfing it is the best we can get, i would settle for that.
Not really - there are various reasons why internet connections can be disrupted and 99% of them are unpredictable and unavoidable.
In the UK, it is not that uncommon for intermittent and unpredictable internet connection disruption. That is only one example, there are others.
The only people's gameplay it is likely to ruin if done right are the gankers.
Oh you sweet summer child...
Look here kiddo, I aint no child and have not been for over 20 years.
Ultimately, the levels of shielding and weapon power achievable through engineering and other means are totally unnecessary.
For example: Personally, I favour long range weapon engineering for various reasons but if FD decided to nerf the damage I would call it fair play.
laughs in 9+ g planetLook here kiddo, I aint no child and have not been for over 20 years.
Ultimately, the levels of shielding and weapon power achievable through engineering and other means are totally unnecessary.
If engineering was deleted from the game overnight, I don't think it would effect many at all. We would all quickly get use to the new ceilings, we would each have our individual meta builds, they would just be different to what we had with the Engineers. In other words, WE WOULD ADAPT, just like we did when Engineers was introduced.
As for the idealist dream that nerfing Engineers would somehow get rid of gankers. Nope, can't see that happening. We are talking about a group of people who think it is enjoyable to attack inferior ships, to fly around stations ramming people in their free Sidewinders. Get rid of engineering and all that would happen is these low life's would just revert back into flying around in A rated meta builds looking for those in weak, lower spec'd ships (and of course religiously avoiding any ship that might pose a threat to them, after all aren't all gankers just reverting to their schoolyard bully persona )
As for the idealist dream that nerfing Engineers would somehow get rid of gankers. Nope, can't see that happening. We are talking about a group of people who think it is enjoyable to attack inferior ships, to fly around stations ramming people in their free Sidewinders. Get rid of engineering and all that would happen is these low life's would just revert back into flying around in A rated meta builds looking for those in weak, lower spec'd ships (and of course religiously avoiding any ship that might pose a threat to them, after all aren't all gankers just reverting to their schoolyard bully persona
)If engineering was deleted from the game overnight, I don't think it would effect many at all. We would all quickly get use to the new ceilings, we would each have our individual meta builds, they would just be different to what we had with the Engineers. In other words, WE WOULD ADAPT, just like we did when Engineers was introduced.
As for the idealist dream that nerfing Engineers would somehow get rid of gankers. Nope, can't see that happening. We are talking about a group of people who think it is enjoyable to attack inferior ships, to fly around stations ramming people in their free Sidewinders. Get rid of engineering and all that would happen is these low life's would just revert back into flying around in A rated meta builds looking for those in weak, lower spec'd ships (and of course religiously avoiding any ship that might pose a threat to them, after all aren't all gankers just reverting to their schoolyard bully persona
Did I miss a comment, are you agreeing with what I said or objecting to it?
High gravity landing situations do not always mean high levels of shields are justifiable (especially not more than 2K shields); However, as landing shield damage seem to be absolute damage based, the higher level of shields should arguably be weaker against other damage types - sufficiently so to keep the "effective" shield strength against those weapons with-in more reasonable levels.
For example: lets say you could achieve 10K absolute damage resistant shields... if the damage resistance to Thermal/Kinetic/Explosive were set to say -400% (damage levels increased by a factor of 5) that would mean by my estimate an effective shield strength of only 2K against those weapon types.
Agreeing. Removing any part of engineering, let alone all of it, will solve absolutely nothing in regards to gankers. I've made a comment about C&P having to be properly fixed to make it just as risky for them as it is for their victims. But as usual, it's ignored, overlooked or entirely shot down with wails of "Open only" or other nonsense
You talk as if you have never landed on a 9+ g planet with a ship that weighs well over and up to 2,000+ tons and her thrusters can't keep you aloft so you have to crash land. Do keep going
Last edited:
It would wreck at least some ship builds without a shadow of a doubt - I think you underestimate the far reaching consequences.
Yes there is that. But overall I would actually get up out of my new comfy chair and do an abbreviated version of a happy dance if FD wiped Engineering out of the game. To me it is an extremely poorly thought out and terribly executed mess that has caused far more harm than good in the game.
....said nobody ever
Okay, is that a problem with engineering or with FDev designing the ships so that they are only viable with engineering? Take the vulture, pre-Engineers it was a minor miracle to get it working due to the small PowerPlant. Post-Engineers and anything is possible. I much prefered it when it was a challenge to get something working but now with Engineers, everything is achievable no matter how unrealistic it is.
I think that about the FSS and the 3.3 update in general (some good things but net bad) but I doubt the FSS will be removed nor the bulk of the 3.3 update reverted.
Engineering was a key part of Horizons which some people paid for so it is unlikely to be removed, I can see a major re balance of the combat aspects happening but that is it.
Where my 3.3 related objections are concerned, we will have to wait and see if FD decide to admit to their errors and fix the mess they made.
If you choose to fly a ship with sub-optimal thrusters then it is a clear case of DFDI. I have landed on a strong gravity planet (over 3g) in my sub-2K shielded Corvette (took at least a third of my shields), and the same planet in smaller vessels like a T-6 (no shield damage). The smaller vessels do not have as much of an issue, the Corvette was quite a bit more awkward but with more practice should be more easily done.
The point I was making was that the planetary landing shield damage could be handled in such a way as to not screw up combat balance. In the combat context, anything greater than 2K is arguably well over what should be allowed - at least without trade offs.
Don't get me wrong, I know that Engineering is here to stay (just like the FSS). Like you, I could tolerate Engineering better if it was even the tiniest bit logical. Either have it so you lose any engineering upon death or make it that you can buy engineered modules that you already have the blueprints for from Outfitting. At present they whole thing just doesn't make sense, even in a game where a lot doesn't make sense, engineering stands out above all of that.
3g is child's play, come back to me when you land on a real high G planet with a fully loaded vette and then we'll talk