Hot take on Ship Health and TTK

I guess the reason the MCs go for dual purpose usage is that corrosion offsets the thermal disadvantage vs hull. Or maybe they retain some of their kinetic potential.
Thermal weapons like pulse and burst and beam don't have their equal counterpart in making a weapon equally or nearly eaqually good in attacking shields and hull?

Not really, no. Intertial impact is pretty...meh. Not even worth using imo based on my experience. You can go Focused for bursts/pulses to do increased hull penetration, but it doesn't seem to do a whole lot.

Lasers are in a plain crap place right now imo. They have huge tradeoffs, interesting engineering possibilities are ruined by prohibitive tradoffs like added "jitter" or heat etc etc. No capacitor in the galaxy is adequate to make Overcharged lasers worth using either, so your best bet for extra damage is long range. Why do energy weapons in space have "damage falloff"? Who knows...
 
Not really, no. Intertial impact is pretty...meh. Not even worth using imo based on my experience. You can go Focused for bursts/pulses to do increased hull penetration, but it doesn't seem to do a whole lot.

Lasers are in a plain crap place right now imo. They have huge tradeoffs, interesting engineering possibilities are ruined by prohibitive tradoffs like added "jitter" or heat etc etc. No capacitor in the galaxy is adequate to make Overcharged lasers worth using either, so your best bet for extra damage is long range. Why do energy weapons in space have "damage falloff"? Who knows...
Dissipation. Lasers are never completely parallem. When travelling through media it gets even worse.
 
Dissipation at some point sure. After 500 meters though?

Realism discussions won't bring us anywhere. If we start on that, i point at the AIM-54 missile, which was brought into service in 1974 and according to wikipedia had a range of over 185 km. Now we go over a thousand years into the future, fly spaceships which can go faster than light, but we control them manually and do dogfights in them.

Yeah, it's for game purposes. I find it way too harsh, too. And it's probably why I didn't do jack shatt against the propped up NPC when they graced us with their appearance.
I'd run successfully with bursts but that stuff went obsolete over nicht with the hardened hulls.

Nah. The range is not the problem. Point in case: we had several new ships after we got engineers. Each of them, i first set up, did not engineering at all, but rather directly took it to a HAZRes zone. And each of them did well enough there, even against Elite rated Anacondas, as long as i did not fight against wings of enemies. Non-engineered weapons are sufficient to do the job.

Killing stuff in CZs might take a bit longer, due to how much defensive engineering the enemies have. But it's not the core problem there, either. My friends (who returned to ED around Xmas and only now start engineering their ships) spent time in CZs in the last months, too. Killing fast enough was only a problem when the commander-ship was around, as that one had to be killed on a timer. The real issue for them generally was when several enemies ganged up on them. While my ship is able to just shrug this off for a while, their ships melted quickly.

Mind you, i'd still want engineers to be nerfed badly. But compared to the rest, the weapon engineering is a minor thing, non-engineered weapons still pack a sufficient punch.
 
Last edited:
Regarding the relatively short ranges of combat engagements, I wave my hand at the frame shift drive. However there are also other clues in game that suggest frame shift drives make space act weird. Cargo canisters lose momentum after you bonk them.

There is also the issue with the partial mass locks and how mass locking works in general. It seems like the FSDs actively do something to lock into the same frame as other local frameshift cores rather than just being "off."
 
Last edited:
Realism discussions won't bring us anywhere. If we start on that, i point at the AIM-54 missile, which was brought into service in 1974 and according to wikipedia had a range of over 185 km. Now we go over a thousand years into the future, fly spaceships which can go faster than light, but we control them manually and do dogfights in them.

But because of jitter, you get nowhere near the advertised range or damage potential even with G5 long range. So it's not just a realism argument, it's a balance one as well. If falloff exists, fine, but it shouldn't start at such an absurdly short range.
 
But because of jitter, you get nowhere near the advertised range or damage potential even with G5 long range. So it's not just a realism argument, it's a balance one as well. If falloff exists, fine, but it shouldn't start at such an absurdly short range.

As long as combat range by itself normally (unless you use long-range engineering) is capped at 3 km, the 500 meters make sense to me. Of course, the whole concept of dogfights in space and a maximum range of 3 km is utterly ridiculous. And the only answer i have on that is that it's a game and supposed to be fun. Which works for me.
 
As long as combat range by itself normally (unless you use long-range engineering) is capped at 3 km, the 500 meters make sense to me. Of course, the whole concept of dogfights in space and a maximum range of 3 km is utterly ridiculous. And the only answer i have on that is that it's a game and supposed to be fun. Which works for me.

It’s the whole ‘mid-20th century dogfights in space’ trope, which admittedly is pretty damn cool so I’ll let them off. With FA-off you can always pretend you’re flying a reimagined BSG Viper, which to me are some of best ‘dogfights in space’ on telly.

Of course if it was up to me all combat would start well outside visual range and consist of lobbing missiles and torpedoes at each other and watching the PDC and flak lightshow try and shoot them down, probably because I’ve watched too much of the Expanse. Of course, I’m fully aware that even if that was the case I’d still be terrible at it and fewer people would enjoy it 😂
 
... non-engineered weapons still pack a sufficient punch.
They don't. Hull reinforcement spam made lasers almost useless. Guess why the MC is the universal solution? Low distributor draw, multipurpose damage. But only when engineered. The bullet sponge is real and TTK went way up with vanilla gear.
in my experience the only thing that still reliably did damage was ramming. The rest was nerfed to near uselessness. Ammo-based weapons I had already classified too under near useless back then because of the hassle with reloading.
 
Of course if it was up to me all combat would start well outside visual range and consist of lobbing missiles and torpedoes at each other and watching the PDC and flak lightshow try and shoot them down, probably because I’ve watched too much of the Expanse. Of course, I’m fully aware that even if that was the case I’d still be terrible at it and fewer people would enjoy it 😂

It's a good game. But a different one. In the end, EVE is just that, for example.

They don't. Hull reinforcement spam made lasers almost useless. Guess why the MC is the universal solution? Low distributor draw, multipurpose damage. But only when engineered. The bullet sponge is real and TTK went way up with vanilla gear.
in my experience the only thing that still reliably did damage was ramming. The rest was nerfed to near uselessness. Ammo-based weapons I had already classified too under near useless back then because of the hassle with reloading.

I use a mix of weapons since launch. Pure laser setups at all times suffered from reduced damage against hull. So yes, of course my setups included things like cannons, multi-cannons or frag cannons, mostly depending on the speed and agility profile of the ship i was trying out.

And if reloading once every few hours is too much of a hassle, then yes, by all means you then have to limit yourself to lasers and suffer the low killing speed.

Sidenote: i even got the impression that there's a tier in NPCs, where lasers currently are sometimes MORE effective against their hull than they were before engineers came aorund. These NPCs have their hull and shields engineered the same way as we do it, when we even out our resists. But they are at G1 or G2 instead of full G5, which means that they still pay a price for the increase in kinetic and explosive resist on their hull: they give up a lot of the thermal resist. (Once the target is dangerous or above, their engineering actually seems to be high enough to offset this, though. )

Anyway, based on the fact that (as described about) i at some time took and take non-engineered weapons to battle and they perform well enough, i stick to my point of view: in terms of offense, engineers did not break the game. It's the crazy defense stacking, which NPCs still don't use to the same level as players, which is the real issue. And i am still convinced that if FD would put NPCs defense to just 80% of what players can achieve, the community would go crazy and we'd be drowning in rivers of tears, asking for defense to be nerfed.
 
Last edited:
It’s the whole ‘mid-20th century dogfights in space’ trope, which admittedly is pretty damn cool so I’ll let them off. With FA-off you can always pretend you’re flying a reimagined BSG Viper, which to me are some of best ‘dogfights in space’ on telly.

Of course if it was up to me all combat would start well outside visual range and consist of lobbing missiles and torpedoes at each other and watching the PDC and flak lightshow try and shoot them down, probably because I’ve watched too much of the Expanse. Of course, I’m fully aware that even if that was the case I’d still be terrible at it and fewer people would enjoy it 😂

I loved the Dread Empire's Fall book series, it had some realistic space combat scenes. Really vivid stuff. They would launch swarms of guided missiles, accelerate them to relativistic velocities, and hurl them at enemy fleets. Which would be tightly packed so their short-ranged particle laser point defense weapons had overlapping coverage. They would also use flights of nuclear missiles as countermeasures - creating big zones of high-energy particle clouds that would disable incoming missiles electronics etc etc.

There was no "dogfighting" due to G-forces but one of the main characters came up with a "starburst" maneuver where multiple ships would do an elaborate coordinated pre-set set of moves based on a mathematical formula. A real meta-breaker that was. Good stuff!
 
Hackmaster G12 focused long-range short-range-blaster fully-semi-automatic 420-no-scope rapid-fire with reverberating cascade Roman Candle with an underslung SLF hangar and a red dot sight. From coming in the top 98% of the first Odyssey CG reward, of course.
No bipod? How are we supposed to conveniently spawn camp?
 
Hackmaster G12 focused long-range short-range-blaster fully-semi-automatic 420-no-scope rapid-fire with reverberating cascade Roman Candle with an underslung SLF hangar and a red dot sight. From coming in the top 98% of the first Odyssey CG reward, of course.

How many open letters will it take to get that to save me participating in the CG?
 
I used to enjoy doing CZ in my CM4.

But then FD increased ship health in CZ to ridiculous levels due to how easy people in big ships could take them down making CZ combat in a small ship very frustrating. You can literally spend 10 or more minutes blasting away and still not take down the shields on an enemy.

Combat was at its best before all the HP inflating modules for hull and shield and engineering.
 
Combat was at its best before all the HP inflating modules for hull and shield and engineering.

Agreed, and I agree with the many that say Engineering should have been sidegrades or at least the power creep not be so excessive.

But CZs are fairly high level gameplay in ED, they are a pretty powerful BGS manipulation tool & good way to find high ranking NPCs, and I think it's understandable that FDev have made CZs hard enough that they cannot be easily done idly by relatively lightweight or multi-role builds - it takes commitment & that includes having appropriate equipment.

But they can still be done & a war effort contributed to by more or less any ship with weapons, just not as effectively. It helps that I like flying a Vette too of course ;)
 
But they can still be done & a war effort contributed to by more or less any ship with weapons, just not as effectively. It helps that I like flying a Vette too of course ;)

Lucky you. For many years, the Imperial Courier was my combat ship of choice. Till defense inflation meant that only very few quite specialized setups could still kill and even they took way too long to still feel rewarding. So i kind of begrudingly migrated to a medium ship.

Which indeed is one factor why i dislike the defense stacking so much: it effectively eliminated the kind of ships which i found most interesting to fly (small, agile but very vulnerable when you get caught) from combat gameplay.
 
Back
Top Bottom