Page 108 of 108 FirstFirst ... 98104105106107108
Results 1,606 to 1,609 of 1609

Thread: Why PvP is not popular in Elite Dangerous?

  1. #1606
    Originally Posted by Truesilver View Post (Source)
    You are definitely right. I've read your post twice and agree with every word of it.

    The reality though is that Frontier have decided to work towards a solution that leaves the Solo/PG PvE guys unaffected (even though some, I know, would actually agree with changes - but many would not).

    I agree that this design decision means that the shield by-passes that will hit Open will have some strange consequences. But I think Frontier's position is clear. I occasionally put a lot of personal capital into trying to change balance issues affecting PvP but I'm not going to try to change this one. I can see it would be futile.
    Yeah, I see your point. It probably is futile since Fdev seems set in their ways on this issue. I guess it's just kindof a "Do not go gentle into the night" thing with me.

    On the whole solo/pve issue though, they really don't have a leg to stand on. This is coming from someone who was dedicated to solo and pve until recently when I decided I wanted more of a challenge, and even then I spend 90% of my time in solo, so I'm not just some evil pvper wanting to trample other people's game experience. The imbalance between player and npc ships is so massive right now that even if players lost half their shield overnight they would still be able to defeat elite big 3 npcs without a problem. My mining cutter, with 5A G4 thermal resistance prismatics, 7 average shied booster, an unengineered huge MC, two turreted efficient pulse laser and a SLF can take out elite npc bounty hunters and pirates in FDLs and Condas without losing a ring of shield with me flying the fighter and my npc flying the mother ship. And I am a pretty bad SLF pilot. I could EASILY quadruple my effective shields if I went for a combat build and maxed out everything with 3.0 rolls. That's not even mentioning the increase I could get in DPS, which could easily be doubled by just equipping a better stock loadout, not to mention the extra 75% I would get from g5 engineering. So even if you nerfed engineered shields by a factor of 4, npcs still wouldn't be a threat to a halfway competent player that was flying a ship with proper shielding.

    The only reasons for players to want such an insane difference in npc and player effectiveness are either they want to be able to kill everything with no effort or skill, or to make up for cheats the npcs use that makes avoiding them impossible. The first is not a valid reason and the second could be remedied by simply removing those cheats (ie npcs don't spawn when you drop out on a random location on a ring, pirates and bounty hunters won't spawn pre-targeting you, ect.)

    I don't think many of the people against nerfing super shield are arguing from the second perspective though. I think it just comes down to the fact that a certain subset of players don't want any challenge at all. They want npcs to be nothing more than moving targets for them to shoot at for credits. It's sad that frontier is caving to them.

  2. #1607
    Originally Posted by Han_Zen View Post (Source)
    The majority of PvE players that aren't all that focused on combat, didn't care either way.
    That is not entirely true, while in a combat context I think an "effective" shield strength (according to Coriolis) of approx. 3k (Engineered 1.5k Boosted Bi-Weave with good resistances) is borderline OP (wrt the bigger ships I can see good reason for people in a non-combat context wanting/needing 3+k of absolute shields for high-G planetary landings in those ships. A c. 1.5k absolute (c. 3k effective) shield strength big ship can take 40% or more shield damage in lower end High-G planetary landing circumstances.

    It is a myth that shields only matter in a combat context.

  3. #1608
    @Darty
    My guess these people you're talking about who don't want a challenge are often those who care way too much about combat rank instead of combat skill. As if ranks in Elite would mean something (it does, but in a very insignificant way at best). Maybe too many players coming from modern MMOs identifying the ranks as something they seem to know from the 'progression' aspect of these games, something that is barely more than an illusion in ED. But how would they know?

  4. #1609
    Originally Posted by rlsg View Post (Source)
    That is not entirely true, while in a combat context I think an "effective" shield strength (according to Coriolis) of approx. 3k (Engineered 1.5k Boosted Bi-Weave with good resistances) is borderline OP (wrt the bigger ships I can see good reason for people in a non-combat context wanting/needing 3+k of absolute shields for high-G planetary landings in those ships. A c. 1.5k absolute (c. 3k effective) shield strength big ship can take 40% or more shield damage in lower end High-G planetary landing circumstances.

    It is a myth that shields only matter in a combat context.
    Sure, but those builds were hardly hurt by the suggested nerf to SBs.
    Builds with three or fewer boosters didn’t lose much.

    Those that complained and had the changes stoped, ran 6-8 boosters.