Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 81415161718
Results 256 to 267 of 267

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: New Limpets and Synthesis Recipes Discussion

  1. #256
    Originally Posted by Cmdr Eagleboy View Post (Source)
    I would welcome that as well. I understand why Sandro and co might be very careful of doing that. Still...would be a quite refreshing change.
    Originally Posted by Teh Smoo View Post (Source)
    I don't really get it. If the hull and module protection was one-each, and shield boosters allowed two each, wouldn't that fix most of it right there? Apply it to NPCs as well, ofc.

    This seems to me, coming in very recently, like the kind of thing that REALLY should have gotten noticed and pre-balanced. Before people took a ship with 8 utility slots, overcharged the PP, and got a mega-shield, and stuck bulkheads in every single utility slot.

    But now, since everyone is used to it, any change is going to be painful. As opposed to introducing things in a nerfed state, and buffing them up to appropriate levels in response to real usage. In a controlled pattern.
    Originally Posted by SushiCW View Post (Source)
    IMO it's fine to be able to add multiples... but the returns need to be diminishing, not linear (or worse) multiplicative.

    But like you said, *any* change resulting in the necessary nerf is going to be painful and difficult to manage.
    I think that FDev should just do the changes that they think are best and let us get on with it. I know that it will mean that some of my engineered upgrades will become useless, but if it makes the game better overall, I am fine with it. Also I may be able to put those upgrades in different ships.

    Boosters also shouldn't give a percentage increase, but a fixed amount. I never understood why an A rated booster would give you more shield points, just because you have bigger shields in the first place. None of that makes any sense to me. SCB's on the other hand can be bigger depending on compartment size, so at the moment SCB's make more sense then Shield Boosters.

    I really dislike MRP's. This should have been rolled into another module like the bulkheads, which are there to protect your internals. Infact why would putting loads of stuff within your cargo area improve your hull (HRP's).

    None of it makes much sense at the moment and could do with a complete revision in my view.

  2. #257
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Yes. Twice.
    The reasons behind pulling both back would interest me a lot. The feedback when you made diminishing returns on heavy duty boosters and in return buffed base shielding of the bigger ships was overwhelmingly positive. I recall very few voices who absolutely wanted to cling to their 5-9kMJ shield monsters.

    The second try with diminishing returns without buffs was not so well received, but still more positively than negatively.


  3. #258
    I think that synthesis is all over the place and badly thought out.

    1. Why can SRVs be repaired, but not refuelled in the ship? It makes no sense. Refuelling should happen on board from the ship's fuel tanks. Synthesis would provide raw materials for SRV repair. This means that you can run out of fuel on the surface and get stranded, but also you can run out of materials and be unable to deploy a functional SRV. A good pilot knows about ship management.
    2. Both ship and SRV should be subject to gradual wear and tear, expressed in increased risk of random malfunctions, reduced module performance and reduced module reboot restoration. This can be prevented by regular maintenance by automatic field maintenance unit and repair limpet supplied with synthesis materials, but in the very long term (e.g. six to twelve months, depending on the strains that the ship is habitually subject to --regular combat: three to six months; careful exploration flying: twelve months) a dockside service is required.
    3. Don't make it possible to synthesise everything. Life support and heat sinks, sure, but complex parts require visiting stations or outposts. There is no need to synthesise ammunition or chaff --most combat pilots operate in the bubble, where there are plenty of stations and outposts for resupply.
    4. Synthesis materials should plausibly reflect what can be manufactured from them. ED prides itself on having a (reasonably) scientifically correct universe; synthesis should reflect that also.

    ED should not just be pew-pew; it should have an element of strategy, management, planning and problem solving in it. Players can favour their preferred elements through their play: bounty hunters and pirates will be mostly in the bubble, so can concentrate on combat and strategic ship tuning while docking at stations/outposts will take care of keeping the ship in tip-top shape. Traders and miners can concentrate on making profits while doing the same. Explorers will be able to push back the outer limits of their range through careful system management and surveying and sourcing materials.

    After all, long-range exploration should convey a real sense of being Out There, in the Big Black, all on your own. The vast distances of the ED galaxy do that beautifully, but if you can basically whip up anything you need wherever you are, and your ship can magically carry on forever, those distances become pretty meaningless. No challenge, no triumph, no satisfaction.
    I aim to misbehave.

  4. #259
    Concerning the synthesis timer and interruption mechanic, some observations from myself and Cmdr Harry Potter in another thread:

    Originally Posted by Truesilver View Post (Source)
    About synthesis interruption, the latest from Sandro was:



    (I think 'cannon' was a typo, meaning 'kinetic.')


    I'm afraid that a 2 second timer wouldn't appear to have much effect upon FAS / FdL etc spamming basic reloads.

    My concern was that the 30 second timer on everything, plus instant interruption, as was in place at the end of Beta 2.4, would have left a big ship unable to reload, ever ... against mediums with effectively infinite ammo.

    But with a 2 second timer it's basically business as usual, on basic reloads.

    All that said, Sandro does say that revisions might be made after this goes Live.

    I suppose one solution could be a 30 second timer on everything, but do away with the whole interruption mechanic. That stops continuous fire while allowing ships of every size and speed the same chance to reload.
    Originally Posted by besieger View Post (Source)
    Yes I 100% agree a blanket 30sec timer for reloads regardless to damage, that way there is some tact to starting the reload as you run out of ammo, timing it well will ensure you are always running with ammo and punish those who cannot follow the flow of the battle, while allowing big ships to reload.
    I think that consideration should be given to doing away with the interruption mechanic albeit whilst going back up to a 30 second blanket delay as above.
    Federal Vigilante PvP Executioner Friend and Supporter of Adle's Armada

  5. #260
    Originally Posted by Truesilver View Post (Source)
    Concerning the synthesis timer and interruption mechanic, some observations from myself and Cmdr Harry Potter in another thread:

    I think that consideration should be given to doing away with the interruption mechanic albeit whilst going back up to a 30 second blanket delay as above.
    I'm sure I replied to this in another thread... I guess there are multiple on similar lines?

    Anyway, the thing with that is, mostly the entire reason the interruption mechanic/timer system was even brought up, was because people saw you could make "infinite" heat sinks, allowing for some mad crazy silent running rail boats (etc etc) essentially making any heat related mechanics fairly obsolete.

    Without making it (near) impossible to synth heat sinks -in combat- it avoids the initial point of making any of these synth changes.

  6. #261
    Originally Posted by Novo Mundus View Post (Source)
    the thing with that is, mostly the entire reason the interruption mechanic/timer system was even brought up, was because people saw you could make "infinite" heat sinks, allowing for some mad crazy silent running rail boats (etc etc) essentially making any heat related mechanics fairly obsolete.

    Without making it (near) impossible to synth heat sinks -in combat- it avoids the initial point of making any of these synth changes.
    But silent running has almost zero relevance to PvP combat, for the reasons that I recently set out here ...

    Originally Posted by Truesilver View Post (Source)
    Well, on Sandro's current proposal, the shortest heat sink timer is 20 seconds, which is instantly reset by taking any weapon fire to shield or hull.

    But added to which, running quickly through the effect of Silent Running on each weapon type:

    1. Fixed weapons: no effect at all. Upon the Silent Runner firing, his ship and all his subsystems are subject to full targeting, including where applicable lead indicator, by enemy plus entire wing.

    2. Gimballed weapons: as above, except that gimbal lock may be of poor quality due to low temperature. Solution is emissive.

    3. Missiles: lock can be infinitely prevented by silent running. Again, solution is emissive.

    4. Turrets: completely unaffected.

    5. Mines: completely unaffected.

    6. Frags/ramming: completely unaffected.

    In short, silent running has literally no relevance to PvP except to missiles and, to a far lesser degree, gimbals, which effect can be completely and permanently negated by fitting one emissive weapon.

    I honestly don't think we need to worry too much about Silent Running, nowadays!
    ... and even less relevance to PvE combat, because NPC's ignore it.

    I don't understand what would be broken about someone being able to synthesise a heat sink reload, uninterrupted, after a 30 second delay.
    Federal Vigilante PvP Executioner Friend and Supporter of Adle's Armada

  7. #262
    Originally Posted by Truesilver View Post (Source)

    ... and even less relevance to PvE combat, because NPC's ignore it.

    Actually... that's not true, I've used it against NPCs multiple times. I possibly have a video of me using it to evade the cops scanning me while I scooped a bunch of pirated cargo, eventually running out of heat sinks, and so having to leave without all my cargo

    I mean... personally I'd be fine with being able to stay running silent in that situation.


    Aaanyway, don't heat sinks allow you to use SCB's? And if you have a megatonne of heat sinks, doesn't it mean you can fill a ship with a megatonne of SCB's and have an even worse level of hit points? I know, there is a counter using one specific rail gun effect, sure, but... I'm not sure that solves the whole SCB thing.

    That's kind of what I meant by the (etc etc) part of - "Silent running rail boats (etc etc)" but I should have been more clear especially on the SCB thing.

    The silent running/SCB/infini heat sink thing is basically what prompted this entire "Let's not allow heat sink synth in combat" thing.

    Leaving silent running aside, as I have no honest clue about silent running in PVP (it was brought up somewhere, so I thought it was a thing), except for me using it to escape wings of crazies a bunch of times the SCB thing seems relevant. Heat sinks became essential to SCB use, because people were concerned with the vast amount of SCB use available to ships with a lot of slots for them (we now have military slots for them, too, which we didn't then) so making "infinite" heat sinks available, could possibly damage, or reverse that attempt to make them less crazy, right? or am I missing something...

  8. #263
    Originally Posted by Novo Mundus View Post (Source)
    Actually... that's not true, I've used it against NPCs multiple times. I possibly have a video of me using it to evade the cops scanning me while I scooped a bunch of pirated cargo, eventually running out of heat sinks, and so having to leave without all my cargo

    I mean... personally I'd be fine with being able to stay running silent in that situation.

    Aaanyway, don't heat sinks allow you to use SCB's? And if you have a megatonne of heat sinks, doesn't it mean you can fill a ship with a megatonne of SCB's and have an even worse level of hit points? I know, there is a counter using one specific rail gun effect, sure, but... I'm not sure that solves the whole SCB thing.

    That's kind of what I meant by the (etc etc) part of - "Silent running rail boats (etc etc)" but I should have been more clear especially on the SCB thing.

    The silent running/SCB/infini heat sink thing is basically what prompted this entire "Let's not allow heat sink synth in combat" thing.

    Leaving silent running aside, as I have no honest clue about silent running in PVP (it was brought up somewhere, so I thought it was a thing), except for me using it to escape wings of crazies a bunch of times the SCB thing seems relevant. Heat sinks became essential to SCB use, because people were concerned with the vast amount of SCB use available to ships with a lot of slots for them (we now have military slots for them, too, which we didn't then) so making "infinite" heat sinks available, could possibly damage, or reverse that attempt to make them less crazy, right? or am I missing something...
    About NPC's, I meant that they ignore SR when shooting at you. About scanning you / smuggling etc I appreciate that it may be (and should be) different.

    About SCB's, I can see that infinite sinks might provide slightly greater SCB reserve than now ... but most PvP builds are already at more or less optimal SCB/HRP/MRP balance under the existing arrangements. Infinite sinks would permit some ships to run with one heat sink launcher rather than two, I would accept (hence slightly increasing base shield strength if a booster was fitted instead) but I doubt it would actually increase the number of SCB's fitted. Double-banking is perfectly normal as it is. Post-2.1, a paper-hull, full SCB build is simply too vulnerable to phasing, feedback cascade and (if shield drops) death.

    The only other concern I can think of is over infinite cooling permitting chain-firing of very hot weapons, most obviously 5 x rails as you allude to. I accept that that would be OP and should be prevented ... but I have to say that as the firer would need to use a sink once every volley or couple of volleys, and max sink ammo is 4, I think that the proposed 30 second delay on restocking would effectively make infini-chain-fire impossible.
    Federal Vigilante PvP Executioner Friend and Supporter of Adle's Armada

  9. #264
    Hello!

    I know I'm a bit late to the party, but I've just managed to bring all the reasons I disagreed with FD's decisions about HS and chaff synthesis in a not-too-WOT format, and I thought that, maybe, my 2 cents would be worth more in the official thread...

    In another thread, Sandro declared that HS synth was deliberately imposed manufactured mats by the ED design team so as to prevent explorers from being entirely self-sufficient. In my humble opinion, this choice was illogical, inconsistent, destructive, unimmersive and improductive, and actually hurt everyone targeted in the process. Here's why :


    FD recognized that FSD-ing between two red giants was an arbitrarily dangerous event - That's why they went out of their way to entirely remove that possibility with this patch. The sad part is that FD could have kept the threat-and-thrill element of such events - while offering us to mitigate it with readily available HS synth, but instead decided to neuter the tool and remove the threat.

    In the end, exploration was made even less exciting. That's the worst part, IMO. One of the very few somewhat surprising / thrilling / dangerous parts of exploration is just entirely gone now.

    And for what? So that we'd no longer need Heat Sinks at all for exploration? Indeed, without the one-in-a-hundred dual-star jump encounter, Heatsinks are quite useless for explorers... So can anyone explain to me why putting a manufactured mats requirement on a now useless item was in any way a means to prevent explorers from being self-sufficient? If self-sufficience is not desirable, why are AFMU refills and limpet synthesis available from moon-pebbles? This makes no sense. Exploration balance cannot be the reason for such a decision.

    So there's the other side of it... Combat balance. In beta 1, a commander who ground their way to get hundreds of mats could essentially run a 0% heat ship 100% of the time. It's like FD thought we'd feel remorse for having to kill harmless trading ships for refills and that would somehow balance the sheer overpoweredness of it... Which is insane. They could not ignore how eagerly some players would fill their material storage to the brim, and that manufactured mats would never constitute a proper balance factor. So it's not for combat balance either. I'd much rater believe they weren't done coding the synth timers or whatever. In the end, they did the right thing about that, and added a timer on synthesis, but they've deicided to keep manufactured mats as a requirement regardless...

    But why?

    HS mats can no longer be a balance factor for exploration self-sufficience, they don't matter for combat balance either, while other modules that are absolutely crucial to long-distance exploration are absolutely self-sufficient. All throughout, HS and chaff recipes seem to be virulently inconsistent just for the sake of it : They don't make sense mechanically because much more complex items can be synthesized from simpler materials, which in turn makes them inconsistent and ultimately unimmersive. Equally unimmersive is the fact that our ships synth modules can create items that are above factory-quality from bloody moon-pebbles will all other types of items. For explorers, this state of affairs led to the actual loss of two gameplay elements : Heatsinks themselves, and dual-star jumps, leading to worse gameplay overall.


    I mean... There is litterally nothing consistent about FD's decisions on this matter. It's like every single step was a non-sequitur. Perhaps I'm missing something... I hope I am.


    Respectfully FD, please... Just make all basic (plus all jump boost and life-support) synth recipes available from rocks, and all medium and advanced ones require increasingly rare manufactured mats... Everybody's problems would be fixed, everything would be consistent, and since the current state of affairs fixes or balances nothing at all, it would be a 100% improvement to the game!

  10. #265
    Originally Posted by Allchemyst View Post (Source)
    Hello!

    I know I'm a bit late to the party, but I've just managed to bring all the reasons I disagreed with FD's decisions about HS and chaff synthesis in a not-too-WOT format, and I thought that, maybe, my 2 cents would be worth more in the official thread...

    In another thread, Sandro declared that HS synth was deliberately imposed manufactured mats by the ED design team so as to prevent explorers from being entirely self-sufficient. In my humble opinion, this choice was illogical, inconsistent, destructive, unimmersive and improductive, and actually hurt everyone targeted in the process. Here's why :


    FD recognized that FSD-ing between two red giants was an arbitrarily dangerous event - That's why they went out of their way to entirely remove that possibility with this patch. The sad part is that FD could have kept the threat-and-thrill element of such events - while offering us to mitigate it with readily available HS synth, but instead decided to neuter the tool and remove the threat.

    In the end, exploration was made even less exciting. That's the worst part, IMO. One of the very few somewhat surprising / thrilling / dangerous parts of exploration is just entirely gone now.

    And for what? So that we'd no longer need Heat Sinks at all for exploration? Indeed, without the one-in-a-hundred dual-star jump encounter, Heatsinks are quite useless for explorers... So can anyone explain to me why putting a manufactured mats requirement on a now useless item was in any way a means to prevent explorers from being self-sufficient? If self-sufficience is not desirable, why are AFMU refills and limpet synthesis available from moon-pebbles? This makes no sense. Exploration balance cannot be the reason for such a decision.

    So there's the other side of it... Combat balance. In beta 1, a commander who ground their way to get hundreds of mats could essentially run a 0% heat ship 100% of the time. It's like FD thought we'd feel remorse for having to kill harmless trading ships for refills and that would somehow balance the sheer overpoweredness of it... Which is insane. They could not ignore how eagerly some players would fill their material storage to the brim, and that manufactured mats would never constitute a proper balance factor. So it's not for combat balance either. I'd much rater believe they weren't done coding the synth timers or whatever. In the end, they did the right thing about that, and added a timer on synthesis, but they've deicided to keep manufactured mats as a requirement regardless...

    But why?

    HS mats can no longer be a balance factor for exploration self-sufficience, they don't matter for combat balance either, while other modules that are absolutely crucial to long-distance exploration are absolutely self-sufficient. All throughout, HS and chaff recipes seem to be virulently inconsistent just for the sake of it : They don't make sense mechanically because much more complex items can be synthesized from simpler materials, which in turn makes them inconsistent and ultimately unimmersive. Equally unimmersive is the fact that our ships synth modules can create items that are above factory-quality from bloody moon-pebbles will all other types of items. For explorers, this state of affairs led to the actual loss of two gameplay elements : Heatsinks themselves, and dual-star jumps, leading to worse gameplay overall.


    I mean... There is litterally nothing consistent about FD's decisions on this matter. It's like every single step was a non-sequitur. Perhaps I'm missing something... I hope I am.


    Respectfully FD, please... Just make all basic (plus all jump boost and life-support) synth recipes available from rocks, and all medium and advanced ones require increasingly rare manufactured mats... Everybody's problems would be fixed, everything would be consistent, and since the current state of affairs fixes or balances nothing at all, it would be a 100% improvement to the game!
    I agree, it doesn't make sense. And also I want the odd risk when jumping into unknown systems that I may get damage from getting too close to a binary, having to use heat sinks, then having to look for materials to replensish the heat sinks. Looks like FDev just took away a load of possible gameplay for explorers by making it even easier then what it already is. I really dislike the new change that dropped us some distance away from the binary stars.

    I love those parts when you have been exploring for a few days, nice and serene, jump to the next system, you see yourself going through a star, heat rising, your adrenaline kicks in, maybe a bit of panic. That is what makes it great. I don't want an easy mode.

    Whats next, a giant balloon deploys when we try to land on a high g planet so that can't kill us either.

  11. #266
    Originally Posted by Allchemyst View Post (Source)
    FD . . . instead decided to neuter the tool and remove the threat.
    Pretty much their MO at this point and very frustrating. Elite is a mile wide and an inch deep, so clearly the solution is to drain water from the pool.

  12. #267
    Originally Posted by Allchemyst View Post (Source)
    Hello!

    I know I'm a bit late to the party, but I've just managed to bring all the reasons I disagreed with FD's decisions about HS and chaff synthesis in a not-too-WOT format, and I thought that, maybe, my 2 cents would be worth more in the official thread...

    In another thread, Sandro declared that HS synth was deliberately imposed manufactured mats by the ED design team so as to prevent explorers from being entirely self-sufficient. In my humble opinion, this choice was illogical, inconsistent, destructive, unimmersive and improductive, and actually hurt everyone targeted in the process. Here's why :


    FD recognized that FSD-ing between two red giants was an arbitrarily dangerous event - That's why they went out of their way to entirely remove that possibility with this patch. The sad part is that FD could have kept the threat-and-thrill element of such events - while offering us to mitigate it with readily available HS synth, but instead decided to neuter the tool and remove the threat.

    In the end, exploration was made even less exciting. That's the worst part, IMO. One of the very few somewhat surprising / thrilling / dangerous parts of exploration is just entirely gone now.

    And for what? So that we'd no longer need Heat Sinks at all for exploration? Indeed, without the one-in-a-hundred dual-star jump encounter, Heatsinks are quite useless for explorers... So can anyone explain to me why putting a manufactured mats requirement on a now useless item was in any way a means to prevent explorers from being self-sufficient? If self-sufficience is not desirable, why are AFMU refills and limpet synthesis available from moon-pebbles? This makes no sense. Exploration balance cannot be the reason for such a decision.

    So there's the other side of it... Combat balance. In beta 1, a commander who ground their way to get hundreds of mats could essentially run a 0% heat ship 100% of the time. It's like FD thought we'd feel remorse for having to kill harmless trading ships for refills and that would somehow balance the sheer overpoweredness of it... Which is insane. They could not ignore how eagerly some players would fill their material storage to the brim, and that manufactured mats would never constitute a proper balance factor. So it's not for combat balance either. I'd much rater believe they weren't done coding the synth timers or whatever. In the end, they did the right thing about that, and added a timer on synthesis, but they've deicided to keep manufactured mats as a requirement regardless...

    But why?

    HS mats can no longer be a balance factor for exploration self-sufficience, they don't matter for combat balance either, while other modules that are absolutely crucial to long-distance exploration are absolutely self-sufficient. All throughout, HS and chaff recipes seem to be virulently inconsistent just for the sake of it : They don't make sense mechanically because much more complex items can be synthesized from simpler materials, which in turn makes them inconsistent and ultimately unimmersive. Equally unimmersive is the fact that our ships synth modules can create items that are above factory-quality from bloody moon-pebbles will all other types of items. For explorers, this state of affairs led to the actual loss of two gameplay elements : Heatsinks themselves, and dual-star jumps, leading to worse gameplay overall.


    I mean... There is litterally nothing consistent about FD's decisions on this matter. It's like every single step was a non-sequitur. Perhaps I'm missing something... I hope I am.


    Respectfully FD, please... Just make all basic (plus all jump boost and life-support) synth recipes available from rocks, and all medium and advanced ones require increasingly rare manufactured mats... Everybody's problems would be fixed, everything would be consistent, and since the current state of affairs fixes or balances nothing at all, it would be a 100% improvement to the game!
    I totally agree with your assessment. FD's game design decisions make no sense whatsoever.
    I aim to misbehave.

Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 81415161718