Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 139

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: Synthesis 30 second delay and damage interruption removes reloading during combat

  1. #61
    Originally Posted by Alexander the Grape View Post (Source)
    Ammo is consistently a major issue..
    Grape, on point as always. This really is the concern. Frontier, in fundamentally shifting archetype capabilities (giving kinetic weapons thermal impact, which in of itself makes it a more useful weapon) has front-loaded ammo as being the limiting factor.

    However, if the amount of ammo, is now well below that expected to be expended to deal with a grade 3 or above engineered shield, never mind the booster situation, then quite unsurprisingly, the inflation in shield strength, has not been done in sympathy with ammunition counts. Sure, limit kinetic weapons, that's fine; but synthesis is a now a common occurrence; this is just dragging on conflict.

    So either the endless shields situation, needs to see a change so it's more a shield+hull+resistance deal, where there's a broader balance so shields aren't the deciding factor alone, or bullet count needs to match.

    You know, I think endlessly going up, isn't working (surprise, right? no not really..) despite people claiming we need more survivability, for "reasons". We all know it's not working. Even Frontier knows it's not working; shields need to come back down, hull needs to shift to balance that. We are over reliant on shields, this isn't a good thing. Said balance between shields and armour archetypes need a fundamental shift back in favour of hull. Shields are cheap, hull isn't; this is always going to encourage shield over hull because why wouldn't anyone?

    Problem is, right now people will just want the timer to come down because that's their immediate problem, not the actual cause. We sort of can't win. I think Frontier probably needs some convincing that ammo counts are fine, in principle, but were considered well before shield inflation due to booster modification, SCB adding free MJ and so on. Bumping ammo up by, say, 30% or so, something like that? Keep the reload count the same as this is the achilles heal projectile weapons have. Reloading. You can modify that, but you can't escape it. And it's an important aspect.

    Alternatively, another module that can actually carry additional rounds; but I hate the existing module proliferation, so that's not really my go-to option. It's probably time to consider that even the smallest ship is actually gigantic and could easily stow 50,000 rounds or more without really any issue.

    Ammo counts are based on a point in time, that we're no-longer at, and haven't been in some time; a combination of shield changes with hull being adjusted (some of the piercing damage is still off the chart and really broken) combined with a small buff to ammo counts.

    Synthesis should be that rare deadlock breaker, not the de-facto outcome. It's now the latter. I'm not saying endless ammo, either, just something more in line with where we are, now.

  2. #62
    Originally Posted by clinton View Post (Source)
    TThere's plenty of simple solutions to the excessive PvP lengths which have already been discussed, which to summerise involve simply applying diminishing returns to the combination of SYS pips, shield resistance and booster resistance.
    Before engineering? Sure. Horse has bolted; no point trying to starve SYS when you can get hysterical recharge rates that make this pretty much redundant. Solution is to up the ammo count, in conjunction with lowering shield strength, and increasing hull resistance so there's a better balance point.

    Engineering makes PIP changes irrelevant, worse with multi-crew there's now extra pips so, super super redundant thinking. You can run all fixed or gimbals, and invite a m8 over, just so you have an extra pip. Changes need to consider what's in the game, and the fact that the game as moved on a lot; ideas from two years ago, aren't automatically relevant now.

    --

    Classic example is the humble trader, who is just trashed in short order because piercing damage is off the charts and even with type-9 carrying more base armour than Cutter, fer cryin' out loud, it's still essential paper in light of piercing damage values. If hull was far far more relevant, then even if shields drop, trader is now watching a decent percentage of damage bounce off the hull because the hull of a trade boat is probably it's best asset.

    This concept has been fundamentally broken by engineering and weapon damage inflation due to shield inflation and has lead to really disparate outcomes. It's all really distorted. It needs to change, imho, it just needs to change.

  3. #63
    Originally Posted by Robert Maynard View Post (Source)
    Why should a ship equipped with a peashooter not run out of ammunition when taking on a well defended target?
    Because when the pea-shooter was created, it was created when it was shooting at a cloth-wearing target and it had about enough ammo to do the job, with a little bit left over. Now, we have a pea-shooter that can send super-heated rounds downrange, with pretty crazy stats, only not at a cloth-wearing target. On no.

    It's now a tank with advanced multi-layer composite armour that essentially requires many many many many many peas to make a dent; however once the dent is made, those super-heated peas just wreak the internals. This is, literally, where we are. Pea-shooters than send lol-so-crazytm peas down range, but because of escalation, they now have to pass through Mt Everest first.

    Here's the thing; Frontier elected to make pea-shooters a better choice, and then backed that up with synthesis, rather than just rebalance the crazy levels of defense huge shields offer, which have only, really ever, gone up. Perhaps the approach would have been to make thermal a better choice, combined with kinetic, and bump round counts so all three (along with synthesis as a fall back) offer more options; so they all have actual value.

    The benefits of hindsight, perhaps?

    Either way, the balance is out, imho. So rather than more escalation, I'd prefer to see shields reduce in capability, armour massively improved so it's closer to a 60/40 split (so that shields are super useful, but not the literal damage on/off switch they are now) and ammo counts are bumped given the amount of resistance and defensive capability that can be built. The game has changed, ammo counts haven't.

    Because then it becomes a game of rock, paper, scissors again; not the rock, paper, shotgun we have now. Synthesis is just masking the real issues here.

    Do you know what this means for PVE? They can still camp out for hours because of increased ammo count, they just can't tank wings of Anaconda any more on shields alone. Conversely, the trader's natural advantage of armour actually pays off, because even if the shields drop, the rebalance of thermal/ kinetic combined with far better effectiveness of armour means they can tank a fair bit whilst expediting a relocation to a more advantageous location (aka the brave sir robin).

    Synthesis has become a crutch. It's the thing we all inherently know at this point. But it's a crutch because it works around the issues. To me, the balance is out. I think Frontier need to take another stab at it, and be a bit more forceful in ensuring it passes testing. I'd like to see the same closed/ open beta method used now; means a broad range of people can see the changes, which removes a lot of FUD and garbage arguments that lead to changes, based on little more than theorycrafting.

    The previous shield changes would have reduced some of the reliance on synthesis, and would have been a start at addressing some of the balance; the closed beta essentially killed any chance because a huge amount of panic spread based on assumed outcomes.

    --

    Lastly? I suspect Frontier is going to have a much better product with 2.4 launch because of the closed/ open beta cycle. I think it's actually been an exceptional beta with a lot of healthy debate (versus panic alone) and that's a credit to all involved. The larger exposure has caught some broader issues and the Powerplay engagement within the PF Bounty is a testament to what happens with open, honest dialog. It's good. I hope we see more of that.

  4. #64
    As far as I could see, the reason why FD were reluctant to nerfbat shields down to hell (which, I agree, would be a necessary change anyway - please don't forget that as you go along) was that the community has sunk so many hours grinding for SB rolls that simply making half of them useless would cause a torrent of raw hatred that'd melt the servers... And understandably so, because players are not guilty of trying to optimize their chances within a system whose development is outside their will. The devs didn't think to check what would be the consequences of 8X boosters on a prismatic cutter with all G5 rolls with like 6 SCBs. Worse, perhaps, the functionally necessary nature of engineering, mixed with how much of a painful soul grinder it is... Making all that "Work" - because that was really work - useless and taking it away... The blood, really, would be on their hands.

    That led me to think, simply and purely, that to avoid the impending "disaster", FD should find a way to compensate the boring, overpowered but painfully hard-worked-for mechanic with another cool feature that's not game-breaking :

    Let's keep all mod and booster effects the same, but let's also put a 150 or 200% hard cap on shields. Make it so SBs increase the time before shields start recharging and regenerating by a greater margin. However, let's take and give : Make it so the "lost" purcentage of shields, whatever % was beyond the cap, is applied as a boost to shield regeneration. If your Cutters's 8X SB god shields were 800% stronger, they're back to 200% max, but one minute after the last hit taken, they kick off recharging 600% faster.

    This would, of course, be modulated by systems distributor capacity (So never actually violently overpowered, but would make systems tweaked dist mods more interesting... or actually relevant)

    It would also have the effect of simply not making "any number of boosters" beyond 3-4 on a ship a pure waste of 20 hours, 35 rolls and 250 materials by giving them a different edge.

    PVE people who just wanna grind dat RES would have "some" difficulty back, but their shields would regen so much faster it wouldn't alter their experience much, given they would be able to engage in each new fight with full shields.

    In my opinion, everyone would win, and FD could move on... But they have to make it dynamic and related to the amount of boost beyond the cap, not just a "flat" (and all too humble) buff like last time.

    Since there are a few PVP highlords in here, and many more involved players, I'm interested to know how'd that fly with them?


    While we're at it, we could also tackle the issue of rampaging hull point inflation, and to compensate for the increased shield recharge window :

    FD has toyed in the last beta with making hull hardness more relevant and tiered between ship sizes. This could be an interesting way to take away a lot of useless Hp. How? Well, Hull reinforcements reinforce hull, not the ship's interior... So...

    Let's make all hull reinforcements/packs/mods increase hull hardness instead of HP. Ships would still gain increased survivability from the packs, but only against certain weapons (making cannons, among others, more relevant, and ammo all the more interesting). Lightweight to military hulls could still offer a range of HP pools because they represent the ship's whole structure, but the rest should all be hull hardness and resistances.


    Also... not wanting to start an entirely new thing but... How about adding more complex physics to the weapon hit model? Giving projectiles a chance to bounce off or be reflected based on the shooting angle and hull hardness might add an interesting dimension to weapons (Say, instead of making PEs ignore "resistances", which is weird and clunky, make them the only projectile weapon that can't ricochet off hull, etc.). The three ugly federal shoes would find an all new purpose, as their hull is clearly made to bounce forward-incoming projectiles. In the same vein, the 'Vette's advantage, through a very flat, angular design, would become more apparent as a purely military ship.


    And while we're at it : As combat would move more towards "hull tanking", "shielded" reinforcements could be made so the "shielded" module gets a mini-shield, that absorbs a small amount of damage before popping and can regenerate as well. That would mean the most "paranoïd" commanders out there would have a way of offsetting non-targeted random module damage (And that'd give a great reason for people to knock themselves out of that OC PP meta...).


    Adding small perks to some energy weapons to counteract their newfound hardened hull nemesis would be cool : Pip-dependant laser damage boosts and beam lasers that gain a damage % boost the longer they stay on target come to mind...



    Anyway, thanks for the read! What do y'all think?

  5. #65
    @Allchemyst lots of interesting ideas!

    I particularly like the idea of an ultra-buffed shield regen replacing a large chunk of the current shield health on the huger Mj vessels, provided as you say that the regen kicked in only after sufficient interval to mean you were out of immediate danger.

    More widely, though - and this certainly isn't meant as a criticism of yourself or any other poster in this thread - although we would all like Frontier to take steps to address hit point inflation ... I think the immediate point is what they should do about ammo / reloading for so long as hit points remain at current levels?

  6. #66
    Originally Posted by kofeyh View Post (Source)
    Synthesis has become a crutch. It's the thing we all inherently know at this point. But it's a crutch because it works around the issues. To me, the balance is out. I think Frontier need to take another stab at it, and be a bit more forceful in ensuring it passes testing. I'd like to see the same closed/ open beta method used now; means a broad range of people can see the changes, which removes a lot of FUD and garbage arguments that lead to changes, based on little more than theorycrafting.
    .
    I absolutely agree with that. Synthesis is a crutch and deserves do be nerfed. It should not be boosted again just to avoid tacking the actual problem. Sure ripping off this bandaid will hurt, but perhaps that's necessary to finally make FD understand and make changes to fight hitpoints inflation.
    .
    .
    Originally Posted by Allchemyst View Post (Source)
    [...]
    .
    There's several good ideas in there. I especially like the idea that engineered shield boosters would provide less raw "health", but would instead grant strongly improved shield regeneration after not taking damage for some time. This would indeed reduce "in combat" health, which is a big PvP problem. At the same time it would still give higher sustained survival for most PvE activities, so all players could profit from this.
    .
    I very much like this idea and hope that FD also considers and implements this.
    .
    .

  7. #67
    Originally Posted by kofeyh View Post (Source)
    Before engineering? Sure. Horse has bolted; no point trying to starve SYS when you can get hysterical recharge rates that make this pretty much redundant. Solution is to up the ammo count, in conjunction with lowering shield strength, and increasing hull resistance so there's a better balance point.

    Engineering makes PIP changes irrelevant, worse with multi-crew there's now extra pips so, super super redundant thinking. You can run all fixed or gimbals, and invite a m8 over, just so you have an extra pip. Changes need to consider what's in the game, and the fact that the game as moved on a lot; ideas from two years ago, aren't automatically relevant now.
    I don't know what you're talking about. Simply applying diminishing returns after SYS resistance is applied, not before, would half effective shield hit points and recharge rates for engineered ships. How is this not a vast improvement?

  8. #68
    Good. You're only supposed to reload between fights anyway. There's a reason why we have mods like high-cap.
    What people do now - min-maxxing doubleshot frag cannons and burning synth like weed - is just wrong.

  9. #69
    Originally Posted by Truesilver View Post (Source)
    @Allchemyst lots of interesting ideas!

    I particularly like the idea of an ultra-buffed shield regen replacing a large chunk of the current shield health on the huger Mj vessels, provided as you say that the regen kicked in only after sufficient interval to mean you were out of immediate danger.

    More widely, though - and this certainly isn't meant as a criticism of yourself or any other poster in this thread - although we would all like Frontier to take steps to address hit point inflation ... I think the immediate point is what they should do about ammo / reloading for so long as hit points remain at current levels?
    Glad you liked them!

    About the ammo issue, I'd say I agree, for now, a little fix is of the essence.

    But in your mind, how should FD arrange the fix?

    For an example, let's take the worst possible situation : Two cutters in a 1v1 fight. Both have like 18000 thermal and energy resist, with SCBs in droves...

    Assuming neither pilots die of old age before the combat comes to an end, Which projectile weapons should be able to fire almost non-stop during the (really too long) fight? What ammo multiplier should be applied?

    Which weapons should "still" be used only sparingly? What ammo multiplier do we give those?


    I mean, I'd very much enjoy having railguns whose ammo can last a 1v1 between PVP Cutters, but "some" might find it a bit over the top, I think...

  10. #70
    Originally Posted by Earth Ultimatum IV. View Post (Source)
    Good. You're only supposed to reload between fights anyway. There's a reason why we have mods like high-cap.
    What people do now - min-maxxing doubleshot frag cannons and burning synth like weed - is just wrong.
    There are some edge cases, for sure, but the majority of lasers and kinetic weapons have identical or similar DPS, DPE and (where applicable) ammo pools as they had in 2015.

    DPS, DPE and ammo pools that were designed for fighting ships with literally 10% of the effective hp of a 2017 build. Even with modding, we all know that the defensive power creep has outweighed the offensive by 5 to 10 times over.

    The fact is that no in-fight reloading simply makes a large chunk of the weapon set redundant in a 1v1. This seems very limiting to me.

  11. #71
    Originally Posted by Truesilver View Post (Source)
    I have just tested the new synthesis reload and interruption mechanics in Beta 2.4 Version 4. (They are in, although have not been included in any version of the Patch Notes.)

    I do not have the mats to test the new utility reloads (chaff and heatsinks).

    However I have tested kinetic weapon synthesis reload in basic, standard and premium versions.

    In every case the result is the same (no variation so far as I can see by weapon or grade of synthesis): synthesising ammunition takes 30 seconds.

    Furthermore, the synthesis is instantly reset to zero (without loss of materials) by taking any weapon fire (including to shields) within the 30 second window.

    In other words, it is now impossible to synthesise ammunition whilst in range of an enemy (unless perhaps one was flying a small ship with heroic levels of evasion, against a Cmdr armed with fixed weapons beyond his current level of ability).

    Ammo reserves have not been buffed and remain precisely the same as before.

    This removes reloading and hence weapons such as cannons and multis from 1v1 PvP, unless one is flying a ship with sufficient speed superiority to clear enemy range and maintain clearance, and is fighting a patient opponent willing to wait for 30 seconds whilst you are out of range, for as many reloads as it takes to finish the fight.

    In practice, I expect that 1v1's that already take 20 to 40 mins will now either be abandoned earlier or start to take 30 mins to 60 mins, being fought over a series of 'rounds' ... bi-weaves recharging whilst synthesis reloading is performed.

    If we move more towards laser-based builds (an existing trend already, admittedly) TTK will simply increase by the same if not a greater margin due to reduced DPE.

    Some reload weapons (most obviously plasma) that come with a high damage pool will obviously be less affected than (e.g.) cannons, the latter being effectively removed. And RIP the rapid fire Pacifier / Frag Cannon...?

    Sandro has suggested reducing the time delay for weapon (as opposed to utility) reloads:





    I would observe again that this might be fine for those of us who fly Couriers in PvP (we would be able to make good use of a short window, in a light build) but will be of absolutely no use to ships such as the Big 3. Synthesis is abolished 1v1, so far as they are concerned, because they take fire pretty much continuously.
    Sounds alright to me

  12. #72
    The 30 sec delay and interrupt is a sound mechanic and needs to exist. Imo, the rest of the game should be rebalanced so that thermal vs shields and kinetic vs hull is viable again in 1v1 without reloading.

  13. #73
    Originally Posted by Ziljan View Post (Source)
    The 30 sec delay and interrupt is a sound mechanic and needs to exist. Imo, the rest of the game should be rebalanced so that thermal vs shields and kinetic vs hull is viable again in 1v1 without reloading.
    .
    /sign
    .

  14. #74
    Originally Posted by Ziljan View Post (Source)
    The 30 sec delay and interrupt is a sound mechanic and needs to exist. Imo, the rest of the game should be rebalanced so that thermal vs shields and kinetic vs hull is viable again in 1v1 without reloading.
    Bingo. Ammo counts are based on two year old mechanics. The game certainly hasn't sat still (regardless of oversimplification) in that time and the amount of armour and shields, across strength, regen and resistance now, is considerably more than at launch.

    Delay is needed; turns synthesis into a tactical choice, not candy. But the ammo counts are now way out, if Frontier is going to mostly keep what we have. Arguably there are a ton of options around armour, resistance, damage types and shield types (less shields, that regen much faster might be part of the cure) would all be good starting points.

    The game ostensibly massively rewards flying giant shields, with massive resistance, using thermally & corrosive tuned projectile weapons. That's the reality. If this is maintained with thargoids (replacing caustic with corrosive) then it's just entrenching the problems further.

    I don't think actually that many are against shifting this; it's more the crap-storm due to having to re-engineer everything again; is it acceptable to essentially have the entire thing atrophy to protect engineering effort from commanders? I think maybe that's where Frontier's been. Not wanting to undo potentially dozens, or even hundreds of hours of engineering because of the storm of protest. Long-term, change is inevitable.

    It's a tough one. But I'm okay with having to redo some work, if the outcome is a much more balanced formula, because this has huge advantages for the currently disadvantaged, as well as keeping things more engaging and more about strategy and tenaciousness at the opposite end; and less just being carried by god rolls and endless MJs leading to protracted fights than go on for 20-30 minutes with people chugging synthesis just to keep it going.

  15. #75
    Originally Posted by kofeyh View Post (Source)
    Bingo. Ammo counts are based on two year old mechanics. The game certainly hasn't sat still (regardless of oversimplification) in that time and the amount of armour and shields, across strength, regen and resistance now, is considerably more than at launch.

    Delay is needed; turns synthesis into a tactical choice, not candy. But the ammo counts are now way out, if Frontier is going to mostly keep what we have. Arguably there are a ton of options around armour, resistance, damage types and shield types (less shields, that regen much faster might be part of the cure) would all be good starting points.

    The game ostensibly massively rewards flying giant shields, with massive resistance, using thermally & corrosive tuned projectile weapons. That's the reality. If this is maintained with thargoids (replacing caustic with corrosive) then it's just entrenching the problems further.

    I don't think actually that many are against shifting this; it's more the crap-storm due to having to re-engineer everything again; is it acceptable to essentially have the entire thing atrophy to protect engineering effort from commanders? I think maybe that's where Frontier's been. Not wanting to undo potentially dozens, or even hundreds of hours of engineering because of the storm of protest. Long-term, change is inevitable.

    It's a tough one. But I'm okay with having to redo some work, if the outcome is a much more balanced formula, because this has huge advantages for the currently disadvantaged, as well as keeping things more engaging and more about strategy and tenaciousness at the opposite end; and less just being carried by god rolls and endless MJs leading to protracted fights than go on for 20-30 minutes with people chugging synthesis just to keep it going.

    What would you think about that? I've been campaigning for this for two betas :

    Originally Posted by Allchemyst View Post (Source)
    As far as I could see, the reason why FD were reluctant to nerfbat shields down to hell (which, I agree, would be a necessary change anyway - please don't forget that as you go along) was that the community has sunk so many hours grinding for SB rolls that simply making half of them useless would cause a torrent of raw hatred that'd melt the servers... And understandably so, because players are not guilty of trying to optimize their chances within a system whose development is outside their will. The devs didn't think to check what would be the consequences of 8X boosters on a prismatic cutter with all G5 rolls with like 6 SCBs. Worse, perhaps, the functionally necessary nature of engineering, mixed with how much of a painful soul grinder it is... Making all that "Work" - because that was really work - useless and taking it away... The blood, really, would be on their hands.

    That led me to think, simply and purely, that to avoid the impending "disaster", FD should find a way to compensate the boring, overpowered but painfully hard-worked-for mechanic with another cool feature that's not game-breaking :

    Let's keep all mod and booster effects the same, but let's also put a 150 or 200% hard cap on shields. Make it so SBs increase the time before shields start recharging and regenerating by a greater margin. However, let's take and give : Make it so the "lost" purcentage of shields, whatever % was beyond the cap, is applied as a boost to shield regeneration. If your Cutters's 8X SB god shields were 800% stronger, they're back to 200% max, but one minute after the last hit taken, they kick off recharging 600% faster.

    This would, of course, be modulated by systems distributor capacity (So never actually violently overpowered, but would make systems tweaked dist mods more interesting... or actually relevant)

    It would also have the effect of simply not making "any number of boosters" beyond 3-4 on a ship a pure waste of 20 hours, 35 rolls and 250 materials by giving them a different edge.

    PVE people who just wanna grind dat RES would have "some" difficulty back, but their shields would regen so much faster it wouldn't alter their experience much, given they would be able to engage in each new fight with full shields.

    In my opinion, everyone would win, and FD could move on... But they have to make it dynamic and related to the amount of boost beyond the cap, not just a "flat" (and all too humble) buff like last time.

    Since there are a few PVP highlords in here, and many more involved players, I'm interested to know how'd that fly with them?


    While we're at it, we could also tackle the issue of rampaging hull point inflation, and to compensate for the increased shield recharge window :

    FD has toyed in the last beta with making hull hardness more relevant and tiered between ship sizes. This could be an interesting way to take away a lot of useless Hp. How? Well, Hull reinforcements reinforce hull, not the ship's interior... So...

    Let's make all hull reinforcements/packs/mods increase hull hardness instead of HP. Ships would still gain increased survivability from the packs, but only against certain weapons (making cannons, among others, more relevant, and ammo all the more interesting). Lightweight to military hulls could still offer a range of HP pools because they represent the ship's whole structure, but the rest should all be hull hardness and resistances.


    Also... not wanting to start an entirely new thing but... How about adding more complex physics to the weapon hit model? Giving projectiles a chance to bounce off or be reflected based on the shooting angle and hull hardness might add an interesting dimension to weapons (Say, instead of making PEs ignore "resistances", which is weird and clunky, make them the only projectile weapon that can't ricochet off hull, etc.). The three ugly federal shoes would find an all new purpose, as their hull is clearly made to bounce forward-incoming projectiles. In the same vein, the 'Vette's advantage, through a very flat, angular design, would become more apparent as a purely military ship.


    And while we're at it : As combat would move more towards "hull tanking", "shielded" reinforcements could be made so the "shielded" module gets a mini-shield, that absorbs a small amount of damage before popping and can regenerate as well. That would mean the most "paranoïd" commanders out there would have a way of offsetting non-targeted random module damage (And that'd give a great reason for people to knock themselves out of that OC PP meta...).


    Adding small perks to some energy weapons to counteract their newfound hardened hull nemesis would be cool : Pip-dependant laser damage boosts and beam lasers that gain a damage % boost the longer they stay on target come to mind...



    Anyway, thanks for the read! What do y'all think?

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast