Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 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. #76
    I agree with the people saying the long, long time-to-kill is the underlying problem. Even if weapons start being able to last that long, who really wants to fight for that long against one enemy? Never mind that at any time during this fight, you're about 15 seconds away from safety with a high-wake to another system. Even if the other player is carrying a Wake Scanner (doubtful) that's plenty of time to jump, drop, pick a new system, and be somewhere else. Because of this, I believe that time-to-kill should be shortened. To do this, I think the base resistances of unmodified shields need to be tweaked.

    ------

    Off-the-shelf Shields have the following resistances:

    -20% Thermal Resistance
    +40% Kinetic Resistance
    +50% Explosive Resistance

    Before you even get started, you're at the soft cap against Explosive weapons and a single Resistance-Augmented Shield Booster can put you over. This is why you never see the Kinetic-Resistant blueprint used, but see Thermal-Resistant all the time; even with trading away up to 15% Kinetic resistance (on a truly awful Thermal-Resistant Shields roll), you can get up to 60% more Thermal resistance. With Thermal-Resistant Shields and two Resistance Augmented Boosters you can look like this:

    57.5% Thermal Resistance (-20% + 60% from Thermal Resistant Shields + 2 x 12.5% Resistance Augmented Boosters, softcapped with resistance over 50% cut in two)
    50.0% Kinetic Resistance (+40% - 15% from Thermal Resistant Shields + 2 x 12.5 Resistance Augmented Boosters)
    62.5% Explosive Resistance (50% + 2 x 12.5% Resistance Augmented Boosters, resistance over 50% cut in two due to softcap)

    Now the ship can use any extra Shield Boosters they have to stack Heavy Duty, transforming a stock +20% A-rated booster into something that's at least +55%, over doubling the effectiveness of extra boosters. People with any serious experience with engineers will also notice that I'm using the worst-case for Kinetic Resistance on those shields and have left out any further bonuses from Secondary effects.

    --------

    My suggestion is to reduce the innate Resistances of shields to something like this:

    -40% Thermal Resistance
    +30% Kinetic Resistance
    +40% Explosive Resistance

    and weaken the Thermal-Resistant Blueprint to cost extra Kinetic Resistance while providing less of a boost to Thermal Resistance. Now it will be much harder to make Thermal Weapons ineffective against your shields, and to do so will cost you more dearly in your Kinetic resistance, or costs deeper in overall MJ from giving up Heavy-Duty boosters. I know I haven't touched on Reinforced shields, however this change would affect them too - they have lesser boosts in base resistance and have other drawbacks like reduced regeneration and broken regeneration. Meanwhile, anyone who has spent a lot of time engineering everything hasn't wasted efforts, as their stuff will be as good as it was before.

    For PvE and un-engineered players, this does make them a bit more vulnerable, but it also makes their targets weaker as well.

  2. #77
    the main problem with all the engineering related stuff is that a lot of it is a pure ugrade, with no downsides. If they were all a choice, it'd go a long way to helping.

  3. This is the last staff post in this thread. #78
    Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous Frontier Employee
    Hello Commanders!

    A quick head's up: The synthesis delays should change based on the recipe at some point, with most weapon ammunition delays being shortened considerably.

  4. #79
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Commanders!

    A quick head's up: The synthesis delays should change based on the recipe at some point, with most weapon ammunition delays being shortened considerably.
    Sandro, still hoping you see sense and change basic heatsink synthesis to use non-manufactured materials - we explorers do not mind about the standard and premium recipes - but at least throw us a bone with basic :/

  5. #80
    I was part of the calling for time-based synth, but the interruption was something I didn't perceive would be added.

    Remove the interruption from ammunition. Time-based synth delay could be extended - even doubled. This already adds relevance to ammunition based weapons, which is partly why I called for it.

    Actually removing ammo based weapons as viable is another story entirely.


    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Commanders!

    A quick head's up: The synthesis delays should change based on the recipe at some point, with most weapon ammunition delays being shortened considerably.
    This is good to hear!

    I'm still of the opinion that ammunition should take a while to synthesise but unlike heat sink/chaff etc. cannot be interrupted. Otherwise, you end up with it either being inviable or not actually changing the landscape at all, based on the fight itself. A big ship against an iCourier would still be hard pressed to get a break to synthesise anything...meanwhile, the iCourier/other small ship can either manoeuvre or speed away with such unchallenged ease that a short synth window may as well not exist. And yes, I'm putting this forward as a PvP and PvE issue in many cases

    Finally, the last thing we want is further convergence on loadouts being long-ranged rails and picking each other off at several KM distance over half an hour where we can synth in peace.

    In either case...thankyou for your consideration on the topic.

  6. #81
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Commanders!

    A quick head's up: The synthesis delays should change based on the recipe at some point, with most weapon ammunition delays being shortened considerably.
    That's great for the combat players. Now please help out the explorers and remove the commodity requirement for heat sink synthesis, the only recipe in the entire game to require a commodity? Double the mat requirements, make it need very rare mats, triple the cooldown, whatever, just please make it accessible to deep space explorers. No combat recipes require a commodity, just the one recipe which explorers could possibly make use of.

    That's inconsistent and doesn't make sense, unless the design intention is indeed to simply prevent explorers from making use of the recipe?

  7. #82
    Originally Posted by Mengy View Post (Source)
    That's great for the combat players. Now please help out the explorers and remove the commodity requirement for heat sink synthesis, the only recipe in the entire game to require a commodity?
    I had thought the complaints were about requiring a manufactured material. Is there an actual cargo commodity required?

    Sorry, I stay away from betas.

  8. #83
    Originally Posted by StiTch View Post (Source)
    I had thought the complaints were about requiring a manufactured material. Is there an actual cargo commodity required?

    Sorry, I stay away from betas.
    Nope, there is no cargo requirement. Mengy is just mixing up the words here. He means manufactured material requirement. Change that for commoditiy and everything else he said is valid.

  9. #84
    Originally Posted by Novo Mundus View Post (Source)
    Nope, there is no cargo requirement. Mengy is just mixing up the words here. He means manufactured material requirement. Change that for commoditiy and everything else he said is valid.
    Ah, fair.

    Let's be honest mate...it's not the galaxy's biggest issue I am with you 100% on the push for exploration development; hell, as a combat-focused player I would happily see no combat updates for months while it's sorted.

    But it's hardly like explorers have been dropping like flies due to heat sink loss so far, and it's not too much for a player to store some mats before their journey. Enough for a few synths should always be enough, and perhaps it'll discourage the notion that you can just bring a single heat sink launcher to equate to infinite heat sinks if ye be someone that needs loads.

    And looking at the bigger picture, I am conversely of the opinion that moving ships towards being indefinitely sustainable/immortal in the void is a bit...weak. Ya should be a top notch explorer to last indefinitely out there. Skills that I don't have, I'd like to point out, as someone that managed to get his iCutter down by 20% in one semi-lazy run from Colonia to home...

    [/derailment]

  10. #85
    Originally Posted by StiTch View Post (Source)
    But it's hardly like explorers have been dropping like flies due to heat sink loss so far, and it's not too much for a player to store some mats before their journey. Enough for a few synths should always be enough, and perhaps it'll discourage the notion that you can just bring a single heat sink launcher to equate to infinite heat sinks if ye be someone that needs loads.
    The basic issue is just one of consistency. I can bang iron and tin rocks together to make a self-propelled and self-guided grappling hook, but I need to obtain manmade materials to make a hunk of metal? It just seems completely backwards.

  11. #86
    Sandro, thank you very much for you continued engagement.

    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Commanders!

    A quick head's up: The synthesis delays should change based on the recipe at some point, with most weapon ammunition delays being shortened considerably.
    That certainly sounds sensible but I think Cmdr StiTch highlights a remaining problem with chain-interruption looping ...

    Originally Posted by StiTch View Post (Source)
    A big ship against an iCourier would still be hard pressed to get a break to synthesise anything...meanwhile, the iCourier/other small ship can either manoeuvre or speed away with such unchallenged ease that a short synth window may as well not exist
    ... namely that I fear that even a very short (e.g. 5 second) delay might not be enough to permit one of the 'Big 3', facing for example a Fer-de-Lance with even one long range pulse laser, to reload ever.

    If we imagine Corvette v FdL, the Corvette of course begins the fight with the advantage of a larger ammo pool, but that pales into insignificance if it is finite whilst the medium opponent's ammo is infinite.

  12. #87
    Originally Posted by dukrous View Post (Source)
    The basic issue is just one of consistency. I can bang iron and tin rocks together to make a self-propelled and self-guided grappling hook, but I need to obtain manmade materials to make a hunk of metal? It just seems completely backwards.
    *shrugs* but gameplay decisions aren't made on realism consistency. They're generally made on what gives the best gameplay.

    I can't give you any official verdict obviously but as far as I am concerned the best choices are the one that contribute to an engaging game. An infinite number of heat sinks for a single heat sink launcher doesn't sound too engaging to me. Of course people want that, but I"want" an Eagle with 3 huge weapons and ten C8 slots

    Anyway - let's take the topic off this. TS raised a thread with regards to synth delay and interruption, not a complaint about the nature of exploration synth materials.

  13. #88
    Originally Posted by Novo Mundus View Post (Source)
    Nope, there is no cargo requirement. Mengy is just mixing up the words here. He means manufactured material requirement. Change that for commoditiy and everything else he said is valid.
    Okay, wait, I thought that the heatsink synthesis recipe actually does require a purchased cargo commodity which needs to be stored in a cargo rack, isn't that the issue which everyone keeps complaining about?


    Are you saying that it just requires a material which can be stored in the 1000 capacity "magical" storage, but a man made material, one which can't be found out in deep space? If that's the case here then I've clearly read some incorrect information and the whole heat sink thing becomes a non-issue for me completely then.

  14. #89
    Originally Posted by StiTch View Post (Source)
    I was part of the calling for time-based synth, but the interruption was something I didn't perceive would be added.

    Remove the interruption from ammunition. Time-based synth delay could be extended - even doubled. This already adds relevance to ammunition based weapons, which is partly why I called for it.
    I agree. The delay can be tuned to be enough of a balancing factor itself, but the interruption doesn't make much sense.

    Originally Posted by Mengy View Post (Source)
    Are you saying that it just requires a material which can be stored in the 1000 capacity "magical" storage, but a man made material, one which can't be found out in deep space?
    Yes.

  15. #90
    Originally Posted by Morbad View Post (Source)
    I agree. The delay can be tuned to be enough of a balancing factor itself, but the interruption doesn't make much sense.
    I must confess I feel a tad silly for requesting something interrupts heat sink/chaff synth and now trying to make the synth changes less interrupt-y.

    If anything though I guess that was the intention...to make heat sink/chaff synth inviable mid combat; sentiment that our good friend Sandro already put forwards at one point, iirc. I am not sure it was ever decided that weapon synth should be totally inviable though, so that's gonna need a slightly different solution - I'd just be glad to see some kind of offset brought back to weapons that were supposed to be balanced by ammunition.

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast