Before asking for things to be buffed/nerfed please consider this...

Hell Razor5543

H

Is it possible that your style of play is at fault?

I have been playing Elite Dangerous since Beta. I enjoy the game a LOT. There are things I do not like, but there is a lot more that I do. I have learned how to accept this, and that (to my style of play, anyway) the game is about as good as it gets (I do know it is an ongoing work, with more to come. Great!). I have several ships, and I have tried some of the others. For example, I did try a T9, and, after a couple of hours, went back to my Python, as I hated the T9 (too slow, lumbering, to the point where I almost fell asleep), but this was not the fault of the T9; it did not meet my style of play. I do know of other players who think it is a brilliant ship. Great, more power to their elbow. I prefer my A rated Anaconda, to me she feels a lot more responsive. However, recently I took my Asp Explorer out to blow the cobwebs away, and I had forgotten how much fun a small ship can be. Does this mean I don't like the Anaconda any more? No, it is a different ship, with different capabilities and limitations, and I can (and do) accept that.

Let me pose a hypothetical situation about a new weapon. I am going to call it "The Iron God Killer", after the gun from the film "Drive Angry" with Nicholas Cage and Amber Heard.



Mmm, Amber Heard.






Right, enough of that (for now, at least), and back to "The Iron God Killer". This is a weapon that will, with one shot, kill any ship less than 1,000T gross weight, 2 shots will kill any Player ship (regardless of configuration), while 5 shots will utterly destroy any man made space based object. It also has a wide gimball range and a very long range (with a telescopic sight to help with the long range shots). The rounds travel at enormous speeds (think rail gun on performance enhancers!). Once it has charged (which will start when it is deployed) it can be fired by the press of a button (no delays such as with a rail gun).

At this point there may be people either going "Great, where can I get one, and how much is it?" or "No, too powerful, nerf the heck out of it". There may, however, be others going "What is the catch?". Well, here goes.

First, it is a Rare weapon (not linked to any faction), that is very expensive (say, 50Mcr). The ammunition is also very expensive (100Kcr per round), and you can only carry 5 shots. Because it is a Rare weapon, you have to wait 24H from placing an order to receiving the ammunition. You can only order 5 rounds (no more or less), and if you already have a few rounds in the magazine the excess are lost (but you still have to pay for them!). It is only available for the Huge hard point. When it is deployed it needs so much power to charge it that (during the charging period of, say 2 minutes) you will only have 4 pips on the power distributer. When it IS fired there will be such a power drain that the first shot will cause major components to power down (such as the shield generator), and if it is fired again within 5 minutes the whole ship will power down, and needs to be powered back up slowly, to allow the systems to recover. 5 shots will take over 30 minutes to be done safely (otherwise the ship wide overloads could cause your own ship to explode).

OK, now it does not look so good, so there may now be people going "Buff the heck out of it!", others may still want it nerfed, while others may now consider it to be balanced. My point is that (to my way of thinking, at least) this is now a balanced weapon, which is very powerful but has consequences to be considered. You may not agree. OK, that is your prerogative.

The reason I came up with "The Iron God Killer" was NOT to ask for it to be in the game, but to ask YOU to look at how things are balanced. Just because you do not like something does not mean it is wrong, merely that it may not suit YOUR style of play.

Finally, I recall somebody saying that, in order for perfection to be appreciated, there needs to be imperfections to compare it against. Elite Dangerous may not be perfect, but to MY style of play it is damned close.

Thank you for reading this, and Please, do consider what I am asking, which is "Is it possible that your style of play is at fault?".
 
Last edited:

A. Watson

A
Well said. I agree - the game is pretty well balanced as it is.

I still think the Iron God Killer is OP though. Might not be if it was fixed instead of gimballed and couldn't destroy stations.
 

Bacalao

Bacalao
Eh, you're analogy follows the idea that balance is represented by a teeter totter and that it doesn't matter how long the arms of it are, as long as they are level, it is balanced. Technically correct, practically a bad way to do things. Good balance keeps things revolving around a mean, the closer to the mean they can all be, the better. Numerically it would be better to have something with an attribute at -0.1 and another attribute at 0.1 and it is bad to have something with an attribute at -5 and one at 5, even though averaged out they come to the same average value.
-
Having heavy drawbacks and strengths can make things interesting and quirky, but it isn't a good way to balance because you end up with a rock/paper/scissors style of play. There is a reason that rock/paper/scissors doesn't have a competitive following even though it is perfectly "balanced".
-
I say we throw the whole premise of it out the window and let the game be fun, make traders really good at trading (even if that means they far exceed the potential of multiroles at trading) and make combat ships really good at combat (even if that means they mop the floor with multirole ships), make the mission structure really variable (so multiroles really have a place, chained missions will go miles for this if you need to trade some goods, mine something, then fight off some pirates and jump a couple hundred light years to deliver some intel). This attempt at balancing the different ships hasn't really added anything to the variety you see on the "competitive" scene (honestly, which 2-3 ships are really used in the majority of PvP?).
-
I'd rather see ships have a distinct purpose and fit that scope and be able to just have fun in it (playing the "I wonder if I can eke out enough MJ to make this ship functional" game isn't fun unless you're an accountant). If you want a competitive balanced arena, everyone needs to be using the same equipment with the same capabilities, it is why we go to such great efforts in competitive sports/games to make sure the field is level, the ball is balanced, we take turns on different sides of the pitch/field, we switch roles (offense/defense), we cap salaries, we ban champions, we lockout perks/guns etc etc etc. True balance comes through homogeneity, not through getting a really bad drawback to be as bad as a really powerful ability is good. CQC is the only place Elite ever has a hope of achieving balance, and that through homogeneity.
-
Screw "balance", I'd rather have fun.
 

Shaamaan

Shaamaan
As much as I'd like to give you a + for the example weapons name, the truth is it's a terrible example, really.

Not that the weapon isn't balanced "on paper". The problem is that it's a one-sided weapon, a very effective one trick pony. Let's break things down:
- it allows a player to one shot other players (in smaller ships at least)
- the purchase times and prices don't really matter - it can be stored for later; these are major inconveniences, but for the actual engagement when the weapon would be in use they are inconsequential
- the drawbacks mean it's basically a one-shot snipe after which the attacker needs to hide; again, an inconvenience, but if they killed their mark, then there's no longer an engagement to be had where these inconveniences would matter

The end result is that a player could have a guaranteed kill without letting the other player react in any way. THAT is what's bad about the weapon. THAT is what would have people (rightfully) angry. These types of strategies are generally disliked in video games - stun-locking, invisible rogues in WoW or one-turn-kill combos is Hearthstone (usually involving charge creatures) just to name some examples - anything the receiving party cannot react to.
 
Last edited:

Caput Mortis

Caput Mortis
I think the problem is that is not how some people see balance

Some would say don't have the cons on the IGK just the Pros but also have a rare shield available (Cloak of the Iron God ;) ) that would block a shot from the IGK.

That's still balance, right? They still get their super weapon and if you want to block it now you just have to have the super shield. If you don't have the super shield then tough....

Balance to me is more like consequences.

Yes I can arm my ship to the teeth but then I have no cargo space.
I can have Thermic Weapons everywhere but then I overheat
I can amp up my shields but then I have less power for other systems
I can increase my Cargo space but then I cant jump as far

Every thing is interconnected

Make Pirating too easy and no one wants to Mine or Trade
Make Bounty Hunting too easy and there will be fewer pirates
Make Trading/mining too easy and no one will bother with BH

It is not one Teeter Totter (That's See Saw for us non colonials) it is Teeter Totters, on Teeter Totters, on Teeter Totters etc etc etc. Changing the "Balance" on one may throw off the balance elsewhere in the chain.

I think your opening line sums it up in a nutshell

"Is it possible that your style of play is at fault?"
 

Hell Razor5543

H
By the way, for those who haven't seen "Drive Angry" or don't know who she is, this is Amber Heard;

amber-heard-23a.jpg
 
Last edited:

sqzbox1

S
Johnny is a lucky man indeed - no wonder he always looks so self-satisfied!

I like your point of view - because it echoes mine I guess. Probably shouldn't have wasted your time with the example though - too detailed and just causes people to focus on the example rather than your argument.

But IMO you are absolutely right.
 

Crazy Jedi

Crazy Jedi
+1 rep sir

except for the use of the word nerf... This is a 4 letter word not suitable for polite conversation and to my mind, punishable by extreme measure.....

is is that too strong of a statement?
Does it need nerfing?

Aah I said it! Call the system authorities!!!! Wash my mouth out...
 

Broon

Broon
Nerf other people's style of play!! My style is the only one acceptable!

LMAO!!!



j/k

Well said OP. +1 rep.
 

Plaidygami

Plaidygami
It's easier for people to complain about the game than to reevaluate themselves and try to change their style. It's pathetic. Yeah, the game ain't perfect, but it's a hell lot better than 90% of the games in its genre, and there are plenty of improvements coming our way. People need to be patient and maybe learn to play the game better. All those "NERF X NOW!" threads are really getting annoying as hell.
 

kofeyh

kofeyh
Cue debates about the balance of the weapon, if it's flawed and or not a good example, rather than realising what the original point of the post is.

FD is under enormous pressure to make the game "generic" in the desire for people to believe everything is fair. This is an impossible goal. +1 rep to the OP.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom