I think the nice thing is, some of the weapons are counters.
ie Force Shell can be a Feedback Cascade counter.
Break through SCBs instantly with modified railguns (Newletter 121)
- Thread starter Alexander the Grape
- Start date
I think the nice thing is, some of the weapons are counters.
ie Force Shell can be a Feedback Cascade counter.
I understand your point Kvas but much of it depends on what you consider a PvE loadout.
I mean if were talking bounty hunting at an RES your PvE loadout will easily stomp everything other than another full combat loadout. Most of the issue is caused by having "combat" modules, first it was SCB's (which I personally had no issue with because i never struggled to get through them) but now its HRPs, and you can't bypass HRPs with skill like you could with SCB's which causes a whole new set of problems.
So two pythons meet, one is pirate spec, one is PvP spec whats the difference?
The PvP spec one has 500%+ effective HP once shields are down, that is an auto win short of a monumental stomping despite both ships being geared for combat.
I mean if were talking bounty hunting at an RES your PvE loadout will easily stomp everything other than another full combat loadout. Most of the issue is caused by having "combat" modules, first it was SCB's (which I personally had no issue with because i never struggled to get through them) but now its HRPs, and you can't bypass HRPs with skill like you could with SCB's which causes a whole new set of problems.
So two pythons meet, one is pirate spec, one is PvP spec whats the difference?
The PvP spec one has 500%+ effective HP once shields are down, that is an auto win short of a monumental stomping despite both ships being geared for combat.
Last edited:
I don't really think my position is that unreasonable to be honest.
There are definitely some people taking things a bit far though, especially since FD have pretty much said that this module is under scrutiny already.
Ah no sorry, that wasn't aimed at you, you seem quite level-headed! [up]
Last edited:
How is he gonna rail gun you when you're hammering him with low damage force shells?
Yeah you still can't compete you'll inevitably just jump out but still.
Actually maybe you don't need to jump if a railgunner just can't stay on target?
Last edited:
I'm not claiming the balance is ruined by these upcoming changes, I'm stating in general that I refuse to let combat balance be ruined by feedback made out of ignorance or inexperience.
Following the above, I clearly mean that I will shoot down unproductive feedback, but people can disagree with my position while still having the necessary experience to provide proper feedback.
For example, A.D.Grape and I disagree quite often, especially in the last beta. But I respect his opinion because I know he is experienced and he has shown himself to be well-informed and capable.
That might be a good counter for the new railgun weapon coming out. This railgun needs to go or be adjusted. To take out a shield because someone uses a scb is lame. You might as well get rid of scb and never brought them in the game in the first place.
Won't work, chaff will render my weapons unusable, have you tried hitting a fast ship with fixed cannons? it's harder than hitting slow ship with fixed rails... Now in a ship that is less agile I won't be able to stop him firing at me with rails and my only option would be reallying on my shields to keep me going. You understand why a weapon that breaks your shields is a bad idea? Only counter is alt + F4
Last edited:
Eh? chaff doesn't render gimbals or turrets useable.
But yeah sounds like you've already lost, better alt-f4 in your case I think.
Don't make me start with you, please.
As the part 2 livestream have informed us, FD wants to go all the way in beta, which implies that many weapons are going to the extreme. The rail gun is probably the most controversial one considering it throws large ships into the trash can, again.
I seriously wonder if FD dislike large ships in combat or something...
This isn't overreaction, this is reasoned and experienced feedback on a conceptual mechanic being introduced.
If I may ask, how often do you fight in a large ship against experienced players? If you do have experience, how crucial was SCB to your survival? How often do you find yourself "dodging" rail guns in a large ship?
My current stance on the issue is to render the weapon much less effective against shield class that includes 7 and above.
I have a funny feeling yes they hate large ships and are trying to push people to use the small ships more. I think they also want to see people spending more on repairs after combat.
For me it's a conceptual critique, just as if my local politician decides to realize some sort of conceptual genocide against a specific population (large ships), I would be shaking my head and saying "no."
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Ugh...
How much time do you spend in combat?
Do you not know that even fixed cannon is hard to land due to its projectile speed and "spin to win" method that experienced pilots employ to nullify kinetic weaponry such as MC or Cannon?
If gimballed or turreted, chaff completely nullifies it.
Not once I did that! I don't want to be forced to do it!
Last edited:
Much of this thread is an overreaction in respect to not having tried it out and not having seen the whole picture.
Sure that's fine but calling for nerfs isn't conceptual critique nor do I think we can fairly conceptionally critique in any realistic manner until weve seen all that's on offer.
So build a quick charging FSD instead. What do you want me to do list every single possible counter in a patch we know little about!
At least I'm coming up with options instead of "Frontier nerf it" "game ruined" "shields are pointless" etc.. which is my main complaint with much of this thread.
Last edited:
I think for once, pretty much everyone who is knowledgable is in agreement: as they are now, the new railguns will NOT be even close to balanced. It really is that simple.
Which clearly is no-one in this thread. Unless you work for Frontier.
Or unless you've somehow managed to get hold of 2.1 early.
Last edited:
Yes, in this thread, not me.
Tell all the political theorists about how they shouldn't point out the flaws in various theories and improve upon them, actually not just political theorists, all theorists.
I'm not rejecting the idea in its entirety, I'm suggesting alternative conceptual implementation based on its conceptual existence, which is something I do with theories of all kinds in my daily life, believe it or not, I'm paid to do it.
Oh, how brilliant:
"Let's see... oh my opponent has a railgun, and I'm in a large ship/rely on SCB, time to flee!"
When you compare the rail gun modification to all other modifications, it's clear which one is breaking balance and which one isn't. Not to mention I already suggested that at least make it less effective against shield class 7 and above (Now I think about it, might have to start with 6 since Python is dead in the water with this change).
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
How often do you participate in PvP? How familiar you are with PvP meta?
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
What he means is knowledgeable of combat mechanics and current meta and how they interact with these conceptual mechanics. Rail gun modification is the most offensive.
Though you did prove yourself to be not very informed in this thread.