Break through SCBs instantly with modified railguns (Newletter 121)

[bitstorm]

You're not denying my position that currently all we have to work with points to the conclusion I've drawn.

I dunno man, it's like you either don;t understand what I'm saying or you're intentionally ignoring it.

To clarify again....

I'm not drawing any conclusion whatsoever on what we currently know, why on Earth would I when I'm specifically saying we should not do that at this time.

You're now asking me to draw a conclusion when I've been saying all along we shouldn't draw a conclusion?? I dunno man.

As well as *knowing* we don't know what 2.1 as a whole consist of, which is one reason to reserve judgement for <some> days, I also feel that hands on can provide more information than theory-crafting can.

Your position is that somehow there will be something that can alleviate the situation, which is exactly "god of gaps." If you don't hold that there will be something that can alleviate the situation, you're pretty much saying nothing productive.

No. My position is that there *may* be something that can alleviate your perception of the current situation.

Whether it's God of Gaps or not, what does it matter. If you're going to argue the point I'd honestly rather you just did that instead of pointing elsewhere.

 

[TomP]

You two, either get a room or get in the [expurgated] sea.

 

[bitstorm]

You two, either get a room or get in the [expurgated] sea.

I'm about to give it up to be honest, it's going absolutely nowhere.

I'm doing God of Gaps or summut. [blah]

 

[DaggerSnake]

OH for crying out loud. I try not to join these threads as it just helps to bump them, but cmon. Can people just be excited to try the Beta and then apply first hand experience to actual discussions based on something other than "sky is falling" speculations. Hell, we don't even know if 1/10, 1/100 or 1/10000 players you meet will even have a module of game breaking doom.

What if you are a PvP group and only 1 of your whole community is able to get their hands on a shield breaking rail gun in the first 3 months of release? Well, that's pretty awesome. It allows that player to stand out and be the legend of that small community. If two wings are getting into it and that player of repute drops into the instance, it creates that "They have a cave troll" moment in the battle...

Look at me, speculating just as much garbage as everyone else...pull it together man. Look what the've let you become...

 

[GluttonyFang]

I dunno man, it's like you either don;t understand what I'm saying or you're intentionally ignoring it.

To clarify again....

I'm not drawing any conclusion whatsoever on what we currently know, why on Earth would I when I'm specifically saying we should not do that at this time.

You're now asking me to draw a conclusion when I've been saying all along we shouldn't draw a conclusion?? I dunno man.

As well as *knowing* we don't know what 2.1 as a whole consist of, which is one reason to reserve judgement for <some> days, I also feel that hands on can provide more information than theory-crafting can.

I'm not asking you to draw a conclusion, I'm stating how your counter point has no effect on my conclusion.

Science or theory crafting of any sort doesn't rely on "waiting for the future."

No. My position is that there *may* be something that can alleviate your perception of the current situation.

Which is pretty much saying nothing.

Whether it's God of Gaps or not, what does it matter. If you're going to argue the point I'd honestly rather you just did that instead of pointing elsewhere.

There are two things I've done since I engaged in a conversation with you.

Confirm the validity of my conclusion of Rail modification's offensive nature to the balance of the game with the present existing information and knowledge.

Point out that your position is similar to "god of gaps."

I don't know what else you're reading out of it.

 

[bitstorm]

Can people just be excited to try the Beta and then apply first hand experience to actual discussions based on something other than "sky is falling" speculations.

NO!!

[mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad] [mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad] [mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad] [mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad]

I didn;t try it yet though, nor do I know everything in the patch but still...

[mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad] [mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad] [mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad] [mad]GAME IS RUINED!!![mad]

Also God of Gapes etc.. [mad][mad][mad]

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Science or theory crafting of any sort doesn't rely on "waiting for the future."

Stupid man stupid.

Like critically review a product 5 days before you receive it because "science doesn't concern itself with waiting for future"?

Aye makes total sense, this is good science sure.

Utterly pointless discussion.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Stupid man stupid.

Like critically review a product before you receive it? Aye makes total sense, this is good science sure.

Utterly pointless discussion.

I know right, how stupid it is to not realize Hume's Uniformitarianism is perfectly applicable to the dichotomy between the previous beta regarding SCB changes and this beta.

Oh wait, science doesn't rely on Uniformitarianism at all, not at all.

What an utterly pointless discussion indeed...

 

[TomP]

I know right, how stupid it is to not realize Hume's Uniformitarianism is perfectly applicable to the dichotomy between the previous beta regarding SCB changes and this beta.

Oh wait, science doesn't rely on Uniformitarianism at all, not at all.

What an utterly pointless discussion indeed...

Next time go to private message? For the sake of everybody else?

 

[bitstorm]

I know right, how stupid it is to not realize Hume's Uniformitarianism is perfectly applicable to the dichotomy between the previous beta regarding SCB changes and this beta.

Oh wait, science doesn't rely on Uniformitarianism at all, not at all.

What an utterly pointless discussion indeed...

I reviewed the second game as bad because the first one was bad, aye I know the game's due to arrive in 5 days and I haven't tried it yet but y'know - Hume's Uniformitarianism!!

Next time go to private message? For the sake of everybody else?

Aye sorry it's just hard to resist.

I'll shut up now, you win this time Gluttony!

 

[GluttonyFang]

Next time go to private message? For the sake of everybody else?

Nah, if it's a personal issue, I'll address it in a private message. There is an impersonal argument going on, so no need.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I reviewed the second game as bad because the first one was bad, aye I know the game's due to arrive in 5 days and I haven;t tried it yet but y'know Hume's Uniformitarianism!

Laughable strawman argument, the previous beta and the current beta both involve combat balancing, and in this case, with rail gun mod being the central topic of discussion. Both times devs go to the extreme and cause the players to point out the obvious. You can very much research this.

To use said argument on a game would mean the necessity of much more perspectives, especially the publisher, developers, and so forth.

I'll shut up now, you win Gluttony!

If there is definitive winning to an argument, there will be much less problem in this world, but clearly that is not the case.

 

[MarcusKross]

I've been reading this thread and Fang, sorry but you are doing the exact thing what you say you don't like which is knee jerk reaction i think.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=245227&p=3815700#post3815700

Don't hate me this is your post.

The discussion that this mod being overpowered or will ruin pvp or make large ships obsolete in pvp right now is unprofitable and redundant simply because of the fact that we had zero reveals in core and internal module modifications. There are still dozens of unannounced modifications coming with 2.1 if i am not mistaken.

Maybe we will get double layer shield mods, maybe scb mods, other balance changes who knows what the beta will bring? All i can say with certainty is that everybody must wait for the beta release only then we will have enough information to make a healthy analysis or discussion regarding this issue.

 

[GluttonyFang]

I've been reading this thread and Fang, sorry but you are doing the exact thing what you say you don't like which is knee jerk reaction i think.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=245227&p=3815700#post3815700

Don't hate me this is your post.

The discussion that this mod being overpowered or will ruin pvp or make large ships obsolete in pvp right now is unprofitable and redundant simply because of the fact that we had zero reveals in core and internal module modifications. There are still dozens of unannounced modifications coming with 2.1 if i am not mistaken.

Maybe we will get double layer shield mods, maybe scb mods, other balance changes who knows what the beta will bring? All i can say with certainty is that everybody must wait for the beta release only then we will have enough information to make a healthy analysis or discussion regarding this issue.

If there will be any modification that can counter the rail, it would be great, but to point out what is broken with the present information is exactly what I'll do.

The previous beta the devs made SCBs useless in the first stage, which was consistent with what they announced that they will do before the beta landed (SCB will require HS and make large ships useless because they need multiple high class SCBs at once).

A knee jerk reaction would be a complete rejection of this rail gun mod, which I did not propose, but instead alternatives.

Edit:

To clarify, SCB isn't dead because of this mod, since smaller and more maneuverable/speedy ships can still take advantage of SCB, whereas large ships are dead in the water.

 

[Roybe]

As you all can see here: This is a perfect example of why it's pointless to argue on this fortum.
A guy who clearly don't have any experience in pvp (or at fighting) start to shoot out opinions and give councils to pvp players.
Sadly it's not the only one.


There is nothing to say about this railgun, except that it's a stupidity. POINT.

Says you.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Says you.

While Odoacre might be too aggressive in conveying his point, he isn't speaking nonsense.

A rail gun isn't hard to land on anything larger than a Viper, and this isn't some "ace pilot" speaking, but serious assessment of the low-skill ceiling necessary to land a rail on a SCBing ship.

Especially on large ships, that rely on SCBs and don't have the ability to maneuver.

If the rail gun mod only work when landing a shot to the shield generator module, it might be more reasonable, but then large ships are still disadvantaged due to their maneuverability.

 

[Roybe]

The problem with this weapon modification is two-fold:

a) Given the right circumstances, it does infinite shield damage. It does no longer matter how strong the shield of the target is, it is destroyed by a single hit.
b) An attacker who brings this weapon into battle will likely use it not just when the target ignites a shield cell. Just like railguns right now, it'll be a mainstay in their arsenal, so they will fire the modified railgun anyway. It's not really a matter of getting the timing right - they are already firing on you, then you activate the shield cell and the only way to prevent an instant shield drop is if they miss all their shots during the cell activation.

In my opinion, just the neutralizing of the shield cell regeneration effect is a very, very powerful ability, this weapon mod doesn't need anything beyond that to be an extremely tantalizing option.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



This is simply not true. A large ship with a big shield won't wait till the last moment, they may fire when just a single ring has been lost, or even earlier.

And re your anyway: if the shields would always be almost down anyway, this weapon mod wouldn't need infinite shield damage anyway. So this is not really an useful argument in favour of infinite shield damage.

If you're hitting an SCB, your shields are near compromised as it is. You can DPS ships enough to currently overwhelm the SCB's now. What's the difference?

We do not know if the modified rail gun has other detriments..so to say that the player will use it indiscriminately, shows a problem...but not one that the devs might not have thought of and balanced for.

I still say, let's see how it works out in the beta before people suggest it is a bad idea.

 

[GluttonyFang]

If you're hitting an SCB, your shields are near compromised as it is. You can DPS ships enough to currently overwhelm the SCB's now. What's the difference?

As the paragraph you've quoted yourself, some ships require using SCB even when their shield isn't near depletion. Also that most players know to draw some distance before using SCB with low shield (which lowers damage due to distance drop off).

We do not know if the modified rail gun has other detriments..so to say that the player will use it indiscriminately, shows a problem...but not one that the devs might not have thought of and balanced for.

We don't, but with the current information, we know that there will only be 6 attributes affected.

DPS
Pure Damage
Capacitor Draw
Rate of Fire
Jitter
Heat Generation

None of these can compensate for the overpowering effect of the rail gun.

So at least it warrants a major concern.

I still say, let's see how it works out in the beta before people suggest it is a bad idea.

It's overpowered as a concept, not that it's a bad idea, it definitely needs tweaking.

 

[Roybe]

Let me put on my tin foil beanie for a moment and say this:

FDev is making this 'poor' choice to let everyone think they added to the design by arguing and coming up with the solution that FDev really wants, and everyone is happy with the change...and the community never questions the change going further! Whatever the actual change they want to put in would be hellfire and brimstone on the forums...now they know that most people wouldn't want THIS so they let everyone hash out the problem and come to the conclusion that FDev truly wants...which is the change waiting within the wings. Nice Meta! Lol!

 

[cluelessforumuser65578]

the healing laser could be a counter depending on it effectiveness

 

[GluttonyFang]

the healing laser could be a counter depending on it effectiveness

It can't be the only counter since it would mean flying a large ship alone is more dangerous than flying a medium or small ship. In a one on one scenario, large ships will now be extremely susceptible to any ship that can make it use even one SCB. If it's one large ship on two, then forget completely about having a fighting chance.

 

[Roybe]

As the paragraph you've quoted yourself, some ships require using SCB even when their shield isn't near depletion. Also that most players know to draw some distance before using SCB with low shield (which lowers damage due to distance drop off).



We don't, but with the current information, we know that there will only be 6 attributes affected.

DPS
Pure Damage
Capacitor Draw
Rate of Fire
Jitter
Heat Generation

None of these can compensate for the overpowering effect of the rail gun.

So at least it warrants a major concern.



It's overpowered as a concept, not that it's a bad idea, it definitely needs tweaking.

To me, it still sounds like a game of chess between two or more players. When to use the SCB's is currently only important when you are under DPS pressure. When to use them under this new change really forces a player to think more about pushing that button.

Here's another thought...if SCB's do become 'useless' in the eyes of those that PvP, won't PvP players have problems reacting to someone that is using them in spite of the meta?

We also do not have an idea on how much work it will take to get said rail gun. Finally, those attributes might not provide a defense against a rail gun used as such...but they surely can limit the use of that gun to a limited number of shots...or complete uselessness except for the snipe. (Very little damage output, very slow fire rate, huge capacitor draw, etc.) It might have a great offensive use, at such a huge cost that people have to really choose to do use this.

I'm taking a wait and see approach until the beta releases....again, this is a good time for everyone to come up with their ideas that would make this a bad implementation, and I'm certain the devs appreciate that discussion.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

It can't be the only counter since it would mean flying a large ship alone is more dangerous than flying a medium or small ship. In a one on one scenario, large ships will now be extremely susceptible to any ship that can make it use even one SCB. If it's one large ship on two, then forget completely about having a fighting chance.

So large ships flying alone should be fortresses that two players have no chance to beat? And we are back to this old, dead, horse.