because there is a difference between beeing weaker (nerfed) and useless (doublechaffed) Chaff impact si way too serious in it's current form, especially in double usage.
Delete Chaff from the game (and make gimballed weapon weaker)
- Thread starter vrcan
- Start date
because there is a difference between beeing weaker (nerfed) and useless (doublechaffed) Chaff impact si way too serious in it's current form, especially in double usage.
Yes, it is a stupid idea! ( You asked the question yourself 
)
Chaff is actually fine, IMO . But Point (1) is actually quite revealing - you want to remove it because you personally don't like it!
Gimbal weapons are already quite weak, I don't see the point in debuffing them more.
- If you don't like chaff, don't use them yourself.
- If you have fixed weapons, Chaff won't affect you.
Decide upon your load out as appropriate.
)Chaff is actually fine, IMO . But Point (1) is actually quite revealing - you want to remove it because you personally don't like it!
Gimbal weapons are already quite weak, I don't see the point in debuffing them more.
- If you don't like chaff, don't use them yourself.
- If you have fixed weapons, Chaff won't affect you.
Decide upon your load out as appropriate.
Last edited:
Please, reread what i wrote.
Yes fixed MCs are popular (but not extremely, you probably dont do much PVP recently, what is pretty ok).
But in the case of fixed MCs you rely on reticle, to aim it.
So as i wrote "WIth gimbaled its no way to use them as fixed by unselecting target"
so it is exactly as i wrote. Please note "by unselecting target", in that case you lose reticle, so with fixed MCs you cant hit for longer distance reliably.
Gimballed are too easy to use, chaff is an equaliser. If you were in a small ship like an eagle and someone had a huge gimballed long range multi, you'd be screwed without chaff.
Things like cannons are not even really effected by chaff, because your range of engagement is so low, that once you are within that range, any shots you fire will land within that inner circle reticle.
If someone double chaffs, then that probably accounts for the majority of their defences (Since who double chaffs on a large ship with lots of util slots), which means they are opened up to other attacks, fixed weapons.
It's one of the few areas that is balanced reasonably well.
Last edited:
Yes. I would also sign that.
none and low shielded builds need chaff... if there was none, it would be safe for all PvP to bring Gimbals weapons and snipe modules.
I don't expect the good pvpers to miss me if i chaff, if they are using fixed or not, but i do know that it reduces the chance they can lock onto my thrusters or power plant and disable me (if they are carrying a gimbal).
if there was no chaff, all you would need to take down a low/no shield opponent is a stack of multi cannons that are gimballed and maybe thermal on some, to take down the weak shields if they have some.
...and then we end up with everyone in a FDL (more so than now)
I don't expect the good pvpers to miss me if i chaff, if they are using fixed or not, but i do know that it reduces the chance they can lock onto my thrusters or power plant and disable me (if they are carrying a gimbal).
if there was no chaff, all you would need to take down a low/no shield opponent is a stack of multi cannons that are gimballed and maybe thermal on some, to take down the weak shields if they have some.
...and then we end up with everyone in a FDL (more so than now)
Last edited:
Troy_McClure
Banned
Bad example there - the eagle has ONE utility (well done, Frontier!)...you'd be screwed regardless, if you're relying on chaff to save you!
I'd like gimballed weps to have a very small firing arc, just to compensate for less accurate hardware. To all intents & purposes, you'd have to pilot & position your ship in the same way as having fixed weps which would be preferable to the current gimballed mechanics, imo.
Yes. Yes, it is. You failed to give a single actual reason, that isn't a personal preference. The fixed/gimballed/turret balance is good as is.
What the.....
Need to stuff more shield boosters on eh?
I'd love to see gimbals get a reduced firing arc and effectiveness tied to sensors. Makes sense to me. Its a great idea!
Need to stuff more shield boosters on eh?
I'd love to see gimbals get a reduced firing arc and effectiveness tied to sensors. Makes sense to me. Its a great idea!
Leave chaff be, but limit NPC's to having the same amount of chaff as players, no unlimited number of materials to continue to synthesize it, and the same cooldown as everyone else.
NPC Chaff is one of the reasons I learned to love the Plasma Accelerator - you can't chaff plasma.
Something I would like though - Emissive Weapons: These raise a ships emissions. Why not make them a viable counter for Chaff? If a ship's emissions are raised enough reduce the effectiveness of chaff. Simple and effective.
NPC Chaff is one of the reasons I learned to love the Plasma Accelerator - you can't chaff plasma.
Something I would like though - Emissive Weapons: These raise a ships emissions. Why not make them a viable counter for Chaff? If a ship's emissions are raised enough reduce the effectiveness of chaff. Simple and effective.
In no game ever is a hardcounter to any weapon system a "reasonaly balance"
missiles can overcrowd poit defense, and point defense has dead angles iirc. but a stupid doublechaff can just nullify one gimballed or even 100 gimballed wepaons. That is absolutely unreasonbly "balanced".
beign able to nullify gimballed is also a big reason for ship imbaalnce when their hardpoints aren't well distributed beause you need fixed wepaons to counter gimball nullifiers. And fixed weapons down't work on widespread hardpoints.
Last edited:
Deleted member 115407
D
It is.
That's why I used it as an example. Because it cant double chaff. So without any chaff, you couldn't even do the chaffing during a firing run then back out of range gimmick.
then give the eagle another slot, it won't make it OP, but we cannot justify an entire system on a single low "food chain" member when the upper food chain is a mess due to one weapon system.
I don't remember this, but it's sad (imho) that this didn't sit well with the community as it sounds like an eminently sensible idea, and would make the sensor suite something to be considered, rather than just automatically D-rated.
As for scrapping chaff. No.
One of the hallmarks of biweave setups is the ability to quickly regen. Regen is stopped for 1 second after any damage is taken; giving gimbals 100% time on target, even at a reduced damage completely negates the benefits of biweaves. Which more than likely will lead to even more people shield stacking.
Would've made the ForumDads pay slightly more to keep their gimbals and turrets as effective as they are currently, of course it was shot down!
Edit: forgot to mention the unholy act of lowering the jump range too!
Last edited:
I'm not quite sure what points people are debating by now or if there's even a debate, but I thought I'd chime in to say the Eagle shouldn't have overwhelming utility - or even "good coverage" of utility. It's a damn small ship that's among the cheapest in the game, with its shining strength being that it's the most "agile" ship you can buy. It should absolutely be flawed on utility coverage and absolutely shouldn't become a balancing factor as a result of weak utility coverage.