Elite: Dangerous PvP Sucks (And How E:D Can Learn From MechWarrior Online)

[Rafe Zetter]

I do agree with you that there's too much "Oh you have this? Well haha, I have that, and that means your this is useless!! Haha!". It's too black & white the way it is now, and the rubbish heat mechanic change they were looking at is an acknowledgement that PvP and combat in general is stale and void of any real depth.

The way Roberts is doing things with SC, is that there are various ships that fill various roles, which makes combat interesting and full of tactical opportunity. What about modules that specifically reduce a ships heat signature (Not temporarily) at the sacrifice of shields? That way, you could actually make use of sidewinders as scout ships.

What about ECM jammer units that scramble enemy sensors completely, but they are based off weapon power, generate a tonne of heat, and take up a weapon slot. Just more tactical options and more combat depth would be fantastic, and it would definitely make PvP more exciting. However, my opinion is that ED NEEDS clans/corps in order to fulfill it's potential. Maybe limit clan size to 50, but it would mean that clans/corps could take up residence in systems and that could lead to some great clan/corp wars.

What about repair beams? The ability to actually support your friends in combat, by repairing them if they get banged up, would be great!

There's so much cool stuff they could do with this game, but there's too many purist fanboys who just want a 3D version of space invaders, with no real tactical depth at all.

#

Repair beams for hull or sheilds idea was put forward many many..many many and a few more times on the forums - every single time it caused a massive argument and then FDev stepped in and said: "No."

Same for clans / guilds.

I'm glad the OP has really put some thought into this, I've not launched the game yet so had no idea that each weapon type had a hard counter. In the original Elite, ECM lasted for just 1 missile, and iirc couldn't be used in rapid succession, so if the first one got blasted the one on it's tail got through - so you played chicken with the first wondering if there was another about to be launched so you got both of them with 1 ECM blast. Only FDev know why this simple but effective mechanic was altered, as the OP said this required more thought than simply button mashing.

The idea of different module sizes giving substantially different bonuses was also put forward - and so far rejected; by different I mean different + added extra's not just bigger = stronger effect of same. (just as the different cargo cannister sizes idea so that more of the market commodities get used was also rejected, seems FDev have an aversion to good logical ideas - but I'm sort of hopeful that FDev will look at the trading info, see half the stuff on their is ignored by almost everyone and reconsider).

FDev constantly said we don't wish to make an Eve-Alike game, yet without knowing it (or maybe they do) they have made a game that while not having many features Eve O does, it also has more than a few game mechanics that are Eve O clones.

In Eve O if you want to go hunt in a certain sector of space, we'll call it type #2, with a certain type of Badguy (rats we call them, no idea why) you take "special loadout #2" which will get you through 95% of all encounters without death because Badguy type #2 shoots X type weaponry and is weak against Y weaponry, so you take defence system X and weapons Y.

Rock-paper-scissors all over again (but with more content).

I love the commitment the OP has put into this but I wouldn't hold your breath on even a fraction of this being implemented.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Anaconda, post Nerf Python....

Even the Asp can be a bit of a pig to keep smaller ships on target.

Z...

Neither combat oriented, they're multi-purpose, but I'm not going to split that hair. You don't need to keep the smaller ships on target when you only have to catch them in your crosshairs one good time to obliterate them. Put some more burst damage in your hardpoints.

 

[Dogoncrook]

Wave that crutch around while you talk about the good old days a bit more, eh? Nerfs happen, that's video games. Find something else to break if that's how you get your jollies and go about breaking it until they fix that too. In case you haven't noticed the game is still in Beta, so why don't you contribute to the testing if you've got a problem with the balance, which if you're complaining about choices you've got a problem with the balance.
|
It's amusing when people talk about choices, but will only utilize the best possible choice, and then complain when it is no longer a choice because of their narrow definition of viability. I suggest you try some different fittings.

What the hell are you on about? I've never used them and I don't need to use them to say it is a fact that torpedoes doing zero shield damage is stupid and illogical they don't even match their own description. They are not viable under any circumstance whatsoever and you would know that if you'd bothered to look yourself.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

What the hell are you on about? I've never used them and I don't need to use them to say it is a fact that torpedoes doing zero shield damage is stupid and illogical they don't even match their own description. They are not viable under any circumstance whatsoever and you would know that if you'd bothered to look yourself.

Sorry, but they just changed to resemble kinetic weapons. Nothing unusual to see here, move along.
|
Despite the fact that I completely loathe WHAT they changed about missiles and torps, they were not wrong to change them, but that's a different discussion.

 

[Derath]

Hey look, it's the most wanted Cmdr in Fed space!


That is because of the existing rule within the game. Chaff hard counters gimbal, so everybody carries chaff, and soon nobody's gonna carry gimbal in PVP scenarios, and their presence in game become pointless (unless you play strictly in solo). Also you're talking about 1v1 or few vs few, and in those scenarios damage-spike weapons (dual-railgun and stuff) will always dominant. I'm suggesting some possibilities for potential large-scale multiplayer battles.

its got nothing to do with chaff, despite the fact the gimbals are the most common weapon type I don't even run chaff, why? Because gimbals are a lower damage weapon variant both in terms of raw damage, and in the fact they frequently miss shots that they shouldn't, at least turrets have a very wide firing arc lol.

I'm totally for them nerfing chaff I think its wrong to punish players that rely on gimbals so harshly but if you want to pvp you generally should take it seriously and that means fixed unless you have a specific strat that requires turrets or gimbals.

Edit: I think every single player i've ever killed has tried to chaff me, every single one of them. That to me suggests both chaff is OP and what chaff is designed to stop is too common.

 

[Dogoncrook]

Sorry, but they just changed to resemble kinetic weapons. Nothing unusual to see here, move along.
|
Despite the fact that I completely loathe WHAT they changed about missiles and torps, they were not wrong to change them, but that's a different discussion.

Kinetic weapons do shield damage. But they nerfed hull damage as well. So what situation is there were a torp is a viable weapon at all? Do enlighten us. Removing them would have made more sense, what they did is straight up boneheaded.

 

[Skip Intro]

If it wasn't for a bunch of idiots sitting inside stations setting off missiles or the same bunch firing missiles against ships trying to dock so they could get their kicks watching the station destroy their targets and the subsequent outcry on the forums, lots of this could have been avoided, IMHO.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Kinetic weapons do shield damage. But they nerfed hull damage as well. So what situation is there were a torp is a viable weapon at all? Do enlighten us. Removing them would have made more sense, what they did is straight up boneheaded.

Burst damage is still burst damage. I can't begin to describe how many kills I've gotten because the pilot thought they still had a chance until it was too late to run because they weren't thinking I had an ace up my sleeve. People have been playing games that are nothing but glorified RNG engines for so long there is a strong mentality that "If he is declining slightly faster than I am declining, I am winning" and any deviation from that scenario does not compute.

 

[Celeste]

So, because you're having a difficult time with different strategies the game sucks?

 

[Dogoncrook]

Burst damage is still burst damage. I can't begin to describe how many kills I've gotten because the pilot thought they still had a chance until it was too late to run because they weren't thinking I had an ace up my sleeve. People have been playing games that are nothing but glorified RNG engines for so long there is a strong mentality that "If he is declining slightly faster than I am declining, I am winning" and any deviation from that scenario does not compute.

Dude you called me out for not knowing what I was talking about and being I guess An old man greifer when I pointed out they nerfed torps so bad they are not a viable weapon. So stop beating around the bush and explain how that's wrong specifically or drop it.

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

If it wasn't for a bunch of idiots sitting inside stations setting off missiles or the same bunch firing missiles against ships trying to dock so they could get their kicks watching the station destroy their targets and the subsequent outcry on the forums, lots of this could have been avoided, IMHO.

They claimed the balance for that would be greifer instances.

 

[hanks01]

I really can't see the problems that the OP is going on about. Whilst there are measures and counter-measures that work against a variety of weapons and tactics, the simple fact is that 90% of the time you don't know what you're up against PVP, PVE or just travelling in general. The smaller ships don't have many utility mounts so most of them can't fit ECM, Chaff and Point defence.

Maybe I've missed something but most of time you equip your ship to take on most situations. I use point defence because if gimbals lower my shields I can always run and regroup, or use shield cells, whereas missiles have range so without a point defence I can take damage at a distance. Same with ECM, point defence does what I want it to do so no point having ECM as well.

Unless you know the exact ship and loadout of what you're going to be facing (and arm yourself accordingly) then chances are you'll equip what works well for you in most situations and how you approach combat. So I really don't see what needs to be changing or why the pot needs to be muddied by taking in MWO mechanics and weaponry.

 

[DYSEQTA]

I agree with a lot of the OP points; it's interesting, I was an avid fan of MWO before ED came along - and ED came along at just the point where MWO was being hit with the nerf hammer across the board, as they killed off anything approaching compromised, alpha builds and turned the game into a generic brawlfest. Interestingly, I feel ED has gone the exact same way. So only the other day I've reinstalled MWO and plan to give it another go, to see what's happened in 8 or so months...

It's better than it was, not prefect by a long shot, but much-much better. Definitely worth the reinstall.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Dude you called me out for not knowing what I was talking about and being I guess An old man greifer when I pointed out they nerfed torps so bad they are not a viable weapon. So stop beating around the bush and explain how that's wrong specifically or drop it.

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



They claimed the balance for that would be greifer instances.

The same way it's always been viable. Keep them held back, sandbag the target until you're confident you can get enough Torps/railgun shots/cannon shots/polish meatballs into them that they can't escape before popping, and pop them. It costs more in repairs, but less in insurance, so the gravy is tasty.

 

[Dogoncrook]

The same way it's always been viable. Keep them held back, sandbag the target until you're confident you can get enough Torps/railgun shots/cannon shots/polish meatballs into them that they can't escape before popping, and pop them. It costs more in repairs, but less in insurance, so the gravy is tasty.

So in other words you still haven't even checked the beta threads that discuss the issue, that you figured I should go test. Classy.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

So in other words you still haven't even checked the beta threads that discuss the issue, that you figured I should go test. Classy.

No, I played the beta. Might jump back in after dinner too.

 

[Mr_Blastman]

Please, I respect the OP's MWO background, but I also have played Mechwarrior Online... a lot (10s of thousands of drops). And I can say with absolute honesty that MWO is one of the worst balanced nightmares I have ever played. There's so much broken with the game I don't know where to start (nor want to as I'm just tired of talking about it).

 

[Tigga]

I rather think you made this thread a bit early. With 1.1 just around the corner, things will be more interesting. Chaff is getting a longer cooldown, right? Even now, Cobras/Vipers only have two utility slots, so while they can double-chaff, they're losing out on cargo/KWS scanner, PDT, and other goodies. Heat sink launcher can be rather entertaining in combat, for example, especially (I would have thought) with upcoming heat changes.

I guess things get a bit less clear once you get to the Asp and above. With 4 utility slots the Asp/Python/Clipper can mount quite a few "hard" counters, though you still have to make choices, especially if you want KWS/cargo scanner. In any case, it's a lot less interesting in terms of choice-making than the smaller ships. This goes extra as gimbals aren't really needed against these bigger ships: fixed weapons do more damage on target, and will often hit more.

In any case, I think there are a lot of viable loadouts for PvP, and a lot of interesting strategies. There are counters, which will hurt you if you rely too much on a single weapon type, but on the whole, most ships don't have enough power to fire all their guns at once anyway, so there's plenty of scope for a mixed loadout. PvP loadouts aren't to counter a specific player (usually), but designed to deal with all-comers. Sometimes your missiles won't work, sure, but if they've chosen to counter your missiles, you have other weapons that will work. Similarily with chaff and gimbals.

 

[Cargobane]

I was a backer and played MWO for at least 2 years. What happened to that game is atrocious. Yes it may be a great shooter to some people, but if ED were to go that route, the void would be too small to hold my sorrow.

I pity ED for even having to see MWO mentioned in comparison.

 

[RatPatrol]

this would be one instance where Eve Online Shines .....


Ship Modules ....
Hardeners vs Dmg Types ....

 

[helmstif]

its got nothing to do with chaff, despite the fact the gimbals are the most common weapon type I don't even run chaff, why? Because gimbals are a lower damage weapon variant both in terms of raw damage, and in the fact they frequently miss shots that they shouldn't, at least turrets have a very wide firing arc lol.

PvP is not exactly always about dueling. Cargo-hauling in open becomes incredibly dangerous in open play for T7 and T9 because they simply do not have the turn rate to defend themselves. The only solutions are 1) gimbal and 2) missiles, both can be hard countered.

That's largely the reason I myself resorted to dishonorable luxury grinding to get an Anaconda. Trading in open in even the slightly populated space is basically suicide.