FD utter failure: engineering brought to an excess

[Guest 161958]

As expected. Complaining is easier than reflecting one's own mistakes, isn't it?

In the current balancing system, the mistake is to play as a miner and explorer. I am not complaining, I have a different idea of balancing than yours. No need to get salty.

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

In the current balancing system, the mistake is to play as a miner and explorer.

No, the mistake is to play as a miner or explorer with a paper-thin build and no sense of situational awareness.

 

[Guest 161958]

No, the mistake is to play as a miner or explorer with a paper-thin build and no sense of situational awareness.

Again, you are talking about skills which I agree are needed. Do not insist on stating where we agree. If you play as a miner/explorer, whatever build you can muster can be killed very easily by pvp wings. Which is good, but it is TOO easy.

 

[Bortas]

In the current balancing system, the only mistake is to play as a miner and explorer.

Funny... I'm playing as a miner on a daily basis, always in open. Interstingly despite many tried, nobody managed to get even close to killing me in my mining ship.

Same applies to my exploration ship, which happens to be an AspX with 54 LY range, >500 MJ shields, 900 HP hull, 540m/s top speed and some defensive stuff.

No, the banlancing system isn't to blame... it's the players' choice to use crappy builds. If you spent the time you are blaming others here learning a few basics about the game, you could solve your problem yourself.

 

[Guest 161958]

Funny... I'm playing as a miner on a daily basis, always in open. Interstingly despite many tried, nobody managed to get even close to killing me in my mining ship.

Same applies to my exploration ship, which happens to be an AspX with 54 LY range, >500 MJ shields, 900 HP hull, 540m/s top speed and some defensive stuff.

No, the banlancing system isn't to blame... it's the players' choice to use crappy builds. If you spent the time you are blaming others here learning a few basics about the game, you could solve your problem yourself.

You really love ad hominem and stroking your ego. I am trying to talk with you not insult you. I have no problem with my build. It is not about hypothetically demonstrating I suck at this game and you do not. It is about game mechanics. One shot killing is wrong however you put it.

 

[Bortas]

You really love ad hominem

Trying to clarify that the fault is on your side, not the game balancing is not an ad hominem. I even offered concrete advice, but you said you weren't interested in it which leads to the conclusion you're just venting.

I have no problem with my build.

Why don't you try to give other explorers advice on how to build an open-proof exploration ship then? Wouldn't that be more expedient than blaming FD?

One shot killing is wrong however you put it.

I disagree. It's your choice to build your ship as weak as possible. Everything you need to be safe from gankers even in open is in the game. You just have to use it. If someone has issues, the community is always happy to help.

 

[Feros-da-Grundig]

There is no need to change mortality rate. Combat logging is a separate issue and has nothing to do with balancing as it is cheating.

Have you ever mined or explored? Because you sound a bit single-minded.

I have used core mining extensively, and posted detailed research about it on this forum and others. I have a mining challenger build with 2700 HP that would kill a weak ganker and escape from the rest of them, and with it I've made hundreds of millions of credits (like everyone else with their aspX or whatever). Trying to squeeze a mining build onto a challenger taught me exactly how many modules are needed. I can provide links to build or research notes if you don't believe me.

If I can make a challenger mine & murder, you can make a conda or a python mine and explore and mechanic without being paper thin.

And yes, I had to make sacrifices on that chally, it has fewer collectors than I'd like due to its mil slots. Asp/python/etc is faster for this reason. The sacrifice makes gameplay slower, much like lower jump range on an explorer. But it won't die to some gank.

If you want a small/medium ship besides the python (and maybe krait) that can do three things then you are really asking a lot, since no one else gets that.

I never did the old mining, because it was not fun for me. With the new mining, I actually get to fly around and aim a bit, and also make ridiculous amounts of credits.

No, I haven't done exploring in the way you mean it, just various prospecting/barnacles/grind unlocks, etc. It's not enjoyable for me, but that doesn't invalidate my view that a ship in open should be able to survive in open.

 

[Captain Willard]

Apples to oranges here. If I'm in a stripped down explorer and come across a dedicated ship killer. I expect no less.
Flying in open in the former is asking for death in short order.

 

[M00ka]

It appears the game is reaching that stage that if a Commander wants to fly anywhere in the bubble (or any other well known location) in Open they have to do it in a ship built for PvP or at minimum one to resist a PvP attack. Too bad if they want to go to an Engineer to get the mods, or visit a Guardian site to get what they need for this new build just to survive. Or worse, just a beginner to the game or someone who is a casual player. Just seems that a small minority are dictating terms and conditions of the game to the majority and that doesn't seem right.

Of course every player has the opportunity to play in Solo or the PG of their choosing, but then they are ridiculed for 'hiding in solo'. Yes the current system is unbalanced, blind Freddy can see that (apologies to anyone called Frederick who is visually impaired) but until FD introduce a realistic C&P that punishes those who prey on the weak nothing can be done about it.

Maybe if this continues FD will finally be forced to introduce the PvE mode that so many want.

 

[Guest 161958]

Trying to clarify that the fault is on your side, not the game balancing is not an ad hominem. I even offered concrete advice, but you said you weren't interested in it which leads to the conclusion you're just venting.



Why don't you try to give other explorers advice on how to build an open-proof exploration ship then? Wouldn't that be more expedient than blaming FD?



I disagree. It's your choice to build your ship as weak as possible. Everything you need to be safe from gankers even in open is in the game. You just have to use it. If someone has issues, the community is always happy to help.

You assume my build is not good because I say there is a balancing problem. That is where the ad hominem lies. You fracture the community even more with this paternalistic behaviour.

When you build a ship to be also safe from gankers you have to make compromises that not everybody is able to take. How many hours per week do you play Bortas?

 

[StuartGT]

people agreeing with me that one shotting is a sign of lack of balance and not proper pvp.

Assuming they've played other games they must know about headshots? Or a super shotgun blast or rocket to the face? One shot deaths and "proper" PvP.

As many others here have already said: gimping your protection via an imbalanced loadout only opens you to insta-death chance. Take heed of their advice.

 

[Captain Willard]

It appears the game is reaching that stage that if a Commander wants to fly anywhere in the bubble (or any other well known location) in Open they have to do it in a ship built for PvP or at minimum one to resist a PvP attack. Too bad if they want to go to an Engineer to get the mods, or visit a Guardian site to get what they need for this new build just to survive. Or worse, just a beginner to the game or someone who is a casual player. Just seems that a small minority are dictating terms and conditions of the game to the majority and that doesn't seem right.

Of course every player has the opportunity to play in Solo or the PG of their choosing, but then they are ridiculed for 'hiding in solo'. Yes the current system is unbalanced, blind Freddy can see that (apologies to anyone called Frederick who is visually impaired) but until FD introduce a realistic C&P that punishes those who prey on the weak nothing can be done about it.

Maybe if this continues FD will finally be forced to introduce the PvE mode that so many want.

We already have open pve mode. It's called PG

 

[Feros-da-Grundig]

You assume my build is not good because I say there is a balancing problem. That is where the ad hominem lies. You fracture the community even more with this paternalistic behaviour.

When you build a ship to be also safe from gankers you have to make compromises that not everybody is able to take. How many hours per week do you play Bortas?

He was literally saying that if your build is good, you should share it to other explorers. That does not seem like he is assuming your build is not good.

Casual players are best served by PG/Solo. You actually up the ante here; you are implying that not only should ship durability be boosted, but that players who play very little should be able to play competitively with players who play a great deal. There is no competitive game that is like that, except trivial ones like the card game war. Open is competitive; whether that is good or bad is a different question but there is no ambiguity. In particular, it is competitive in combat. That is just how it is. You seek to make it less so it seems.

 

[M00ka]

We already have open pve mode. It's called PG

Wrong, a PG can be anything the owner wants it to be. In fact I still don't know why those yearning for full on PvP action haven't created a PG for just that. There are hundreds, if not thousands of PG, not all of them the same, not all of them open to Community.

 

[Zwei34]

[video=youtube;1ULz7ukMb7s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ULz7ukMb7s[/video]

 

[Riverside]

Watching a video of gankers killing explorers in one, two volleys of cannons. I like pvp, but this is not pvp, this is a click once to win mechanic.

Thinking how beautiful and fun this game is and how hard developers failed in balancing attack and defense.

I want everyone to play in open, but engineering (nice addition) was brought to an excess.

I would gladly fight back, but then I am shut off from all the exploring and other cool things this update brought because I do not have time to explore 30 or less ly per jump and I cannot bring all the stuff I need.

If there was more balance between a pvp build and explorer build it would be feasible.

Repped the OP for raising a valid issue about balance that has (I think) a fairly straightforward solution - weight more of a ships total hull hitpoints towards the standard hull & less to the stat buffing modules.

The overall effect would be to make the basic (unengineered) hull more survivable without changing the total strength of a fully engineered ship. I'm only referring to hull armour & HRPs.

I have to say though, I agree with the general principle of planning for all contingencies, even if part of that plan is to accept without complaint that the ship is a paper aeroplane & would be knocked out by a stiff breeze.

 

[Y nt Zoidberg7]

Hang on, let me just get in the right frame of mind.... Okay, I smacked my head against the wall a couple of times, I think I'm ready.

I have 4 exploration vessels. My favorite and most used is a DBX (Scooty Puff Sr.). It has 82 mj of shielding and can jump 67.62 ly per jump. I would be STUNNED if I lasted more than one shot against a PVP ship lol. As many, many, many others have stated, it isn't a problem with balance. It is a problem with people not accepting responsibility for their in-game choices. If you want to fly an origami swan with and FSD like me, sometimes bad things are going to happen

So in short, I disagree OP.

 

[Bortas]

It appears the game is reaching that stage that if a Commander wants to fly anywhere in the bubble (or any other well known location) in Open they have to do it in a ship built for PvP or at minimum one to resist a PvP attack. Too bad if they want to go to an Engineer to get the mods, or visit a Guardian site to get what they need for this new build just to survive.

They don't. Take a look at Rinzler's guide to "Git gut guide to trading in open". He is explaining how to build a PvP-proof T-7 just with unengineered modules. Works with exploration ships, too.

Also explorers don't seem to have a problem engineering their FSDs for max range and lightweighting everything else. Shouldn't be a problem to engineer their amor and shields a bit, too.

 

[Feros-da-Grundig]

Repped the OP for raising a valid issue about balance that has (I think) a fairly straightforward solution - weight more of a ships total hull hitpoints towards the standard hull & less to the stat buffing modules.

The overall effect would be to make the basic (unengineered) hull more survivable without changing the total strength of a fully engineered ship. I'm only referring to hull armour & HRPs.

I have to say though, I agree with the general principle of planning for all contingencies, even if part of that plan is to accept without complaint that the ship is a paper aeroplane & would be knocked out by a stiff breeze.

First, I agree HRP and ShBst resist boosts are questionably strong.

However, I basically already made this point to OP (without your reasonable thoughts about debuff HRP):

We're talking about a simple boost. You want a boost to durability across the board.

OP's response was to imply I never mined, and justify why he wants a fragile ship that can do 3 different things at once, but also play in open. :shrug:

Without saying your idea is good or bad, I think it would just lead to slightly lower mortality rates and more combat logging in this DW2 thing. 1 hit, 10 hits, doesn't make a huge difference.

The root problem is not build. It is mode choice and pilot knowledge/ability.

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

A thread full of people saying the same thing does not make anyone right, and I am not here to be convinced or to convince you, I am trying to have a peaceful discussion.
I see that some agree with me through rep but avoid participating so they do not have to bear the ad hominem, and others who disagree with my opinion. All is good.

Discussions like these might stem good feature requests which improve the game if done right.

I meant I did not search videos on youtube, I happened to see it in a link and followed it.

One click kill is a sign of imbalance both on the target and the perpetrator in my opinion.

What would it take to convince you that defense has benefitted more from engineering than offense?

The strongest engineering mods I can think of only increase damage output by ~+80%.
Otoh, using a Chieftain for example, just adding the reinforced/hicap mod (on a 5A gen), and HD super capacitors to 2 A class shield boosters brings the raw shield values from ~339 to ~877!
That's almost exactly double the change at ~+160%