Goodbye Open til SCB issue is sorted

[Kyuubey]

Basically, with PvP, who wins? the best pilot or the ship with the most internal compartments?..the game mechanic is truly awful in this respect, but, as I said..roll on 1.4.

The person who brought more friends

 

[Gédéon_Lecanard]

<SCBs pile up praise>

I must say, I agree with you most of the time, but on this subject, you are very much seeing things from only one point of view: exclusive pvper. Even more specialised: wing pvper.
A few days ago, as I was saying that I'd rather switch to solo for CGs than having to bother to deal with continuous streams of interdictions from pirates, you dismissed the argument and said that I wasn't even trying, coming there in a unprepared ship. Remember?

Ok, tell me, then: how does a single trader who wants to make a living -and therefore has to use at least a few module slots for, say, cargo holds- can deal with a full wing of buffed up pythons, FDLs and such, weaponised to the teeth and carrying SCBs in such amounts that they may contemplate starting a career in trading those themselves.

-he can't run away. (if he's not too slow, the multiple interdictions will ensure he's screwed anyway)
-he can't fight. Not only a single ship in that wing is far more shielded and armed than he is, but SCBs pile up ensures that there's no chance a shield would even be threatened in the pack.

SCBs are making this even worse. The way they are implemented make it so that they are useless to traders as they use precious module slots, and completely overused by fighters since they are pretty much all they need. And this is only from a trader perspective.

As far as fighting goes, I can't help but yawn whenever I see a fight that will revolve around who got the most SCBs. It makes people lazy, fights boring, and actually, logoffskys are becoming irrelevant since most of those dull turn-shoot-SCB-repeat excuses of a fight ends up with the less SCB stacked ship chickening out once its last pill has to be used. This part about fighting is only my opinion. The one about traders vs pirates in open is a fact.

edit: I like SCB concept. It's another addition that gives variety. But now, they work hard against variety.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

I meant in PVP. When using SCBs in PvE players just curb stomp the AI regardless of strategy.

In PvP the most successful strategy is for the bigger ship to just full reverse and keep firing on target as it doesn't care about return fire because of SCBs. Hence, the slugfest you may keep hearing about.

This proves to me you are among the anti-SCB folks who are losing PvP fights due to lack of skill, and blaming SCBs. Someone who has spent the time and effort learning the system and the ways around it will completely roll you and it will probably take them less than twenty seconds to do so. Your 'successful SCB strategy' will not save you.

In ours. The tendency has been toward faster maneuverable ships instead of heavy boats of mass destuction for long, destroyer class was literally an anti-heavy ship weapon and is nowaday so efficient that almost no heavy capital ships are built other than carriers, dreadnought almost doesn't exist since long, and the last battleships in the world where decomissioned in 1990. Same goes for intermediate heavy like cruiser and battlecruiser. Frigates and Destroyer own the sea now.

In the reality where speed and agility scale directly inversely to size, and you don't end up with an Eagle almost as slow as Python.

I'm sorry the game isn't as you envisioned it. There is no ship in the game that can stay in the blind spot of the most basic boosted FAOff turn or two. This is what the reality is. All other things equal, sidewinders will not be destroying farraguts, eagles will not be killing pythons, haulers will not be beating clippers, etc. Again, this is what the reality is. To say otherwise is a misinterpretation of reality.

 

[CMDR Kantos Kan]

This proves to me you are among the anti-SCB folks who are losing PvP fights due to lack of skill, and blaming SCBs. Someone who has spent the time and effort learning the system and the ways around it will completely roll you and it will probably take them less than twenty seconds to do so. Your 'successful SCB strategy' will not save you.

Wow! This is one of the most rude post I read in a long time. You're assuming he's losing his PvP fights because lack of skills? How do you know that for a fact?

To continue in the same stupid path, you sound like someone who is stacking tons of SCBs to win all his PvP fights!

Yes, someone like you who learned how to find ways around the system by stacking as much SCBs as possible. You know, you sound like the one who lacks skills...

 

[Gédéon_Lecanard]

Someone who has spent the time and effort learning the system and the ways around it will completely roll you and it will probably take them less than twenty seconds to do so.

Now I'm curious. What does that strategy consist in?

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Wow! This is one of the most rude post I read in a long time. You're assuming he's losing his PvP fights because lack of skills? How do you know that for a fact?

To continue in the same stupid path, you sound like someone who is stacking tons of SCBs to win all his PvP fights!

Yes, someone like you who learned how to find ways around the system by stacking as much SCBs as possible. You know, you sound like the one who lacks skills...

I know this for a fact because he says that reverse is the most successful PvP strategy.
In reality, against competent or expert PvPers, this only makes it easier for them to kill you.
Hence, I question his skill and mastery in the area of PvP, and call him an amateur.

Now I'm curious. What does that strategy consist in?

Frag cannons, rails, PAs, even beams against smaller ships.

EdiT:
I couldn't find a video of an actual duel, but I did find a video that illustrates some of the potential:
https://youtu.be/02jPpec4SMc?t=11m

 

[Kastor]

Frag cannons, rails, PAs, even beams against smaller ships.

EdiT:
I couldn't find a video of an actual duel, but I did find a video that illustrates some of the potential:
https://youtu.be/02jPpec4SMc?t=11m

Frag cannons require you to be closer than often feasible, especially against the reversing style of gameplay everyone is using. Rails are a great counter but to run enough of them you must handicap the rest of your ship, especially if your using a combat ship rather than multirole. PAs are a mix of both.

But sure, we can use those to beat SCBs or you could loadout with SCBs and Beam lasers yourself and slog it out. That's fine.

Now tell me how to use multicannons, pulse lasers, burst lasers, seeker missiles, dumbfire missiles, torpedoes, cannons or mines to beat SCBs. Or should we just remove all of those from the game.

Not to mention PDTs, Hull Packs, AFMs, Armor and ECMs.

So that's what... 12+ different types of module and equipment that your one module is making redundant. Granted many of them have their own issues but we can't see and fix the shadows those issues cast while they are all under the shadow of SCBs.

Heck, the only major module balancing we've seen since SCBs were introduced was missiles. Why? Because only missiles were op enough to be noticeable behind SCBs. There are so many issues with the combat as it stands, hundreds of tiny little things. Missiles and Armor not doing their job, turrets ignoring silent running, no real module attacks other than Powerplant and drives, AI in general, ECMs never seeing use, the powerplay weapons and on and on and on. But none of that has been looked at like shield cells have.

The one thing you are so fanatically defending is stopping almost all progress made towards a funner, more balanced combat.

Do you really love SCBs so much that you aren't interested in what will come after they are gone. How many interesting and new tactics could be developed to fill the void they will leave. So many things that are currently redundant suddenly seem useful again.

 

[Gully Foyle]

Lose the SCBs. They cause more trouble then they are worth. Make the game harder, more folks would enjoy it.
SCBs turn PvP into a faceslapping fest.

 

[Morbad]

I must say, I agree with you most of the time, but on this subject, you are very much seeing things from only one point of view: exclusive pvper. Even more specialised: wing pvper.

Wing PvP is the most dangerous situation one can face in Elite: Dangerous, therefore that is what my combat doctrine revolves around.

If I am in populated space, I am almost certainly in a vessel that I feel can defeat or evade any wing of CMDRs I am likely to encounter, by myself, regardless of what I happen to be doing with that vessel.

A few days ago, as I was saying that I'd rather switch to solo for CGs than having to bother to deal with continuous streams of interdictions from pirates, you dismissed the argument and said that I wasn't even trying, coming there in a unprepared ship. Remember?

I do.

Ok, tell me, then: how does a single trader who wants to make a living -and therefore has to use at least a few module slots for, say, cargo holds- can deal with a full wing of buffed up pythons, FDLs and such, weaponised to the teeth and carrying SCBs in such amounts that they may contemplate starting a career in trading those themselves.

-he can't run away. (if he's not too slow, the multiple interdictions will ensure he's screwed anyway)
-he can't fight. Not only a single ship in that wing is far more shielded and armed than he is, but SCBs pile up ensures that there's no chance a shield would even be threatened in the pack.

SCBs are making this even worse. The way they are implemented make it so that they are useless to traders as they use precious module slots, and completely overused by fighters since they are pretty much all they need. And this is only from a trader perspective.

I trade on occasion, and I am on occasion interdicted by CMDR pirates, blockaders, or other malefactors.

A couple of recent examples, though none are against full wings...

First ship is a pure trade python, with 260 tons of cargo space, no SCBs, and no weapons:
[video=youtube;fcVdWyJPh5o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcVdWyJPh5o[/video]
I ram my interdictor and continue on to my destination without delay.

A combat trade Python, for CG areas, with 240 tons of cargo space, a modest supply of SCBs, more counter measures, and a weapons load-out I am comfortable with:
[video=youtube;cP12gvPNJXc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP12gvPNJXc[/video]
These guys actually catch me almost completely off guard, I was tired and growing complacent with the lack of resistance and allowed them to sneak within interdiction range without even being able to check their loadouts first. My chaff and ammo are already depleted from fighting in two SSS I encountered on the way to my destination. Were I in a fresh ship, the prismatically shielded Asp would likely have been shot down and the Clipper probably would have had to flee. I disengaged when I ran out of ammo...then immediately dropped back to normal space, only ~70km from where I entered SC (you can see the low wakes of my opponents pop up on my sensor display after I drop back to normal space), waited another 90 seconds, and entered SC again...my interdictors were 1500 ls away, moving in the opposite direction and I was able to make it to my destination and deliver my cargo without further molestation.

An older, but still relevant, encounter:
[video=youtube;JJyGQQaS-bM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJyGQQaS-bM[/video]
That's a Clipper with 232 tons of cargo on board, no SCBs, no weapons, A4 shield generator and quad A boosters.

I've done open trading in Asps and T-6s as well, and have never lost any ship to pirates. If you are on the ball no Python can catch you and Vultures can barely keep up. FDLs and Clippers can be very dangerous, but even a T-6 can escape them. There are tactics to avoid repeat interdictions (one of which I mentioned above), but I am perfectly willing to delay or abandon delivery if it means saving my ship...which I do not think is an unreasonable situation to be in. Sometimes the job, or area, is just too dangerous and the best option is to cut ones losses and come back later.

As far as fighting goes, I can't help but yawn whenever I see a fight that will revolve around who got the most SCBs. It makes people lazy, fights boring, and actually, logoffskys are becoming irrelevant since most of those dull turn-shoot-SCB-repeat excuses of a fight ends up with the less SCB stacked ship chickening out once its last pill has to be used. This part about fighting is only my opinion. The one about traders vs pirates in open is a fact.

I don't agree with your opinion or your "facts".

Now tell me how to use multicannons, pulse lasers, burst lasers, seeker missiles, dumbfire missiles, torpedoes, cannons or mines to beat SCBs. Or should we just remove all of those from the game.

I frequently use multicannon, pulse lasers, torpedoes and cannon.

I frequently defeat opponents with many more SCBs than myself.

Sometimes it's about catching them off guard; sometimes it's about a cunning feint that forces them to move pips away from SYS before I deliver a devastating counter attack; sometimes I just hit way more often than my opponents do, and force them to burn two, three, or four SCBs for every one of mine.

In PvP the most successful strategy is for the bigger ship to just full reverse and keep firing on target as it doesn't care about return fire because of SCBs. Hence, the slugfest you may keep hearing about.

I'm generally considered a fairly prolific and successful PvP player, but I do not consider this to be the "most successful strategy". Reversing is often quite useful, but so are all other movement axes. A formulaic response to attack that always calls for a pure reverski will fail against competent players more often than it succeeds...as will any other inflexible tactic.

Not to mention PDTs, Hull Packs, AFMs, Armor and ECMs.

So that's what... 12+ different types of module and equipment that your one module is making redundant. Granted many of them have their own issues but we can't see and fix the shadows those issues cast while they are all under the shadow of SCBs.

SCBs don't make any of these redundant...shields do.

Also, my pure combat FDL has a B1 AFMU.

 

[Morbad]

Wow! This is one of the most rude post I read in a long time. You're assuming he's losing his PvP fights because lack of skills? How do you know that for a fact?

To continue in the same stupid path, you sound like someone who is stacking tons of SCBs to win all his PvP fights!

Yes, someone like you who learned how to find ways around the system by stacking as much SCBs as possible. You know, you sound like the one who lacks skills...

I'm inclined to agree with Psycho Romeo.

Ultimately, all battles are won or lost on skill. Maybe not the skills the pilot in question would prefer to be testing, but skills none the less.

When I came upon an enemy CMDR who was AFK in a low wake and destroyed his ship without him even being at his controls...that was due to a lack of skill on his part. If you need to do something and cannot dock, you should make sure you aren't being shadowed before dropping out of SC, and once you do drop out of SC you turn FA off, boost in some random direction, cause the ship to spin, then power off your thrusters and move four pips to sys. This way you will be moving quickly, with no exhaust trail, and you will be very cold, meaning even if I drop into your low wake shortly after you do, I will have difficulty finding you. Even if I do find you, I have to keep my pips ENG to follow, which reduces my damage output. These are all things that will make it difficult for another CMDR to encounter you if you have to leave your controls, and will buy you time if you are discovered.

Now, this CMDR assumed that because I had destroyed him in this manner that I lacked skill in the areas he happened to value, so he and a friend interdicted me, presumably expecting to defeat me, and I sent him to a rebuy screen again, just to let him know his assumption was incorrect.

So now that I presumably also sound like someone who stacks as many SCBs as possible and cannot fight without them, maybe you can tell me how many SCBs I use in this battle (I'm the pilot filming, in first person, in case that was unclear):
[video=youtube;iHfCAK4Rg5A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHfCAK4Rg5A[/video]

 

[Mephane]

I'll self-quote from the other thread, because I don't think the other thread has enough visibility so far. I have been thinking about SCBs some more, and I have an idea for how they could be redesigned to address excessive SCB spamming and slow passive shield regeneration simultaneously, while still preserving the idea that a bigger ship can stack SCBs for greater effect than an smaller ship:

• SCBs are a buffer for SYS power, no longer requiring ammo.
• After purchasing or turning on an SCB, it needs to charge its internal capacitator from SYS.
• When that capacitator is full, the SCB can be fired at will, depleting its entire charge.
• You can have multiple SCBs, and they will behave like chaff, i.e. not firing together, but sequentially. (You could press the SCB key binding in quick succession to fire multiple SCBs almost simultaneously, of course, but you wouldn't need to deal with fire groups just to prevent them from going all off at once.)
• Firing an SCB has the same effect as it does now, with one major change: they also work when the shields are down, spending their stored power to speed up the shield reinitialization.
• When you toggle an SCB off, it immediately loses its charge.
• When multiple SCBs are depleted, they recharge sequentially, starting with the weakest or strongest one (not sure which way around it would be better).
• SCB recharge rate depends on class and rating, so that generally, SCBs of the same rating recharge at the same speed between all classes, but of course draining more from SYS the higher class. In other words, a C2 SCB and a C4 SCB all take the same time to regenerate (provided sufficient SYS power), but the C4 SCB drains SYS more during that time, because it also stores a bigger charge.
• The amount of power an SCB stores is equal to what it can put into the shields, and not necessarily equal to a full SYS bar (it could be less or more, depending on the sizes and ratings of the two modules).

Now please hear me out, for here comes my reasoning and some of the consequences I hope/expect such an implementation would have:

• If you want to use multipe SCBs, you need to keep them powered. The option remains, but removes the awkward module juggling while at the same time turning their passive power draw into a meaningful consideration, not something to just shrug off at the press of the "OFF" button.
• SCBs become more of a once-in-a-while tool instead of something to be spammed non-stop, due to their single-charge nature, you won't be able to fire many dozens in succession, but will have to wait for them to recharge.
• If you have multiple SCBs, you now have complete ad-hoc control how many fire. Each press of the SCB button activates the strongest charged SCB without any need to deal with extra fire groups just to manage the SCBs.
• It is now an option to not spend an SCB before the shields are down, but do a gamble whether the opponent will get through the shields at all, or will do much hull damage afterwards (remember, 1.4 will address power plant sniping), and if you lose that gamble, the SCB doesn't turn into dead weight, but remains a tool to speed up recovery.
• There is the distinct possibility that, due to their regenerative, ammo-less nature, that SCBs might now provide a real solution to the problem of long passive shield regeneration, because they can short-circuit the 1MJ/s passive regeneration by sending a large chunk of energy into the shields, previously drawn from SYS. Therefore, indirectly, they also serve the purpose of speeding up regenerating between fights by speeding up the effective rate of SYS->shields energy transfer. Using them in this manner also provides an interesting trade-off: having your SCBs depleted between two engagements, you won't have them all recharged in the next fight already, and you will need to keep pips in SYS if you want them to regenerate while you are fighting.
• That "SCBs empty, immediately head back to rearm" moment is gone, too. They are now a tool both for emergency and sustain, actually increasing their overall utility in a much more flexible way.
• It is conceivable that there could be equivalent devices for ENG and WEP, that store extra energy for these capacitators in exactly the same manner. WEP and SYS cell banks could even provide for a real trade-off, and combat ships could come wit a mixed loadout of various types of cell banks, while traders might prefer, for example, only ENG and SYS cell banks. (Please note that I am against the idea of a universal cell bank, precisely because that would eliminate the need to think through your loadout and what type of cell bank you want to bring into battle.)
• The entire notion of "shield potions" is replaced with a flexible module that integrates into other ship functions (power management).

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

There have been some good points imo and personally i like Mephane's ideas..... however I also respect that many players - who have more experience of the issues than I - feel strongly that the current system is fine and it should stay the way it is.

With this in mind, perhaps after 1.4 is out of beta (probably not worth it now) the beta servers could be used to have a play with different options. Give everyone access during this time and play around with it, changing it every couple of days.

So long as everyone tries to go in with an open mind, and is prepared to admit something works well even if it is not what they originally wanted, then maybe there could be some hard data rather than just talking hypotheticals.

if at the end of it, no one has changed their mind and those who like SCBs as they are still now, fair enough, but at least people would have tried it.... And Frontier will have more data to work with if they decide to make changes.

sometimes what sounds good on paper is not good in reality, and maybe those who currently do not like SCB stacking will realise that they are the way to go after trying other ideas?

 

[Maelkhor]

Right now, big ships aren't invulnerable to wings...unless handled very wisely by the wing as a whole, they are already a liability. If they lose their largest advantage...the ability to absorb huge amounts of damage...they lose any utility that would justify the rebuy cost they would be far more likely to face.

It's true, but maybe the issue is that ships price scale is so badly correlated to ships stats progression. I'm not asking to nerf all price, as it is currently the only intensive for grinding, but this point to another issue, ED is a very very good base for what could be the best space opera ever done, but in it's current state and despise what FD says about it, it is still a dull beta really lacking meaningfull content and variety. If viewed from the perspective of a sandbox game, the game totally lacks players created content aspect, from an MMO point of view, the variety of interaction would be a shame (resumed to 6 or so minigame), for a solo space opera, freelancer was more exciting, only things left is PVP, and even this is feels broken in many balancing aspects.

The game is really too old school in term of gameplay content for it's own sake, I could use an analogy by comparing the with the Zelda series evolution for exemple, for a lot of fans, Ocarina of time was the best game of the franchise, but it is mainly because we compare things in their own timeframe, OoT was just so great when it came out, but what if we had to compare it obectively with the latest zelda games?

Now if we had to replicate the game in term of content depth nowaday and compare it with the lasts occurence of the serie, it would in fact feel very lacking in term of sidequest and activities, small, linear as hell, unpopulated and not lively at all, even creepy.

I feel the same for ED, it currently feels like a (although promising) modern rendition of a badly aged gameplay. So maybe it is not the game for me, but in this case it is a shame because I don't feel like SC is going toward filling this nich of real modernization of space opera.

So I'm not ranting about SCB for the sake of it, what despise me is the defense of the current statu quo in a game that really deserves to be better in all aspect. Because I know that if the game doesn't take a great acceleration in term of content (horizon is still the addition of an oldschool aspect of the game and won't really add to what is really missing) I'll get bored sooner than later, and I would be very disapointed at this point.

Hardocre fans of the current gameplay won't care, but if ED fails to attract enough players for enough time, and if SC is less than 10% of what they promise and won't deliver, space op game will return to nether for some others decades.

 

[Bortas]

I'll self-quote from the other thread, because I don't think the other thread has enough visibility so far. I have been thinking about SCBs some more, and I have an idea for how they could be redesigned to address excessive SCB spamming and slow passive shield regeneration simultaneously, while still preserving the idea that a bigger ship can stack SCBs for greater effect than an smaller ship:

As well thought-out as your suggestion may sound on the first glance, it has a serious flaw:

Normal SCBs have limited charges, your's dont.

- If the system you described is strong enough to keep shields up under heavy fire, it will be possible to keep shields up indefinetely, which would be even worse than now.

- If your SCBs don't have the potential to keep the shields up under fire, then they would be useless from the start.

 

[Mephane]

As well thought-out as your suggestion may sound on the first glance, it has a serious flaw:

Normal SCBs have limited charges, your's dont.

- If the system you described is strong enough to keep shields up under heavy fire, it will be possible to keep shields up indefinetely, which would be even worse than now.

- If your SCBs don't have the potential to keep the shields up under fire, then they would be useless from the start.

The #1 balancing factor for my SCB proposal would be the speed at which SCB refill themselves. This would need to be slow enough that even a Python stacked with SCB won't be able to fire them indefinitely. Maybe there also could be a delay between firing an SCB and the beginning of them recharging, so that they don't recharge while you are still going through your set of stacked SCBs.

 

[CYB34]

SCBs can be easily balanced with a cooldown for each cell.
Take your pick, 5s, 10s, 20s, 30s, hell even 1m to make them completely useless.

No need for new mechanics or complete modifications to the current system.

 

[Bortas]

The #1 balancing factor for my SCB proposal would be the speed at which SCB refill themselves. This would need to be slow enough that even a Python stacked with SCB won't be able to fire them indefinitely.

That's what I mean... if they don't charge fast enough to keep shields up for more than their initial use, then what's the point?

They are impossible to balance... they would be either overpowerd or useless. Knowing how FD used to balance things in the past, chances are, they will be useless. Better to stick with the current system, that's at least predictable.

 

[Mephane]

That's what I mean... if they don't charge fast enough to keep shields up for more than their initial use, then what's the point?

They are impossible to balance... they would be either overpowerd or useless. Knowing how FD used to balance things in the past, chances are, they will be useless. Better to stick with the current system, that's at least predictable.

Erm nope, they wouldn't be useless. If, for example, an SCB took 5 minute to recharge, that would still mean if you have 5 SCBs, you'd still have on average 1 shot per minute, but you could blow them all rapidly and then have to wait 5 minutes for the first one to become available again. My idea is to specifically prevent the deadlock where both sides are spamming SCBs endlessly, while allowing to increase you SCB power by stacking multiple of them, if you have the room and power in your ship.

 

[Bortas]

Erm nope, they wouldn't be useless. If, for example, an SCB took 5 minute to recharge, that would still mean if you have 5 SCBs, you'd still have on average 1 shot per minute, but you could blow them all rapidly and then have to wait 5 minutes for the first one to become available again. My idea is to specifically prevent the deadlock where both sides are spamming SCBs endlessly, while allowing to increase you SCB power by stacking multiple of them, if you have the room and power in your ship.

Fair enough, but the "deadlock" you are mentioning exists only in 1v1 PvP and even there only under certain circumstances. More often than not, good players can break through the shield-cell barrage. Your suggestion is extremely biased towards duel style PvP and completely neglects wing combat.

 

[Mephane]

Fair enough, but the "deadlock" you are mentioning exists only in 1v1 PvP and even there only under certain circumstances. More often than not, good players can break through the shield-cell barrage. Your suggestion is extremely biased towards duel style PvP and completely neglects wing combat.

I am not sure what you mean by the last part about wing combat? Do you mean a ship should withstand the attack of an entire enemy wing for a prolonged time?