Goodbye Open til SCB issue is sorted
- Thread starter Achilles7
- Start date
Ok i'll try again... one thing is fighting in an arena with different sword, shield spears and choose to use an heavy armour or a lighter... this is a fight with balanced rules...one thing is allowing in this fight arena to use kevlar high tech armour with laser guns. It's logic that all the warriors will choose lasers and kevlar armour despite their skill...because this is the only way to survive. This is BAD BALANCE. The loadout or skill choice is overwhelmed from the need of more SCB.. this is the issue...i'm not talking about to get rid of them, but in that way they're bad and umbalanced
It's not bad balance - it just keeps players from fighting with mining lasers
And as already proven the second way to survive is to go stealth instead of shield.
Last edited:
Maybe back in beta in sthealt you survive...try now. LolIt's not bad balance - it just keeps players from fighting with mining lasers
And as already proven the second way to survive is to go stealth instead of shield.
Actually you are not seeing the problem I was discussing. Yes, there will be no financial penalties arising...that is my point. What will happen to PvP players, their opportunities, and the quality of their time in the galaxy? Where will those that truly want a 'real' PvP experience play? What type of PvP player will remain in the galaxy at large? Where will the targets for these types of players be actually playing? There is a huge shift coming into this game and it does not benefit the galactic PvP'er.
- - - Updated - - -
There is a solid meta growing for stealth...whether it can overcome the SCB meta...-<shrug>
Exactly where they are getting it now: being hunters in power play.
Also I don't think duellists going off into CQC is a bad thing. Especially for the ones that have a sour taste just thinking about shield banks and other possibly even dirtier fighting tactics employed inside an open galaxy.
They can get their classic mirror dog fighting inside CQC. Everyone looking for the high risk and financial penalty will still get it when hunting enemy power players.
Agreed, which is something the supporters of how they are currently used just don't seem to get.
You can't get fourteen times the firepower. You can't get fourteen times the engine speed. You can't get fourteen times the cargo space. But you CAN get fourteen times the shields.
Last edited:
PowerPlay is not played where people can be shot at, either someone announces for RP reasons they were going to be somewhere to do just that or they want to be shot at. I went out hunting one night and found no one for more than 5 hours. Will never do it again. Biggest waste of game time I, and my wing, ever did. Obviously, mileage varies...but for the PvP people I play with...not worth it.
As far as the state of PvP in the galaxy, we have to wait and see...unfortunately, from a behavioral/economic/game standpoint...I see nothing but a huge black pit. However, there could be some reason that people will remain available to be killed in the galaxy.
This is kind of what I was getting at when I mentioned the blindness of people.
.
I did trading once. I had a T6. I'd like to think I'm a smart man. I took A rated modules, a better shield, some SCBs, and chaff. In the end I had about 20% less cargo and 20% less jump range than a pure trader.
.
I got interdicted by something that completely outclassed my ship: a clipper. The clipper ordered me to drop my cargo. I applied all my ED experience to this situation, and made a judgment call. My FSD timer clicked, I deployed chaff, started spinning up, and boosted away.
.
I won this combat scenario. I escaped, damaged, but alright. My attacker lost this combat scenario. He did not get my cargo. In fact, he did not even get through my shields. Why? Because I applied my skill in my decision making. My skill told me to build defensive at the cost of profits. My skill told me to flee. My skill won me this PvP fight.
.
Again: blindness. This 14 times shield strength means little. Anyone keen on punching through SCBs is going to take frag cannons or rails, and it will take me approximately eight seconds to do so. A single SCB takes what, three to activate five to fully deploy? So...
.
What kind of rubbish is this?
The moment you log in, you step into the arena. Whether you bring Kevlar and a rifle to the arena or a knife and a backpack to the arena is nobody's choice but your own. You are condemning yourself if you bring the latter. No change to balance will fix a player's stupid decision to run into a fighting arena with nothing but a shirt and a backpack.
Last edited:
while i can't agree with the first point (specifically: "13,6x shield strength is a shame", why?), i can't even spot the 'second point' in a seemingly random collection of mostly gratuituous assumptions about player behavior ... care to point at it?
You are talking to a trader that understands all this. However, I would like an option to stop...and use my outfitted T9 to fight someone with....unlimited SCB's prevent this from occurring...there is only one loadout a T9 should have....enough shields and armor to last a high jump. SCB's force all players to only play singular roles...it removes any chance for 'OMG I cant't believe you did that moments!' Sorry...SCB's bad design that limit players to certain builds....less possibility for interesting interactions...less overall fun for all players.
I think the biggest thing here is that it isn't a matter of trading off one thing for another. You're not looking at two fighting ships on even footing.
You're talking about multipurpose ships being able to outperform dedicated combat ships because the only limitation on SCBs is power usage, and multipurpose ships don't have nearly the same limitation there.
I think if we look at the basic balance of ship types, the issue would begin to resolve itself. Though we don't yet have a dedicated combat craft in the Anaconda tier, even a single FDL should be of significant concern to an Anaconda pilot if things were appropriately balanced.
Warships should be devastating in combat. The current combat model combined with the lack of SCB limitations has put that out of balance.
You're talking about multipurpose ships being able to outperform dedicated combat ships because the only limitation on SCBs is power usage, and multipurpose ships don't have nearly the same limitation there.
I think if we look at the basic balance of ship types, the issue would begin to resolve itself. Though we don't yet have a dedicated combat craft in the Anaconda tier, even a single FDL should be of significant concern to an Anaconda pilot if things were appropriately balanced.
Warships should be devastating in combat. The current combat model combined with the lack of SCB limitations has put that out of balance.
Remove SCB's once they fix the damage model (which they said is upcoming in next patch). SCB's are a band-aid for their broken subsystem targetting/damage model. They should not be needed once it's fixed.
I don't think anyone outright supports how they are currently used. Sure they can be fine tuned like anything else in the game.
But complaining about them being what they are or outright demanding their removal just doesn't seem appropriate.
That said I do think similar modules for fire power (extra ammunition cargo or laser charges?) and engine power (boost charge ...? perhaps just have one energy cell charge that can be applied to either sys/eng/wep instead of scb) could be great.
After all 14x the shields ins't exactly what it is - it's 14x the chance to restore your shields - with a capable opponent you may fail on your first try.
I thought anacondas are first of all somewhat well armed cargo ships (see the large bulky box at the bottom).
There are dedicated battle ships of the same size coming that will probably outperform it on that front.
Last edited:
I agree with the sentiment...but doubt you are correct in the implementation. There is some fiddling with the damage model...particularly around the 'powerplant go boom' attack. You could be correct...but it would be a surprise to me.
I don't particularly think there is anything broken about SCB's in their current state.
The person who came more prepared.
Your complaint ultimately seems to be that you took a giant Swiss Army knife into a sword fight and found that the tooth pick and magnifying glass weren't as useful as the more specialized tools of your opponent.
Part of being a good pilot is preparing for and choosing your fights wisely.
The person who came more prepared.
Your complaint ultimately seems to be that you took a giant Swiss Army knife into a sword fight and found that the tooth pick and magnifying glass weren't as useful as the more specialized tools of your opponent.
Part of being a good pilot is preparing for and choosing your fights wisely.
Last edited:
You got outplayed bcus your lack of knowledge about the ships and im sure that you dont have a proper loadout, many ppl doesnt realize that scb are like rock paper sizors, if you had good burst/nuke power you can take down shields and dont let them use one scb, but with lasers and multicannons agains a SCB build you have to run, 2nd the curier has more shields than a vulture and potentially 8 SCB.
I win several times agains scb builds on my stealth dbs.
I win several times agains scb builds on my stealth dbs.
It is r,p,s between PvP people, well rock or paper anyway. And not having enough SCB's means you are rock all the time. Against anyone else their choices are limited to the 'hold your breath and make the high jump before I die'. Since there is no reward to players that PvP in the game...there is no reason to outfit anything in a PvP manner unless you are planning on PvP'ing in a particular ship.
Last edited:
why not just make the scb's produce more heat so the only thing you can do is just keep basic maneuvering without crossing into the major cook off zone? torps produce a ungodly amount of heat if they fire at same time why arnt scb's?