You can run empty slots. Explorers run empty slots, racers run empty slots traders may run empty utility slots.
Tank builds are the only type that are allowed to fill up every slot to thier advantage.
There is currently a massive bias towards defense in outfitting. This is a fact, not an opinion. You can just count the modules or look at the improval potential.
It's not on the same level. Defensive hit points can be raised by at least 1000% from engineering and module stacking.
Speed is max 40%
Jump range about 60%
Firepower about 100%
Easy way to ballance, is to limit the use of defensive modules and utilities.
Everyone has access to the same modules and engineering, if they want it. This means that the game is balanced, as no-one has an intrinsic advantage over anyone else. If one player spends a couple of weeks of game time preparing a combat build ship, then I would expect that ship to be significantly more powerful than my trade ship that I spent half a day engineering. No-one has yet provided a convincing argument as to why this should change. If you want balance, play CQC. It's a simple as that. Ships cannot possibly be balanced in the main game - the level of imbalance is irrelevant (but just because you can't balance a trade and a combat ship, does not mean that the game itself is not balanced).
Forget the how, my idea is just one of a lot of different suggestions. This...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...Gs-in-open-have-got-really-toxic-haven-t-they!
...is the why.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...Gs-in-open-have-got-really-toxic-haven-t-they!
...is the why.
It does not have to be in ballace. It would be nice there was something other than defence in the game.
There are four hit point adding modules, in adition to armor and the shield generator. All except the MRPs can be engineered.
Why do players need all this defense? Who would be hurt if it was restricted?
In my opinion, it wouldn't really work. Player-killers deliberately attack soft targets, and the number of optional military modules they carry aren't there to help them kill their target. That's what WEAPONS are for. The only reason why player-killers carry the optional hardware is because:
- There's nothing else they need to bring with them.
- It gives them time to combat log if it turns out their target is willing to fight back.
In my opinion, there are are three things that should make open a healthier place for PvP:
- Repurpose the CQC rating in the main game to instead show an ELO style-rating for PvP combat. Let the original Combat Rating be a measure of how well we perform against the non-members of the galaxy.
- Add opt-in avenues for PvP that reward close fights or being the underdog. One of Powerplay's flaws IMO was that there was no reward for PvP combat at all. Which would impress the unwashed masses more? Killing the UPS driver, or killing the Red Baron? Allowing players to align with a minor power, and then ensuring that minor-powers have enemies AND allies, both in system, and in neighboring systems, would be a good start... plus a galaxy-wide "pirate" faction that nobody likes.
- Heavily penalize random killing.
Because it is still possible to take down a Cutter in less than 30 seconds with a suitably outfitted combat ship. I know this from personal experience at Obsidian Orbital the other night.
In fact, I don't think I even lasted 30 seconds.But more to the point, who is hurting now? Why restrict when in itself the restriction is pointless?
Because it is still possible to take down a Cutter in less than 30 seconds with a suitably outfitted combat ship. I know this from personal experience at Obsidian Orbital the other night.
But more to the point, who is hurting now? Why restrict when in itself the restriction is pointless?
my friends cutter lasted 20min being hit from 2 medium ships full eng. fas and fdl but carries 260 cargo see the difference
if you want to carry 700+ cargo don't expect to survive in open
You're making invalid assumptions about what I fly in Open - I didn't have anywhere near 700t cargo capacity, and was loaded with prismatic shields and other defences. At which point in my post did I complain about being destroyed? I know what happens when you go to a CG in Open, I was there by choice. The reason I didn't survive was actually down to a computer problem - it doesn't change the fact that it is possible to take down a Cutter very quickly. A CG is an ideal place to demonstrate that.
That depends on what values you talk about as a base. Either way, letting us have more jump range isn't a very good idea. We can already traverse the galaxy in 6:30 hrs. I and many explorers likely wouldn't be too happy of having 600 ly of jump range.
Same goes for speed, for practical uses allowing ships to go at 5000 m/s would make battles literally impossible. You'd exit your weapons range in less than a second and multicannons would not hit the ships at all since they travell at 1600 m/s. If firepower was boosted as much as 1000% then PvE ships truly wouldn't stand a chance against others so it would defeat the purpose of the OP. Boosting that much the armor doesn't really break the game, actually Id say shields have worse problems.
Key word, cheap cobra...
Last edited:
The only way that's true is if someone gets the drop on you with reverbs, which is pretty rare tbh. Other than rare outlying cases, the Cutter is a nigh impregnable fortress that you actually have to want to die in to do so.
With a specialized bomber I'd think otherwise.
Last edited:
Yes, a specialized bomber with reverbs, as I mentioned. And even then you'd have to be watching Netflix on the other screen or talking on the phone to succumb before being able to wake out. And, as I said, "specialized bombers" are pretty rare. It's easy to spot them and act accordingly. To die in a "properly outfitted" Cutter you basically have to not be paying attention, or to fall for some station kill shenanigans.
Last edited:
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I don't have enough experience to really say anything about that. I guess the other options would be to cook alive the Cutter and keep it in a place for some time with containment missiles.
I haven't been following the thread very closely, so I imagine I'm missing the point and narrative, so I apologize if that's the case. I just happened to see the comment about a Cutter being "easy" to destroy and I lasered in on it. Of course any ship can be destroyed if a proper trap is laid, but the trap usually involves a number of very unlikely variables coming together. Unlikely enough that I think a single combat ship taking down one should be a noteworthy event worthy of a round of drinks and a celebratory air around the bar
Why on earth would I make this up? Which bit are you disbelieving? I can paste my log here, though I doubt that would help. At the point several people attack a Cutter at once, damage occurs very quickly. When my framerate goes to hell for no apparent reason, there is not a lot I can do about it. I have a 6A reinforced prismatic shield, 6 heavy duty boosters, SLF. My hull is paper. My shields (which are around 5000Mj I believe - I get a little over 6000 with my 8A prismatic) went down, after which my ship is a sitting duck.
Both of which were a factor, as I have already stated. While I was actually paying attention, my computer wasn't...
Unlikely enough that I think a single combat ship taking down one should be a noteworthy event worthy of a round of drinks and a celebratory air around the bar
lol, I'd agree with that. But that's not what happened, nor did I ever say that was the case.
Last edited:
I haven't been following the thread very closely, so I imagine I'm missing the point and narrative, so I apologize if that's the case. I just happened to see the comment about a Cutter being "easy" to destroy and I lasered in on it. Of course any ship can be destroyed if a proper trap is laid, but the trap usually involves a number of very unlikely variables coming together. Unlikely enough that I think a single combat ship taking down one should be a noteworthy event worthy of a round of drinks and a celebratory air around the bar
The OP says that be limiting the amount of military modules in our ships, that would improve PvP in general and make more people go to open. If you wonder, I disagree with it.
Insofar as their is ‘PVP’ problem it is a human one not a technical one. Therefore it cannot be solved by the sort of tinkering the OP suggests. Insofar as it needs solving it can really only be done through incentivising or deterring types of behaviour.
The line between pvp and attery is both thick and blurry anyway. A crime and punishment system might deter some behaviour but the bottom line is if you are in Open you stand a chance of being attacked and if you are not in a geared up combat ship you are going to get destroyed if you cannot escape. Players are often so rich now that even buying back a fully kitted Corvette isn’t necessarily going to deter them.
The dedicated PvP player is likely to be better equipped and more skilled at combat and flying in Open means you have to accept that and fly accordingly.
That’s what open pvp in most games are like.
I’m not a PvP type but when I fly in open I try to keep my wits about me. If I don’t like what I’m seeing I bug out before trouble can start. I don’t fly anything I cannot afford to lose. My ship will be engineered for survivabiity and I will avoid known trouble spots.
I just make the possibility of getting intercepted and killed into a feature and if I just want to have a quiet life i play other modes.
The line between pvp and attery is both thick and blurry anyway. A crime and punishment system might deter some behaviour but the bottom line is if you are in Open you stand a chance of being attacked and if you are not in a geared up combat ship you are going to get destroyed if you cannot escape. Players are often so rich now that even buying back a fully kitted Corvette isn’t necessarily going to deter them.
The dedicated PvP player is likely to be better equipped and more skilled at combat and flying in Open means you have to accept that and fly accordingly.
That’s what open pvp in most games are like.
I’m not a PvP type but when I fly in open I try to keep my wits about me. If I don’t like what I’m seeing I bug out before trouble can start. I don’t fly anything I cannot afford to lose. My ship will be engineered for survivabiity and I will avoid known trouble spots.
I just make the possibility of getting intercepted and killed into a feature and if I just want to have a quiet life i play other modes.
No, I most definitely don't agree with the OP. The people who don't want to play in Open for fear/irritation/lack of interest in PvP aren't going to come back or stay in Open just because the killing/defensive potential of combat ships has been modified to some minor degree to give the trader or all purpose ship less of a disadvantage. These players simply don't want to deal with PvP under any circumstances, so modifying my uber deadly FdL isn't going to make them any difference. Now, I don't necessarily disagree that current combat load outs should be seeing revisions and re-balancing, just not for the same reason as the OP.
Also, I categorically disagree with the notion that pure dedicated combat rigs shouldn't have the edge on multi-purpose ships. Why shouldn't a specialist ship be rewarded for specializing?