Good to know, thank you.
Kill accreditation balance is offending some
- Thread starter Wily Rites
- Start date
Yet this entire thread exists because the ship is not working well. You said it yourself. You’re not getting kill credit, which 99% of us know is happening because you’re not able to sustain time on target. Good for you if you’re trying something different, but you’re not walking on untrodden ground. This has been tested for as long as the game has been online, including by me and several people who have responded to you. So, again, this means you’re either deliberately crippling yourself and then complaining about the result being contrary to your expectations, or you fundamentally don’t understand what’s you’re doing. You want to permaboost, but you’ve crippled your ENG power regeneration which will actively prevent you from doing so.
Super Capacitors is set up in a way that actually gives more effective HP against all potential damage sources in spite of the loss of resistances. You can verify this yourself both in game and when playing on EDSY or Coriolis. To deny that this is happening means that you either don’t know because you never looked or you’re just being contrary for the lulz. If you’re going to show me a ship with Double Braced shield boosters then I’m not sure what you expect me to think about how you understand such things.
No it does not, that is your opinion as to why the thread exists. I understand very well what I'm doing, I'm riding in the saddle of a min max search. Do you know what it is that I'm doing though?
Did you ever test to see if having a stronger capacitor behind your bi-weaves, make them stronger or not? That is my current hypothesis, not finished testing yet though.
I don't want to permaboost, I've not ever stated nor even suggested that I do. In fact it is the permaboost that lead me to the conclusion that I could drop to a system capacitor and the build will still work, and it does work, despite you ever it is that you believe.
You do you, I'll do me, and I'm sure the world will still be spinning tomorrow ... and without a doubt, the combat kill accreditation mechanic in elite will still be just as poorly balanced.
Brilliantly well engineered -post.
Bravo!
And you’ve caught many fish with it, debating your cleandrives, and preturning npcs. Excellent excellent.
This forum still produces the goods sometimes
Bravo!
And you’ve caught many fish with it, debating your cleandrives, and preturning npcs. Excellent excellent.
This forum still produces the goods sometimes
This thread reminds me of similar threads that we often see regarding min/maxed trade ships. Someone wants to build the ultimate mega trade ship at the expense of all other design considerations. And then complain because the game is unforgiving to such a design: its the games fault it doesn't work well.
Commander: I got the best trade ship ever, but the interdictions are unfair.
Forum Response: Use a ship that is easier to control. So you can win interdictions.
Commander: No! I need the biggest ship possible. I need all the cargo space.
Forum Response: Put on some shields.
Commander: No! I would lose valuable cargo space! No Shields!
Forum Response: Well, you gotta do something different...
Commander: No! I have the perfect maxed-out ship. The game is flawed.
Commander: I got the best trade ship ever, but the interdictions are unfair.
Forum Response: Use a ship that is easier to control. So you can win interdictions.
Commander: No! I need the biggest ship possible. I need all the cargo space.
Forum Response: Put on some shields.
Commander: No! I would lose valuable cargo space! No Shields!
Forum Response: Well, you gotta do something different...
Commander: No! I have the perfect maxed-out ship. The game is flawed.
This thread reminds me of similar threads that we often see regarding min/maxed trade ships. Someone wants to build the ultimate mega trade ship at the expense of all other design considerations. And then complain because the game is unforgiving to such a design: its the games fault it doesn't work well.
Commander: I got the best trade ship ever, but the interdictions are unfair.
Forum Response: Use a ship that is easier to control. So you can win interdictions.
Commander: No! I need the biggest ship possible. I need all the cargo space.
Forum Response: Put on some shields.
Commander: No! I would lose valuable cargo space! No Shields!
Forum Response: Well, you gotta do something different...
Commander: No! I have the perfect maxed-out ship. The game is flawed.
Pretty sure the unshileded T9 is more of a meme than a reality.
Do you know what the minimax algorithm is, and why it is used? Fascinating stuff if you are into the computer science side of programming, this is what I mean when I say min maxing, pretty sure that the term came into use because someone was using this to find best possible combinations.This thread reminds me of similar threads that we often see regarding min/maxed trade ships. Someone wants to build the ultimate mega trade ship at the expense of all other design considerations. And then complain because the game is unforgiving to such a design: its the games fault it doesn't work well.
Commander: I got the best trade ship ever, but the interdictions are unfair.
Forum Response: Use a ship that is easier to control. So you can win interdictions.
Commander: No! I need the biggest ship possible. I need all the cargo space.
Forum Response: Put on some shields.
Commander: No! I would lose valuable cargo space! No Shields!
Forum Response: Well, you gotta do something different...
Commander: No! I have the perfect maxed-out ship. The game is flawed.
Of course I don't use the algorithm, I do it by feel, the saddle is of course key to this algorithms functionality, but I refer to sitting in the pilots seat and having fun ... As being in the saddle.
Do please forgive me my nerds humour, it is what it is.
Last edited:
Fairly recent. T9, completely unengineered, 5C shields, no shield boosters, lightweight allow hull. Cmdr can't survive.
fairly recent
LOL this is KI Asp level good.
This thread reminds me of similar threads that we often see regarding min/maxed trade ships. Someone wants to build the ultimate mega trade ship at the expense of all other design considerations. And then complain because the game is unforgiving to such a design: its the games fault it doesn't work well.
Commander: I got the best trade ship ever, but the interdictions are unfair.
Forum Response: Use a ship that is easier to control. So you can win interdictions.
Commander: No! I need the biggest ship possible. I need all the cargo space.
Forum Response: Put on some shields.
Commander: No! I would lose valuable cargo space! No Shields!
Forum Response: Well, you gotta do something different...
Commander: No! I have the perfect maxed-out ship. The game is flawed.
My 900m/sec Viper is the perfect trade ship.
It's very offputting to find that the game often pays rewards in excess of a million credits for trade missions requiring more than the 4t of cargo space my Viper has.
Clearly, this is unacceptable.
I'm perfectly capable of flying trade missions and my ship is built exactly the way I want it so the obvious solution would be if the game was changed to provide trade missions requiring less than 4t of cargo to be transported for large rewards.
This change would be for the good of the community because it'd help teach everybody to fly a Viper very, very quickly and, thus, avoid unwanted interactions.
You know it makes sense.
The rather amusing thing here is that you still sing this mantra based upon hearsay, despite my providing video footage of the manoeuvre being performed in a krait. As I suspect that you are just making one single lone evaluation in your assessment: FDL or not FDL ...
Let me try to clarify this for you a little; In pre turning, as the name suggests, you begin turning before boosting, so as not to be boosting in the wrong direction or you boost turn using a combination of thrusters so as to remain in the vicinity of your target, boosting as they pass you if they boost, and in a manner which assure that you maintain you range proximity when doing so, depending entirely upon the nature of the manoeuvre that is being performed by your opponent and of course the nature of their ship. Rather than the natural instinct which is to simply boost into the turn, to turn faster, sending you hurtling into a different direction something other than that of your opponents.
Now, to help you get a clearer idea of how this working, if you target is not an FDL, yes other ships do exist, there may be no advantage to finishing the manoeuvre at exactly the same speed as your full boost as the likelihood of your ship matching your opponents boost and speed is pretty much non existent, this only happens in the 'unreal tournament' in which everyone is flying pretty much the same ship. As such, the notion that one must do this is completely mute; Boost matching, which is achieved when this is the case, is another subject entirely, and you need be flying very similar ships for this strategy to work and thus to for it to be relevant.
You were doing fine until you commented, perhaps consider watching the provided video of the manoeuvre before moving forwards?
Last edited:
Might I suggest you ease off a little, perhaps refrain from sniffing the vipers rocket fuel; It is polluting your community spirit.My 900m/sec Viper is the perfect trade ship.
It's very offputting to find that the game often pays rewards in excess of a million credits for trade missions requiring more than the 4t of cargo space my Viper has.
Clearly, this is unacceptable.
I'm perfectly capable of flying trade missions and my ship is built exactly the way I want it so the obvious solution would be if the game was changed to provide trade missions requiring less than 4t of cargo to be transported for large rewards.
This change would be for the good of the community because it'd help teach everybody to fly a Viper very, very quickly and, thus, avoid unwanted interactions.
You know it makes sense.
Last edited:
In the context of RPG gaming (this is a game forum) min/max is short "minimizing and maximizing" for optimizing a character or build by placing all skills and attributes to the available extremes. Rather than a distribution for achieving more of an overall balance. In my native language this is a well known term.
Minimax in computer programing, algorithms and decision making, is something different. It is for determining the best next move. But not relevant in the context of this discussion.
You can use minimax for finding possible optimum solutions to build configurations is why I mention.
You might wish to revisit your algorithm that determines the optimal hardpoint loadout for maximizing the effective dps based on ship's capability and pilot's skill to maintain target-on time.
All joking aside, if you are trying to get better at ship flight and fixed weapons while also being effective it is often recommended to carry a combo of weapons until you become a superstar. Maintaining a high effective dps with only fixed weapons is challenging. I'm not very good, so don't take this as condescending. Actually, I suck at combat. But I have methods that seem to work for me. Certainly a PvP player would shred me in a couple seconds.
I suspect a big reason why your battles take so long is you got big honking guns but your effective dps is very very low. You are giving your enemy's shields lots of time to restore. Which means you gotta keep beating those shields down using kinetic weapons. I suspect over-and-over. My #1 advice is choose your flight style and weapons to maximize target-on time which translates to max effective dps which brings you to a short battle so you can move on.
You might wish to revisit your algorithm that determines the optimal hardpoint loadout for maximizing the effective dps based on ship's capability and pilot's skill to maintain target-on time.
All joking aside, if you are trying to get better at ship flight and fixed weapons while also being effective it is often recommended to carry a combo of weapons until you become a superstar. Maintaining a high effective dps with only fixed weapons is challenging. I'm not very good, so don't take this as condescending. Actually, I suck at combat. But I have methods that seem to work for me. Certainly a PvP player would shred me in a couple seconds.
I suspect a big reason why your battles take so long is you got big honking guns but your effective dps is very very low. You are giving your enemy's shields lots of time to restore. Which means you gotta keep beating those shields down using kinetic weapons. I suspect over-and-over. My #1 advice is choose your flight style and weapons to maximize target-on time which translates to max effective dps which brings you to a short battle so you can move on.
I'm not using it, I am just aware that it can be used for this; This is why I make the joke about 'being in the saddle', sorry if you missed that.
My battles finish very quickly, only in rare cases against certain threat level 5 [does higher exist within power play system events?], my DPS is not low but it can be sporadic, it is the case that on some occasions there is a big gap. If that gap falls when a particularly tough enemy is near the popping point, and the security forces are around, then I often loose them as an extremely frustrating end after putting in a lot of effort in what was otherwise a really good engaging and very fun fight.
This is now pretty much solved as I can use the preturn in battle to keep better range, though I do thank you for your concern. I am now also selecting modules and targeting drives, which is making a big difference if I am behind the target, depending on their size.
Again I will state, that I am highlighting an extremely frustrating spot in the UI is all, far too frustrating to be good design, it crosses the line between great gameplay and becoming annoying.
I say UI as it is the same kind of frustrating and shoddy organisation in the logical graph of desktop app interfaces, it is all just graphs to me. This game also does have a lot of very dark patterns, and as such this could be intentionally set as it is, but I do not believe this to be so. If I were writing this game, I would look to remove this kind of experience for users as much as possible.
I get the feeling that the design specification of the project is very different from how I would approach a games treatment of its users. Which is cool, it is all about design decisions. They might not keep me as a user though, I may possibly head off looking for something like Microsoft flight simulator, now that it has missions and all, or il2.
I've just learned about frag cannons and drag munitions, and am again really very disappointed by the design. I can't even use physics to explain their existence and it seems to completely break what was a pretty decent flight mechanic. Now I'm really scratching my head, this seems to be turning into more of an arcade game and somewhat less of a sim.
Last edited:
Dude, have you ever fought against anyone other than an NPC?
Sure yes, not a great deal so far as it is usually so really badly balanced because I'm playing the game and not in a fully maximised combat build, so I highwake out rather than getting into a fight that I know that I can't win. You know that I'm specifically discussing a PvE build here right? I'd like to be able to include other human pilots in the 'environment' appellation, but you just can't when the ships are not balanced in any sane way as to make fighting interesting.
Why do you ask?
I've just wacked PA's on this build now, having learned how ineffective silent running is in game, which really is a disappointment, the previous build was for experimenting with that. Now I'm pondering a weapons focused distributer on the krait, to see if it could handle rather fewer efficient PA's perhaps some overcharged one on there instead.
Though I'm having a few sessions off at the moment, I'm in PvP basic training, which is where I've learned about range control and the different types of pre-turns, there are some lovely folk in the community who give up their spare time to give lessons, fantastic stuff! I've no idea why it matters or not whether or not I do get involved in PvP in game, in relevance to this thread. If I'm honest I've had several occasions where I could have interdicted and attacked power play folk who are likely not PvP'ers in my power play system, but I decide not to do that to them.
On some occasions when I've fought other human players it's been really easy, when they are not gankers in fully kitted out combat builds that are no good for anything other than combat in game.
I think I'll fit a manifest scanner, and only kill the ones who are carrying undermining materials, or are wanted. As it is my belief that going out for combat anywhere other than in a combat zone or as fighter support for a cargo delivery mission, with a fully kitted out combat vessel, is really poor game. To my mind you should at the very least have a kill warrant scanner on board, and some minimal cargo space for basic operations, a hatch breaker limpet controller. Something that involves some lucid game play, at the very least.
Last edited:
Well that is a surprise, not the solution that I was thinking about, but the new merit balance completely resolves this issue!
Thank you FDev for this tuning to merits, rather less inclined to grumble about the few that get away with the balance like this; Heck, I even feel as though I'm on the same team as the security forces now!
Thank you FDev for this tuning to merits, rather less inclined to grumble about the few that get away with the balance like this; Heck, I even feel as though I'm on the same team as the security forces now!