Let's Fix: SCBs

[Frenotx]

I'm of the opinion that the current implementation of SCBs is unsatisfying. It's frustrating to watch your progress against someone's shield get erased over and over again. Since you can't even see their SCB ammo going down, it makes fights feel like an endless slog. Because of feedback cascade, SCBs are of questionably utility the slower ship in a given PvP engagement, giving a substantial advantage to the already-advantaged faster ship (they can out-range the opponent's feedback rails and bank tank, while their opponent can't do the same). They annoying, and exist in a knife's-edge state of either being too strong in a given fight, or almost useless.

As such, I challenge you, no, US, to come up with better implementations. I'm not talking about just tweaking numbers here- I'm talking alternate implementations. If you come up with an idea and like it, make sure to ALSO POST IT IN THE SUGGESTIONS FORUM so the devs see it. Include a link to the post here if you do, so other people can find it. If you like someone else's idea, make sure to ACTUALLY COMMENT ON IT IN THE SUGGESTIONS FORUM, TOO. Rep does nothing to increase visibility; only comments will help the idea get seen by the devs. To get things started, I'll leave you with the idea I just posted:

Spoiler

Proposal:

• SCBs
  • SCBs no longer function while the shield is up
  • Instead, SCBs can be used to accelerate the shield rebuilding process
  • The player would still need to wait for the shields to start rebuilding (16 second delay after shields fall)
  • SCBs would otherwise function as the do now: generate heat, consume an ammunition, and dump a bunch of MJ into the rebuilding shield to speed it up
  • Excess SCB charge after the rebuild is done is lost. I.E. if your shield is only 400MJ (200MJ to rebuild) and you use a 300MJ SCB, the shield will still only come up at 50% (100MJ wasted)
• Feedback Cascade:
  • Make feedback cascade come with the following stats: -50% breach damage, +400% damage vs. SCBs
  • Makes feedback cascade do less damage to most modules, but 200% "normal" damage to SCBs. Give you a good tool for limiting someone's SCBs, but requires you to hit the actual module to utilize it. Since SCBs now only work in the shield rebuilding phase, you will definitely get a chance to try and destroy your opponent's SCBs before / during their use. On the defending side, you can fit MRPs to intercept some the damage to your SCBs to protect them, but be warned- the MRPs will be taking a pounding if your opponent is successfully hitting your SCBs with feedback cascade rails (since they're intercepting double-damage rail attacks)

Why:

• Shields are not terribly fun to fight against. The hitbox is bigger (less aim needed), none of your damage sticks, and the entire module targeting / damage system is irrelevant. Slogging through the shield, only to watch all your progress get erased (over and over again) by an SCB is very frustrating. It feels like you're not making any progress, since you can't even see their SCB ammo going down.
• This proposal would make sure that all shield progress "stick". Tearing down someone's shield guarantees that you'll get at least 16 seconds to do some damage to their hull and modules. From the defending side, you only have to worry about 16 seconds or so of vulnerability before you can potentially rebuild your shield again with an SCB.
• Allows CMDRs to potentially counter SCBs even if they don't have that one special effect, by way of targeting and shooting the SCB module while the opponent's shield is down
• Allows CMDRs to defend against feedback cascade rails, by way of having MRPs and AFMUs, and / or by angling their ship to "hide" the module from fire. Big ships can reliably field SCBs against smaller faster ships, as long as they're prepared.
• This moves feedback cascade in line with the rest of the module targeting / damage / repair mechanics, instead of it existing as its own edge case
• Makes armour more relevant in general, even to a more shield-focused ship.

Edit: Since people seem to missing the point of the thread, have some clarification from a post I made later in the thread:

This is what I want people to think about:
How can we change SCBs such that
1) There an effective module that's a compelling choice when you're equipping your ship
2) Not obvious to "un-fun" to deal with from the other side
3) Have counter-play options (and ways to defend against said counterplay) that involve gameplay and player input, not just special effects and rock-paper-scissors build selection.
4) Are not overly game-changing when no counter is present
5) Are not useless when a counter is present

One thing to note: I understand that super pen, and to a lesser degree missile, are currently very hard to deal with once your shields are down. THAT IS ANOTHER PROBLEM THAT NEEDS ADRESSING. That topic is beyond the scope of this thread. For the sake of discussion, please just assume that those particular problems are dealt with, or even better, come up with some clever solutions for those problems and put them in the suggestions forum! I'm not a fan of, "You can fix X! Y is broken too!" mindset, as all that does is make nothing get fixed.

 

[Schmack]

Wait, "if you come up with an idea and like it"?

Did I read that correctly?

The SCB is what allows the PvP videos posted here to be 30 minutes long, shoot shoot pass turn repeat ad nauseum.. then either CL or boom or friendly "GG".

I don't use the SCB. Did use it back in the day though, before engineering when the extraction sites were fun (they are still fun these days but mostly for collecting low grade mats, who wants to make 4m/hr shooting the same ship over and over?)

BUT..

The game has grown too complex already. I've been playing for years and I still haven't figured it all out. I don't want another set of variables to think about.

 

[Frenotx]

Wait, "if you come up with an idea and like it"?

Did I read that correctly?

The SCB is what allows the PvP videos posted here to be 30 minutes long, shoot shoot pass turn repeat ad nauseum.. then either CL or boom or friendly "GG".

I don't use the SCB. Did use it back in the day though, before engineering when the extraction sites were fun (they are still fun these days but mostly for collecting low grade mats, who wants to make 4m/hr shooting the same ship over and over?)

BUT..

The game has grown too complex already. I've been playing for years and I still haven't figured it all out. I don't want another set of variables to think about.

Yeah. If you come up with an idea and are particularly pleased with it, make sure to make a corresponding post in the suggestions forum so the devs can potentially see it. Part of my suggestion is to try and bring SCBs and feedback cascade more inline with the normal game mechanics, such that there's less stuff to keep up with.

 

[Surprised Brony]

I support your suggestion. Leaves less to worry about during the whole fight. Can't stand juggling 30 different things in combat in any game.

 

[Riverside]

It's a noble cause & all that but why post two threads?

If you have a suggestion post it in the suggestions section, done :/

 

[Frenotx]

It's a noble cause & all that but why post two threads?

If you have a suggestion post it in the suggestions section, done :/

Because that is just my suggestion. I like it, but I'm sure there are plenty of other possibilities. I just want the SCB implementation to be better, so I'm trying to get other people to come up with suggestions too. If we work together, perhaps we can come up with some dynamite ideas!

 

[GammaZ]

IMO what's happening with SCB-s is just a symptom of another issue - shields being generally too strong. SCB-s have enough drawbacks as they are, now if shields were weaker it would actually be a challenge to properly time SCB (without wasting it, or loosing shield), unlike it is now when you think "well, i am at 70% now, i can refill it to 90% with SCB without any risk, why not".
Lower shields to ~110% of max size SCB capacity for the ship, and it will make for some interesting choices, like play it safe, trigger it at relatively high shield and loose some sustainability, or wait till the last moment and risk loosing shield/rendering SCB useless for the rest of the fight. And i think this is how it was intended to work too... the problem is, first shield boosters then engineers broke it...

 

[Eriseley]

I like your idea because it encourages the player to stay in the fight instead of disengaging. My idea when I was kicking it about was to have SCBs harm Shield Generator integrity, but I think this would just ultimately encourage disengage and AFMU/reboot.

Oooh, your idea gave me an idea though, which would be a new module type you could activate when shields are down to give localized shielding to modules, kinda like a shield-based, situational MRP. Or even a temporary ablative effect or something.

 

[EvoBeardy]

I don't mean any hostilities or offence by this;

But didn't you recently take out a Cutter in a Viper, while taking fire from other ships and pretty much succeed?

Someone else bullied a Corvette owner (admittedly they didn't seem to know what they were doing as much as you Pro-Pilots but still) in a Sidewinder just recently...

Personally I don't think small ships should have an easier time against larger ships than that, it's comparable to a Humvee taking on a tank. Excellent piloting has been proven to be able to take on lesser skilled pilots in larger and tankier ships. So you're looking for insta-kill? Group ganking would be made even easier.

16 seconds is enough to annihilate modules, even with 3 MRPs (need some HRPs), even annihilate hull. There would be zero point in SCBs if they could only be used as a bandage instead of a preventative.

For what it's worth, I PVE only, I prefer Medium ships and don't prioritise use of SCBs. I own a Cutter, a Corvette, and I've used SCBs of course, hell I have one on my Chiefy as a pure backup incase things get hairy.
I'm just airing my opinion on how this will affect everyone, from my perspective.

If bigger ships with bigger shields are the issue, (this is something I was thinking about recently, hearing all the polava everywhere) then simply make the boosts they receive from Boosters and SCBs diminish the higher the size, small ships still have protection they need, bigger ships aren't as OP.
However, it's already been shown how little these mean to experienced pilots with the right tools, so.

I just get the impression that things like this are because PVPers want quicker and easier kills, are fed up of their prey running or taking too long to kill etc. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I mean, you can't synthesise SCB ammo, so they're gonna run out sooner or later, if they've got more then they've opted for Shield Tanking instead and will be pretty much royally fluffed when their Shield drops.

What about some extra ability of a KWS to display how much Countermeasures your opponent has, like Chaff/HS and SBC ammo and sizes? That way it's not a guessing game for a viable Hunter, and you can plan your tactics and strategy accordingly.

 

[CMDR The Riz]

Here's a PVE example of just how annoying SCBs are (had this video in reserve, was planning on using it in a "buff shock cannon plz" thread, but I've found it relevant to this discussion):

[video=youtube_share;jabVYpdYIQs]https://youtu.be/jabVYpdYIQs[/video]​

I definitely liked what I saw in the OP - it's a very good start. I'd suggest limiting the number of SCB modules you can fit to one to prevent a Cutter from chain-firing several of them and then suddenly you have to burn through 5 GJs of shields again. Either that or adjust how much each cell charges a broken shield based on SCB size and grade.

 

[Deefrize]

I like this idea but.. i dont remember who post old concept for scb's


The idea was the following:
- Remove SCB completely and allow to recharge shields from SYS
- Depending on the size of the power distribution there will be a charge capacity (for example 1E = 60MJ , 1D = 70MJ , 1C = 80MJ , 1B = 90MJ , 1A = 100MJ and for 8A = 800MJ)
- Depending on the size of the power distribution it will have cooldown for X minute per press
- it still can be cascaded by rails
- it will also overheat ship after pressing button like SCB


So.. there will be no "Double banks" and "stacking banks" , cooldown and this still requires heatsinks.


Its not mine concept , i saw it 1-2 years ago , FD seen this but no one word about this..
sorry for my poor English.

 

[Han_Zen]

I like simple. Remove the SCBs and the boosters.
Make recharge depend on shield/distributor ratio. 8A shield/8A distributor = 2A shield/2A distributor.

Any form of stored energy should only be allowed to fill up the distro banks.

 

[shevek]

I quite like the idea as it's a added a layer of skill even for PvE combat, but I would need to see it in action with wing v wing combat just in case ships go pop before they have a chance to use a SCB.

 

[Bigmaec]

I like simple. Remove the SCBs and the boosters.
Make recharge depend on shield/distributor ratio. 8A shield/8A distributor = 2A shield/2A distributor.

Any form of stored energy should only be allowed to fill up the distro banks.

Problem with removing boosters is that then traders are even more cannon-fodder against engineered ships than they are now.

Regarding the Python vid above: the courier build is just bad against SCB ships. Those pythons annoyed me that much that I educated myself on feedback rails, and use them
since then. No more problems against SCBs now.

 

[Frenotx]

Problem with removing boosters is that then traders are even more cannon-fodder against engineered ships than they are now.

Regarding the Python vid above: the courier build is just bad against SCB ships. Those pythons annoyed me that much that I educated myself on feedback rails, and use them
since then. No more problems against SCBs now.

That's kind of the problem. SCBs (base game module) are very tedious, annoying, and generally not fun to play against... Unless you bring a feedback cascade (horizons only), at which point they become trivial. That's the knife's edge conundrum I spoke of. That's what I'm trying to inspire people to think about ways to fix. How can we change SCBs such that
1) There an effective module that's a compelling choice when you're equipping your ship
2) Not obvious to "un-fun" to deal with from the other side
3) Have counter-play options (and ways to defend against said counterplay) that involve gameplay and player input, not just special effects and rock-paper-scissors build selection.
4) Are not overly game-changing when no counter is present
5) Are not useless when a counter is present

 

[Redomus]

Strangely enough I feel like I have to disagree with the SCB thing. I like the current implementation of them, it works and makes sense and gives each type of shield its own style, however flawed prismatics may be. I would rather shield stacking strength for heavy duty was dialed back and resistances were more of a thing along with some better hull options.

This feels like it would make cutters/prismatics/fdl even more OP in terms of shield sponge. If you want a faster recharge you use a bi-weave for shield rebuilding, thats a balance I think we all can live with.

 

[babelfisch]

My fix for SCBs:
Remove all passive and active defensive modules from the game and be done with it.

 

[Durden T.]

I don't feel like this changes would improve the overall balance of combat, which I see now pretty steady.

Reducing SCB and/or boosters (as some has stated in this thread) would contribute to:

- Make traders and explorer builds (or any not combat focused build) a lot weaker, reducing the available configuration options and the chances for them to survive interdictions and pirate attacks.

- Reduce the advantage of the big ships comparing to smaller ones, making this choice and the incredible cost of this ships to simply not be worthy. Big ships with great internal capability should be superior to smaller ships in terms of shield strength and SBC/shield booster capacity. The changes you propose will greatly affect this balancing, making the smaller fighters more powerful.

- Reduce overall combat duration for good. Combat between powerful PvP ships would last considerably less. One of the things I like more of the combat in Elite is that a fight can be long, it is an exercise of strategy and patience. This changes would turn fights into something different, and this changes could affect a lot of players that are happy with things as there are right now.


I'm never closed to improving the game in any term or field, but when proposing changes, it needs to be clear how the proposed changes will affect the current balancing of the game, and which players will be benefited from the proposed changes. To be a suitable change to make, all the player base should end up benefited, not only one part.

 

[npcole]

I used to be annoyed by PvE shield cell banks. Then I got two engineered beam lasers on my cobra. They really don’t bother me any more.

Lasers were “meant” to take down shields and they do a damn fine job even in a small ship.

I see a lot of people complaining about shields and then hitting them with other things.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

The only thing I'd maybe change is limiting SCB banks to max 2 per ship.