I must disagree here. Nerf boosters, yes, but SCBs? The current implementation is fine as is. The ultra long fights last because of G5 DDs with 145% multiplier, generating as much acceleration to make it mathmatically impossible to hit with considerable force from beyond 500m - 1000m.
That said, we rely on either hitscan weaponary (that have much less DPS overall) or on long range blueprints (that have less DPS compared to OC or other bluepritns as well).
The origin of the ultra long TTKs does not come from the SCBs but from the insane agility plus hitpoint inflation in regards to base strangth (both, hull and shields).
HD stacked FDLs or Cutters tanking between 3k and 11.6k MJs is beyond any ammo capacity, even with high cap or OC. SCBs only contribute to a minor fraction of these eHPs. They are mos teffective in high resistances builds as each MJ you restore is multiplied by SYS pips and resistances, multiplaying the eHPs from SCBs by around 4.
That said, Bi-Weaves with their utterly fast charge rate also contribute to hitpoint inflation. They technically generate ~ 6 - 7 MJs/s which you have to multiply by 4 again (SYS pips, resistances) and you end up with a broken regeneration rate of ~ 25 - 30 MJ/s (eHPs) ... which is about the raw DPS of a C3F beamlaser.
With that in mind, I would stay away from SCBs (especially for large ships) and take a look on HD stacking (both, hull and boosters), resistances (resistance boosters and HD HRPs) and FCR (to make it less OP against big ships ... change the FCR so it deals raw SCB MJ damage ... like 120 MJ/shot. This would reward hittign small targets but is less effective against big ones ... big ships could sustain more shots but are easier to hit anyways.).
Change the HD and resistance bluepritn so they don't give resistances across the board but one or two resistance types (like bulkheads) at the cost of the other resistance type and total hull/shield strength.
For example:
"Reinforced Shield Booster": +12% kinetic r. +16% explosive r. -8% thermal r. -20% shield boost multiplier (from 20% to 16%).
"Thermal Resistant Shield Booster: -8% kinetic r. -12% explosive r. +32% thermal r. -20% shield boost multiplier.
"Overcharged Shield Booster": +50% shield boost multiplier -10% thermal r. -6% kinetic r. -4% explosive r.
"Reactive hull reinforcement": +22% kinetic r. +28% explosive r. -34% thermal r. -20% hull reinforcement.
"Military hull reinforcement": +50% hull reinforcement -8% kinetic r. -4% thermal r. -12% explosive r.
etc.
This way we would have significant choices to make instead of just having a hand full of "go-to" blueprints as they have basically no downside.
If this owuld take place, we would see builds again that are actual hybrid and have strengths and weaknesses instead of overall protection against everything. For example a kinetic resistant shield loadout with a thermal resistant hull loadout underneath make it still an all-round build, but the playstyle will need to be adapted for each opponent and their damage type loadout. Especially challenging in wing fights as you'd have to adapt to whatever is currently shooting at you.
Weak thermal shields? All pips to weapons and engage if under laser fire. Or just facetank against multicannon builds as your shields are suited better against it. Shields down? let them recharge vs your laser opponent and avoid fire from these multicannons now.
However, as it stands now we all have ~ 50% shield and ~ 40% hull resistances which is why PAs are the meta now and rails are used for their special effect to bypass SCBs and hulltanks by killing the cells and later the moduels as they have far less hitpoints and can't be protected by anything except. TLBs help it a little but doesn't protect you from skilled blind snipers that just snipe your modules without targetting. With TLBs being basically the only defense to super pens, PAs move even more into the focus.
Conclusion: SCBs are fine as they are now. The real problem is too even resistances and HD stacking for both, shields and hulls. Removign the "across the board" blueprints and adding loadout choices to be needed would created weaknesses for each ship and allow for appropiate counterplay without the outcome of "rock-paper-scissors" as we have seen in 2.1++ as you'd still be able to protect your ship all-round but not at a single defense type (shield, hull, hitbox, agility, etc.). You'd be forced to adapt and use certain defense types/strategies instead of just soaking up ALL kinds of damage with a single all-round defense strategy/system.
That said, we rely on either hitscan weaponary (that have much less DPS overall) or on long range blueprints (that have less DPS compared to OC or other bluepritns as well).
The origin of the ultra long TTKs does not come from the SCBs but from the insane agility plus hitpoint inflation in regards to base strangth (both, hull and shields).
HD stacked FDLs or Cutters tanking between 3k and 11.6k MJs is beyond any ammo capacity, even with high cap or OC. SCBs only contribute to a minor fraction of these eHPs. They are mos teffective in high resistances builds as each MJ you restore is multiplied by SYS pips and resistances, multiplaying the eHPs from SCBs by around 4.
That said, Bi-Weaves with their utterly fast charge rate also contribute to hitpoint inflation. They technically generate ~ 6 - 7 MJs/s which you have to multiply by 4 again (SYS pips, resistances) and you end up with a broken regeneration rate of ~ 25 - 30 MJ/s (eHPs) ... which is about the raw DPS of a C3F beamlaser.
With that in mind, I would stay away from SCBs (especially for large ships) and take a look on HD stacking (both, hull and boosters), resistances (resistance boosters and HD HRPs) and FCR (to make it less OP against big ships ... change the FCR so it deals raw SCB MJ damage ... like 120 MJ/shot. This would reward hittign small targets but is less effective against big ones ... big ships could sustain more shots but are easier to hit anyways.).
Change the HD and resistance bluepritn so they don't give resistances across the board but one or two resistance types (like bulkheads) at the cost of the other resistance type and total hull/shield strength.
For example:
"Reinforced Shield Booster": +12% kinetic r. +16% explosive r. -8% thermal r. -20% shield boost multiplier (from 20% to 16%).
"Thermal Resistant Shield Booster: -8% kinetic r. -12% explosive r. +32% thermal r. -20% shield boost multiplier.
"Overcharged Shield Booster": +50% shield boost multiplier -10% thermal r. -6% kinetic r. -4% explosive r.
"Reactive hull reinforcement": +22% kinetic r. +28% explosive r. -34% thermal r. -20% hull reinforcement.
"Military hull reinforcement": +50% hull reinforcement -8% kinetic r. -4% thermal r. -12% explosive r.
etc.
This way we would have significant choices to make instead of just having a hand full of "go-to" blueprints as they have basically no downside.
If this owuld take place, we would see builds again that are actual hybrid and have strengths and weaknesses instead of overall protection against everything. For example a kinetic resistant shield loadout with a thermal resistant hull loadout underneath make it still an all-round build, but the playstyle will need to be adapted for each opponent and their damage type loadout. Especially challenging in wing fights as you'd have to adapt to whatever is currently shooting at you.
Weak thermal shields? All pips to weapons and engage if under laser fire. Or just facetank against multicannon builds as your shields are suited better against it. Shields down? let them recharge vs your laser opponent and avoid fire from these multicannons now.
However, as it stands now we all have ~ 50% shield and ~ 40% hull resistances which is why PAs are the meta now and rails are used for their special effect to bypass SCBs and hulltanks by killing the cells and later the moduels as they have far less hitpoints and can't be protected by anything except. TLBs help it a little but doesn't protect you from skilled blind snipers that just snipe your modules without targetting. With TLBs being basically the only defense to super pens, PAs move even more into the focus.
Conclusion: SCBs are fine as they are now. The real problem is too even resistances and HD stacking for both, shields and hulls. Removign the "across the board" blueprints and adding loadout choices to be needed would created weaknesses for each ship and allow for appropiate counterplay without the outcome of "rock-paper-scissors" as we have seen in 2.1++ as you'd still be able to protect your ship all-round but not at a single defense type (shield, hull, hitbox, agility, etc.). You'd be forced to adapt and use certain defense types/strategies instead of just soaking up ALL kinds of damage with a single all-round defense strategy/system.
![[VR] Enexemander](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/119/119036.jpg?1621636716){kind=avatar}
