Nerf crowd about to ruin the game again

I suppose if they nerfed them I would have to leave CZs or RES more often to restock, but still not that much. As it is now I can usually get my fill of combat for the session and have a bank or two completely untapped.

I do wish that there was an alternative, I mean, it's either SCBs or hull reinforcements for a combat build for internals (unless I am missing something in the outfitting screen), and we all know which is far more effective. I'd like to see something that can give a short boost to damage that would effectively cancel out an SCB being popped, or speed (NOS for space-planes!) or something, just anything else.

I find myself looking at my combat python with all those empty internals thinking, well, I could put in SCBs or......another SCB......oh, look, I could put in another SCB! But maybe I have missed something.
 
And what about being able to be completely invincible versus a wing of 4 Elite Anacondas in a Vulture and be able to beat the snot out of them ?

That is balanced ?

I'd be surprised if there was a Vulture build that could do that. On my one with class 5 shields and class 4 scbs I barely get a ring back. I usually use on the Vulture when I'm running away to prevent the shield dropping and the loooong recharge. There are only a few ships in the game that SCBs turn them into ridiculous tanky builds and from my experience the Vulture certainly isn't one of them.

My own tunnel vision perspective, like picommander I tend to run my ships multi purpose and even the combat focussed ones are built and weaponised for a variety of scenarios (balancing speed, lastability etc.) PVP is a rare treat and I rarely both to completely respec my multi purpose ships (well, Asp and Clipper) for that role in mind. Only time I ever put strong SCBs on my Asp was to give me half a chance of snagging an unknown artificat from a Type 9 before its two anaconda escorts blew me out of the sky. So when I do PVP I tend to find that tanky builds don't tend to bother me (especially the clippers that my FDL can alpha strike and ram.) That being said I do understand why people find it a problem and I don't think it would be a bad thing to reduce the modules for those 3-5 bank builds.
 
SCB's are I think a good addition, but it's too easy to pad your combat capability with them, so they become an offensive weapon, rather than a defensive weapon. There was a comment earlier that they are required to go up against 4 ships. If you are over matched 4 to 1 and the 4 ships are decent you should be dead. For me in that situation you are using the SCB as an offensive tool to allow you to fight multiple enemies. In other words its allowing a ship to be over powered, that is a huge problem in combat and effectively makes a high end ship almost impregnable. Effectively PvP is an SCB matchup. Winner is the one with more SCB's. I understand its great for PvE, but are we really flying "Incredible Hulks".

Where I agree with SCB's is for traders and explorers in ships that are travelling long distances in a "defensive" capability and the SCB is basically a defensive weapon.

I suggest two changes.
Switching in an SCB should be a serious event that is not viable to do in combat. Make it take 2 minutes. Then its a case of working out when you should use it and perhaps having to use it before you need to.

The SCB should not directly replace cargo bays, because more cargo bays available means more SCB's. Instead the vessels should be capped according to class. A trading/explorer vessel offering more capability than a fighter.
 
And what about being able to be completely invincible versus a wing of 4 Elite Anacondas in a Vulture and be able to beat the snot out of them ?

That is balanced ?

- - - Updated - - -



If we still had SJA, I'd agree.

I would say the devs are fairly happy with where 'balance' currently is. With the reassignment of MoM™, they have declared AI 'finished' (one of the proofs they can point to was the amount of people in the forums stating the AI was now to hard and they could not play). PvP builds have always been very different from PvE builds, as they are focusing on diametrically opposed goals. PvE builds are more DPS based, PvP builds are more defensive. Because the DPS can be held constant with more defense...everyone can use this to their own advantage...wins for everyone!

Personally, I'm not a fan of health potions within this game...but, this game is built to deter players from meaningless PvP. The meta has gotten to the point that if you are going to kill someone...you had better have plans on what to do if you fail.

The interactive crowd, those that are playing PowerPlay and Community Goals, have to remain effective at the game...because this is how the game is meant to be played....thus they have to be able to kill ships or move freight, etc. to meet the games goals...so the devs apparently feel that your point is moot...i.e. yes, it is fair that a ship can be constructed to do exactly what you describe so the PvE players can effectively collect their trophies for turn in.
 
SCB's are I think a good addition, but it's too easy to pad your combat capability with them, so they become an offensive weapon, rather than a defensive weapon. There was a comment earlier that they are required to go up against 4 ships. If you are over matched 4 to 1 and the 4 ships are decent you should be dead. For me in that situation you are using the SCB as an offensive tool to allow you to fight multiple enemies. In other words its allowing a ship to be over powered, that is a huge problem in combat and effectively makes a high end ship almost impregnable. Effectively PvP is an SCB matchup. Winner is the one with more SCB's. I understand its great for PvE, but are we really flying "Incredible Hulks".

Where I agree with SCB's is for traders and explorers in ships that are travelling long distances in a "defensive" capability and the SCB is basically a defensive weapon.

I suggest two changes.
Switching in an SCB should be a serious event that is not viable to do in combat. Make it take 2 minutes. Then its a case of working out when you should use it and perhaps having to use it before you need to.

The SCB should not directly replace cargo bays, because more cargo bays available means more SCB's. Instead the vessels should be capped according to class. A trading/explorer vessel offering more capability than a fighter.

You pretty much nailed it in your first paragraph there. Not sure if I fancy your suggested changes but the problem with SCBs from my experience tends to be from turning the multipurpose ships into combat vessels. I think if they nerfed them for specific ships or classes it wouldn't be such a problem. An A6 scb for an A7 clipper shield seems to give the whole shield back, similar with the Python and Asp and probably the Anaconda as well.
 
Well, to be honest there is no problem once you realize that PvP pew pew is in this game only to provide a role play option.

The real PvP is set to be PvE activities between groups.

That is why PvP provides no tangible benefits to your bottom line....nor does it help in Community Goals or Power Play. PvP pew pew is a fun diversion and that is about all.

Still, my main point is that an important part of a game like Elite, where no content has any kind of wall around it (except permit systems, for what it's worth), an important part of playing the game is being able to judge for yourself if you can handle the situation you're about to fly into, or that you've just flown into.

Getting out of nasty 4v1 situations is what the FSD is for.

If a single item allows you to simply plow through a situation like that, all it has done is rendered PvE trivial and is sure to make PvP one-dimensional when it's used on that side.

Unfortunately, one of the signs a piece of equipment is too strong is often that a lot of players have become dependent on it. They lose perspective of what they should be able to take on, they start seeing that piece of equipment as a baseline that you shouldn't leave the station without, and start considering any loadout that lacks it to be "crippled" or "underpowered". When they run into something too tough, they stop thinking "I should have NOPEd out of there", and start thinking "I should have brought more X".

And that seems to be what's going on with SCBs.
 
I would say the devs are fairly happy with where 'balance' currently is. With the reassignment of MoM™, they have declared AI 'finished' (one of the proofs they can point to was the amount of people in the forums stating the AI was now to hard and they could not play).

If that's the case it would be very worrying, given that 'MoM' let slip that there's currently a bug causing all AI to behave as harmless :) I think a lot of the perceived increase in difficulty is coming from so many npc rocking turrets, which negates your ability to outmaneuver them. That said, if the current difficulty level is Harmless across the board and so many people are claiming that they struggle FD may well have chickened out on any fix/increase in difficulty. Anyway, kind of off topic.

I don't really agree with 'The meta has gotten to the point that if you are going to kill someone...you had better have plans on what to do if you fail.' If anything it's the opposite. If you realise you can't destroy somebody you just keep spamming scb until you Hi Wake out of there. The only real risk is falling for bait and getting caught by a high alpha wing dropping in. Even then, you usually have time to bail as soon as they show on scanner.
 
Last edited:
......so the devs apparently feel that your point is moot...i.e. yes, it is fair that a ship can be constructed to do exactly what you describe so the PvE players can effectively collect their trophies for turn in.

I think you may be spot on there - while I do enjoy my PvE playing... looks like I'll now be playing with Netflix permanently running on my other screen.
At least I'll catch up on my films / shows while trading and RES camping ;)
 

Don't forget this one....

July 31- https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=171185


I am a PvP and PvE pilot and I think the mechanic is fine the way it is and should not be changed what so ever. Without SCB's I can not take on 2v1 and 3v1 situations and makes all engagements extremely short and unsatisfying.

CZ - NPC's tend to focus target on CMDR's. No SCB's means you either must go in there with wings or not at all. No SCB's means I could probably only last a couple minutes before I had to jump out.

PvP - limits engagements to only fair fights only for the majority of the community. gone are the engagements listed above and all that is left is more balanced engagements which is more "fair" but less "fun". And I am talking about I like being on the "unfair" side of that coin.

RES - same issue as CZ's but maybe to a lesser extent.

There are many other examples but I believe SCB's, in their current form, enrich game play, not reduce it.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't really agree with 'The meta has gotten to the point that if you are going to kill someone...you had better have plans on what to do if you fail.' If anything it's the opposite. If you realise you can't destroy somebody you just keep spamming scb until you Hi Wake out of there. The only real risk is falling for bait and getting caught by a high alpha wing dropping in. Even then, you usually have time to bail as soon as they show on scanner.

If someone doesn't want to engage in a PvP situation or is not currently able to (maybe they have 1 mil in bonds to turn in and don't want to loose them) there should be a mechanic other than combat logging to avoid the PvP situation.. SCB's offer that. I use them a lot in CG's when wings of 4 pirates are pulling me over in my Conda with high alpha weapons. That is a valid scenario for me to want to avoid a PvP fight and the only way to do so is to use SCB's until I can jump.
 
Don't forget this one....

July 31- https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=171185


I am a PvP and PvE pilot and I think the mechanic is fine the way it is and should not be changed what so ever. Without SCB's I can not take on 2v1 and 3v1 situations and makes all engagements extremely short and unsatisfying.

CZ - NPC's tend to focus target on CMDR's. No SCB's means you either must go in there with wings or not at all. No SCB's means I could probably only last a couple minutes before I had to jump out.

PvP - limits engagements to only fair fights only for the majority of the community. gone are the engagements listed above and all that is left is more balanced engagements which is more "fair" but less "fun". And I am talking about I like being on the "unfair" side of that coin.

RES - same issue as CZ's but maybe to a lesser extent.

There are many other examples but I believe SCB's, in their current form, enrich game play, not reduce it.

Disagree. I fly a Cobra without SCB's, I do fine in CZ's. Use chaff, use tactics. I can often easily bag a few Pythons as long as I don't take on all of the enemy at once.
Just curious, what do you mean by ''lasting''?

I don't see how PvP is more ''fair'' because of SCB's.
 
I don't see how PvP is more ''fair'' because of SCB's.

What I mean is this.. I like 2v1 and 3v1 (me being the 1) fights.. the SCB's balance their over powering fire power and gives me a chance to really challenge myself. If they get rid of SCB's I think they also need to do away with wings because then it is just a game of who has more friends.
 
Last edited:
Dear FD,

I'm getting really tired of this.

Now they're talking about killing SCBs, and those are a critical part of PvE. The momentum is very strong, those against the nerf mostly seem to be keeping quiet, and you've shown time and time again that you're very... democratic; you seem to go with what you hear the most. I'm mostly satisfied with the way the game is now, but I'm tired of the mechanics being sliced away by bits and pieces in ways that badly damage the experience because people who are strictly here to duel other players make demands based on the way they want things to go while they fight each other. If you kill SCBs, I will NOT be satisfied at all.

I'm starting to honestly think that we're not going to be able to combine PvP and PvE successfully in the main game. Something needs to change, big time, to save us PvEers from the nerfs you keep imposing on us at the behest of the PvPers.


Did FD announce a nerf?
I hope not. I like how it is now.

- - - Updated - - -

What I mean is this.. I like 2v1 and 3v1 (me being the 1) fights.. the SCB's balance their over powering fire power and gives me a chance to really challenge myself. If they get rid of SCB's I think they also need to do away with wings because then it is just a game of who has more friends.


Well, there certainly is truth in that.
I have been playing open for a long time until they introduced Wings.
I cannot not compete with a player wing.
I won't even try.

I do play open once in while now, but I would do it more often if I could add npc's to a Wing.
 
Don't forget this one....

July 31- https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=171185


I am a PvP and PvE pilot and I think the mechanic is fine the way it is and should not be changed what so ever. Without SCB's I can not take on 2v1 and 3v1 situations and makes all engagements extremely short and unsatisfying.

CZ - NPC's tend to focus target on CMDR's. No SCB's means you either must go in there with wings or not at all. No SCB's means I could probably only last a couple minutes before I had to jump out.

PvP - limits engagements to only fair fights only for the majority of the community. gone are the engagements listed above and all that is left is more balanced engagements which is more "fair" but less "fun". And I am talking about I like being on the "unfair" side of that coin.

RES - same issue as CZ's but maybe to a lesser extent.

There are many other examples but I believe SCB's, in their current form, enrich game play, not reduce it.

Hi, I do high-intensity RES and CZs in a Viper without SCBs. :D

I'll go ahead and do some hypothesizing about the AI based on what I've observed in there:

The NPCs actually seem to have some kind of threat system that decides who they focus on. Once they decide to focus on someone they tend to stick to it unless something significant distracts them. It seems to be pretty heavily weighted toward damage-over-time, though I think they also put a higher priority on big ships than smaller ships (which means when I start flying bigger ships, managing aggro will probably get more difficult). Any individual NPC, of course, puts the highest priority on whoever is inflicting the most damage to their own ship. Due to NPCs having terrible aim when shooting at each other, this is typically becomes the player within seconds of engaging.

As long as I'm floating around not shooting anything, and the NPCs have someone more aggressive to focus on, they generally ignore me. This allows me to sit around scanning people and picking my targets even in CZs, where they're all hostile by default instead of neutral.

When I engage a target, typically that target and only that target will immediately switch its attention to me. Because I quickly became its largest source of damage.

If I spend too much time blasting a single target or chain to too many targets too quickly, I start attracting attention from unengaged NPCs because I've built up a lot of aggro. As long as you have a good number of friendlies around, boosting away for 20-30 seconds will generally drop your aggro enough that they will break off and start focusing on the friendlies damaging them. Like I said, it's very heavily weighted toward their current largest source of damage. If you have no friendlies nearby then there's nothing to distract them and they will swarm you: either FSD out to reset the instance, or boost toward the largest group of friendlies you can see. The enemies chasing you will disengage as soon as the friendlies start damaging them.

RES are even easier because the NPCs you're after are neutral by default, and will not aggro unless you damage them first (and as long as you don't carry any cargo into the RES, always empty your cargo hold before bounty hunting). So only engage one at a time, and if it's not a ship you can kill quickly then wait for them to engage another NPC first. It will quickly turn into a 2v1 or more in your favor, especially if they engaged a Fed. Similarly for wings, wait for the wing to engage someone else first. Once they're distracted, you can pick them off one at a time without the whole wing going after you.

Obviously managing aggro like that means you have to play slower and more cautiously, with a good eye for when you're drawing too much attention. The quoted post seems to be a pretty good example of "players start seeing it as a baseline and can't imagine playing without it".

I hope this little peek into how the NPCs think helps make fighting them easier for you though. Good hunting, pilot. ;)
 
I think I have a solution that may well please everyone, bold claim I know but I'd be interested to hear feedback on this.

From experience in PVP and flying my ships I believe the current setup is that Shield strength is effected by hull size and SCBs are a fixed amount of shield top up.

These numbers are just an example but could do with FD confirmation that the theory is correct. As things are currently:

A6 SCB - 400
A5 SCB - 300
A4 SCB - 200

Imperial Clipper with A7 shield - 400
FDL with A5 shield - 500

So Clipper pops A6 shield on a 400 strength shield, gets full 400 back.
FDL pops A4 SCB on A5 shield gets 200 back.
Even A5 scbs will give a Clipper more back than what the FDL gets for one size downgrade.

So....

If they change SCB calculations to bring them inline with how shields are calculated for ships we'll remove the insane tankage that some of the ships in game get. Then it becomes a percentage calculation of ship size, shield size and SCB size to give the required top up. This will stop the multi full shield potion on the multipurpose ships and SCB effectiveness into a more balanced scenario for all ships that equip them.

Thoughts?
 
What I mean is this.. I like 2v1 and 3v1 (me being the 1) fights.. the SCB's balance their over powering fire power and gives me a chance to really challenge myself. If they get rid of SCB's I think they also need to do away with wings because then it is just a game of who has more friends.

2v1 with similar ships is perfectly possible and can be great fun VIDEO even if you die as its a good fight SBC's just make it boring, player wings I would inflict as much damage as possible to 1 or 2 of them then run.
 
Given that some readers no doubt failed to see (or click) that link, I'll just repost your excellent point here (hope you don't mind)

I just went to the other thread (which I have not partaken in because this is an old argument that is now being rehashed again apparently) and gave rep where rep is definitely most deserved.
 
Heh. got a point there.

So it sounds like you want to beef them up, not nerf them, am I right?
I said ages ago that I thought SCBs should recharge over time. Like, a few minutes for small ones, up to ten for the largest. Nobody listened. Even though, if you did that, you could probably get away with limiting them to 2 uses each, which would go a long way towards preventing the hugely long battles that the PvP crowd hates so much...
I don't need them regardless. I want the things on my ship to make sense, not be a Cr sink or a lever for game balance. I don't want to "beef them up". I don't need to. I don't even use them now.
 
SCBs are just the tip of the iceberg of a laundry list of broken mechanics. The whole system needs to be changed from the ground up, otherwise it's a band aid fix one after another.
 
If I may come with a snarky side-comment: I don't think the devs have designed any part of the game to be SCB-exclusive, though.

What I'm trying to get at, if the only difference between you being vaporized in five seconds and escaping with half of your shields intact, is replacing a 8-tonne Cargo rack with a class 3A SCB, then maybe, just maybe, there is a prolem with how that SCB interacts with the game.

Let me change the module in your statement and see if your point still holds true:

What I'm trying to get at, if the only difference between you being vaporized in five seconds and escaping with half of your modules intact, is replacing a chaff launcher with a heat sink launcher, then maybe, just maybe, there is a prolem with how that heat sink launcher interacts with the game.

You could add a number of things in there, like an extra fuel tank or a module repair kit (or whatever that repair module is called) and it would do the same thing.

The entire purpose of adding battle gear is to survive a battle. You add that SCB and you can not carry that 8 tons of commodities. That's the trade off. Meanwhile you're flying around with an SCB that you only use two or three times before it's useless.

- - - Updated - - -

SCBs are just the tip of the iceberg of a laundry list of broken mechanics. The whole system needs to be changed from the ground up, otherwise it's a band aid fix one after another.
The game is an arcade style game, which is made obvious by the "honk" and big blue font for your kills/credits/bonds or whatever. It's made obvious by the big yellow circles in space to indicate orbits and targets and such. It's not a flight sim or a battle sim or any other sim. It's a game designed and implemented as such, now with even a board game aspect to it as well. The problem is players want to now make it into a space battle sim for hardened players who use Warthogs and game chairs and Occulus Rift and such. I'm all for that, but it's currently built as an arcade style video game. As such things like cell banks are just the little mushrooms Mario gets to energize himself up with.
 
Back
Top Bottom