[POLL] Remove Shield potions from Elite Dangerous?

[Max Rockatansky]

I don't care one way or the other if they stay or not.

But I don't get the "magic potion" meme. Other space games have similar modules.

For example, in EvE, you have Cap Boosters: "these mid-slot modules use cap booster charges to inject a temporary amount of power into the capacitor". Would you consider them "magic potions" as well?

they need to be at least limited in their usage. cooldown timer, or just one or two uses.

It's not magic, it's science.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Clarke's third law !

 

[Defacto]

I don't think they need to be removed, but they tend to be a little overpowered at present. Maybe make them one-shot or a bigger fitting/power cost. Something substantial.

I don't really think the problem is that they're overpowered. The problem is that the way they work degrades the game (very subjective, of course, but so is things being overpowered).
The way I see it, there's two ways to fix this: Either, remove SCB's, or rework how they function completely. The only way (IMO) that this will be solved by nerfing is if the SCB's are nerfed so much that they basically become useless, which will have the same effect as removing them.

 

[Dbrn47]

Well, personally, I could give two toots about eve but, to answer your question: YES

Could you though? Could you really?

Time to kill is pretty low with the right loadout, extending it adds opportunity for strategies and tactics, also remember that the more shield cells you run the more sacrifices you need elsewhere. I don't see what the big deal is other than you thinking "If I shoot you, you should die."

 

[kelticfury]

It's not magic, it's science.

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Arthur C. Clarke

 

[Dbrn47]

they need to be at least limited in their usage. cooldown timer, or just one or two uses.



Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Clarke's third law !

When did Superman enter this conversation?

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Arthur C. Clarke

Someone already beat you to it, can you guys stop crapping on my attempt to tease the OP, GEEEEEZ.

 

[Aleksej]

There already is an official confirmation that shield cell banks will be rebalanced.

Hello Commanders!

Just a quick heads up: we've been looking at the stats for shield cell banks and have made some tweaks, which should filter out in a near future update. Basically, cell capacities have been reduced, cost per cell has been increased, and the passive power draw for having a cell bank active has increased.

We're not totally convinced this is the end of tweaking shield cell banks, but we think it will be a move in the right direction.

Hello Commander Flyinpiranha!

I should add that the main reason we're tweaking the shield cell bank is simply because we think our initial numbers were a bit messed up.

I think it's fair to say that a shield cell bank will potentially give a combatant a significant advantage in terms of survivability even after our changes. The way they work has not fundamentally changed at all.

However, before the tweaks, their various costs failed to update in line with other values, making them fairly ridiculously good value, which was never the intention.

Hello Commander Flyinpiranha!

To clarfy:

We have not made the changes to make shield cell bank better or worse for two individual ships in a duel. We have simply made their running costs more in line with the benefit they offer. For example, the cost of a shield cell was basically silly, so we've increased it significantly. The cost of running a cell bank was negligible, so we've increased the power draw. But the ability of a cell to charge shields is unaffected. And larger ships can still basically fit more cell banks than smaller ships.

Looking at things objectively, the game is full of asymmetric conflict: a hauler is going to struggle against any combat ship, for example. Even if we wanted to balance the ships for one versus one battles, we would struggle like crazy.

Hello Commander Jimac!

To be fair, we're not simply balancing around credit cost. And to your other points, well, we have to make calls for the game based on all sorts of criteria: different aspects of game play, fiction context, player experience, etc.

Basically, we're not just making a player versus player game. And yes, once our next changes roll out, there might still need to be some further changes. But I simply disagree that it's a flawed concept. I think it's a sold concept that we're committed to making as good as possible for the game.

Hello Commander Redan!

Looking at the various rewards and penalties is an ongoing effort, so when we find tweaks we think will make the game better we'll push them through.

Hello Commander NeilF!

Carrying multiple shield cell banks will mean that you're not carrying something else. And with a higher power draw requirement, the more banks you carry the more likely you will need to micro-managing your power plant.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want shield cell banks to be the "be all and end all" of module selection; we going to keep an eye on them once the changes roll out, it will be great to get feedback from the player base, and if more tweaks are required (even to the point of cool down usage, one cell bank only etc.) we won't be afraid to implement them. I'm certainly not going to sit here and announce that "everything is awesome! Tss, mm, tss, mm, tss, mm".

I simply disagree with the notion that because they can create imbalance - they should be dropped. In my opinion, given the amount of imbalance it's possible to create for any situation - this argument is not strong enough to sway me.

I hope this helps show where we're coming from on this, naturally, no-one is forced to agree with out stance .

Hello Commander NeilF!

It's fair to say that more internal modules may end up appearing.

I believe the good thing about this issue is that there are lots of potential levers to pull. In addition to the various suggestions stated (all of which are appreciated by the way), we could, for example: introduced significant heat gain when using a cell (Commander Suprez, you read my mind!), increase the delay before the recharge kicks in, cause some nasty penalty if you use a cell and it over charges your shields by some amount, make activation require a charge instead of use a delay, and so on.

So, yes, we're aware that there are issues (hence the initial steps we're taking), we will be looking into options as required.

 

[The Brigadier]

Curse you shield cells!

 

[Oddnoun]

Deleted because I do not want mods to warning me again for my OPINIONS

 

[Dissentient]

Make them have one charge that refills automatically, but has 5 minute cooldown.

 

[The Brigadier]

Good on paper, bad on everything else.

 

[OneAmongOthers]

IMO shield cells are horrible.

Seriously, they just need to be removed from the game. They may have seemed like a good idea on paper and whoever championed the idea will most likely have hurt feelings but, they really really need to be deleted from ED. Magic potions belong in D&D / Pokeman not ED.

Also. any thoughts of weapon cells or engine cells should be axed.

An alternative *maybe* would be; a one time shot with shield cells and that they cost half what insurance for you ship would be.

I don't care honestly about your narrow minded opinion. To I don't care for PvP or any of that garbage. I hope shield cells stay and the devs finally come out and say "Shield cells are never going to be removed... deal with it" Accept them or don't I really don't care.

 

[Aleksej]

Closing the thread as there is already a confirmation of incoming changes regarding shield cell banks, which I have compiled in my previous post within this thread:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=103696&p=1612558&viewfull=1#post1612558