problems with permaboost [video]
- Thread starter Badben
- Start date
Saw that one. Pretty interested to see what they mean. Hoping it somehow doesn't exacerbate this problem, but I'm not entirely sure how that'd be the case.
"Boosting is causing balance issues, eh? BUFF BOOSTING."
Mr Grape is on the money, as ever.
It's no coincidence that the most recent instalment of my "Truesilver's Top Tips" series (wow, back in April '17) ...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/341107-Truesilver-s-Top-Tips-No-3-Gimballed-Duelling
... was written up based upon no fewer than 20 1v1's all conducted with perma-boost (on my side) throughout, facilitated by flying a shieldless FdL with 3-4 pips to Eng throughout, just to ensure that not one single second of perma-boosting might unnecessarily be wasted.
I never quite got to macro-ing my boost button into auto-fire but I suppose it would seem a sensible next step, if nothing else to avoid repetitive strain injury.
Ah, I remember that earlier thing in pre-2.1 ED called 'intelligent timing' ... but I'll stop before I become too nostalgic.
It's no coincidence that the most recent instalment of my "Truesilver's Top Tips" series (wow, back in April '17) ...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/341107-Truesilver-s-Top-Tips-No-3-Gimballed-Duelling
... was written up based upon no fewer than 20 1v1's all conducted with perma-boost (on my side) throughout, facilitated by flying a shieldless FdL with 3-4 pips to Eng throughout, just to ensure that not one single second of perma-boosting might unnecessarily be wasted.
I never quite got to macro-ing my boost button into auto-fire but I suppose it would seem a sensible next step, if nothing else to avoid repetitive strain injury.
Ah, I remember that earlier thing in pre-2.1 ED called 'intelligent timing' ... but I'll stop before I become too nostalgic.
Last edited:
Those were the days, my friend- when your had to think about when you used your boost, and things like distance control and positioning actually mattered... Alas.
Yeah, combat needs multitasking I think. Its cool.
I doubt engineers were desinged to raise the skill bar. They did add diversity in our builds though.
I'd argue ship choice is more diverse now than ever.
Indeed, in a 6-axes of movement game the loss of distance control (via the long range mod and zero fall-off for range) is I think the greatest dumbing-down of all, because in truth even the perma-boosting at close to medium range is sub-optimal. Optimal ED PvP is really now just a 5.5 km facetank, with relative movement of both targets reduced to near zero, and may the best spreadsheet win.
I said I wouldn't get nostalgic but it seems such a loss compared to when one of the most important parts of my wing's tactics was that, unlike most others, we withheld fire outside of 1.5 km. Trigger discipline & range control, these user-controlled inputs helped so much. Ah, the nostalgia.
This is why the first thing I want to ascertain in Beta tonight is what Frontier have done (if anything) about the long range, -40% thermal load, feedback cascade / super penetrator special rail gun combo. (One of the two most popular PvP guns and my own favourite weapon.)
If the answer is "Nothing, those that have them, keep them, via grandfathering, and the new guys can either choose thermal load reduction or a special, but not both" ... well, then this will really need to be fixed. Because no new guys could beat us grandfathers and our god-mode grandfathered rail guns, ever, under those conditions.
My own preferred solution would be for the thermal load reduction secondary to be automatically factored into the new blueprints (so at g5 you automatically drop thermal load on a c2 standard rail to 12.0) ... but we shall see.
(Sorry for semi-off-topic but I think it's all part of the seamless boosty unbalancedy RNG-y PvP-y thang!)
Last edited:
I wouldn't be that pessimistic; especially since they removed Force Shell jitter
To add to the discussion, the patch notes include the line
- Increased manoeuvrability benefits when boosting based on the ENG pips
I'm afraid that is the answer. You can only have one experimental effect (confirmed on steam), so you have to choose between special effect, or "secondary effect". If they wanted to incorporate the reduced heat into the base blueprint, they'd need to do it to all of them to avoid an (even more significant) "one obvious choice" situation. Ideally if they were going to do that they'd just lower the base heat, but that would make the grandfathered modules even MORE ridiculous. They've really created a balance nightmare with that choice.
I wouldn't be that pessimistic; especially since they removed Force Shell jitter
To add to the discussion, the patch notes include the line
This might be a problem...
- Increased manoeuvrability benefits when boosting based on the ENG pips
Could that one be to help the 4-pip hull tanks evade the swarms of insta-disintegration bacterial missiles, fired by 4-0-2 booster-stacked reverskiers??
Hee hee
See above.