The name Elite: Dangerous is a reference to the combat rankings Elite and Dangerous and has nothing to do with game difficulty.
Scrap or redesign shield cell modules, they are too overpowered and trivialize PvP.
- Thread starter KazumaKat
- Start date
The name Elite: Dangerous is a reference to the combat rankings Elite and Dangerous and has nothing to do with game difficulty.
aowqyaaw
Banned
Rrrrright... And you earn that by popping tic-tacs and hiding behind rocks?
For someone looking at the title for the first time, the assumption that the gameplay may in some way be 'Dangerous' is an "ill-conceived notion".... sure.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
They better re-work that trailer then.
Last edited:
You can get Elite rank in Trading, in Solo. So yeah, the "gameplay" has nothing to do with the "Dangerous" moniker. Although I think some would prefer it to be called Elite: COME ON PLAY HOW I WANT SO I CAN PK YOU COME ON IT'S FUN OMG COME ON. But I don't think that would fit on the box well.
Better objectively (i.e. for everyone). It's not like if FD drops/nerfs SCBs, you'll start massively losing in PVE, right? I'm not suggesting that PVE should be somehow "sacrificed" to PVP, not at all (in fact, I prefer PVE myself, I just like to have the occasional PVP fight, so I play in Open, not Solo). I simply believe that if the game is well-balanced, it's a step forward, regardless of the game mode, and since the possibilities offered by the game are huge, anyone can find a comfortable niche for oneself. Do you really need items of huge power (SCBs, like they are now) to beat the cr*p out of stupid NPCs? Come on, I can destroy an elite NPC Anaconda with a A-grade Viper 9 times out of 10 if I use SCBs, and I'm not even a good pilot! It's just not OK! If I try to do it without SCBs, however, it's a whole different story - my ass is kicked at least 6 times out of 10, if not more, simply because the damn thing is constantly frying me with turreted lasers, even if I stay on its six. Sure, it's much more difficult that way, but who said that putting down a small frigate with a fighter should be easy?
BTW, if you don't want to be PK-d, but still don't want to leave Open Play, you can always do some missions/trading in remote systems, then go fight other players (or not) for fun, in the more populated systems. I don't see the problem with constant unavoidable PKs. Besides, almost any ship can escape a fight by boosting and jumping away - if your ship is small, it will likely be faster than the pursuer, and otherwise you're fat anyway and your shield/hull can take a beating while the FSD charges up.
Last edited:
aowqyaaw
Banned
I would like to bust a myth that games should be balanced around PVE or that majority of players never even touched PVP. There is absolutely no evidence it is so. Vocal PVE minority wants easy IWIN buttons and their ultimate mantra is: "BUT U CANT BALANCE GAME AROUND PVP OMG". ED should be balanced around both, they are both equally vital in online game where you meet other humans.
Balancing around PVE should not mean lowering the difficulty of combat to ridiculously low levels. It is absolutely not true that PVE player = incapable 10 years old child who wants easy win while shooting easily acquired big guns. Also, any post including word "griefer" should be automatically disregarded since griefing currently affects what? 0.0000001% of ED population? Or maybe even not that. There should be stuff for everyone to do and have fun.
Balancing around PVE should not mean lowering the difficulty of combat to ridiculously low levels. It is absolutely not true that PVE player = incapable 10 years old child who wants easy win while shooting easily acquired big guns. Also, any post including word "griefer" should be automatically disregarded since griefing currently affects what? 0.0000001% of ED population? Or maybe even not that. There should be stuff for everyone to do and have fun.
Nailed it, I couldn't have put it better myelf. +Rep.
Last edited:
Consumables dictating the outcome of a PvP encounter is bad game design.
PvE too, actually
I have to disagree with a couple of points here:
I don't think SCB's have the overall effect of helping traders survive piracy; the trader will have emphasized cargo capacity in his build and so will probably have fewer SCB modules then the pirate or 'griefer'. In reality, that trader will be running and charging up the FSD and doing nothing else. Perhaps one hit on a SCB will help keep the shields up while he does this. If for some reason FD make it harder to jump out when under attack, this trader, even if well-armed, will wish SCB's didn't exist because he will never have them coming out of his ears like the PvP oriented pilot will, and is almost certain to lose.
Using lots of SCB's right now I feel is the opposite of 'wit' and the very definition of 'no-brainer' if you want to win vs another player. It overrides all other loadout choices and tactical considerations, especially power management.
By way of partial apology for focussing on the PvP effect of these modules, I would say that though I did overlook the negative effect on PvE they bring, you can easily not use SCB's in PvE only playstyles.... until we get NPC's as good as human opponents, that is!
aowqyaaw
Banned
Far more 'on the money' than anything I've had to say on the subject. SCBs sway the balance too far in one direction. All the rhetoric from the other camp has made me more than a little zealous, so I'll revert to my original stance and call, firstly, for a compromise. After that, then who knows.
Btw, the proposed 5 second spool, isn't much of anything. We'll all be back here after it's implemented, mark my words.
Last edited:
To this I say improve the AI, like a few have said in the SCB thread, this is a bandaid to an overall issue with NPC AI. I would rather see me have to recruit a couple NPC fighters to take on the Elite Anaconda NPC. Or have to get a better ship before I could something like that.
It doesn't have to do with the crutch itself being removed (and even the fix they are doing isn't affecting it much), I usually only go through one or two SCB's when I am at a RES, it has to do with the "This sucks for PVP, the fights last too long" and now it seems to be the focus of the forum and the lead designer. They did say they 'missed a couple numbers' but that's just PR speak IMO.
My Trader Asp happily sacrifices cargo for SCB's. I can then have longer to escape or more ability to kill the attacker.
OK, say they improve the AI to the level of your-average-player (which I doubt, actually - humans are sneaky
), but even then those Elite Anacondas are going to be relatively easy to kill with SCB spamming, because the Anaconda's only big advantages over smaller ships are its firepower and armor, and both of them are rendered useless by SCB spamming.You missed the point. What he (and me, for that matter) was trying to say is that the SCBs themselves are not the problem, overusing (spamming) them is. Or, rather, the fact that the game gives you the ABILITY to spam. While some players simply won't use this ability, because they don't find it very amusing to be immortal, some other people will exploit this violently. This is why many players suggest limiting SCBs to 1 module per ship - it will be perfectly enough for your trader Asp to escape a fight, or to have a couple of emergency shield recharges in a dogfight, but it will not allow you to fit 42 shield charges on an Asp, like you can now.
Last edited:
Using your words:
There is a great difference between Demon's Souls and Truck Simulator. At the moment Elite is the latter... and I think only a small part of player actually want the former.
Sooo... I'm disappointed with the current state of the gameplay: graphics and sounds are amazing, but I'm a guy who search playability in the games. At the current stage it's all too easy, boring and repetitive. I two words "unfinished" and "unpolished".
The shield potion is badly designed as it's now.
During the WW2, warplanes had special emergency systems to increase the engine power (called WEP, as War Emergency Power): these systems were giving a surplus of power (higher AtA) at cost of the engine reliability. WEP time was limited as the engine could blown up. The modern NOS was invented in those days.
IMO in Elite there should be something like that, not only for shields, but also for speed and weapons: entering in emergency the shield would be stronger, the ship faster BUT the internal components should be really damaged by that.
Repair costs are already different between small and big ships.
And again, a WEP like the MW50 (Methanol-Water 50%) required a distinct tank: so here we are again, a ship with a C4 power plant should use ONLY a C4 WEP.
For many parts E : D is really complex and well designed: the shield potion is a cheap and bad idea.
Last edited:
OK, say they improve the AI to the level of your-average-player (which I doubt, actually - humans are sneaky
I mentioned before, make it impossible for me to take one out solo. Make it so I'd have to hire NPC's to help me, basically simulate group play and if I chose to I could group up with others and play this way. Or make it so I need to have a decent ship that can handle a 150m+ battlecruiser piloted by an "Elite" Pirate.
The problem isn't healing potions, the problem is the AI and need to have "balance" among all the ships.
Where did you ever get the idea this game was supposed to be PVP focused?
Make it how? If SCBs are removed, exactly this effect will be reached, even without tweaking the AI - it will either take a bigger ship or several small ships to take down an Elite Anaconda, because your small Viper/Conda won't be able to magically heal itself. Problem solved?
This kind of misses the point. All other things being equal your PvP-focussed attacker will have less cargo capacity and more SCB capacity and will therefore always win, easily.