Your builds are not as good as they could be with both ships. But even fully optimized an Anaconda still outguns a Corvette. The two additional large hardpoints on it do more damage than the one huge it doesn't have. Technically the T10 outguns both, but it's not overly practical with it's hardpoint placement.Run to Frack with that for an idea - the vette might be down on firepower from where you want it to be, but it has about the highest DPS of any ship and boost turns QUICKER than a mamba:
My 'Vette PvE CZ build:
Similarly specced Mamba:Coriolis EDCD Edition
A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerouss.orbis.zone
Coriolis EDCD Edition
A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerous
Vette boost turn pitches at 50 degrees per second vs the mamba's 52 degrees persecond, both sitting with 4 pips engines nd boost. So no, it doesn't need any more firepower, if your vette isn't sufficiently potent the problem may well be located between the throttle and the stick.
Shield Booster Diminishing Returns- Stop the Stack
- Thread starter Snoiperman
- Start date
I'm not against change, I've submitted tens or suggestions and supported even more over the years, but part of the problem with stuff in the forum is that a lot of player suggestions, especially PvP ones, are somewhat myopic, solving one perceived problem, while introducing new ones or exacerbating other, existing, problems. Like this suggestion, could be surmised t
Problem: PvP fights take too long
Proposed solution: nerf shield stacking
Unintended consequences: PvE ships would have paper thin shields
Further consequences: PvP ships would still have deathstar like firepower, and very little PvE ships could do to defend themselves pushing even more PvE players out of open - ergo less contacts to tussle with, making a PvP playstyle more boring, rolling around a an even ghostlier galaxy, ruining the game for yourselves.
But as I've pointed out, if that diminshing return is stacked on all shield booster configurations it would not just nerf, but full on gimp the defenses of most PvE builds. So I'm opposing the initial position of a broad nerf on shild booster stacking, however:
They are so fracking bullet spongey as is I'm surprised they aren't already running that shizzle, I already find them, and the "new improved" CZ's boring. Tanky bullet sponges, "ten kills for a win - Yay!", rinse repeat
I preferred the old system where I could stay in theatre for two or three hours, or until I ran out of ammo, which ever came first. But the new system, win --> jump out --> jump back in, rins repeat, it feels like relogging, its grindy, its monged up...
I estimate a Spec Ops FdL in the area of 600-800 mj of shields.They are so fracking bullet spongey as is I'm surprised they aren't already running that shizzle, I already find them, and the "new improved" CZ's boring. Tanky bullet sponges, "ten kills for a win - Yay!", rinse repeat
I preferred the old system where I could stay in theatre for two or three hours, or until I ran out of ammo, which ever came first. But the new system, win --> jump out --> jump back in, rins repeat, it feels like relogging, its grindy, its monged up...
Now a 6 stack booster + Prismo FdL has 3600 mj.
Can you feel the PvPer pain?
I'd welcome your feedback if you would be so kind as to post some updated builds incorporating your suggested alterations on them?
One that's best treated by steam "retail therapy"?
I'm surprised its as little as that, it feels like it takes forever to get past their seemingly endless supply of SCB's...
Sure. After all, lasers cant be countered by point defense and ecm. This way players MUST counter missiles, not just ignore them.
I meant base mj. If you count SCBs it's a bit more, granted.
Thanks for sharing those mate, I've liked the post and I'm just away to look over them now
Here's an Anaconda warship for comparison. The Corvette sure beats it in the shields department, but in raw firepower it's best.Thanks for sharing those mate, I've liked the post and I'm just away to look over them now
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity: did any of your suggestions ever make it in game, at least partially?
On points, I don't think diminishing returns would do much. Bigger overhaul is needed. PVP (and arguably PVE too) really takes too long. Well built ship currently can facetank too much damage, especially from NPCs, which do not have optimized, cheesy engineered system loadouts.
NPC loadouts need to be drastically improved, because now, regular pirate has very thin shields and hull both. Even combat fit CZ ships have much weaker defenses than players' vessels.
I fully agree on "deathstar firepower" argument. And I don't understand intent behind letting you engineer weapons for flat out insane damage boost (each OC/efficient) with no drawbacks, along with ability to bend resistances and engineer hulls/shields through the roof at the same time... If it could be clocked back a bit, removing shield stacking and returning focus on hulls may keep TTK in comprehensible limits, while focusing more on evasive maneuvers and heavier usage of utilities to keep yourself alive.
I mean, oversimplifying overhauls like that won't get us nowhere. Of course, when you do one thing, the rest must be put in line as well. You can't just remove SB stacking and leave all builds, including NPC as they are... By the way, when was the last time NPCs had any review and update of their loadouts?...
And to be honest, I don't think shorter TTK could kill PVP, or make it more boring, if I understood you correctly.
I've singled this quote out, but there were several posts about this from you and others. Do you mean PvE combat ships or PvE ships in general? You're never going have a shot against a ship purposefully build to kill other player ship unless your build is made for the same goal (assuming equal skill of course).
Though this applies especially for non combat ships, I think the point of the phrase 'build for open' is a tad misunderstood. You're not supposed to fight them back, you're supposed to be able to survive long enough to get the hell out (either through speed or survivability, usually). And I don't think that the proposed change, though imperfect, would affect this.
I would make it simple, tie the max number of booster to the ship size.
Like S=1, M=2 and L= 3 or 4?
KISS
Like S=1, M=2 and L= 3 or 4?
KISS
Alright, now everyone just runs maximum explosive resistance under their shields. Try getting through this (https://s.orbis.zone/cpkv) build with 47500 shields and 18000 effective hull for explosives. How much damage do you want the class 2 missiles do you want to deal to actually damage this? Do you want your missiles to deal more damage than a Huge multicannon?
Also, again, I can just run away from missiles in my cutter or courier. I don't need the ECM or PDC. I can just run with 6x regular shields and outrun or distance myself 2.5km away from the person with missiles and just dodge the missiles or by shooting at them with medium or small screening shell frags. It is safe to say even the new and improved missiles would be easily countered without sacrificing booster space.
Now, lets talk about how absolutely bad of a change this would be:
Small ships are forced to sacrifice a booster slot that it does not have for a ecm or pdc. Pretty much gives all other ships better shields.
Size two weapons are now being used as the entirety of the main armament: Literally all non railgun and MC weapons are now useless, since you can skip shields using the size two missiles at close range. PDCs and ECMS cannot counter a point blank dumbfire missile, and since you skip about 90% of their HP, shield tanks are useless.
No variety in gameplay. With only one weapon and only one counter (fast ships) Only hulltank ships would exist, killing variety.
Unrealistic. Missiles simply cannot go through shields. Even lasers cannot go through shields, and even the ones that do only phase through.
I'd like to see a hard limit of one booster each (thermal resist, HD, Resistance). Didn't do the maths though.
Many of the Spec Ops FDL's I've encountered recently are running Prismatics (obvious from the hit colour of the shields) - I don't know about boosters as for some obscure reason I don't tend to check their loadout at my leisure
No, they wouldn't ever present the challenge of a human opponent, but they are pretty darned tanky and use phasing (or something that will damage hull when shields are intact) as well very often.
I have no idea of the loadout of the named pirate assasination missions might be, but they certainly hit hard and are tough enough to kill... (Having lost my frag Mamba only a couple of days ago to one! - but I'm just a scrub...)
@Cmdr. Numa These questions aren't criticisms, just me trying to learn from your builds, but I've got a few things I was wondering about so I will bang them in bullet points for easiness:
- Mamba:
- I take it the mamba is "raider" ie: does a couple of CZ's then dock to reload the SCBs, railguns and MCs?
- Why the 5a SCB and the class four shield, not t'other way around? Is that most MJ as you're going to have to dock to reload anyways? That's like a PvP build so I'm guessing this ties to the "raider" philosophy?
- Regarding the cascade feedback rail guns, do you save them exclusively for neutering shield banking or do you also use them as main weapons?
- In general, why do you use Reactive Surface Composite rather than Military Grade Composite for your bulkheads?
Not really. With a full on balance pass targeting overpowered engineering modules, we could get rid of the massive power creep that has happened over time.
Heavy Duty Nerf- Harder to stack multiple.
(or we could do shield boosters entirely- 1 for small, 2 for medium 3-4 for large)
Overcharged Nerf- Less drain on distro, less damage.
SRB- Slightly less damage.
ETC. General nerf to the one-choice engineering modifications.
About PVE players- If we implement my suggestion, they could still use resistance boosters on their ships, that is they still remain tanky, but not invulnerable to damage like before.
Your build doesn't have any module reinforcements. If missiles ignored shields, your external modules and thrusters would be gone in seconds. Including the shield boosters.
Not to mention they could engineer the missiles with Penetrator Payload, obliterate the shield generator, and then do the rest with thermal or kinetic.
Easy to make a seemingly overpowered build if you ignore any of the downsides.
Wow!
My ships are certainly not invulnerable to damage - where can I find some that are?