Shield Booster Diminishing Returns- Stop the Stack

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
ED doesn't really do KISS mechanics though. And in theory, that's what SB power draw is supposed to be accomplishing. It's just that with power plant engineering and weapon efficiency mods, most combat ships can now run powerful weapons and all the SBs they can fit, without any particular trade-offs.

Also, since FD really dislike breaking existing builds, I find it deeply unlikely that they would impose a solution like this. If they were to address this problem at all, something like a diminishing return formula is almost surely how they would do it, since that nerfs stats but doesn't result in anyone logging in one day and crashing because their thrusters are now unpowered.
 
Resistance are already have dimishing returns mechanics bulid on them, while shields boosters was supposed have similar, but it never went into live version, while current state of PVP is broken by that alone.

Quote of these changes:
"Shield booster stacking will start having a negative diminishing returns effect from 80% boost onwards, of which is capped at 150% maximum boost. This applies to engineered modules or vanilla."

Why devs not decided to include that, beats me, but ever since that last "balance" patch for engineering 3 years ago, meta moved towards who can stack more MJ on thier FDL's, or cutters. At that time, it was also when absolute dmg for PA was added, since if I recall corectly, there was ton of crying at these forums from most PvE'ers that feared if such change would went into live, that they would be even easier victims to gank, while almost all PvP'ers, knew that shield stacking would lead to current state, and we all wanted have that change to be real... But PvE'ers cryin won this battle so PVP is broken right now.

My bulids are still waiting for that change, and if these would be actuall in game, none of my bulids would suffer, since I was never fan of shield stacking anyway.
 
Last edited:
@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?
The Mamba can only do one high CZ before running out of ammo on the multicannons.

The SCB are more for emergency, so usually aren't depleted by that point, the Biweave does it's job well. The SCB to shield ratio is there, because even like this the two SCB dualbanked together will only refill one ring of shields. It would be even less if the shield was the size 5. And the MJ are still more than adequate.

The rails are primarily to neuter SCBs, but they also help the beam punch through the shields of engineered targets like spec ops or enemy captain. Usually they have still ammo left when the multicannons run out.

Reactive armor combined with the small thermal resist HRP balances the resistances out. Even though shields usually should never fail on those builds, if they do, then the armor has no weak point.
 
ED doesn't really do KISS mechanics though. And in theory, that's what SB power draw is supposed to be accomplishing. It's just that with power plant engineering and weapon efficiency mods, most combat ships can now run powerful weapons and all the SBs they can fit, without any particular trade-offs.

Also, since FD really dislike breaking existing builds, I find it deeply unlikely that they would impose a solution like this. If they were to address this problem at all, something like a diminishing return formula is almost surely how they would do it, since that nerfs stats but doesn't result in anyone logging in one day and crashing because their thrusters are now unpowered.
Does it though ? I mean, having millitary slots on some ships and passenger slots on other is pretty KISS as far a constraining outfitting goes.

Now, if power was intended to be a limiting factor, it failed horribly as far as the boosters go.

At the very least, some more than linear energy use for each booster installed. For example :
  1. st booster => 1U power
  2. nd booster => 2U power
  3. rd booster => 3U power
  4. and so on...
It would mean that five booster would use in total 15x the power of a single one. Now that is constraint level power use.

Anyway, 30min+ to kill a ship is plain dumb and boring. That what I think. Some might find it thrilling to have bullet sponges FdL PvP and god-mode PvE but I don't.
 
Just out of curiosity: did any of your suggestions ever make it in game, at least partially?
A few did, the one I'm most proud of was the recursive route planning that got galmap route planning from 1 up to 20 kylies.
EDIT: updated with link to the suggestion in 2016

On points, I don't think diminishing returns would do much. Bigger overhaul is needed. PVP (and arguably PVE too) really takes too long.
I agree, but I have been around this place for long enough to be concerned that some suggestions which on the face value look OK are something of a "paperclip maximiser".
Well built ship currently can facetank too much damage, especially from NPCs, which do not have optimized, cheesy engineered system loadouts.
I agree, NPC's in CZ's are too bullet spongey, PvP must be a nightmare if you are tackling a shield maxxed ship, however, negating shield stacking in broad terms renders most PvE ships very vulnerable, and given how fond of SCB's NPC ships are, there'd be no room for anything other than SCB laden shield tanks, with dire consequences for non-combat gameplay.
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 actually find the NPC's in CZ's bullet spongey? In my 'Vette in a CZ it takes numerous railgun shots to pop an NPC eagle, its like four five minutes to take the hull down AFTER getting through the shields. Spec OPs Alphas? Ah Frack! I can feel my hair turning grey while I rain lasers and rail guns on them while they spam, and that's even with deathstar firepower...

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...
IMHO, and if you want feel free to call me an armchair dev as others have, they goofed with engineers, letting the players run loose with such powerful mods destroyed all semblance of balance the game had, and may ever have. They spent a lot of time trying to rebalance it in 2016 with, erm, mixed results.

Essentially it's a case of "the genie is out of the bottle now", and it ain't going back. I think the rehash of engineers 3.0 with materials traders et al was a case of , we cannae turn this back, so we can at least make it easier to access.
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.
What can they do? And where do you stop, is a 900m/s viper working as intended? What about an 80+ LY Conda? Can you imagine the screams of horror if all these engineered weapons and modules players had put in hours were removed / nerfed? Especially given these things are "earned" through grind.
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 r, with erm, emove 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.
The only thing I can think that would work would be to smelt every engineering mod to weapons, shields and armour, returning all the materials used to the players and start again with offensive and defensive modules needing another visit to the latest iteration of engineers. But this time, a whole new The only thing I can think that would work would be to smelt every engineering mod to weapons, shields and armour, returning all the materials used to the players and start again with offensive and defensive modules needing another visit to the latest iteration of engineers, but a whole set of new, more sensibly incremental upgrades would be available rather than the insane damage upgrades, and the corresponding, equally mental, defensive capability upgrades.
 
Last edited:
Resistance are already have dimishing returns mechanics bulid on them, while shields boosters was supposed have similar, but it never went into live version, while current state of PVP is broken by that alone.

Quote of these changes:
"Shield booster stacking will start having a negative diminishing returns effect from 80% boost onwards, of which is capped at 150% maximum boost. This applies to engineered modules or vanilla."

Why devs not decided to include that, beats me, but ever since that last "balance" patch for engineering 3 years ago, meta moved towards who can stack more MJ on thier FDL's, or cutters. At that time, it was also when absolute dmg for PA was added, since if I recall corectly, there was ton of crying at these forums from most PvE'ers that feared if such change would went into live, that they would be even easier victims to gank, while almost all PvP'ers, knew that shield stacking would lead to current state, and we all wanted have that change to be real... But PvE'ers cryin won this battle so PVP is broken right now.

My bulids are still waiting for that change, and if these would be actuall in game, none of my bulids would suffer, since I was never fan of shield stacking anyway.
I've been wryly smiling wondering when someone was going to bring up the 2.3.03 beta that tested this :)
 
But you will never notice the changes as a scrub PvE player...
(of course you will, but never let the truth get in the way of a good nerf demand)
This thread has been all over the shop, from "nerf shield boosters" to "buff the corvette", even skirted with open & PvP / PvE...

I'm not necessarily against the idea of nerfing stacked heavy duty shield boosters, but this needs to be done with a scalpel not a sledgehammer so as to only impinge on the absolutely ridonks super-shield-setups some edgecases are running without affecting more mainstream playstyles.
 
I am against it, the OP gave the solution with a DPS build, if you want to destroy a ship that is the most expensive in the game and that takes months to be assembled with this type of build you will have to have an equally equipped ship on the counter, know against who you are going to fight and adapt to, ask for nerf is to try to make the game adapt to your build and the correct thing is that you have to adapt to the game ... ganker boys want to destroy the game's tank ship in 2 minutes combat ...
 
This thread has been all over the shop, from "nerf shield boosters" to "buff the corvette", even skirted with open & PvP / PvE...

I'm not necessarily against the idea of nerfing stacked heavy duty shield boosters, but this needs to be done with a scalpel not a sledgehammer so as to only impinge on the absolutely ridonks super-shield-setups some edgecases are running without affecting more mainstream playstyles.
I think we can second that, we don't want one thing fixed and 3 others broken instead. One relatively simple solution would be to deal with the shield boosters and adjust the power level of NPC ships to keep them in the desired state.
 
I think we can second that, we don't want one thing fixed and 3 others broken instead. One relatively simple solution would be to deal with the shield boosters and adjust the power level of NPC ships to keep them in the desired state.

Or make pvp weapons specifically for shields that would be less efficient in pve.

Hey wait don't those already exist?

I guess you would also need then something to ease with the outfitting for specific fights.. not sure how works currently anyway. What do pvp players do currently when their weapon loadouts are completely inappropriate for the next match? Never happens because people only organise or club seals?

Maybe another way could be to tweak damage parameters against player ships?
 
There is absolutely no change needed.

PvPers should stop whining about this and get in a PvP group where they can set the rules on how many shield booster are allowed in a fight (if any)! Level 11 does just that in fact!

Some of the most fun PvP is done in stock Sidewinders and other small ships. Just agree what you're going to fight in. Nerfing defenses only benefits gankers who don't want to have a gentlemen's agreement in a fight.
 
Last edited:
I really don't get why this has turned into another PvE vs PvP crowds argument (mostly from just one side). I actually reject the idea that such a strict separation exists and that they are opposing groups.

It's a simple matter of game balance.
 
I actually find the NPC's in CZ's bullet spongey? In my 'Vette in a CZ it takes numerous railgun shots to pop an NPC eagle, its like four five minutes to take the hull down AFTER getting through the shields. Spec OPs Alphas? Ah Frack! I can feel my hair turning grey while I rain lasers and rail guns on them while they spam, and that's even with deathstar firepower...
Technically they are bullet spongy, but since I use cookie cutter weapon loadouts on my krait, no pun intended, they still fold pretty quickly. OC thremal MC chew up shields pretty fast, feedback rails completely shutdown their ability to get much use of SCBs and corrosive lets me chew through their hulls quite nicely, while my beam Taipan helps a bit, maximizing damage under crazy debuff. But what I meant was that they aren't as bullet spongy as they could potentially be. Examples were given on extreme defenses here, and I'm sure you're aware.

What can they do? And where do you stop, is a 900m/s viper working as intended? What about an 80+ LY Conda? Can you imagine the screams of horror if all these engineered weapons and modules players had put in hours were removed / nerfed? Especially given these things are "earned" through grind.
I do realize that it could easily lead to angry riots if they go ahead and just nullify 90% of grind players did. However, for the context, I do have quite a fleet of fully engineered G5 monsters, that I crushed my soul to engineer, but for the positive changes, or at least attempts to balance it out (we do have test branches afaik) I'd personally trade it all in a heartbeat. Can't speak for the rest of the playerbase, of course...

The only thing I can think that would work would be to smelt every engineering mod to weapons, shields and armour, returning all the materials used to the players and start again with offensive and defensive modules needing another visit to the latest iteration of engineers. But this time, a whole new The only thing I can think that would work would be to smelt every engineering mod to weapons, shields and armour, returning all the materials used to the players and start again with offensive and defensive modules needing another visit to the latest iteration of engineers, but a whole set of new, more sensibly incremental upgrades would be available rather than the insane damage upgrades, and the corresponding, equally mental, defensive capability upgrades.
Since new engineering isn't like old one, where your got random rolls, tuning engineered effects could just be applied globally, without messing things up too much. Value changes like, say, 50% to 10% should be easy. The only problem would be that certain engineering players did, would become weaker, and they would have to re-engineer stuff for shift in meta (possibly). As I mentioned, I'm okay with re-engineering everything if I must, IF changes would really improve balance and variety. But returning mats isn't necessary. For the rest of the playerbase, make re-engineering of their each current (old) module once free all the way up to any new effects they choose.
 
I built a vette when the hub bub was all about taking away stacking.
I put two of each in the vette. Hd, Resist, and Thermal.
I'm happy as a clam with the stats for pve. I went for great defense, weapons not so much. Old people can't fly.
Not even going to put two cents in on an idea for this mess.
 
Last edited:
True, but I dont't want to wait 20 minutes on my 1500 DPS anaconda while overheating to kill ONE cutter.

If that 20 minutes was shortened there's still plenty of time to jump out anyway. At the point where someone has engineered 8 shield boosters, they've played a bit of the game, and will only die if they choose to stay, even if you removed all their boosters beforehand. People complain about boosters, the real problem (if you care about killing people) is high waking.
 
Top Bottom