Meanwhile the outfitting for the 99% of combat in Elite that isn't "PvP" is more interesting and balanced than it's ever been. My utilities are no longer full of SBs and internals of SCBs. Instead I've got a lovely mix of chaff, heat sinks, boosters and my internals are banks and hull reinforcements and I run a lovely mix of kinetics and thermal weapons to deal with big heavily shielded ships and small, armor heavy ships without too much trouble. All in all outfitting in elite is better than it's ever been IMO. Locking me down to one of each would destroy that completely leaving only a choice between having my one HRP bigger than my one SCB or vice versa, hardly interesting.
The Logic of Internals
- Thread starter shadragon
- Start date
I fully agree with this. An arbitrary limit of one would not be good, but a limit of one is not the only way stacking could be controlled. I think the ideal solution would keep the current range of (normal) PvE loadouts, make those loudouts more competitive to a pure PvP fit, but do so in a matter that gives a pure PvP fit a bit of an edge still.
Provided that we can use Internal Ammo Racks as an Option to Cargo Racks with Optional Hard Point Ammo Detonation, I like this idea of adding more fluff to the barebones of the craft. However wouldn't such a situation such as a combat zone or conflict zone where any amount of aggro can jump onto you, at any time where this might hurt PVE?
Last edited:
We can safely run without HRPs in PvE because NPC's don't use armour or even bulkheads outside of CZ's. Were the NPCs using top-range loadouts (and were better pilots, but ignore the AI aspect for now) packed to the rafters with HRPs consider how much the PvE meta would change. Combat would devolve into a ludicrous slugfest, which nerfs ammo weapons into the ground and would make combat severely unprofitable. Hell in the current meta by outfitting your ship with a "pvp" combat loadout, even just by stacking HRPs and/or SCBs, you make your ship vastly more durable than the NPCs could ever hope to be. This takes 90% of the tension out of combat, because you'd have to be a moron to lose with such a massive HP handicap.
What's needed then is some kind of trade-off for HRPs. You don't like the concept of limiting HRP usage. You want to preserve the 'hull tank' option. Okay, fine, but hull tanks have literally zero drawbacks right now. They aren't particularly hampered by the extra weight, and HRPs disproportionately boost small ships while simultaneously dramatically devaluing bulkheads on large ships. This is not healthy for the game. It makes PvE too easy, and PvP too homogeneous.
Personally I'd like to see HRPs scale based on the ship in question, say 20% of the bulkhead armour value and cost (and mass) for the largest, most effective module (D5 currently) and work your way down from there. Maybe introduce special HRPs that are good at protecting specific modules/areas of the ship or are more effective against specific types of weapons.
In addition it would be nice to see more combat-oriented modules in the future so we have more options than just health regeneration (SCBs) or extra health (HRPs).
I would love this. And transfer limpets to optionally deliver the ammo to other ships; give transport ships a supporting role in major combat operations.
I would love this. And transfer limpets to optionally deliver the ammo to other ships; give transport ships a supporting role in major combat operations.
a logistics ship who makes money by scavenging materials for synthesis and supplying ammo and limpets to miners and combat ships? Whoever has the best supply and combat experience wins? I think we're getting sun tzu over here. Other than the one problem of we cant pay escorts and such yet, which im hoping soon could be explored or an even contract share or something.
Last edited:
I would love this. And transfer limpets to optionally deliver the ammo to other ships; give transport ships a supporting role in major combat operations.
Or alternatively everyone will just use lasers if their ammo crates/ammo weapons could explode.
Ammo crates are a good idea but they will likely only be of use in PvE, which is fine I suppose. Won't say no to more options. However it does create another hurdle for the viability of ammo weapons compared to lasers that needs to be crossed. A ship like the FDL with limited internal options might have a hard time squeezing one in for example.
Yeah, I like the storage and limpets, not too sure on the explodey part. You would say that they're stored in a safe form, and the reload mechanism arms the ammunition on delivery.
well thats the thing, because if safety was in mind of the ammo stowage, similar to modern systems, there would be a relatively low chance of ammo detonation anyways. Most MBT's and Ammo Carriers for SPG's and Artillery today use multiple fail safes for crew survivability, such as a blast door for example and a blast panel directed outwards for the explosive force to direct. However like I said, it's just an example of what we could add, provided everything is within reasoning of balance other than the typical PVP variables of pilot experience and pilot ability. Sure an FDL may not go with an ammo stowage, but I consider the FDL an Attacker, its not really made for a sustained fight like people want it to be, its made for short term fighting, you drop your payload and you reload, and you can trust on the craft for doing it.
Last edited:
If there is a palatable solution, I'd think this would be it. Though past history of PvP in any game is indicative that there will always be a meta, there will always be what's considered "best" and the serious PvP players will always flock to it almost exclusively, no matter how much you try to eliminate the gap. We also have to remember that people are lazy, which why stable metas exist, there may well be a combination that mops the floor with silent running, rail gun FdLs but no one has found it because there isn't a need yet (and usually one isn't perceived until the devs tweak something, even if the tweak is actually insignificant, I've seen metas shift entirely on the back of single digit damage tweaks weapons). I'm not averse to HRP changes at all, I think they could do with a bit less hit points and a bit more module protection but I'm sure there are many ways they could be tweaked to be more "balanced" for PvP. I don't think module limitation is it though, I haven't ever understood why any modules are limited to one in a ship. Being able to power two of one kind can be controlled but I don't see a reason why we shouldn't be able to carry redundant shield generators or fuel scoops or anything.
Extra ammo doesn't really affect combat endurance in a single encounter anyway outside of railguns, torpedoes, missiles and mines. So adding more ammo isn't going to unbalance PvP or PvE, it just makes the gap between ammo weapons and lasers for long-term sorties smaller ie. less inconvenient to use. I'd like to see base ammo increases across the board in addition to extra ammo boxes, but that's just me. All this ammo stuff is a bit off-topic though.
It depends on how you want to play it. There are shield tanks in the game that rail-de-lances can't puncture (at least not without several friends). There are also counter builds like the frag-de-lance for example that will either force an RDL to keep a distance where it's rails are least effective, or risk coming in close to get shredded by volleys of flack. In a 1v1 either of these setups has the opportunity to wreck an RDL that decided not to run. The builds are out there to work out, people just tend not to like them because you either sacrifice effectiveness against shielded ships or you sacrifice time to kill by being a tank and are left with many enemies simply going away when they find they can't break you instead of getting those satisfying kills.
I know some of the older games allowed for multiple shield generators, but what was the point? Was one slaved to the other for a larger shield pool? Did you get a separate secondary layer of shielding? was it just one you could turn on if the first was destroyed? I don't know the answer, but it feels weird to me to have several shield generators trying to form a shield in the same space. As for the scoops, I sort of get it and sort of don't. One could say that the scoop has to make use of the cargo hatch and thus only one can be used at a time making a second one useless for anything other than a backup, buuuut there is no visible hatch or structure that opens on ships while scooping which makes it rather difficult to come to a conclusion about how the scooping is actually done. It's kind of a coin toss, and that's my two cents.
You're scooping the corona of a star. Now, that's not really something dense. In fact, the corona of a star is pretty good vacuum. This means that something with the area of the cargo hatch, even if flying through at very high speed, wouldn't be collecting much fuel at all. Thus, it's necessary to conclude that the fuel scoop must be projecting some funnel-like field that sweeps up coronal mass in an area that's much bigger than the ship.