The only way I can see all the new "niche" weapons working balance wise...

[NeilF]

The only way I can see a laser which can recharge a wingman, or a Rail Gun that nukes the enemy's shields if they use a shield cell, is if the weapons are otherwise pretty much the standard weapon.

eg: Consider if as an extreme example if the Feedback Cascade Railgun is only half as effect as a traditional Rail Gun, to offset it's additional benefit. This would surely mean all the time you're using it again individuals not using SCBs, your working at a loss. Most likely, it would be enough to put you off using it.

My head is telling me, if there is any siginificant "performance cost" of a such a weapon over it's "standard form", it risks being simply too risky to use.

Instead, if the "bonus feature" was basically an alternative ontop of the core weapon behaviour that (in my head) sounds more logical. ie: You buy:-
- A standard beam laser for less money.
- You buy/build a shield recharging version, which otherise has the same performance.
- You buy/build one with some other funky feature, which otherise has the same performance.


Thoughts?

 

[Vingtetun]

Without it sounding rude.
Why do things need 'balance' other than maybe the price?

 

[ShimEnki]

Without it sounding rude.
Why do things need 'balance' other than maybe the price?

Exactly....unless its another PVP we need equal ground tune.

 

[Faybs]

For starters it's a railgun, which means you get 30 shots before you need to go back to base. Then there's the fact that they haven't said if normal damage is affected - this may be something that's only good against shield cells so you need a "real" weapon as well as this to be effective. We just don't know. What I am seeing with these mods is the rise of the support craft - when you get into a furball it's no longer just everyone for himself except for the first minute when everyone piles on the biggest enemy. We are going to start seeing small, very agile ships and slow ones with big capacitors that pack only utility weapons. A wing will consist of a big ship with a couple of eagles or sideys packing SCB breakers, and maybe federal driftship with shield regen beams and the new missiles.

 

[evoelise]

Why do things need 'balance' other than maybe the price?

Consider that you have a wide choice of weaponry.
But one weapon is over-powered.
So everyone uses that one weapon, your wide choice of weaponry is pointless.
Everyone using the same weapon is also dull.

 

[Jukelo]

Without it sounding rude.
Why do things need 'balance' other than maybe the price?

Money isn't an issue in ED. So with money out of the picture, if something is clearly better, then virtually everybody uses it. All that time and effort you spent into adding other content nobody uses is wasted. And then you lose customers because they get bored by the lack of viable variety.

 

[Weps]

Not to mention vanilla vs. Horizons users. I'd hate to see accusations of pay-to-win in regard to Horizons content when those exclusive weapons turn out to be far superior to what we have now.

 

[CMDR Corlas]

Without it sounding rude.
Why do things need 'balance' other than maybe the price?

My answer; because people who enjoy playing this as a multiplayer game want to be able to do so without being at the complete "mercy" of the inevitable sort of people who play multiplayer games for the sole purpose of denying someone else an enjoyable game experience.

Although, said that, I think the OP and I have completely opposing views on what balance means, in terms of these weapons.

 

[Henri]

I thought there would be a random element thrown into the mix as well though at the moment I don' t know where I got that from so no two will be exactly the same.
Other than that as I understand it obtaining the modification will require materials, ranking, reputation, standing and a permit.
It might take considerable time to compile that alpha build and even then....

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

Without it sounding rude.
Why do things need 'balance' other than maybe the price?

Wouldn't you want it so that using these weapons was a choice you made based on preference rather than it being the "meta" choice ?

 

[Faybs]

Not to mention vanilla vs. Horizons users. I'd hate to see accusations of pay-to-win in regard to Horizons content when those exclusive weapons turn out to be far superior to what we have now.

If there are no advantages to going down to planets, why would anyone buy Horizons?

 

[bitstorm]

Consider that you have a wide choice of weaponry.
But one weapon is over-powered.
So everyone uses that one weapon, your wide choice of weaponry is pointless.
Everyone using the same weapon is also dull.

But if I'm not using SCB's how is your anti-SCB weapon OP?

I mean you coulda had some other modification.

 

[Jypson]

If there are no advantages to going down to planets, why would anyone buy Horizons?

Advantage? Is 'fun' an advantage?

 

[Perseus]

We haven't seen engineered shield or utility items yet. The balance may be in these items.
Beta will tell . . .

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

If there are no advantages to going down to planets, why would anyone buy Horizons?

Something different to do.

Plus, flying on worlds where you have to take into account gravity reminds you that being in space makes you lazy

 

[Ian Skippy]

The only way I can see a laser which can recharge a wingman, or a Rail Gun that nukes the enemy's shields if they use a shield cell, is if the weapons are otherwise pretty much the standard weapon.

eg: Consider if as an extreme example if the Feedback Cascade Railgun is only half as effect as a traditional Rail Gun, to offset it's additional benefit. This would surely mean all the time you're using it again individuals not using SCBs, your working at a loss. Most likely, it would be enough to put you off using it.

My head is telling me, if there is any siginificant "performance cost" of a such a weapon over it's "standard form", it risks being simply too risky to use.

Instead, if the "bonus feature" was basically an alternative ontop of the core weapon behaviour that (in my head) sounds more logical. ie: You buy:-
- A standard beam laser for less money.
- You buy/build a shield recharging version, which otherise has the same performance.
- You buy/build one with some other funky feature, which otherise has the same performance.


Thoughts?

You only need to replace one railgun with this effect as there is no cummulative benefit. So on a normal pvp ship you'd lose 10-12.5% of damage to gain the ability to complete negate all your foe's SCBs. Sounds fair to me. I think with all these experimental mods it might pay of to go for diversity and flexibility.

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

I have a feeling some of these new weapons may have a "power usage" disadvantage but not necessarily "damage done" nerf...though it would damage the potential damage it could do due to the power required.
I would expect the shield booster beams to use just as much power as an aggressive beam, may even be a bit more but we'll have to wait and see and they'll be waiting for feedback in the Beta before finalizing anything anyway.
I'm expecting many tears, that's the usual way of things.


If not done correctly then lone players may be a thing of the past in Open. I would love there to be something for those who need a little help just surviving against a wing of 4.

 

[Faybs]

Advantage? Is 'fun' an advantage?

Something different to do.

Plus, flying on worlds where you have to take into account gravity reminds you that being in space makes you lazy

I was referring to the assertion by Weps that Horizons is pay to win.

 

[Alexander the Grape]

If there are no advantages to going down to planets, why would anyone buy Horizons?

Because additional options are an advantage, even if none are strictly better

 

[milligna]

Plus SRVs are a blast in VR and the rest of the Horizons updates sound like great additions to the game. It's so tedious hearing people reduce Horizons to just the first planetary landings update as if the rest aren't included.