The problems and solutions to the present boosting system (or why the drag munitions change was a bad solution to an important issue)

The drag munitions change did do some work to reduce permaboosting, but it went about it the wrong way; by creating a highly specific and limited solution to a systemic issue within the game, i.e. the current boost system and its attendant issues. However, systemic issues require systemic solutions, and the problems with the boost may only be fixed by addressing the boosting system itself, and not through mods, modules or other niche changes.

The present boost system really isn't a particularly fun or powerful system. It creates 3 issues, namely:-
1. Uselessness of capacity mods/Charge meta on engines
2. Permaboosting
3. Lack of controllability

1. Uselessness of capacity mods/Charge meta on engines
Since boost works as a one shot, all you really need is enough charge to attain that single boost shot; anything beyond that amount is worthless, making capacity mods useless and charge enhanced mods the only way to go for ENG.

Lets say that a boost requires 50 capacity from your ENG capacitor; with the present boost system, all you need is that capacity of 50; a mod that bumps capacity to 60 or even 70 is usless compared to a mod that allows you to get that 50 capacity quickly. The extra 10 or 20 capacity is useless compared to any sort of recharge rate buff.

2. Permaboosting
Permaboosting works and is useful because boost as it stands can just be connected; you can go from one boost to another and there's no real reason to hold off on boosting for the most part since it both makes you move faster and turn better. Any changes to this would necessarily have to affect a large number of mods.

There's no real issue IMO with the effects of boost per se, but the issue comes in when you just constantly apply the boost. The reason for this is simple; since boost works as a one shot, there's no actual reason to bank that boost, instead it's just better to be constantly moving from boost to boost. You dont really have much control over the boost beyond when to deploy it, and since it work as a one shot, you have no reason to conserve the boost.

3. Lack of controllability
This is perhaps the worst effect of the current implementation of boost. The boost always comes as a fixed buff for a fixed duration; you can't really do much beyond decide when to deploy it. It can actually be a massive hindrance in combat since it has a good chance of making you either overshoot or undershoot your target and thus leaving you little better off than when you started.

And while boost bleeding is indeed a thing; what it amounts to is a good way to deal with a bad system.


Solution

The solution to the boost issue IMO is to change the boost to a toggle instead of a one shot. Instead of just giving your ship a one off boost, the boost constantly drains your capacitor to give a sustained increase to your ship's thrust and handling.

This change solves the issues in the following way:-
1. Makes capacity mods viable by allowing for an actual choice between more frequent but lower duration boosting or longer duration but more frequent boosting.
2. As boosting becomes more controllable, limiting permaboosting becomes both easier (by tweaking charge consumption rate) and less less intrusive to existing mods (since mods wouldn't need to be touched at all).
3. This system would also be much more controllable, since it gives the player much more control over when and how much to deploy the boost.
 
I like this idea. Tho i think a heat addition would be interesting too so that boosting pushes up your heat like firing a beam laser at the bottom of your capacitor to add balance to boosting your self dry and to the over use of boost. Right now boost adds heat but not much.

Also push to boost or toggle options would be good.
 
Push to boost (or toggle, or configurable-in-options) would be great as a thrust multiplier that drains the ENG capacitor while active. If nothing else it'd provide a reason for ships like the vulture and krait that can boost forever on two pips to actually put more than two pips in engines sometimes. The same way you have to put pips to sys while using the shutdown field neutraliser - if you want to keep your boost going, you're going to have to give up on sys and wep pips.
 
I would say that the system is upside down. Yes, it is space, but since the game has sound in space, it could also adapt boost, speed and ship control in a much more immersive way. So, how?
Forget the throttle blue zone. That's for airplanes. Space ships should have better maneuverability at lower speeds, and loose this maneuverability relative to acceleration and top speed. So, boosting would take away almost all of your ship's agility, forcing you to stop boosting and reducing speed for an efficient turn. You could use Flight-assist-off to do this at high speeds, though. Ship's acceleration should add turbulence. And of course, as I agree with the OP, boost should be a toggle button. Pressing boost should consume distributor energy, and add heat.
 
What I read is, "I want controlled after-burners."

I can't really comment on the 'boosting meta' as it isn't something I really encounter beyond shooting the slot with my Beluga for kicks.

That said, I have always thought it odd that Elite doesn't use a controlled after-burner like most flight-simulators, especially of the 'in space' variety. On the one hand, I'd be totally fine with forcing boost to be a 'continuous' control function, but that throws a big wrench into controller mapping - especially for consoles. The existing boost mechanic has a high degree of simplicity. One solution could be to create two mappings - 'one shot boost' as you describe it, and 'controlled boost' which is continuous pressing of the mapped key(s).

Dunno what to tell you about permaboosting...I can't say I've really encountered it as an issue. I have more trouble with mass-locking than anything else: we could really use a tackling module of some type.
 
How about you keep producing heat for a while after the boost and if you boost again during the 'afterglow' the additional heat adds up to the next 'afterglow' until you stop boosting or overheat yourself. Dirty tuning would have a much more noticeable downside with its high heat production compared to clean tuning or strengthening.
 
How about you keep producing heat for a while after the boost and if you boost again during the 'afterglow' the additional heat adds up to the next 'afterglow' until you stop boosting or overheat yourself. Dirty tuning would have a much more noticeable downside with its high heat production compared to clean tuning or strengthening.
At risk of enraging folks the rely on boosting more than I do, I have always felt boosting does not have near the heat-penalty one would expect from dumping 50% to 200% or more velocity into the engines that constitute nearly a quarter of most ships volume.
 
What I read is, "I want controlled after-burners."

I can't really comment on the 'boosting meta' as it isn't something I really encounter beyond shooting the slot with my Beluga for kicks.

That said, I have always thought it odd that Elite doesn't use a controlled after-burner like most flight-simulators, especially of the 'in space' variety. On the one hand, I'd be totally fine with forcing boost to be a 'continuous' control function, but that throws a big wrench into controller mapping - especially for consoles. The existing boost mechanic has a high degree of simplicity. One solution could be to create two mappings - 'one shot boost' as you describe it, and 'controlled boost' which is continuous pressing of the mapped key(s).

Dunno what to tell you about permaboosting...I can't say I've really encountered it as an issue. I have more trouble with mass-locking than anything else: we could really use a tackling module of some type.
Controllers could just use a toggle instead of a hold. Press the boost button once to activate boost and then once more to deactivate the boost.

We already have something similar for FAOff, where it can either be a hold (default for keyboards) or toggle (default for controllers).
 
At risk of enraging folks the rely on boosting more than I do, I have always felt boosting does not have near the heat-penalty one would expect from dumping 50% to 200% or more velocity into the engines that constitute nearly a quarter of most ships volume.
I quite agree with this statement, boosting barely generates any heat at the moment. This also contributes towards dirty drives being the default engine mod, as the extra heat from the engines barely makes any difference even when permaboosting.

I'd arguably go slightly further and argue that boosting should deal direct damage to the engine modules themselves (a tiny amount, but enough to incur repair bills and discourage permaboosting in extended encounters with non-reinforced drives). This would both discourage permaboosting, as well as giving reinforced drives a useful niche in combat builds beyond attempting to hulltank. Then again, I am very much in favour of much more wear and tear on our modules to make economy driving and maintenance costs relevant.
 
@cool_lad: Arguably, the best solution would be for boosting to hinder manoeuvrability rather than help it, and increase the integrity damage of manoeuvring beyond certain limits while boosting.
 
I think that we're well overdue for a patch that addresses ship, combat and bots. These areas haven't been really updated properly (as evidenced by the abysmally low ranges and falloffs of weapons, for example) and are in desperate need of work on many areas.
 
Top Bottom