The SCB (Shield Cell Bank) Thread

Darkhaert

D
Jesse30 said:
I barely even play the main game anymore, the only time I get on the main game is to fly my Python and do some trading. Every time I have an PvP encounter it comes down to who has the most SCBs, please at least look into giving us a counter to SCB stacks, so why even bother looking for conflict in open when you could do the same with CQC without the aid of health poison. Does anybody else agree? at least in a real world scenario you know the only way to counter a tank is hit it from the back or the top, at least give us that option to find a weak spot to give us more game-play options, like choosing between fast and agile or slow and strong.

An example of good combat gameplay, I didn't need SCBs to accomplish that,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XARXJdyBzlY
Click to expand...

Yes yes yes all well and good, And lets make trade built ships, combat bilt ships, and inbetween "Smuggling" built ships all be the same. And while we are at it lets make a vulture and DBS drive like rocks and turn like anacondas. Lets make everything easy right?


I agree SCB stacking is a little annoying to fight against, but it isn't "impossible" to beat someone stacking them either. They could just limit one per ship or maybe add in some DR with them say the second won't nearly have as much of an effect as the first one. but, personaly i don't see that much of an issue. Practice some new tactics, Use Chaff, get better weapons (something like burst lasers to eat through shields like a knife cutting soft butter), use thrusters to stay out of their firing arc, ect. It's Elite:Dangerous, there is gonna be better pilots, better builds. If your in a trade ship and you can't turn an run to get the hell out of dodge then use tactics, adapt. Don't cry "NERFBAT" everytime you see something you clearly can't overcome at the moment. No matter how long you've been playing sometimes there is more to learn. And keep in mind stacking SCB's and using them all effectivly takes some skill and management. when you switch between firing groups or turn modules on or off that takes a little bit of time which a little window were damage you are doing is dropped cause switching firing groups makes your weapons stop firing to register the switch so it adds more pressure on people who are using more then one.
 
Last edited:

Legacy_LuckyLuke

Banned
Legacy_LuckyLuke
Not wanting to add more fuel to the fire: But I honestly don't understand what the fuss is all about. I went and bought an A6 SCB for my Python last night to understand how they work.

In my assessment - they aren't the 'instant gulp' magic potion everyone has been harping on about. They have to be used whilst shields are still up; there is a delay factor in the charge being released; and from what I can see it only charges one ring of shields. On top of that there is a delay until you can use the next charge. A few times in the CZ I've have so many ships firing on me that the last thing I want to be doing is faffing around with firing the SCB. And even when I do it's not guaranteed to make a difference if I don't get the timing right.

Maybe it would be different in a 1-on-1 match where things aren't so intense. And I am only using 1 module, so that's only 4 charges. I suppose if I had several I would use them a little more freely each time I lost a ring to shields. But even then, I don't want to give up any of my hull reinforcements as the default hull on the Python is paper thin so I need a bit more protection for when the shields do go down. (Or when I need to get out of there :))

If anything the SCB just gives me a little more stamina in the combat zone.

All in all they seem like a good thing, and the mechanics of their operation means a little skill is involved in their usage. I don't think I'll be getting more than one though, for reasons stated above. Though I can see why some wouldn't like them though :)
 
Last edited:

SAB380

SAB380
Agree with the argument that SCBs were a quick fix to game balance and mechanic problems.
People using them on big ships and arguing they need to be there should instead be arguing that the big ships need improved game mechanics. I love my Anaconda and am pro-big ship. I don't like the idea that I should have SCBs stacked up in it. Instead:

a) The powerplant should never be accessible on any large ship. It is utterly absurd that you can hit them in combat. They should be in the deepest part of the ship, surrounded by near impenetrable specialized armour that is way too expensive to build a whole ship out of and is reserved for power plant shielding, and then further:
b) The standard outer armor on the large ships should be at least 100% stronger than it currently is, probably 200% stronger.

c) And then IMO Shield cell banks needs to be replaced with a single module (no different to thrusters / scanners / etc) that would fit an 'overcharge unit' that would function the same as the current SCB but have a negative drawback like a heat spike that causes a temporary weapons overcharge ...but would still allow smaller ships to survive and zip off temporarily from wherever they are.
 

Burlsol

B
The only thing I would change about them is needing slightly more time between when it is used and when you can use another. Even an additional 20-30 seconds would be enough to make a big difference. The problem with them as they stand is that currently they can be used in too quick succession to counteract damage being done, allowing them to act as a continual lifeline. For example, an A2 SCB can outpace the damage from a pair of medium multi-cannons constantly firing for the whole duration, then another can be used soon after so that almost no progress is made towards dropping the shields unless you have other damage sources. Meaning that in 1v1 it is entirely about how many SCB your target has instead of being able to maintain damage. This issue can be further exploited by alternating between SCB and chaff. The only limiting factor is the number you can fit on a craft and having enough power available to keep one online at a time. The later part is a much smaller issue given the practice of setting macros to turn off and on SCB as you use them.

With the additional time between usage, you wouldn't be able to use them back to back so could not use them to brute-force an encounter.

The only other option would be to add some sort of weapon which is specifically designed to deal increased damage to shields, in particular larger class shields, but which does very little damage to armor or subsystems. Or allow kinetic based weapons to deal small amounts of damage through shields.


I disagree with the poster above though in regards to the whole poweplant or armor issue. Targeting the power plant is almost the only way a smaller ship can disable a larger one since it takes too long to damage anything else. To point, I have had to actually sit there for 2-3 minutes drilling away with beams on the hull of an Anaconda to destroy it despite damaging both the power plant and life support to 0% and the ship being stuck there motionless, whereas before I could just make the power plant go boom. In "fixing" the issue, the only thing they did is make it boring. Power plants on large ships should remain vulnerable components since they take up a rather large amount of space within the hull, and cannot be extensively shielded due to needing to interface with drive, shield generator, and capacitors. Keeping them vulnerable means that you need to learn to position yourself relative to your enemy to keep them blocked by other portions of your hull so that focused damage cannot be done to a single spot. The offset for this vulnerability shouldn't be making them invulnerable, but rather making field maintenance kits useful. In this way, larger ships could use their big guns to defend themselves like they should be able to do, but repair most system damage once the fight is over. Making large ships unstoppable is not good balance. Making skill and experience counteract skill and experience while allowing ways to make up for mistakes is good balance.
 
Last edited:

GJ51

GJ51
Sorry, you're already too late.

I spoke directly with the devs today and they've agreed that it's quite proper that the game is going to be modified to my recommendations on the next update. They examined my opinions very closely and agreed that mine was the correct way the game should be played.

Better luck next time...
 

Windscreen Smudge

W
photolifepl said:
Stop crying. No more nerfing. If you can't handle it out there go and play Lego Batman Op :]
Click to expand...

SCB's screw with the ship balance of the entire game, either fix SCB's, or start fixing the entire ship lineup. Your choice.


Edit: I'm still of the opinion that the majority of SCB rebalancing could be done by moving them to utility slots.
 
Last edited:

Muetdhiver

Muetdhiver
I think moving them to utility is a poor fix.

I'd rather have them replaced by a charge boost on the sys capcitor and having
different capacitor banks as internals. That way, stacking them is possible, but will
cost you huge amounts of power as all the capcitor banks will have to be turned on and charged to be usefull.

The whole percieved problem of imbalance is because combat able ships with lots of internals have no other usefull
combat internal to fit in. Give more choice (eg. 3 diff types of capacitor banks, some battle repair module, amo modules
and magic, the issue will solve itself.)

Besides, the ship lineup is fine, its just that some ships are designed as tanks, while other as interceptors.
Some people want the cheaper interceptor to be as tanky as the tank while being faster. Seems like imbalance to me...
 

Windscreen Smudge

W
Muetdhiver said:
I think moving them to utility is a poor fix.

I'd rather have them replaced by a charge boost on the sys capcitor and having
different capacitor banks as internals. That way, stacking them is possible, but will
cost you huge amounts of power as all the capcitor banks will have to be turned on and charged to be usefull.

The whole percieved problem of imbalance is because combat able ships with lots of internals have no other usefull
combat internal to fit in. Give more choice (eg. 3 diff types of capacitor banks, some battle repair module, amo modules
and magic, the issue will solve itself.)

Besides, the ship lineup is fine, its just that some ships are designed as tanks, while other as interceptors.
Some people want the cheaper interceptor to be as tanky as the tank while being faster. Seems like imbalance to me...
Click to expand...

The ship lineup is a horrific mess. You have 2 ships that can't even be used with any reliability because their functions haven't been put into the game, 2 more that're horribly underpowered for their role, one that reigns supreme in every role, a couple more that're broken solely because of their flight mechanics and two ships that have been deemed useless for anything but grinding credits in solo by the community.

Balancing SCB's will take care of about half of that. Waiting for more modules to come around isn't the answer, in my opinion, because you could be waiting until doomdsay for them to be added and you're relying on those modules to be balanced in order for them to have any effect. If they turn out to be in every scenario worse than SCB's, then nothing will change. If they turn out to be better than SCB's, then we have a new and even bigger problem, while SCB's become part of the statistical norm.
 

Daffan

Daffan
Titan1978 said:
oh god!!
STOP WITH ALL THE NERF TALK!!

There are people who Like SCBs! You're not going to win the "I Dont like it - so Nerf it" debate! That's YOUR viewpoint! Don't jam it down other's throats!
Click to expand...

ok but let's not kid ourselves, SCB lovers - they are in the minority.

SCB's are boring because there is no other internals worth taking, they are super strong and make ramming even more powerful. It's a battle of attrition and scb win every time. Multi-purpose ships are OP because of it - 30+ SCB's
 
Last edited:

clinton

C
Alternative to nerfing SCB

Just increase ordinary shields strength and armour by a factor of 10, and increase weapons damage by a factor of 10.

That would solve the problem of SCB without nerfing them.

Problem solved.
 

Kyle Brennan

Kyle Brennan
I'm going to take a special interest in laughing at these same people whenever they own and operate large ships. Once they realize that their Condas or Pythons are useless in any form of combat due to shield regeneration time the tears will flow again, except in the opposite direction.
 

possessed

possessed
Daffan said:
ok but let's not kid ourselves, SCB lovers - they are in the minority.

SCB's are boring because there is no other internals worth taking, they are super strong and make ramming even more powerful. It's a battle of attrition and scb win every time. Multi-purpose ships are OP because of it - 30+ SCB's
Click to expand...

that is a lie ...
 

Windscreen Smudge

W
possessed said:
that is a lie ...
Click to expand...

No. It is not.

When I can take a Python, fit it for Piracy to include cargo, two limpet controllers, an interdictor and scanners and still have room to fit enough SCB's that I don't need to fear any ship in the game solely because of the SCB's, there is a problem. That problem magnifies to ludicrous degrees when you take off all of the bells and whistles and fit for straight combat. There's nothing to put in those 6 empty slots except SCB's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom