The SCB (Shield Cell Bank) Thread

[Deleted member 38366]

My take on all that :

- 1x Chaff limit (or deny auto-sequencing of multiple launchers)
- 1x SCB limit

I'd be perfectly fine with that. Then it all boils down to actual skill or having somewhat better equipment.
A Battle-Anaconda or Combat-Python will still be very tanky Ships. But it'll all have hard limits that can be overcome either in numbers, skill or plain luck.

PS.
As a small "inbetween" limitation... One could increase the energy requirements for double- or triple-fittings etc.
1x 5A SCB draws 2.1MW
2x 5A SCB draws (2.1MW + 2.1MW) * multifit factor, i.e. 1.25
3x 5A SCB draws (2.1MW + 2.1MW + 2.1MW) * multifit factor, i.e. 1.5

Essentially put a power limit on stacking SCBs. That would still allow for multiple SCBs but come with those limitations... something like that might work as a compromise.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

My take on all that :

- 1x Chaff limit
- 1x SCB limit

I'd be perfectly fine with that. Then it all boils down to actual skill or having somewhat better equipment.
A Battle-Anaconda or Combat-Python will still be very tanky Ships. But it'll all have hard limits that can be overcome either in numbers, skill or plain luck.

Chaff lowers the skill ceiling?

And here I was thinking Chaff raised the skill ceiling by requiring either fixed weapons or for gimbal users to clear their target and aim for once.

Err... Yeah..... I'm pretty sure that last one if the real McCoy....

 

[Jesse30]

Haha, I love that you guys managed to move this thread onto arguing the best fix. PROGRESS! (fist pump)

Windscreen, Defacto and Jesse. You guys are great, you really get it.

roak... your recent posts seem to have a way different view to your previous ones that I argued with. Maybe they were just badly explained. I withdraw my previous judgement.

Trust me we get it man, is all about coming together as a community and find a solution as team and both side be happy at the end. I like this game a lot and I want to see become bigger than the other Space Sims out there, if they don't fix the SCB meta people will lose interest soon enough, unless Horizons will make me an offer I cannot refuse.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

Chaff lowers the skill ceiling?

And here I was thinking Chaff raised the skill ceiling by requiring either fixed weapons or for gimbal users to clear their target and aim for once.

Err... Yeah..... I'm pretty sure that last one if the real McCoy....

Not really concerned about Fighers with Gimbals - more thinking about Turret users in less-than-stellar maneuvering Ships/Hardpoint placement. Rides that yield extremely poor results when being limited to fixed weapons.
A double-chaffing maneuverable Ship can run circles around a fully kitted Anaconda without ever getting hit. Good luck trying to hit such a guy after setting Turrets on fixed - IF you realize what's going on in the 1st place.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Not really concerned about Fighers with Gimbals - more thinking about Turret users in less-than-stellar maneuvering Ships/Hardpoint placement. Rides that yield extremely poor results when being limited to fixed weapons.

Chaff is there expressly to limit the big advantage these ships gain by basically having a nearly 360 degree firing arc, which keeps pressure on a target's shields without the requirement of good piloting. Chaff is working as intended and needs no changes.

 

[{SAS}Stalker]

Limiting the use of large ships in PvP is fine by me, considering right now they're the vast majority of what I see people flying for the express purpose of fitting more SCB's. It's boring. Let's see some variety on the field, and some actual tactics come into play. The large ships may lose tank, but all ships collectively are losing tank, so the large ships should be able to push DPS off the field faster unless they're just in a bad situation they shouldn't be in to begin with. Disregarding that, if you take my suggestion that SCB's be moved to utility slots before being balanced larger ships won't be hit as hard as smaller ships.

Players willing to run to Solo don't need this as an excuse. Anything can be pointed to when you really want to point fingers and pass the blame.

I still think the biggest post nerf patch criticism will come from traders/miners/randoms who suddenly find themselves running out of shield much faster than they do now. The PVP crowd will as you say not be vastly effected, although I think the meta will change to hull tanks and heavy plate armour (FAS anyone?) and many condas and the new cutter/corvette with become garage trophies.

People will simply die faster or choose to high wake faster.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

I still think the biggest post nerf patch criticism will come from traders/miners/randoms who suddenly find themselves running out of shield much faster than they do now. The PVP crowd will as you say not be vastly effected, although I think the meta will change to hull tanks and heavy plate armour (FAS anyone?) and many condas and the new cutter/corvette with become garage trophies.

People will simply die faster or choose to high wake faster.

I think the Lakon traders will be mollified by getting some of their cargo space back assuming SCB's get moved to Utility slots. Anaconda traders won't care. Eight utility slots is plenty to give them what they need between chaff, heat sinks, boosters and SCB's. Pythons may have to still sacrifice some cargo for armor, but only trial and error will tell on that one.

 

[Stealth Gamer92]

It will likely limit the use of "large" ships in pvp battles because when you are being focused you need to tank damage.

There's a difference between "focus" & "tunnel vission" and you sir just described useing a crutch to allow more tunnel vission.

 

[Frenotx]

There's a difference between "focus" & "tunnel vission" and you sir just described useing a crutch to allow more tunnel vission.

Think he many focused as in focus fire, as in the entire enemy group all concentrating their fire on you.

 

[Stealth Gamer92]

Think he many focused as in focus fire, as in the entire enemy group all concentrating their fire on you.

If he did I retract my statement.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

There's a difference between "focus" & "tunnel vission" and you sir just described useing a crutch to allow more tunnel vission.

That's not what he meant by Focus. It's not always a 1v1, and in those instances you and your allies "focus" a target instead of spreading your damage out to push them off the field or eliminate them.

 

[BostromNZ]

I can only assume that the CMDRs who are shouting the most about nerfing SCBs are the elite PvPers. Why would you nerf something that is designed to save your ship when so many are already afraid to fly in Open. It would push even more into Solo, is that what we want?

 

[Alexander the Grape]

I can only assume that the CMDRs who are shouting the most about nerfing SCBs are the elite PvPers. Why would you nerf something that is designed to save your ship when so many are already afraid to fly in Open. It would push even more into Solo, is that what we want?

Because it means that the griefers emergent murder-based gameplay purveyors in their highly tuned PvP ships stuffed full of SCBs are basically unkillable by any ship in a non-PvP setup.

SCBs are NOT a defensive mechanic. They allow you to tank damage but that is used to wantonly attack people, safe in the knowledge that they have more MJ available than their victims.

Plus SCBs don't help if your shields are down. If you want better "ship saving mechanisms", make armour modules on a par with SCBs

 

[raok]

plenty of tricks to keep even a Vulture in your sights

Well, I will give another change for the python... Tomorrow.

What are these "plenty of tricks" if I may ask? I may have use for those

roak... your recent posts seem to have a way different view to your previous ones that I argued with. Maybe they were just badly explained. I withdraw my previous judgement.

I agree, I wrote only some pointers. Just because subject already in some other thread and did not want to repeat exactly the same. Tried to take a shortcut

It will likely limit the use of "large" ships in pvp battles because when you are being focused you need to tank damage. If they whack SCB with the nerf bat they need to balance that with massive hull upgrades to bigger ships and massively reduce the damage class 1 and 2 weapons do to larger, A class shields.

If SCB takes a nerf, something has to be changed/buffed. I agree. Especially for the big ships.

Hull HP should be probably buffed for all ships. Should be far stronger than shields. So that you just cannot win PvP fight if you always jump before you lose your shields.

But then there is one more thing... I think that the game was designed so that players are playing ~"fighter" class ships. All the ships we are flying are rather small, and the big military ships are not in our reach. Even if we would like there to be a variety of different kind of ships, maybe devs do not.

Still, would be cool if players would be using turrets in Anaconda for PvP. So that none of the weapons would be totally useless. But sure, then the ships would need other kind of buffs, like SCB stacks + increased hulll HP

 

[Stealth Gamer92]

That's not what he meant by Focus. It's not always a 1v1, and in those instances you and your allies "focus" a target instead of spreading your damage out to push them off the field or eliminate them.

Like I said if I misunderstood I appologize, but stacking still isn't needed in that situation from my experience you can run too.

I can only assume that the CMDRs who are shouting the most about nerfing SCBs are the elite PvPers. Why would you nerf something that is designed to save your ship when so many are already afraid to fly in Open. It would push even more into Solo, is that what we want?

I only PvP in self deffense and never use them(well on certain ship's I use one & that's more than enough, my current ship is all D rated Hull packages on the internal's and will give me a good 3 minute's to run), then again it sound's like unlike most I approach fighting more tacticfully from the start by only picking fight's where I'm not outgunned 10-1.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

I can only assume that the CMDRs who are shouting the most about nerfing SCBs are the elite PvPers. Why would you nerf something that is designed to save your ship when so many are already afraid to fly in Open. It would push even more into Solo, is that what we want?

It's not going to push even more people into Solo, because the people running to Solo don't look at combat mechanics and modules judging whether they favor one ship over another, their playstyle, their preferred ship and use their analysis of those factors to make the decision of whether they want to stay in Open or not.

They lose a ship, they throw a tantrum, and they leave. They're going to throw a tantrum no matter how they lose that ship or what factors were involved. We're playing Elite: Dangerous, a Space sim with full PvP mechanics, not Prams and Pacifiers, the latest Nanny simulator from Frontier Developments.

 

[Alexander the Grape]

SCBs aren't even that good in large scale PvP because your shields can be alpha'd/rammed down.

The issue of focusing is a valid one but SCBs are not a solution.

 

[Jesse30]

I can only assume that the CMDRs who are shouting the most about nerfing SCBs are the elite PvPers. Why would you nerf something that is designed to save your ship when so many are already afraid to fly in Open. It would push even more into Solo, is that what we want?

I disagree SCB stacking is not really helping traders at all, traders have shields as it is a few SCB's wont save them after all. However, SCB will give pirates alike more endurance, have you ever noticed anybody getting out of dodge when the police shows up? The last time I feared the those pesky Vipers it was back in Beta. Like someone mentioned a few post ago, I don't want to destroy Annies or Python in my Viper as an escort, but at least want to be a force to be reckon with, instead of being ignored and the trading vessel gets destroyed.

 

[{SAS}Stalker]

If he did I retract my statement.

I did, should have made it clearer.

 

[Don_Von_Hulio]

When the CQC instance style of areas become integrated into the main game.... Elite will be made alot funner and instead of relying on SCBs people will use real tactics and planning escapes and flank attacks from cover.