Nitek [pl]
Banned
No they are not. You forum nerfers are the minority. If you can't adapt - again - lego batman.
The SCB (Shield Cell Bank) Thread
- Thread starter OnePercent
- Start date
No they are not. You forum nerfers are the minority. If you can't adapt - again - lego batman.
The majority of people just play the game and never even come to the forums.
You nailed it, Ive been here since Beta as well and combat was fun and challenging, I had to actually outweigh risk vs reward. That all changed when they introduced SCB's, facepalm.
Lego batman?? really, I probably fly in circles around you before you even touch my shields, you cannot deny SCB's are for noobies.
I could outfit my whole Python with SCBs just to stay competitive, but is that all my options at the moment? seems like it until they remove SCB for noobs.
I am also in the "SCBs are not fine" camp, but I might be less extreme than many. My main problem with the current meta can be summarized with a response to this argument:
About ship categorization
I think in the beginning ships were clearly intended to have categories. And I like it. IMHO some ships should be better at trading, some better at fighting and some should be good allrounders that can be made into very effective traders/fighters/explorers with clever outfitting.
But as many commenters have pointed out, the way SCBs currently work leads this categorization ad absurdum. SCBs simply make the multi-roles too powerful. Want some proof? Jump over to the Federal Corvette thread and read the comments. People are afraid the Corvette will be a less powerful fighter than the Anaconda. Why? Because the Corvette will be a dedicated fighter. It will probably be power starved and wont have the internals to load up on a gazillion SCBs. Of course this may turn out to be false, but I believe it highlights the current problem very well.
But on to my main point..
Builds
Yes, builds matter. They should. I love tinkering with the build of my ship until it feels perfect. Its one of my favorite things in computer games. But in ED there currently is NO build variety at all. There is one build which is the clear winner: As many SCBs as possible. For PvP there simply is no viable alternative at the moment, there is no counter to that strategy. And many people - me included - find that boring.
Its not that we cant adapt to the meta, I am pretty sure many people in the "Nerf SCBs" camp have PvP optimized Pythons or Anacondas in their hangar. Its just that having only one viable PvP build template has become stale.
Elite is a great game, I am sure most of the "whiners" dont want to ruin it. They want to tune it, make it even better and increase the fun that can be had with the game in the long run.
About ship categorization
I think in the beginning ships were clearly intended to have categories. And I like it. IMHO some ships should be better at trading, some better at fighting and some should be good allrounders that can be made into very effective traders/fighters/explorers with clever outfitting.
But as many commenters have pointed out, the way SCBs currently work leads this categorization ad absurdum. SCBs simply make the multi-roles too powerful. Want some proof? Jump over to the Federal Corvette thread and read the comments. People are afraid the Corvette will be a less powerful fighter than the Anaconda. Why? Because the Corvette will be a dedicated fighter. It will probably be power starved and wont have the internals to load up on a gazillion SCBs. Of course this may turn out to be false, but I believe it highlights the current problem very well.
But on to my main point..
Builds
Yes, builds matter. They should. I love tinkering with the build of my ship until it feels perfect. Its one of my favorite things in computer games. But in ED there currently is NO build variety at all. There is one build which is the clear winner: As many SCBs as possible. For PvP there simply is no viable alternative at the moment, there is no counter to that strategy. And many people - me included - find that boring.
Its not that we cant adapt to the meta, I am pretty sure many people in the "Nerf SCBs" camp have PvP optimized Pythons or Anacondas in their hangar. Its just that having only one viable PvP build template has become stale.
Elite is a great game, I am sure most of the "whiners" dont want to ruin it. They want to tune it, make it even better and increase the fun that can be had with the game in the long run.
Last edited:
Nitek [pl]
Banned
Jesse I believe you were killed by Triadius already :]
There is a clear winner build because the SCB's are the only game in town as far as combat internals are concerned.
Why not have the AFMU do the following :
Then, voilà, two other worthy combat internals. Build variety stems from the availability of options, not the removal of options
as some seems to be so fond off.
If hull tanking was a thing, with the possibility of repairs and stuff, then :
Why not have the AFMU do the following :
- Auto repair the most damaged modules, with PP always being first.
- When repairing, does not need to switch the modules off.
- Can also repair the hull of the ship
- In addition, have the hull package bring in a %modifier to hull as the shield boosters.
- Lower the price and mass of armor by a factor of two.
Then, voilà, two other worthy combat internals. Build variety stems from the availability of options, not the removal of options
as some seems to be so fond off.
If hull tanking was a thing, with the possibility of repairs and stuff, then :
- Lasers would become less dominant, which is an other balance issue.
- SCB's become less attractive, esp. if heat gen was raised. Make it so that lasers + SCB's + boost = big trouble or heat sinks. (more heat sinks => less shield boosters)
- Increase the attractivity of high hull ships, like the Dropship.
*edit : added in suggestions
Last edited:
Good suggestions.
I think people mostly cry for an SCB nerf because SCBs are part of the problem and it is the easiest thing to demand. New outfitting options that make other loadouts more viable are probably a much better solution. At least they would be for me.
This is a good idea.
Well said, If you joust like that then you can't fire at them for long enough to stop them using SCB's; get behind them, full pip's to weapons and when they pop the SCB keep hammering them. You can do more damage than the SCB can recharge you just need to stay with them.
Yeah small ships like eagles and vipers are always going have difficulty with combat builds on the big ships but that's because you're bringing a knife to an artillery duel!
That's an excellent idea, adds variety to the combat builds and also increases the usefulness of kinetics.
I also like "attractivity", not a word but totally should be!
Last edited:
No, because the answer to bringing SCB's in line with their drawbacks (Power requirements, heat, charges, weight, etc...) is not to buff other modules to break them just as badly as SCB's.
Last edited:
Because fixing the imbalance in combat internals is best done by removing said internals altogether... lol.
I will not go further than that about your idea of buffing the FDL and nerfing everything else, because this all this is about, in fine.
I will not go further than that about your idea of buffing the FDL and nerfing everything else, because this all this is about, in fine.
SCB's are the only internal that were put in the wrong slot to begin with. They are directly combat related, they have a number of charges before they are depleted, and they are a defensive module.
What other modules fit these three requirements?
Chaff
ECM
Point Defense Turrets
Plain and simple: SCB's are in the wrong slot. Frontier screwed up.
scb need to be nerfed 50% and all the lasors too.
buggys in the tech demo looked also way overpowered , nerf it too.
buggys in the tech demo looked also way overpowered , nerf it too.
You can either make everything useful or make everything useless. The later has people saying "Who cares?" and the former makes people think. I would rather they didn't make everything about this game totally beige.
Whole heartedly agree with you on this.
They wouldn't fit on a utility slot, its a battery array...
We're saying fix it, not grind it into dust. Pretty big difference, especially because there is so much room to play on the SCB's before they become undesirable.
- - - Updated - - -
A heat sink for my 1000 ton ship fits on a one meter square platform and jettisons with enough energy in it to power a small town for a day, I'm sure Frontier can find a way to explain SCB's.
Many things don't make sense in ED .. moving it to a utility slot would force players to pick what they need and not just stock pile them (as they do now). Watching a lot of videos on YouTube showing PvP combat fights and it becomes a game of endurance - the one with the most tends to win.
Last edited: