To the Devs: Shields & Armour - Working as intended?

[Try4Ce]

Well I think we are all waiting for the dynamic damage model.
IMO, the ships armor should be seperated in different parts of the ship. If a subsystem needs to be shut down, but is covered by armor, that armor plating first has to be shot to dust, to actually expose the subsystem. Would make so much more sense. Plus, Pilots should be able to harden single modules, like add additional protective coating. It's the future after all, which should be quite possible.

Plus, I always loved to power shifting of shields in X-Wing. If that would be possible in Elite Dangerous as well, it would add another layer of battle strategies and mechanics on top of what we currently have.

Ah, the fantasies

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Here how hull protection apparently works:

Hmm, I remember I read about that, I had actually forgotten it. Still, the mechanic is entirely backwards.

until subsystems health is greater then hull health, you take down the Subsystem's.

That doesnt make any sense. If both parts are at 100% then the damage will simply alternate between hull and module.

Not to mention that we have no definite fact that the targets simply did not use B grade modules.

When SS health reach hull health, you take down hull first, and so on.

If hull and module have equal HP then 50% of the shots hits the hull then.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Would be nice to do some more testing on it, but I think it was useful to point this out.

I think this is the most frustrating thing.

Why the hell do we have to GUESS these things?

-Odd arbitrary stats hidden in vague descriptions
-Unclear and/or poorly described mechanics

Why not just give us basic damn stat for what a thing does.

If I add armour to my ship I would damn well be able to CLEARLY read on the fitting screen WHEN and WHAT it protects - Not to mention HOW.

That part cannot be rocket science to add in a description. Not to mention weapon range and how different weapon interacts with shields, ship etc.

They have a manual that essentially describes NOTHING of these things.

 

[rizal72]

I think this is the most frustrating thing.

Why the hell do we have to GUESS these things?

-Odd arbitrary stats hidden in vague descriptions
-Unclear and/or poorly described mechanics

Why not just give us basic damn stat for what a thing does.

If I add armour to my ship I would damn well be able to CLEARLY read on the fitting screen WHEN and WHAT it protects - Not to mention HOW.

That part cannot be rocket science to add in a description. Not to mention weapon range and how different weapon interacts with shields, ship etc.

They have a manual that essentially describes NOTHING of these things.

I understand your point, but a lot of players would reply to you that they like all this "discovery" thing, and that they don't like to simply know everything, without the pleasure of discover
As myself, I think that the true lies in the middle, as always: FD should give us some hints just to "point" our discoveries.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

I understand your point, but a lot of players would reply to you that they like all this "discovery" thing, and that they don't like to simply know everything, without the pleasure of discover
As myself, I think that the true lies in the middle, as always: FD should give us some hints just to "point" our discoveries.

Oh I like to discover things, things that are mysterious or so, but not the basic mechanics and functions of my ship.

Its like buying a car and when I ask the car company about engine performance they tell me it's between a Bugatti Veyron and a Lame Horse.

Or when I ask about safety measures and crumple zones they tell me if can survive a direct hit from a battle tank as long as the engine is wrapped in tinfoil.

Basic functionality and how each module function and what it does are BASIC information.

Like how much extra protection DOES a B grade module add? How damn hard is it to say it's 50% more durable?

At least the D grade module is significantly lighter we have learned from trial and error - Why not just add that little tidbit that it is LESS durable but LIGHTER.

 

[Battleship Kickass]

The protection from bulkheads and hull reinforcement being necessessary to protect subsystems to make them useful is exaggerated by most people IMO. Yes yes we all blow up most NPCS by targeting their PP and blow them up at 50% hull. They also all dogfight like beginning CMDRs and let you constantly get broadside PP shots on them.

Never once have I ever been destroyed by an NPC from shooting my PP in any ship. Never once have I been destroyed by a CMDR shooting my PP in any PvP combat I've been in either, likewise if I've ever destroyed a CMDR by a PP kill I can't remember it, but there may have been one before (over 1000 PvP kills). With pilots fighting who keep their face towards you most of the time, it is very hard to destroy the PP before the hull.

I've always found bulkheads very effective in PvP combat to increase survivability, especially if you engage in wing combat to survive long enough to high wake...4 combat ships can put out damage fast.

A couple thoughts:

I believe it may be possible that as hull % goes lower, angle of attacks that damage targetted modules may be hightended to make them easier to hit, but I haven't tested this yet so don't quote me on it yet. Also I no longer know if increased hull damage increases module damage, that test was a while ago.

Some ships such as the Dropship have very easy to hit modules that matter (Drives, FSD, and PP) while some have difficult to hit modules such as the Clipper.

Someone testing noticed that if you accidentally hit another module while having one targeted it will damage the targetted module...this is nothing but dumb luck so shouldn't really matter much (not that it shouldn't be fixed if it is not intended).

I don't believe bulkheads and armor reinforcement need to protect modules personally. If they did it would make targeting subsystems more pointless than it already is except for the drives which I assume they wouldn't protect anyway. It would make NPC's a lot tougher in CZs though that's for sure.

 

[Cablefast]

Oh I like to discover things, things that are mysterious or so, but not the basic mechanics and functions of my ship.

Its like buying a car and when I ask the car company about engine performance they tell me it's between a Bugatti Veyron and a Lame Horse.

Or when I ask about safety measures and crumple zones they tell me if can survive a direct hit from a battle tank as long as the engine is wrapped in tinfoil.

Basic functionality and how each module function and what it does are BASIC information.

Like how much extra protection DOES a B grade module add? How damn hard is it to say it's 50% more durable?

At least the D grade module is significantly lighter we have learned from trial and error - Why not just add that little tidbit that it is LESS durable but LIGHTER.

I hate to say it but I think most of this obfuscation is by design and not by omission. From what I've read on this forum, FD does not want people playing the meta game. Their idea of fun is not stating out the perfect ship. Whenever they have to make a choice between sharing information with us or protecting meta data, they always choose the protection side. Sometimes, this results in them not sharing vital information.
-
Just so you know, I deeply disagree with their strategy. I think you are asking many relevant questions and I wish FD would share this type of information. So +1 to you.
-
As to the OP's original post, combat requires significant rebalancing. Armor and bulkhead usefulness are a good point. The "easy button" power plant explosion is another good point. Shield Cell potions are a third. There are other things I'm sure. What's more, there are probably many good ways to fix these problems.
-
As for now, I just play the game as is:
Bulkheads and armor are almost useless. Understand that fact and don't equip them. PvP or PvE, if shields are down, you should run. Maybe this is by design, maybe not. If it is by design, then all I ask is that AI also take it into account. If it's not by design, then admit it and rebalance when able.
-
I personally hate the power plant explosion. I don't mind being able target it but I don't think it should be an it should be an instant win.
-
Now with all of this said, ED is still the single best game I've ever played. I'm passionate about some things that I'd like to see fixed but won't cry if I don't get them. Thanks FD!

 

[bendover]

dont agree with making small weapons as effective as bigger weapons it would mean there would be no reason for large weapons to exist,small ships have enhough advatages as it is

 

[Snarfbuckle]

dont agree with making small weapons as effective as bigger weapons it would mean there would be no reason for large weapons to exist,small ships have enhough advatages as it is

Which is not what I said.

Smaller weapons do less damage but ON TOP OF THAT they do even LESS damage against a larger ship. So if weapons do 5-10-15 damage and are used against a ship in a larger "class" they are reduced 30% MORE and an ADDITIONAL 30% against an even larger ship.

So if a small laser does 15 damage against Small VS Small they do 10 damage against Small VS Medium and 5 damage against Small VS Large.

And how the hell do small ships have an advantage in this game?

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

has any1 ever targeted anything else then PP or Thrusters on an NPC?

i was used from other space games, that bigers ships are easier to kill if first disable multiple subsystems - not here. Here you can't even a kill an anacondas sensors without bringing its hull down to 50%, while at the same time you could have killed it by destroying the PP.

something IS very wrong here.

 

[Guidebot]

This whole issue is one I'd like developer clarity on. Just a quick note to let us know if this is something that they're going to change or not, really. I don't mind it too much as it is, but it definitely doesn't feel right.

 

[znôrt]

.
1. Modules completely unprotected by armour - making armour modules useless against any competent player targeting modules unless you fight PVE...
2. Hull upgrades that add armour points that are essentially useless the moment modules are targeted

it's worse than useless in pvp because you put yourself at a disadvantage (reduced mobility) by using it. so yes, this looks definitely broken.

3. Reduced damage of a weapon because a ship is larger by 30% per size class to simulate bulk i suppose
.

one may not like it, but it's not unfair. after all those are much bigger and expensive ships. not a great implementation but the balance makes sense to me.

4. Cytoscrambler "balanced" due to the above reasons, since armour is useless the gun is not allowed to shoot straight to avoid it being "unbalanced"

dunno, haven't used it yet. from what you say, it might just need some tweaking ... or not. afaik it's not intended as an uber-weapon anyway, just supposed to spice things up.

 

[Yabba Addict]

There will be no dev answers, no clarity given. We've raised this issue and issues similar before, including in the bugs forum. The best we got in there was some boilerplate 'we'll flag this to be looked at' answer, and that was, I suspect, only because the thread was getting too big for the bug section with no dev reply. Understand that this is a PVE game. A solo game with multiplayer bolted onto it like a Mad doc sewing a second head onto an orc, looks kinda cool but doesn't work properly.

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

There will be no dev answers, no clarity given. We've raised this issue and issues similar before, including in the bugs forum. The best we got in there was some boilerplate 'we'll flag this to be looked at' answer, and that was, I suspect, only because the thread was getting too big for the bug section with no dev reply. Understand that this is a PVE game. A solo game with multiplayer bolted onto it like a Mad doc sewing a second head onto an orc, looks kinda cool but doesn't work properly.

you are wrong:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=164849&page=2&p=2514921&viewfull=1#post2514921