What combat balances are proposed?

Will these be limited to payouts and missions boards, or will we see some weapons looked at again?

Personally, I would like to see big ships capable of holding their own better when facing squads of FDL gankers. A single railgun on one of these ships can nullify your chance of regaining shield and the base shield itself doesn't stand a chance of holding up too long against a barrage of plasma from a pack of these ships. I'd like to see railguns with cascade effect changed to only reducing half of the scb's worth per cell. And that is the maximum I would allow, personally. The size of the hit box, especially in a Cutter, makes it near impossible to avoid being struck by these. And although I'm fully engineered, it really doesn't feel that safe out there when facing these kinds of foe.

What are your thoughts on this? I know that fighting 1v1 against a big ship, the railguns were supposed to benefit these players. But in my opinion, they are a bit OP against shield cell banks and need toning down.
 
Personally, I would like to see big ships capable of holding their own better when facing squads of FDL gankers.
Big ship (especially Cutter) shields are already ridiculously OP. It can withstand incoming damage for quite a long time, even against a full wing.
But it's not supposed to ignore the dps of a full wing of FDL's foreever, simple as that.

A single railgun on one of these ships can nullify your chance of regaining shield
That's not true. It's dependent on both the size of SCB and the damage of the feedback rail.
 
Big ship (especially Cutter) shields are already ridiculously OP. It can withstand incoming damage for quite a long time, even against a full wing.
But it's not supposed to ignore the dps of a full wing of FDL's foreever, simple as that.



That's not true. It's dependent on both the size of SCB and the damage of the feedback rail.
If those FDL's are using thermal conduit PA's and someone has a feedback rail, then they'll certainly kill the Cutter. I don't know where you get the idea that they can't do it.
 
If those FDL's are using thermal conduit PA's and someone has a feedback rail, then they'll certainly kill the Cutter. I don't know where you get the idea that they can't do it.
If the Cutter sticks around to fight to the death, then sure, even a pair of FDLs (with any sensible weapon set, for that matter) should easily have the upper hand. There aren't many pairings of proper medium/large combat ships flown by similarly skilled pilots where I wouldn't give the 2v1 side strong odds to win, so...

The FDLs can't make the Cutter stick around long enough, though. Reinforced prismatic + 6 engineered boosters is >7000 MJ absolute, so with 4 pips to systems >18000 MJ absolute. More than enough to get away before shields drop, especially since the FDLs don't masslock it.
 
They should add more variety of combat ships appearing in Combat Zones such as Kraits, Mambas, Keelbacks and also remove laughable presence of T-9's. What is their role in CZ's? To deliver food and drinks for combatants? Slf bay doesn't make T9 a viable combat option especially with that handling, pathetic shielding and firepower comparable to a small ship. Why do they throw expensive T9's into combat zones? T9 isn't a poor mans Anaconda! Whose idea was it? A combat kitted T9 with mil composite costs over 300 million, instead you can have two combat ready Kraits MK2 with mil armor or...more than two DOZENS of Keelbacks! (15mil each incl. mil composite) and you don't want to face 25 angry Keelbacks with slf's in a combat zone. Come on FDev, this needs to be reworked. If you really need that flying cow than at least go with T10's.
 
Heavy duty shield boosters should probably get a nerf, but the FDL should probably get a slight nerf as well. I saw someone say that the FDL was buffed at some point, which made it the meta combat ship. Bringing it back to near pre-buff levels might make other combat ships more viable again.

I wouldn't want to see too much buffing and nerfing though, in terms of ships and modules. That kind of thing can be overdone and lead to quarterly buff/nerf cycles where everything eventually gets it's turn at the meta.

Subtle buffs and nerfs or don't touch it at all.
 
If the Cutter sticks around to fight to the death, then sure, even a pair of FDLs (with any sensible weapon set, for that matter) should easily have the upper hand. There aren't many pairings of proper medium/large combat ships flown by similarly skilled pilots where I wouldn't give the 2v1 side strong odds to win, so...

The FDLs can't make the Cutter stick around long enough, though. Reinforced prismatic + 6 engineered boosters is >7000 MJ absolute, so with 4 pips to systems >18000 MJ absolute. More than enough to get away before shields drop, especially since the FDLs don't masslock it.
You can get away of course. Even into SC for a quick drop. But a couple or more FDL's with strong plasma is a lot of firepower, which can quickly reduce shields with enough volleys. My point, though, is that once that base shield is down, it's almost impossible to bring back up with rails nullifying the SCB, effect, and ultimately, trying to fend off 3 FDL's with chaff and them doing rings around you, makes it most likely all you can do is run.

I would still like to see rails only reduce scb's by 50% at most. Even then I'd say that's too high. I suppose you could argue, however, that a solo medium ship shouldn't be any more capable of tackling a large ship, than a large ship is capable of tackling a wing of medium ships. However, in the medium ship case, it is possible to 1v1 because of the maneuverability and the railgun!
 
They should add more variety of combat ships appearing in Combat Zones such as Kraits, Mambas, Keelbacks and also remove laughable presence of T-9's. What is their role in CZ's? To deliver food and drinks for combatants? Slf bay doesn't make T9 a viable combat option especially with that handling, pathetic shielding and firepower comparable to a small ship. Why do they throw expensive T9's into combat zones? T9 isn't a poor mans Anaconda! Whose idea was it? A combat kitted T9 with mil composite costs over 300 million, instead you can have two combat ready Kraits MK2 with mil armor or...more than two DOZENS of Keelbacks! (15mil each incl. mil composite) and you don't want to face 25 angry Keelbacks with slf's in a combat zone. Come on FDev, this needs to be reworked. If you really need that flying cow than at least go with T10's.
Haha, it's a joke! Type-9 has no business being in them.
 
However, in the medium ship case, it is possible to 1v1 because of the maneuverability and the railgun!
This is because the Cutter is a total slug.

With similarly competent pilots the FDL will eventually win, no matter how many SCBs the Cutter has because the Cutter's time on target will be so much lower. It may take 40-60 minutes, but eventually the cutter will probably have to leave...after the FDL shoots down all it's SLFs and pecks the mothership into submission. Only if the Cutter has some turrets will it have much chance to win that battle of attrition.

The other large ships, well at least the Anaconda and Corvette, are maneuverable enough to outfight peer-level CMDRs in FDLs, the overwhelming majority of the time. They still have less time-on-target than the FDL, but the gap here is much smaller and more than made up by the extra durability and firepower of the larger vessels. Even pilots that will always best me in a 1v1 FDL vs. FDL duel will generally lose by a country mile if I switch to a Corvette and if I can beat them most of the time with an FDL, I can beat two of them at a time with the vette.

Ultimately, shield inflation usually just drags things out. We generally know what the outcome will be, barring new developments (like allies dropping in), 60 seconds into a fight between mediums and a Cutter...it's just a matter of taking the time.

Most 1v1s vs. Cutters go vaguely like this for me:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x13SGjUjAoY


If the Cutter has SCBs and I don't have rails, just multiply the length of the video by three. If I'm using a laser-free loadout, then insert a couple of rounds of synthesis in there. If there are SLF, just add fifteen minutes to the beginning where I do nothing but shoot them all down.

The cutter pilot can reverski all they like, it doesn't matter, the FDL can still go forward faster. Only if they happen to be in a bi-weave cutter or they are positively riddled with turrets, does it get really tricky. The thing just rotates too slow to fight most mediums well, and no adjustment to SCBs or feedback cascade or anything else is going to change that.

Of course, I'm not saying the cutter has no utility, or that having huge shielding isn't extremely useful, it just doesn't mean much in a 1v1 against a vessel that can be outside your effective cone of fire most of the time.
 
I'd like to see
  1. Boosters deleted entirely, replaced with engineering voucher tickets.
  2. only one HRP can be used at a time, and only if no shield.
  3. Base shield buffed to balance.
  4. Hull and HRP buffed to balance.
  5. Hull, HRP, and shield mods reconfigured to be more horizontal in stats.
  6. One MRP limit, with buffed module integrities across the board, or nerfed penetration/seeker module damage.
  7. Emissive removed, replaced with thermal cascade, and thermal cascade increases accuity of target by what's effective to +15% heat, even during silent.
  8. Dumbfires to have minimum arming time, long enough for PD to do something.
  9. Plasma set to thermal damage only, and buffed 40%
  10. Cannons buffed 30%
  11. Make the burst laser exactly like the rail gun, merge all existing railguns to the burst, with slightly more damage, less dps, less efficiency, and get rid of the original not-very-compatible-with-engineering-mods-tripple-hit-burst laser.
  12. Reinvent the railgun to be a projectile weapon, has projectile velocity of 3km/s, inflicts explosive damage (like a real rail gun and not this fony theExpanse hole maker nonsense), and has a highly efficient ammo stock due to not requiring charge packed rounds, but costs a lot more cap to fire.
  13. Make all ships top speed 1000 m/s, where they differentiate only by acceleration, and their acceleration tapers off linearly beginning at their current top boost speed - to reduce the effectiveness of reverski, enhance kiting, chasing, the general enjoyment of going fast, and all without negatively affecting joust.
  14. Ships that have trash speed and firepower to have greatly enhanced shielding, hull, module protection, or all of the above.
  15. All ships medium, or larger, chosen to have enhanced offensive and defensive capability, to have slightly reduced maneuverability and/or turn rates.
  16. Light fighters to have significantly lower boost cost and boost cool-down, possibly even an extra pair of small weapons, and not just for the asp scout.
Actually who am I kidding. I could write a book about all that inhibits this game's shine, but there's already been far more than a book's worth of explanation and discussion archived in history without there ever being any indication the current mess is anything other than worshiped as sacred.
 
This is because the Cutter is a total slug.

With similarly competent pilots the FDL will eventually win, no matter how many SCBs the Cutter has because the Cutter's time on target will be so much lower. It may take 40-60 minutes, but eventually the cutter will probably have to leave...after the FDL shoots down all it's SLFs and pecks the mothership into submission. Only if the Cutter has some turrets will it have much chance to win that battle of attrition.

The other large ships, well at least the Anaconda and Corvette, are maneuverable enough to outfight peer-level CMDRs in FDLs, the overwhelming majority of the time. They still have less time-on-target than the FDL, but the gap here is much smaller and more than made up by the extra durability and firepower of the larger vessels. Even pilots that will always best me in a 1v1 FDL vs. FDL duel will generally lose by a country mile if I switch to a Corvette and if I can beat them most of the time with an FDL, I can beat two of them at a time with the vette.

Ultimately, shield inflation usually just drags things out. We generally know what the outcome will be, barring new developments (like allies dropping in), 60 seconds into a fight between mediums and a Cutter...it's just a matter of taking the time.

Most 1v1s vs. Cutters go vaguely like this for me:
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x13SGjUjAoY


If the Cutter has SCBs and I don't have rails, just multiply the length of the video by three. If I'm using a laser-free loadout, then insert a couple of rounds of synthesis in there. If there are SLF, just add fifteen minutes to the beginning where I do nothing but shoot them all down.

The cutter pilot can reverski all they like, it doesn't matter, the FDL can still go forward faster. Only if they happen to be in a bi-weave cutter or they are positively riddled with turrets, does it get really tricky. The thing just rotates too slow to fight most mediums well, and no adjustment to SCBs or feedback cascade or anything else is going to change that.

Of course, I'm not saying the cutter has no utility, or that having huge shielding isn't extremely useful, it just doesn't mean much in a 1v1 against a vessel that can be outside your effective cone of fire most of the time.
Yes, the Corvette definitely has the edge of the 3 big ships. It lacks escape power unless high waking, but definitely can stand alone a bit better.

Sadly, it still has only it's base shield to rely on when taking a hammering, however. Especially bad if the enemy chaff and you're using gimbals, leaving you helpless for the most part.

I do think the big ships ought to be allowed their shield prowess, since they are after all lacking in some other ways and are easy to hit.
 
Will these be limited to payouts and missions boards, or will we see some weapons looked at again?

Personally, I would like to see big ships capable of holding their own better when facing squads of FDL gankers. A single railgun on one of these ships can nullify your chance of regaining shield and the base shield itself doesn't stand a chance of holding up too long against a barrage of plasma from a pack of these ships. I'd like to see railguns with cascade effect changed to only reducing half of the scb's worth per cell. And that is the maximum I would allow, personally. The size of the hit box, especially in a Cutter, makes it near impossible to avoid being struck by these. And although I'm fully engineered, it really doesn't feel that safe out there when facing these kinds of foe.

What are your thoughts on this? I know that fighting 1v1 against a big ship, the railguns were supposed to benefit these players. But in my opinion, they are a bit OP against shield cell banks and need toning down.
From my understanding, and likely a few other folks who've stated so the plan is just to adjust number values on a few tables.
 
From my understanding, and likely a few other folks who've stated so the plan is just to adjust number values on a few tables.
Yep. So far they've only mentioned credit rebalancing when it comes to combat or other activities. It doesn't mean we won't get a ship and module balance pass in the future, but I think fdev might hesitate to make those kind of changes right when the game is getting popular again.
 
Small ships should be a threat to bigger ships at all times. The food chain is more or less upside down compared to real combat right now.

But at that point it is what it is. Combat would be much more dynamic with less tanking and bullet sponges. I think that most weapons lack hitting power.

But frankly just a bit more credits for combat and better black market prices would do a lot to liven things up. Or maybe provide escort services for people scared of being ganked?
 
Yep. So far they've only mentioned credit rebalancing when it comes to combat or other activities. It doesn't mean we won't get a ship and module balance pass in the future, but I think fdev might hesitate to make those kind of changes right when the game is getting popular again.
Slides up Dev glasses until they do that anime thing
I dunno about popular, but I think right now I would imagine the focus would be in trying to make a rational improvement to the current build by making as few changes as possible before rebuilding their base. From prior conversations from frontier to the greater community (Like for instance mentioning that space legs would involve dovetailing a FPS onto the existing game engine) kind of showcase that they're basically rebuilding or refactoring lots of the core game in their upcoming project. As it is, likely everything presently out is in some token just legacy software at this point. If it gets adjusted too much, it creates a bit of a headache that deviates from their current build. (Or as stated in another thread, sounds like many builds across multiple active-work titles, a cardinal sin of game development) so to appease the small current playerbase, while trying to get fundie money from onboarding new players from the free release. They're looking to see if they can trigger retention by any factor by way of raw value adjustment in the interim.
Which, is fairly reasonable at this point and kinda what I would have done. I just wouldn't have nerfed anything and just added things.
 
Top Bottom