Whats with all the hate for shield cell banks?

[askavir]

SCBs were a shot in the foot with a huge shotgun.

It ruined PvE plausability, as now everyone can face hordes of high rank enemy ships without danger (npcs don't use SCBs).

It ruined PvP, as PvP battles are now just SCB pileup contests.

It ruined mixed style, as now you can only have an PvP outfitted ship, or outfit it for other uses, cannot have mixed gaming style.

 

[starhawkprime]

Well now that CQC is coming maybe the "Quick Kill" fix that folks are pining for will be satiated. I think scb have a place in the main game. Logically the superior combat pilot should prevail because when you come down to it, it's all about damage on target and avoiding damage on you! People don't like their prey jumping away and that's always a predators perspective, the prey with their 200 tons of goods and crap combat skills are happy as hell. All things considered I like them but I don't do much PVP. If I want that action i'll try CQC when it's released.

 

[Pile_O_Gunz]

Capping scb to one is pointless. Equipping one will be a no-brainer for every pvp pilot and everyone have one is the same as nobody having one(except we're now one slot down)

The real fix is to make sure it's not a no-brainer they need to add other modules just as appealing to pvp pilots.

 

[Sandro Sammarco]

Hello Commanders!

AI can use shield cells, though not every ship loadout has them. This is part of a slightly wider issue where high skill-level AI don't always have the hardware you might expect them to fly with. Over time, this is something we'll want to look at, but not right now.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there's also possibly an argument that if shield cells were removed, why would Commanders stick around after losing their shields if they currently leave when they run out of cells?

Shield cells were made to have somewhat more punitive heat and power effects a while back, which I think was in the right direction, but possibly too restrained.

We have been discussing them recently: one idea I'm personally quite interested in is the concept that cells overcharge your shields to unsafe levels, beyond the generator's normal capacity, potentially damaging your shield generator (and thus causing malfunctions/destruction) if during the time the cell is active the shield *doesn't* receive enough damage to drain it down to below the generator's normal maximum. We haven't checked all the angles on this idea (and there are others), but at face value it seems potentially cool to me.

I still strongly believe shield cells have a place in the game and don't want to remove them, however, although there won't be any changes in the short term, given time we'll get around to looking at them again to see if we can make their functionality better.

Hope this info helps.

 

[Kyuubey]

Why not make SCBs into an actual consumable. For example a 6A SCB has 3 charges and costs about 3 mil. Once the 3 charges are spent, the module is ejected from your ship like a spent heatsink. You can not sell a partially used SCB. Your only options are to fly with 1/3 charges or buy a new SCB for 3 mil. While this does not fix SCB spam, it'll add a cost to it.

Another idea would be to limit the number of SCBs based on ship size. Small ships can have 1 SCB, medium sized ships can have 2, and large ships can have 4.

 

[Zieman]

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there's also possibly an argument that if shield cells were removed, why would Commanders stick around after losing their shields if they currently leave when they run out of cells?

If bulkheads/armour and their reinforcement packages actually meant something (like better protection to modules), just one SCB module per ship would be (IMO) the right answer.

 

[McCloud]

they are available for everyone my biggot with them is they make the canda, python, clipper, to good at combat while combat ships which cant hall cargo and are extremely power starved are only viable pve

they made one trick ponie ships completely useless and mutlie roll ships which are suppose to be jack of all trade masters of non supreme gods of combat and moderate cargo haulers.

This. Combat specific ships should be the dominant force on the battlefield, not multi-role ships. Perhaps limiting the amount of SCB that multi-role ships can carry would be a good idea.

Why most of the current 'combat' specific ships have pitiable internal slots and power plant issues while multi-role ships usually have more power and internals than they know what to do with is beyond me.

 

[HeavyGroovez]

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there's also possibly an argument that if shield cells were removed, why would Commanders stick around after losing their shields if they currently leave when they run out of cells?

Hi Sandro,


There are many of us who are happy with SCBs the way they are and have presented this exact argument.

 

[JessieColt]

Hello Commanders!

AI can use shield cells, though not every ship loadout has them. This is part of a slightly wider issue where high skill-level AI don't always have the hardware you might expect them to fly with. Over time, this is something we'll want to look at, but not right now.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there's also possibly an argument that if shield cells were removed, why would Commanders stick around after losing their shields if they currently leave when they run out of cells?

Shield cells were made to have somewhat more punitive heat and power effects a while back, which I think was in the right direction, but possibly too restrained.

We have been discussing them recently: one idea I'm personally quite interested in is the concept that cells overcharge your shields to unsafe levels, beyond the generator's normal capacity, potentially damaging your shield generator (and thus causing malfunctions/destruction) if during the time the cell is active the shield *doesn't* receive enough damage to drain it down to below the generator's normal maximum. We haven't checked all the angles on this idea (and there are others), but at face value it seems potentially cool to me.

I still strongly believe shield cells have a place in the game and don't want to remove them, however, although there won't be any changes in the short term, given time we'll get around to looking at them again to see if we can make their functionality better.

Hope this info helps.

Hi Sandro!

Thank you for taking the time to post regarding the concerns with the SCB's.

I, personally, do not think that anyone truly has an issue with SCB's, per se. The issue seems to be stacking them to the point where they are no longer a tool used in game, but a deciding factor in PvP.

If a ship stacks A rated shields, with 4+ shield boosters and 4+ SCB's, it becomes almost a completely 1 sided fight.

A lot of conversations that I have seen revolve not around removing them from the game but changing them in some way. Maybe changing it so that only 1 SCB can be slotted, or that firing the SCB has the same heat affect as firing your Frame Shift Drive(30%) increase to heat levels, etc.

Without any type of limits in place for the SCB's, they can make anyone who can afford to stack 4+ of them almost completely invulnerable.

The consequences of which make PvP feel like a Pay to Win scenario. Since even crappy pilots with horrible combat ranks but who can afford the ships with the multitude of module slots and the funds to buy them, can win almost any PvP fight by stacking SCB's.

 

[Pile_O_Gunz]

This. Combat specific ships should be the dominant force on the battlefield, not multi-role ships. Perhaps limiting the amount of SCB that multi-role ships can carry would be a good idea.

Why most of the current 'combat' specific ships have pitiable internal slots and power plant issues while multi-role ships usually have more power and internals than they know what to do with is beyond me.

Its not just combat ships the multi-role ships beat the traders at trading too. T9 vs anaconda is debatable but many prefer the ana.Wouldn't mind a buff to the specialists personally.

 

[newman1702]

I honestly think SCBs could be replaced with an emergency power module that can give the equivalent of 4 pips + 20% extra to SYS, WEP or engine (not all 3 at once). This effect would last a few seconds and have a few charges, like SCB's do. So, you do have your emergency battery but it's not the "magic potion" as people call it - it merely boosts recharge rates for a short times. It would also give players more tactical options than SCB's do by being able to reinforce any system for a short amount of time. I think this could be interesting with the upcoming power plant changes where your power plant's energy output decreases when it takes enough damage - you're in a fight and your power plant took significant damage. Do you use your emergency power to try to escape, or to give you a few more seconds of combat effectiveness, to try and bring your enemy down if he's damaged as well? Might be interesting.

 

[PhanttoM]

Hello Commanders!
<snip>
Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there's also possibly an argument that if shield cells were removed, why would Commanders stick around after losing their shields if they currently leave when they run out of cells?
<snip>

Because there are no other options/alternatives when it comes to shield management — If I could have a device (which takes up an internal compartment), that dramatically increases the time to get the shields back up after failure, that would be an alternative.
(Boosters are not alternatives, as those can be equipped along with cells)

This was further emphasised by the "power plant 0% = kill" mechanic.


*Edit* But yeah, the new overheat mechanic might be a good compromise.

 

[ROLX]

One of the Beta guys just posted: Using SCB's caused ship heat to go to 150%. Thinks it has something to do with the power distributor.........

 

[Lobstris]

Hello Commanders!

AI can use shield cells, though not every ship loadout has them. This is part of a slightly wider issue where high skill-level AI don't always have the hardware you might expect them to fly with. Over time, this is something we'll want to look at, but not right now.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there's also possibly an argument that if shield cells were removed, why would Commanders stick around after losing their shields if they currently leave when they run out of cells?

Shield cells were made to have somewhat more punitive heat and power effects a while back, which I think was in the right direction, but possibly too restrained.

We have been discussing them recently: one idea I'm personally quite interested in is the concept that cells overcharge your shields to unsafe levels, beyond the generator's normal capacity, potentially damaging your shield generator (and thus causing malfunctions/destruction) if during the time the cell is active the shield *doesn't* receive enough damage to drain it down to below the generator's normal maximum. We haven't checked all the angles on this idea (and there are others), but at face value it seems potentially cool to me.

I still strongly believe shield cells have a place in the game and don't want to remove them, however, although there won't be any changes in the short term, given time we'll get around to looking at them again to see if we can make their functionality better.

Hope this info helps.

Firstly, getting the AI to use the right equipment, and present a more varied challenge (well tougher at higher ranks), should be a lot higher on the list - to the point where I was *personally* very disappointed that the AI changes Sarah mentioned for 1.4 seemed to disappear. Surely if players are going to create 'pvp' ships, stacked to the gunwales with PCBs, then, for a level playing field it would be nice for the AI to have the same option. Likewise, no AI should be flying around without any form of shields.

Secondly, the 'Devil's Advocate' argument you make for commanders not sticking around is, I feel, a good argument for SCB removal - it encourages more cowardly, life-preserving and 'realistic' gameplay. I'd rather more commanders (and AI) ran from combat, than sticking around to be annihilated, just so the player can rack up kill counts to combat Elite, and...

Thirdly, without limiting SCBs to one per ship, or having another mechanic to limit their use, we get into a situation where the large ships, such as the Python and Anaconda, are consistently used in a combat role, which I would argue is against their original presentation in the previous games a pure trading ships, reliant on turrets for defence (albeit with the possibility for large, fixed mounted weapons that you wouldn't want to get in front of. There is also too much of a gap between ship capabilities already - a pack of Eagles or Sidewinders should be a serious threat to an Anaconda, no matter how expensive or well-equipped the bigger ship. Small ships should not necessarily just be 'annoying road-bumps' for bigger ones.

Following on from the above, however, the idea of 'overcharging' shields, with excess energy going into heat build-up/module damage if not dissipated seems a good one (if we ignore what form of energy shields are converting incoming projectiles and beams into anyway? ).

Oh, and AI wingmen - to protect those SCB-less, large trade ships? When?

 

[ROLX]

I don't know how cross post.

Granite posting SCB heat damage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxkC6nmnOao

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=179124

 

[Iskariot]

I noticed a lot of people slamming shield cell banks. I don't think they are only available for just certain people, are they?

As far as I am concerned SCBs are a great example where pvp gets in the way of single player.

I think SCBs are fine the way they are. I like options like these.
The only thing I would like to see is NPCs using them (more).
I do not mind prolonged battles at all. Battles are very fast as they are. Having NPCs using SCB would be great fun for me.
It would mean that more ships would escape from my slow Python, but that only means that I would have to rethink the way I do things.

I don't mind a bit of heat generated by SCBs by the way. That sounds like a logical consequence of forcing energy into your shields so quickly.
150% seems a bit steep though, but I will have to experience it first to be able to judge it.

 

[CMDR MAIN SEQUENCE]

We have been discussing them recently: one idea I'm personally quite interested in is the concept that cells overcharge your shields to unsafe levels, beyond the generator's normal capacity, potentially damaging your shield generator (and thus causing malfunctions/destruction) if during the time the cell is active the shield *doesn't* receive enough damage to drain it down to below the generator's normal maximum. We haven't checked all the angles on this idea (and there are others), but at face value it seems potentially cool to me.

I really don't like this idea, it's 3301 and we can fit equipment that damages our ship? Doesn't make sense. If the overcharge caused heat issues then fine, this adds another aspect to heat management which is all good.

 

[ROLX]

As far as I am concerned SCBs are a great example where pvp gets in the way of single player.

I think SCBs are fine the way they are. I like options like these.
The only thing I would like to see is NPCs using them.
I do not mind prolonged battles at all. Battles are very fast as they are. Having NPCs using SCB would be great fun for me.
It would mean that more ships would escape from my slow Python, but that only means that I would have to rethink the way I do things.

I don't mind a bit of heat generated by SCBs by the way. That sounds like a logical consequence of forcing energy into your shields so quickly.
150% seems a bit steep though, but I will have to experience it first to be able to judge it.

Yup. I always chose the bells and whistles and just kept a low grade SCB for emergencies. Just my preference.
You can see in the video that the heat dissipates quickly, but I would imagine it would be disastrous to continue to fire during that dissipation cycle.

 

[CMDR Kantos Kan]

Hello Commanders!

AI can use shield cells, though not every ship loadout has them. This is part of a slightly wider issue where high skill-level AI don't always have the hardware you might expect them to fly with. Over time, this is something we'll want to look at, but not right now.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, there's also possibly an argument that if shield cells were removed, why would Commanders stick around after losing their shields if they currently leave when they run out of cells?

Shield cells were made to have somewhat more punitive heat and power effects a while back, which I think was in the right direction, but possibly too restrained.

We have been discussing them recently: one idea I'm personally quite interested in is the concept that cells overcharge your shields to unsafe levels, beyond the generator's normal capacity, potentially damaging your shield generator (and thus causing malfunctions/destruction) if during the time the cell is active the shield *doesn't* receive enough damage to drain it down to below the generator's normal maximum. We haven't checked all the angles on this idea (and there are others), but at face value it seems potentially cool to me.

I still strongly believe shield cells have a place in the game and don't want to remove them, however, although there won't be any changes in the short term, given time we'll get around to looking at them again to see if we can make their functionality better.

Hope this info helps.

Sandro,

As always, appreciate you take the time to step in and give your thoughts. Much appreciated, actually!

 

[McCloud]

Firstly, getting the AI to use the right equipment, and present a more varied challenge (well tougher at higher ranks), should be a lot higher on the list - to the point where I was *personally* very disappointed that the AI changes Sarah mentioned for 1.4 seemed to disappear. Surely if players are going to create 'pvp' ships, stacked to the gunwales with PCBs, then, for a level playing field it would be nice for the AI to have the same option. Likewise, no AI should be flying around without any form of shields.

Secondly, the 'Devil's Advocate' argument you make for commanders not sticking around is, I feel, a good argument for SCB removal - it encourages more cowardly, life-preserving and 'realistic' gameplay. I'd rather more commanders (and AI) ran from combat, than sticking around to be annihilated, just so the player can rack up kill counts to combat Elite, and...

Thirdly, without limiting SCBs to one per ship, or having another mechanic to limit their use, we get into a situation where the large ships, such as the Python and Anaconda, are consistently used in a combat role, which I would argue is against their original presentation in the previous games a pure trading ships, reliant on turrets for defence (albeit with the possibility for large, fixed mounted weapons that you wouldn't want to get in front of. There is also too much of a gap between ship capabilities already - a pack of Eagles or Sidewinders should be a serious threat to an Anaconda, no matter how expensive or well-equipped the bigger ship. Small ships should not necessarily just be 'annoying road-bumps' for bigger ones.

Following on from the above, however, the idea of 'overcharging' shields, with excess energy going into heat build-up/module damage if not dissipated seems a good one (if we ignore what form of energy shields are converting incoming projectiles and beams into anyway? ).

Oh, and AI wingmen - to protect those SCB-less, large trade ships? When?

Yes I agree! Couldn't have said it better myself. +1