-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Elite: Dangerous |OT| Every Man's Sky
- Thread starter Aztechnology
- Start date
- Status
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
I think it'd be really interesting to see a modded version of this game where linear and angular velocity were uncapped, and ships varied only in linear/angular acceleration as they would in reality. It would be beyond unacceptable for beginners (and the AI!), but I think it would add some interesting gameplay elements for those willing to stick with it.
If nothing else, it would be a lot of fun to mess around with. Basically I miss Independence War and its flight model--that game was a blast.
Funky Functionality
Member
I too would like to yaw until centrifugal forces tear my ship apart.
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
Exactly. Totally awesome, but maybe not beginner friendly.
What ship is this? looks like something out of Silver Hawks.
Mengy
wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
Not humanly doable, more like it.
The logical consequence of velocity being uncapped in a combat situation would be fights with automated weapons at distances where the human eye wouldn't be able to see the targets. How else would to spacecrafts even at the speed of space shuttles engage each other in passing, when both could reach 25,000km/h and beyond?
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
Well that's exactly what would happen in a completely open universe, but if combatants start out within a few klicks of each other at zero relative speed, neither will build up that kind of velocity unless attempting to break away. Supercruise would confine the sphere of combat to local areas a few klicks across in game due to how it locates ships.
Independence War had unrestrained velocity (combat A.I. limite of 1kps but able to accelerate beyond that limit manually) and combat stayed relatively confined due to the limit of ranges on weapons and starting velocities being zero (it had a supercruise very similar to Elite's).
Wait... so Rank 2 and 5 Stacks ?!?
So If I ever get Rank 5 with Hudson... I would have 250%? (if he keeps rank 1)
Taking into account the engine's limits then, you'd still be whizzing past each other at breakneck speads. Trying to hit each other with weapons that are only effective at 3km. Its's probably realistic to assume that you'd easily keep accelerating to 800-2000m/s, as currently the ships do between 300-400 when boosting. You'd have to hope for luck to hit anything with fixed weapons and could forget gimbaled weapons for smaller targets, as those have a bit of inaccuracy, which makes it difficult enough to hit something as big as a Viper at the 3km even now.
It most likely all comes down to taking pot shots at very long distances, which might not even work with the weapons current implementation and a lot of jousting, turning towards each other and jousting again. The game in its current form is not designed to make for interesting combat if velocities were unlocked.
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
No, I don't think it would be fun nor would I want them to do it, I just think it would be interesting as far as a mod to play around with goes. And you could certainly build up huge amounts of speed with uncapped velocities, but it doesn't mean it would be the smartest way to do it. It'd be fun to see what kind of combat would develop in PvP based on that ruleset.
Edit: And the game I-War, Independence War, whatever it was called, was based entirely on an engine like that with similar weapon ranges. Ships were capable of about 10g acceleration and could manually go beyond a "sensible" limit of 1kps. Ultimately the ships ended up running at much lower velocities to maintain range, with ships trying to avoid jousting.
Here they talk about the Synthesis and Materials we will be able to collect at lunch
https://community.elitedangerous.com/node/335
Interesting concept. So those that will take time to go on a planet/moon to find mats to be more effective in battle will definitively get an edge.
AND they also talks about the upcoming Nerf (expected) to Shield Cell Banks :
All in all, I'M happy they nerf the stacking of Shield Cells.
https://community.elitedangerous.com/node/335
Interesting concept. So those that will take time to go on a planet/moon to find mats to be more effective in battle will definitively get an edge.
AND they also talks about the upcoming Nerf (expected) to Shield Cell Banks :
All in all, I'M happy they nerf the stacking of Shield Cells.
Anton Sugar
Member
Nice! Good info, all around. Interesting proposed SCB nerf.
Mengy
wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
FDev said:
Wow, those are some awesome improvements to deep space exploration! Now not only will we be able to replenish the AFM's when out in deep space but we will be able to jump farther than before to span large gaps between stars or even reach new stars that we can't get to now, simply by exploring barren planet surfaces along the way! I like that design wise, I like that A LOT.
For the Delay thing : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=199155&page=4&p=3084431&viewfull=1#post3084431
Most excellent.
Most excellent.
Something related to storage to look forward to:
Michael Brookes said:It's better to play it than for me to describe it - you'll get your chance soonYou can ask though, but I may not answer.
The storage of the materials is a commander centric thing. We've taken a slightly different approach with this because the materials work differently to other items in game as they are not immediately useful. With vouchers you can cash them in immediately, but with materials that isn't the case, you have to carry then until they are useful. However this personal storage may well evolve down the line as we're thinking about station based stashes for materials which would replace these personal stores.
Michael
Anton Sugar
Member
Oh snap! That's a pretty big deal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=TmrkDO9iFyw
Sneak peak of the Imperial Cutter and of a Fortified Starport!
I'd have to say, the Cutter looks cool. I guess the angles showed at first didn't help it.
Sneak peak of the Imperial Cutter and of a Fortified Starport!
I'd have to say, the Cutter looks cool. I guess the angles showed at first didn't help it.
Anton Sugar
Member
Daaaaayum, looking good.
Check right about the dash--our first look at the material scanner?
Check right about the dash--our first look at the material scanner?
ColonelSkills
Member
How this is going to play with builds doing priority stacking in case of power plant failure is going to be interesting. Swapping FSD in and out for that particular edge case will be a lot tighter if the thing takes a lot longer to spool up. Might lead to more plant shooting rather than drives again.
Anton Sugar
Member
Also, ALMOST didn't notice the description of that vid. Beta coming "likely tomorrow"!
Funky Functionality
Member
98m will be enough for a decently-equipped T9 if you buy it in Li space with the discounts.
Yeah, this is the most exciting info for me so far. With all the various HMCs and metal-rich planet types out there, I can just see there being some correlation between their coloration and the types of materials common to their surfaces. I'm imagining jumping into a new system and spotting what used to be an HMC that wouldn't make me look twice, and now foaming at the mouth to get down there and gather them sweet FSD boostyjuices.
Mengy
wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
So I've done a lot of mining lately and decided I needed a change of pace, so I hopped into my Diamondback Explorer and headed out away from civilization. I haven't visited the Spirograph Nebula yet so I pointed my ship that way and meandered my way down there.
The Witch Head Nebula wasn't far off my course so I decided to bop around there for a bit and scan a couple of systems that I hadn't been to yet.
The Spirograph Nebula is only about 12 jumps away from Witch Head, here is a view just one jump out from the center of it (the Spirograph Nebula is the little blue one in the bottom left, the large red nebula is both Barnard's Loop and Orion in the background):
It's a small nebula, encompassing only one system but a jam packed system it is, BD-12 1172. Lots of planets and stars, many with rings around them.
Space throughout the entire system has a bright green blue hue to it, you can see bright stars penetrating the nebula but the very close Barnard's Loop and Orion Nebula are completely obscured, not to mention the entire Milky Way. It's a very pretty system to visit.
Now I have to decide where I'm headed towards next. Maybe I'll jump around Orion and Barnard's for a bit sightseeing and scanning.
The Witch Head Nebula wasn't far off my course so I decided to bop around there for a bit and scan a couple of systems that I hadn't been to yet.
The Spirograph Nebula is only about 12 jumps away from Witch Head, here is a view just one jump out from the center of it (the Spirograph Nebula is the little blue one in the bottom left, the large red nebula is both Barnard's Loop and Orion in the background):
It's a small nebula, encompassing only one system but a jam packed system it is, BD-12 1172. Lots of planets and stars, many with rings around them.
Space throughout the entire system has a bright green blue hue to it, you can see bright stars penetrating the nebula but the very close Barnard's Loop and Orion Nebula are completely obscured, not to mention the entire Milky Way. It's a very pretty system to visit.
Now I have to decide where I'm headed towards next. Maybe I'll jump around Orion and Barnard's for a bit sightseeing and scanning.
Personally, I like the Cutter's cut (herp derp... >.<) a lot more than the Clipper's. The Clipper's protruding canopy has always bothered me. It looks a bit like a duck's skull. Apart from the fact that I think the design is just trying to be sleek with all the sweeping forms, but failing at it due to being overdone.
The cutter on the other hand, has a somwehat simpler form and lacks that duck face thanks to the canopy being part of the hull's shape.
The cutter on the other hand, has a somwehat simpler form and lacks that duck face thanks to the canopy being part of the hull's shape.
StonedRider
Member
I've returned too!
10 Earth-likes, many Terraforming candidates, about 30 Neutron stars, one Black hole and about 50 millions credits.
Bought Type-9 and giving it a break for Fallout 4!
My trading Type-9 costs about 100 millions with C6 shield, A6 FSD, default lasers. Bought in Li space, as Funky mentioned.
Great pics!
Anton Sugar
Member
Tooooon of info in this week's dev Q&A:
tldr
Loot & Crafting
Ozric: Will you be going into more details on how the wave scanner works?
Michael: It's better to play it than for me to describe it - you'll get your chance soon
Osric: Can you explain where our materials will be stored? It does seem odd that they are not lost on destruction yet exploration data and vouchers are. I can understand the reasons for it, but it seems to go against how everything has been done in the game so far.
Michael: The storage of the materials is a commander centric thing. We've taken a slightly different approach with this because the materials work differently to other items in game as they are not immediately useful. With vouchers you can cash them in immediately, but with materials that isn't the case, you have to carry then until they are useful. However this personal storage may well evolve down the line as we're thinking about station based stashes for materials which would replace these personal stores.
Micha: Hmm, so crafting is mostly going to be about refuelling and restocking weaponry?
Michael: No - this is just a prelude to it. The main aim for crafting will be weapons and modules.
Horizone: So these materials, they will not be visible in any other way than on the scanner, they will not materialize in the game other then lines on a inventory?
Michael: You'll find objects in the game using the wave scanner - like outcrops, then destroy them and collect the materials.
Xondk: As an explorer, I was kinda hoping that the initial run would also include a way to restock oxygen and maybe very expensive way to repair canopy, like needing to find certain crystals and such to repair it with.
Michael: It might - it's on the list for the AFM to be able to repair the cockpit, but I'm not certain if it will make 1.5 or Horizons yet.
Micha: Hmm, ok, so priority #1 is, as always *pew pew pew. It'd be great if the game would also cater more to those of us who are not into fighting all that much. It's great to hear that you're putting these requests on the TODO list, but pushing out basics like hull/cockpit repair beyond EH is.. well, a tad disappointing.*
Michael: Unfortunately that's the call that we have to make is balancing time and people with work. It's on the list so will happen, but we do have other priorities as well and not just for 'pew pew' - and that's coming from someone halfway to Sagittarius A* with a broken canopy!
CMDR-AD: Regarding "materials"... When I heard that they could be used to create new ammo, immediately I had *very large quantities in mind. After all, restocking a Large size Canon (the muzzle appears to be nearly 1.5 meters in diameter?!) with 105 rounds of that size would an immense quantity of material. Based on this Dev update, then it seems that these "materials" are more like small additives which enhance the other primary resources used to create the ammo.*
Michael: In this case it's both - they will restock your ammunition, but if you use different materials then they can be of a better quality than shop bought ammunition.
Osric: so do you imagine that once you have these station based stashes in (if you do it) then you will no longer keep the materials once you die, or you still could but the amount you can keep in your ship would not be as much as the station storage?
Michael: It's yet to be decided on how a station stash would work if we went that way - it might be a complete replacement, or it might be an additional store, but the personal one reduced. We may even settle on a completely different solution!
Wstephenson: Michael, will synthesising ammunition or AFMU supplies also require mineable bulk commodities? Creating things with significant mass from trace Materials would otherwise seem to require a liberal application of E=mc².
Michael: For this first iteration no, but with the full loot system that is quite likely.
Genar-Hofoen: Is it the case that certain material types will be more likely to be found on certain planet types than others?
Michael: Yes. The type of material is determined by the type of the planet and its geology.
Genar-Hofoen: This boosted FSD Jump - would a Fuel Rat be able to transfer whatever substance is needed for them?
Michael: No.
Bliss: I hope the wave scanner has an audio component to it. That could be really creepy on the dark side of a planet!
Michael: As with everything in game audio is key to the experience.
Fuub: It seems the material system is centered to the SRV wave scanner. Does this mean we can't go exploring planets surface flying with our ship and land when we spot a good location to find materials? This was the type of gameplay I was expecting from Horizons tbh, not only SRV stuff...
Michael: The planets are huge so you need to fly between locations and you will get an indication from the ship's scanner that there is something of interest in the area, but you need to be in the SRV to track it down.
Mephane: That brings up another question: can you also make normal fuel for the ship, or only the SRV? Because otherwise, having to rely on the ship to move around between potential sites to "harvest", you become ultimately limited by the fuel of the ship, and required to leave the planet to scoop fuel from a star, for example. In other words: could just as well have implemented a way to pump fuel from the ship into the SRV, same effect in the end, sooner or later you have to go scooping anyway. Plus, being able to refuel the ship on the ground would mean those boring lifeless rocks around brown dwarfs could suddenly become a life saver...
Michael: Ships are still refuelled by scooping from stars. I'd love to do gas giants in thew future
Ravenov: Will we be able to synthesize limpets? Either as a stock replenish, and/or making existing ones more efficient. For the long range Fuel Rat, being able to resupply yourself when 20k ly from anywhere would be a real boon...
Michael: Not yet.
Powers, Factions & Background Simulation
Orfeboy: One more question if I may - Is there any hope of having Intergalactic corporations operating outside of the Galactic powers? Kind of like Shell, Intel and Google? What I mean is big powerful corporations that players can work for? As a player group it is our current intention to operate as a corporation. More powers to affect the game in that way could make the game more interesting. Just some thoughts.
Michael: It's quite possible - it would make for an interesting power.
Orfeboy: Do you see minor factions as becoming more central to gameplay in ED? Do you forsee a time where player groups will be able to develop and watch minor factions flourish and be responsible for their growth and failure on a much more developed format than right now? Would FD see this as a primary goal for the development of the game?
Michael: Oh yes - the minor factions is something we want to develop further and getting player groups involved is part of that process.
Schlack: Could you advise if there has been an ongoing adjustment of BGS influence values behind the scenes while you're trying to find the "sweet spot". We are finding some inconsistent results and are unsure whether it is bugged, something going on behind the scenes, there are factors that we haven't taken into account.
Michael: The only recent change with the influence balancing has been adding the cap to prevent the sudden swings that have been seen. The cap varies depending on the amount of player actions and the size of the system's population. We'll continue to monitor and adjust as needs be and there are other plans to expand the galaxy simulation in the future.
Schlack: Any update on some love for the Alliance? The question was asked in the recent livestream. Sandro was, unfortunately, quite tight lipped on the matter. Hopefully that means something exiting happening, however it does feel something like neglect. If Alliance love is far down the priority list, please let us know. We know lots of CMDRS want lots of things NOW!. Soon (tm)?
Michael: The Alliance will be getting some love, but not soon I'm afraid.
Missions & Careers
Marc_Hicks: With all the major improvements we have seen to missions over this last season, will we finally get to see an improvement in the number-& variety-of military missions in the game? Better yet, will we ever get the Military Mission sub-screen that we used to get in Frontier & First Encounters? At present the military aspect of the game still feels more like an afterthought than a genuine career path.
Michael: Military missions is something we want to take a step back with and come at them differently. I'd like to see them acting as more of a career.
Marc_Hicks: Again, with the major improvements coming to missions in 1.5, will we see a significant upgrade/improvements to the "Counter-mission" system, to give them a bit more variety? I was thinking "variety" in terms of how these Counter-missions turn up (mix of USS, Super-Cruise "Contacts" or activated by player actions in normal space), the size & nature of the rewards for taking the Counter mission (much larger cash pay-outs, synthesis materials & "loot", 'directions' to lucrative salvageable wreckage, places of interest et al, massive influence boosts with that faction etc) & the penalties for accepting/refusing a "Counter-mission".
Michael: Contact mission is something we're starting to add in 1.5 and Horizons.
Marc_Hicks: Are there any plans to bring in Escort Missions & Convoy Raid missions? I'll understand if you're not in a position to answer that at the moment, just thought I would try to take advantage of your presence here at the moment.
Michael: We still have loads of things we want to do with missions - including escorts.
Ships
Nyres: Someone brought up the FDL heat issues and got me to thinking. If you go through with this you need to do something about the FDL's heat dissipation or risk that it will be a worthless ship in serious combat which given its cost is kind of insane. The FDL has such a horrendous heat management even when trying to be the most balanced for heat generation that I really do fear that the new shield cell bank change sounds like it will equal one use of scb = heat damage on the ship.
Sandro: I think the FDL is probably due for a buff at some point during season 2.
Module Rebalancing
Brimstone: Could you please elaborate upon the "delay" that shield cell banks will suffer once they are turned on? There is already a delay after activating a shield cell bank, roughly 5 seconds, so will this then be longer? Or, does the delay happen when the shield cell bank is turned on via the modules tab, so we need to wait before it can be activated?
Michael: The delay is for a lot of the modules, if you turn them off then they will take time to power up again. The delay will be in activating them from the modules tab.
Osric: That sounds good and I like the idea of it, but you didn't answer my question of which other modules it applies to? Is there a definitive list? I'm curious more than anything.
Michael: Most modules will be affected although the timings will vary - you'll see the details when the beta is released.
VictoriaG: Shield cells are supposed to save you not push your ship closer to death, what's the point of them then? And are you going to nerf the AI then so NPCs don't cheat, don't have magic powers of invisibilty, immunity to masslock, ability to hide their true wing numbers? in short why don't you actually FIX stuff before pushing these nerfs on folks.
Michael: They are supposed to be a last resort - your shields and armour are your primary defense and as with every release we're fixing a raft of issues and will continue to do so.
Sandro: Shield cells will still help keep your ship alive, it's just that they generate a lot of heat doing so. Careful application of cells still offer tremendous benefits, and with heat management (from heat sink launchers for example) they are formidable. But spamming cells of a decent quality for the ship you're in will have the potential to cause more harm than good. This, coupled with a delay in booting up shield cell bank modules, diminishes (without removing completely) the benefits of having lots and lots of shield cells. And of course, hull reinforcement modules will grant moar hull; our intention is to bring these two forms of defensive internal modules slightly closer together. [Replying to NeilF's multiple comments also] I would argue that the goal here is not to make every combat fair - that simply makes no sense with the range of ship capabilities that may or may not be present. The goal is to mitigate against a path of least resistance (the argument being that everyone should just load up with as many shield cell banks as possible) during outfitting.
Sandro (to everyone): Recharging shields quickly at starports: yes, we want to do this, just not sure when we'll be able to get it in. Looking at shield recharge times: this is something we will be looking at in conjunction with loot. The penalty for using a single shield cell is not going to blow your ship up (unless you were like at 1% hull and a million degrees temperature), but chaining use of cells should become a danger factor (initially to your modules). The delay for powering a shield cell bank module (note, there is no change to the activation cost of a shield cell) is significant, but should not be completely prohibitive (well, we'll see, and tweak as required!) Did I say moar hull from hull reinforcement packages? I really, really meant it...
Eymerich: Scb is a bad balance and to me sound like an hatred nerf. In this way a ship class A fitted whose cost is over 400 Milions could be destroyed by a python a fitted (160 mil) and 2 viper (10 milions). Glad I play in solo...
Michael: You just need to adapt your tactics - the hull reinforcement is more valuable or use heat sinks to offset the heat damage. The change just means you can't spam using the SCBs without some preparation.
GluttonyFang: Heat is manageable, and understandable to a certain degree. The delay between SCB switching will kill off large ships in intensive wing combat. Hull reinforcement doesn't help if the opposing player targets modules. What tactics can large ships use exactly to compensate for this nerf?
Michael: You will need to assign more power to the SCB if you want to use more than one of them and manage the heat - I'd also question if the big non-combat ships are the best ships for large scale combat.
GluttonyFang: Not to mention: "Was large scale PvP combat with large ships taken into consideration with this change? If so, how are large ships justified on the battlefield with said changes?"
Michael: You're assuming that they should be. Big ships have their place, but make big targets so in a large dogfight I would expect them to be vulnerable unless well protected by smaller and more maneuverable escorts.
GluttonyFang: I suppose my question is what role can large ships fit with the new SCB change? The tanking ability is technically gone, are we suppose to consider large ships to be DPS from now on, instead?
Michael: You can tank the large ships quite effectively with the upgraded hull reinforcement packages and with proper heat and power management you can still use your SCBs - you just can't spam them like you used to and I repeat that bringing a big, slow ship to a dog fight might not be the best move anyway and if you do, then you have to prepare accordingly.
Nathan Explosion: Why should a large ship not be capable of defending itself against ships 1/10th or less of its value through sheer force? What else justifies the price tag?
Michael: You mean like a battleship can be destroyed by a much smaller ship? The large ships have inherent from their size and how they're loaded out, but the SCBs were far too strong for them, but with the large ships you can still use multiples of them, you just have to prepare properly, so assign more power to them and have heat sinks at the ready. Use armour and hull reinforcements to tank them. A bigger doesn't always mean better.
GluttonyFang: Can you address the problem with modules by any chance? As it stands, thrusters and FSD on large ships are very vulnerable even with hull reinforcement packages, is there anything that will be done to strengthen said modules?
Michael: Not yet, but that is one of the weaknesses with those ships. With the loot system building stronger modules should be possible, but it will come at a cost somewhere else. You need to use the right tool for the job - you wouldn't use a Spectre gunship in an air superiority battle despite its amazing firepower.
Sandro (to everyone): As with all changes, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, so we look forward to everyone's feedback once the changes go to live test. A few points though: the heat generated from using shield cells is based on the rating of the cell bank. Using lower rated cells will give you less heat at the cost of less shield regeneration. And of course, heat sinks are effective at cooling your ship down. Using a cell every now and again isn't going to do much more than a little bit of module damage from heat, which in general is far better than taking hull damage (and it also plays into module malfunction more). It's also still possible to fit multiple shield cell banks and use them - you will need to manage power more carefully as there's a twenty or so second delay before a shield cell bank boots up after being powered. What these changes are for is to see if we can't decrease the effectiveness of shield cells, and especially chaining them, whilst increasing a potential alternative - hull reinforcement
Sandro (cont.): Now there's an interesting argument/fear about relying on hull rather than shields, which is sub-system sniping. A little while back, we decreased the size of pretty much all sub-system targets significantly and we stopped the power plant destruction from being an instant kill. Gimbal and turret weapons suffer from inherent confusion, limiting their ability to hit small targets and we reduced the range of most weapon's penetration. Even still, sub-system targeting needs to be useful, otherwise why have it? So will sub-system sniping become the new path of least resistance if shields break more often? That's something I'd like feedback about from these changes. If it turns out to be the case, we have multiple options to address it: we can increase module health, increase damage reduction for fitting hull reinforcement packages and of course scale back the penalties for shield cells, as well as offer protection from modules with the loot system. So the point here, as is always the case when we make design tweaks, to try out stuff in anger and get feedback from it that will ultimately help us improve the game.
tldr
- Storage of materials is personal to the commander and does not take cargo space
- Station based stashes are being seriously considering
- Synthesis system is just a prelude to the real crafting system
- Wave scanner finds certain objects (like outcrops) that can be destroyed to find materials
- Cockpit repair may be a part of the synthesis update down the line (couldn't commit to 1.5 or 2.0)
- Mining/ore is not required for synthesis, but will likely be required for at least some crafting
- Cannot transfer materials/synthesized stuff (specifically asked if a group like Fuel Rats could transfer super-FSD fuel to someone)
- Regarding finding materials with your ship: ship can detect points of interest, then SRV is deployed to scan/detail what appears
- Michael would "love to do gas giants" for fuel scooping in the future
- You will not be able to synthesize limpets "yet"
- Michael thinks having a big corporatation as a power would be "interesting" and says it's "quite possible"
- They want to continue developing player groups/minor factions to make them more central to gameplay
- Alliance will be getting some love, but not soon
- They want to revamp military missions so it becomes more of an actual career path
- "Contact mission" is being added to 1.5/Horizons--not sure what he meant by this, given the question
- Escort missions are in the plans
- FDL getting a buff of some sort (the question was specifically about power mgmt in light of new module updates) in Season 2
- Module reactivation delay takes time only after they have been powered off
- Most modules will be affected by a delay--more info to come
- SCBs are meant to be a last resort--they don't want them to be spammable
- "I would argue that the goal here is not to make every combat fair - that simply makes no sense with the range of ship capabilities that may or may not be present. The goal is to mitigate against a path of least resistance (the argument being that everyone should just load up with as many shield cell banks as possible) during outfitting."
- They want to add a quick shield-recharge to stations but unsure when it will come
- Using a single SCB may not hurt you but spamming them will
- Hoping that this value decrease of SCB also makes some of the other options more attractive, like hull reinforcement
- Concerns that SCB nerf will kill big ship PvP combat: "I'd...question if the big non-combat ships are the best ships for large scale combat."
- Reiteration of the above point in a few posts--sounds like they're trying to further emphasize the intended roles of ships; big non-combat ships aren't designed for dogfighting
- Heat from SCB is based on rating: lower rating=less heat but less boost to shields
- ~20 second delay before a shield cell bank boots back up after being turned back off
- They're going to be monitoring how effective sub-system sniping is after this patch--they don't want it to be insta-kill like it was with the power plant, but it still needs to serve a purpose
Their responses to the questions about large ship combat/SCBs strike me as not being very well thought out. Michael's defense of "The big ships are vulnerable in a large dogfight, they need escort craft etc" isn't really the best option considering how limited wings are/combined with the sheer amount of people that play alone 99% of the time. I agree SCBs are far too useful at the moment but I would've just completely gotten rid of the ammo portion of SCBs and made it a use/recharge mechanic reliant on you having to refill it with pips to SYS. More like a cooldown than a pot in MMO terms. The whole heat damage/time to boot up thing just doesn't make sense, at all. It sounds like they want people to have SCBs and Hull modules now rather than choose which to tank with.
Why not? Just like in real life big ships are vulnerable to smaller one cause they can simply attack their weakpoints and stay out of relative harm.
For the Heat thing well, think of it this way : Shield Cells are basically intense surge of energy passing through the shield generator to regenerate them at a crazy rate. Energy Surge = Intense heat.
For the boot thing, well, it's just like a computer really. I guess that's the concept.
Anton Sugar
Member
I think DrBo42 isn't questioning the "real-world" justification/logic of these decisions, but more from a game design perspective.
I am wholly ignorant on large ship combat, so I don't have anything to add, haha. The delay to bootup time for modules will be very interesting--I mean, watch any Isinona video. When he's doing all his stealthy Silent Running stuff, he is doing a TON of module management, on the fly. That will be gone, to a degree, when this patch hits.
I am wholly ignorant on large ship combat, so I don't have anything to add, haha. The delay to bootup time for modules will be very interesting--I mean, watch any Isinona video. When he's doing all his stealthy Silent Running stuff, he is doing a TON of module management, on the fly. That will be gone, to a degree, when this patch hits.
Since you want to go that route...It's a stored cell of energy moving to a near empty shield. Shield runs at X amount of heat at full power/integrity, why would the heat level do anything other than return to that once a cell is dumped into it? It's not like the shield cell is being powered and then injected, it's already powered. That and heat has never been an issue in regards to shields, ever. They're just bad excuses to fix a mechanic that's been broken since implementation.
Yes, they essentially over-designed a fix that ends up having harmful effects on everyone.
That's easy to say, but what would be a better fix?
As for heat penalties: It's not unthinkable. batteries get hot when being recharged. Why shouldn't the technique in ships that quickly pumps a lot of energy into the shields in a short amount of time generate more heat than a shield that is either at a constant level or recharging at a slow pace?
They quiet obviously want that SCB mechanic in there as measure to maintain the shields for a bit longer when faced with a lot of fire, but don't seem to be happy with the effect this has had on the meta. Large ships keeping up their shields far longer than they intended, due to being able to stuff their internal modules with SCBs.
Completely get rid of the ammo function of SCBs, limit the equip amount to 1 or 2. Turn it into a rechargeable battery heavily dependent on SYS power/distributor grade. Changes the dynamic of combat and makes the pilot switch to the defensive to recharge their SCB once used etc. Essentially turns a pot to a cooldown (dependent on power management/module grade). That way you don't have to deal with the overcomplication of boot-up times and heat sinks. Simple.
As for heat generation, look at the FSD. I can't fathom the amount of energy dumped into a shield eclipsing the amount of heat generated to charge a jump in nearly the same amount of time.
ColonelSkills
Member
The salt at shortening engagements so they aren't 10 minute SCB tanking exchanges where invincible anacondas just high wake out is bizarre. Giving fighters and escorts a reason to exist is wonderful for variety. It's really annoying seeing that grumbling pushback, but any sort of leveling attempt when one strat was by far the most viable is to expected, I guess.
Edit: To directly address some of the above. I don't think module granularity control is going to really be a problem. There will be a delay, but until we find out what those delays are, it's hard to say exactly how some of that stuff will work. My biggest question is how the FSD itself will boot up, since that's the go-to module for shutdowns for priority shenanigans.
Draining SYS capacitor into shields immediately (or via speed or some other limiting factor based on module quality and size) isn't a bad idea, but what really needs to happen is the SYS capacitor needs to be used for a larger variety of purposes. I'd argue that a shunt like that should still have a heat penalty though. But you'd effectively be super tanking with four pips into that anyway if you get rid of SCB ammo, depending on how much power you put into that, and it's general effectiveness. I am all for shortening engagements instead of drawing them out longer. Having SYS do something else of value (maybe have an effect on module boot time) would offset just tanking that.
The biggest thing is shields need to not have the static recharge rate, because the heat of SCB use/module swapping boot up time thing all makes sense to me from an additional mechanics and granularity standpoint. It just needs an offset so that those much larger generators aren't taking half an hour to regen your shields.
Edit: To directly address some of the above. I don't think module granularity control is going to really be a problem. There will be a delay, but until we find out what those delays are, it's hard to say exactly how some of that stuff will work. My biggest question is how the FSD itself will boot up, since that's the go-to module for shutdowns for priority shenanigans.
Draining SYS capacitor into shields immediately (or via speed or some other limiting factor based on module quality and size) isn't a bad idea, but what really needs to happen is the SYS capacitor needs to be used for a larger variety of purposes. I'd argue that a shunt like that should still have a heat penalty though. But you'd effectively be super tanking with four pips into that anyway if you get rid of SCB ammo, depending on how much power you put into that, and it's general effectiveness. I am all for shortening engagements instead of drawing them out longer. Having SYS do something else of value (maybe have an effect on module boot time) would offset just tanking that.
The biggest thing is shields need to not have the static recharge rate, because the heat of SCB use/module swapping boot up time thing all makes sense to me from an additional mechanics and granularity standpoint. It just needs an offset so that those much larger generators aren't taking half an hour to regen your shields.
I'm only talking about SYS power being placed back into the SCB battery, not draining it for shields. Basically making it so SCB is used, battery on it is empty, its recharge rate is now entirely dependent on your SYS power. So if you continue to be on the offensive with power to WEP, and 1 pip to SYS your SCB will recharge very slowly etc.
SCB were a mistake, they're nothing but trash.
And people are salty because there's a huge overlap between people who play many hours, people who have large ships and people involved in the community. I'd wager most players will welcome any nerf to ships that just won't die.
And people are salty because there's a huge overlap between people who play many hours, people who have large ships and people involved in the community. I'd wager most players will welcome any nerf to ships that just won't die.
ColonelSkills
Member
Oh, I see. I thought you were saying something like "Shield Cell Bank Usage --> Drains existing SYS cap directly into shields, very quickly", as opposed to from an external store.
The proposal that you have a fixed rate drain on SYS capacitor into an external store to be shunted from rather than directly also makes sense, and then the quality and rate of the SYS cap drain is defined by the cell bank module quality.
That's definitely a more robust solution, and I like it in terms of internal consistency and game logic, especially with existing systems.
That said, I feel that the result of SCB usage is, functionally at least, somewhere between an extreme fight time extension tool at best to fight reset button at worst. Their existing mechanics are fundamentally broken. There needs to be a penalty to hitting that button. Not just in terms of "well, I can only hit it once in the average fight", but an actual downside.
A lot of weapons have downsides, heat/capacitor/ammo usage versus penetration, beams and rails are huge examples of this. Cannon projectile travel time, etc. Basically everything about missiles and mines. Defenses need the same across the board revisit. Heat Sinks need to have a downside, SCBs need it. Chaff needs it. SCBs just work with the shields mechanic too well right now and just the most easily abusable. I hope that other tools are revisited in the future as well.
Basically, if I need to think about when or how to fire, I would like the other guy to need to think about when or how to use defensive measures. This needs to be an across the board thing. But SCBs are by far the biggest culprit here and I welcome the massive meta shift this implies.
Anton Sugar
Member
oh man oh god oh man
Nice! Really like the paintjobs change, I was just asking for something like this
Anton Sugar
Member
Someone just started streaming 1.5: http://www.twitch.tv/fireytoad
WHAT. So good. Can you make a screenshot?
- Status