|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
11
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 17:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP, you realy think that main problem with armor tanking vs shield tanking - active repair\shield boost? No. Problem is shield tank get all low slots free. And u can: fit damage mods, fit tracking enh, fit nano, fit PDS (its boots shield tank too, lol!) And only 1 "-" with shield tank. That you "need" 1 slot for prop module (in most situation). And what i can fit in med slots, if i want armor tanking? Armor ships have 3-5 med slots (3-4 most of them). Prop module, 1-2 points (that i cant use coz of distance>coz of speed>coz of armor tank>coz of mass) EWarfare... No damage mods, no module that "boost" my armor tank (like PDS).
Yeah, new AAR is cool and new rig is realy cool (with my "fast math" i calculated like ~3,5k armor repair with AAR on Hyper with 3 different rig for armor repair in overload mod) . But it still not the solution for armor tank gangs\CTA fleets (with CTA armor fleets still useful but not like "nagassssssss" or rokhs, megathrone? what is it? PVP Hyper in fleet? Srsly? Dominix? Is he alive in fleet pvp?).
So, why not give armor tank ships module is med slots, that will boost armor tank? Like PDS. Or special "damage mod" or smth else? |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
12
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 08:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Apostrof Ahashion wrote: And please drop the entire AAB idea, just buff armor repairers.
Active tank is "ok" only at solo and Alliance Tournament 100500 (becuase you know that they cant alpha your ship). Its not the solution at all. Resist bonus hull works always and armor rep bonus hull works only with "special" module! You must fit it to use all potential of that bonus. it is ridiculous. And ofc you forgot about logist. In rather big fleet (10+ppl) you just can pick 2-3 logists and it will be in 1000% useful then armor reps\shield boosts. So in fleets gallent su..."bad" becuase armor rep bonus is useless.
Its wrong topic name. It should be "solo and AT boost for armor ships..." |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
13
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 07:51:00 -
[3] - Quote
You are talking a lot about AAR but you forget about topic name: Armor tanking 2.0 And if we agree that there are ships for solo pvp and fleet pvp so why gallent's ships for solo (well most of them)? 2 gallent's BC for solo (and only Talos, that pretty new in EvE sometimes use in fleet pvp. Why sometime? Naga lol!). Maybe its time to change brutix\myrm bonus (as well as gal. command)?
And also. Armor tank is still worse. Becuase shield tank ships faster, have more DPS, better distance control (tracking enh ftw) and realy good tank. And if we take shield logists its pretty better then armor setup in all ways.
What about that? How this change (aar+new-amazing-skill) will help us to chose armor tank ships more often? |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
13
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 10:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote: Burst >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sustained for pvp.
Not realy
Burst>>>>sustained when you have <10-15 ppl at opposite fleet. |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
13
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 15:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote: As a site note, remember armor and shield are different. For example, there's no equivalent to 1600mm plate for shield. Asking LAAR to be as good as XLASB is silly, because that's not the way things work. Notice for example the extreme scarcity of mid slots compared to low slots : there is only one T1 ship with more than 6 mid slots which is the Scorpion, not even a combat ship.
Oh yeah they different... Lets take a look on LSE and 1600mm. 2 LSE shield point bit high then 1 1600mm armor points (5250 vs 4800). But you need low for damage mods, track enh and etc. So shield tank have more dps, same resists and same HP. They have sig penalty? Its nothing. From personal experience: 50% time in fight i need active MWD (Nagas, mael, hurri). Do you think that im carry about sig? |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
13
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 15:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
Roime wrote: 1600mm II is the biggest buffer module in the game. It simply needs to come with serious drawbacks.
Yeah. But 2 LSE use less PG then 1 1600 and more CPU. Gives you more HP and not affected on your mobility. You can say: "But its 2 LSE! They need 2 med slots!" Yes. But you need med slots only for tanking and prop. Points? Recons. So you free with low slot. DPS, nano, more working distance, PDS (that what do you think? boost your shield tank! I want med slot mod that boost my armor tanking) Solo\ small pvp? Well instead of LSE you fit ASB. And btw, I can't effectively fit 1600 on crus\BC becuase it its realy a lot of PG and i need fit worse turrets. Does shield tank crus\BC need fit worse turrets because they use BS mod for shield tanking? No. Balance? No.
|
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
15
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 16:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
Actually, yes they do. CPU is not an unlimited resource, and people do are complaining about it in the BC rebalance thread.[/quote] Well problem with PG is more often then problem with CPU (for me).
The major problem armor vs shield is a penalty. Armor rigs+plates significantly reduce your modility. And what "penalty" takes shield tanking? Sig? Speed>>>sig anyway.
What if shield rigs and SE would have scan res penalty? More shield is more powerful an elekromagnitny field or smth like that.
And what if armor rig and plates had agility penalty instead of speed. |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
19
|
Posted - 2013.01.24 19:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
Sinzor Aumer wrote:Holly war Shield vs Armor keeps rolling... But among those graphs of reps per second and HP calculation of LSE and 1600 - I dont see almost none comments about Reactive Armor Hardener. Do you think it's fine, so no need to worry? Or do you think it's so fail that not even worth considering? Did you even try it - in EFT or in EVE itself? Let's be honest. When RAH appear it was terrible (1% per activation 10 sec cycle). Now its better but with ridiculous skill (-10% cycle and -5% cap need) its only useful on BS (and sometimes not even on BS). It eating cap realy fast ( 6\s, for example hardner eat 1,5 cap\s ) and it gives 30\30% after 3 cycle if you are get shots from 2 source. Yeah it works like damage control (no stacking penalty) but with that cap appetite its horrible. I better fit EANM.
Maybe it need redesign? For example it will consume ~30-40 cap per activation with 8 (to 4 if skill 5) sec cycle and gives +10\20\30 (12,5\25\37,5 overheat)% of all resist per activation (not only after you get hit) and after 5 activation it will be shut down for 20 sec. Or significant increase cap per activation (60-200) and make it free from shut down.
So it will be like invul adaptive for shield but pilot need to track his status for activate it (when he become primary or smth like that. So it require pilot "skill" to manipulate his own survival, not just: "i turn on all my resist becuase they cap stable" ).
Or i dont know. But usual you havnt 15-20 sec for "wait! my resist switching!" |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
21
|
Posted - 2013.01.25 17:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote: So Fozzie, how about no PG for plates and no cap use for reppers (just nanite paste).
PG on plates isnt a problem realy. Well it would be better if it cost like 350-400 PG but with no PG it will be like
Perihelion Olenard wrote: So you'd have nothing against cruisers fitting 3-4 1600mm plates for an absolutely absurd amount of HP?
But if you mean with giving no PG for plates, make flags for each type of plate (like 1600 only for BS, 400-800 only for BC/crus) and buff a lit all (non 1600mm) plates. Well maybe it will work :) |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
21
|
Posted - 2013.01.25 18:05:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mund Richard wrote:Come to think of it, why not just remove small shield boosters from the game, rename mediums to smalls, larges to medium, and XL to large? Then people couldn't complain about how armor cannot oversize, while shield can double-so.
If you call the gun a candy, the gun will lose ability to shot?
In 1.1 retribution Fozzie shouldnt start thread with: "Armor tanking 2.0 (1.5 now)" Its better: "We are finaly nerfing shield tank: all ridiculous mods like ASB, useless penalty that "cost" nothing for shield tank and etc"
But hey, im glad for this change as well. I belive step by step CCP will find balance and design between armor and shield tank :) |
|
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
22
|
Posted - 2013.01.26 11:50:00 -
[11] - Quote
I dont understand why you so over overexcite about active tanking. Its small part of PvP\PvE in EvE and (for me) not so important as buffer armor tank and ship balance that occurs because of this. Gallent ships is worse for fleet PvP. Ammar ships better but coz of the design of armor tanking (all their ridiculous penalty and deficiency of low slots for smth esle instead of tanking to be effective).
Most useful ships in pvp matar and caldari.
CCP, tell me. Why i want to chose armor tank instead of shield tank? Shield better in all ways. |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
22
|
Posted - 2013.01.28 17:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
Irya Boone wrote:And no more skill to train to balance something obvious. make the changes affected By current skills in Game because it's unfair to be at the same level than shield tanking we have to learn more ?
Agree. Its ridiculous to add new skill if you just can reduce mass of 1600 by 25% and mass of other plates by 45%. Btw i talk much with my FC about "let's use 800mm plates on HAC, they would faster!" And know what? It not an option. You need 2 800mm plates for getting similar EHP. And it doesn't cost that. You get few m\s amd lose tonn EHP for HAC. I will never fit thorax in armor tank becuase it is totaly uneffective for now. Thorax was created for roam and in roam you need speed, burst damage and lit tank. So... Where i should use "new" 800mm plates? |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
22
|
Posted - 2013.01.28 18:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Captain Semper wrote: I will never fit thorax in armor tank becuase it is totaly uneffective for now. Thorax was created for roam and in roam you need speed, burst damage and lit tank. So... Where i should use "new" 800mm plates?
Dual web rax is bar none the best rax for solo/small scale pvp. The increase in speed and dps of the shield ship means jack **** when you can be easily killed by a t1 frig, just saying... Well 2 LSE, i invul, EM rig and 2 core ext rigs - and you have pretty nice shield pool with not bad resists. |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
23
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 09:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
Few minutes ago i tested AAR... Is it ok that AAR still need cap for use even if it charged? What a point make one more simple armor repair if 1 neut counter you "mega burst armor tank"? |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
23
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 18:06:00 -
[15] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: This is the whole point of the AAR, as stated clearly in the OP.
It modulates rep but not cap use, because we're at or past our limit for "game mechanics that other players cannot influence".
What point? To be unbalance? Ok. This is my point: Burst tanking gives you high quality survival at extremely situations. What is extremely situation? It is: You taking a tonn of dps from 3-4 source. You rappidly lose your cap because of neuts---> your active resists will going down and your tank will be instantly parish. "But armor tank could fit cap boosters to their mid" Cap boosteries just support armor reps for be cap stable. When you lose capa because of neuts - cap boosters cannot help you.
So what we finaly have?
ASB immune to neuts and this why its totaly cool. Yeah your tank will be less w\o capa if you use active resist (let be honest - all shield ships mostly uses active res) but you still have great survival thing - ASB. AAR get neuts and you die because cant do anything. You rep cycle will be equal to cap b. cycle (cap b. cycle> then rep cycle so...). Why? Because you will have capa for use your AAR only when cap b. give you it. For heavy - 12 sec (or 9,6 overheat, and I still at all didn't mention about fit problems with heavy cap b.). Today i were killd like 3-4 times at Sisi only because cap b. was reloading and i cant use AAR. And ofc dont forget perfect thing. That shield boos bonus ships are matars that use art\auto that dont need cap for shoot. So even totaly neuts and 0 capa cyclone still have his full dps and full tank.
"Balance!" -¬-¬P |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
23
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 21:47:00 -
[16] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote: That's only true for dedicated neuting ships ; most ships are not those ; most ships with neut are simply ship with utility high and often no cap booster.
Problem is that only large battery compensate for the cap efficiency of a meta4 neutralizer, and they are insaley difficult to fit.
Many times i saw hypers, maels, brutix and even vindic that just fit 2-3 neut instead of turrets. All battery (S,M,L) must have same bonus for neut reduction. And not 12,5% (why it 25% for vamps that rarely use and 12,5% on neuts? Switch plz) 25% for all. Small and medium need less CPU (50 and 75 for T2? Srsly?). |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
24
|
Posted - 2013.02.02 19:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
Marcel Devereux wrote:A Thorax with a 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I with 3 Medium Trimark Armor Pump IGÇÖs currently has a base speed of 1570 m/s with a microwarpdrive. With the proposed skill at level V the speed becomes 1618 m/s. That is a 48 m/s improvement or 9.6 m/s per skill level. For each skill level you are improving the speed by 0.06%.
A Thorax with 800mm Reinforced Steel Plates II with 3 Medium Trimark Armor Pump IGÇÖs 6 currently has a base speed of 1632 m/s. With the proposed stat change and skill at level V the speed becomes 1691 m/s. That is a 59 m/s improvement or 11.8 m/s per skill level. Without the skill trained and the mass change the speed is 1661 m/s. That is a 30 m/s improvement or a 6 m/s per skill level. For each skill level you are improving the speed by 0.03%
A 0.06% and 0.03% speed improvement for training up a rank 3 skill seems kind of silly. If that was actually a 5% speed increase I would say that it is worth it. But introducing a skill that gives such a small increase does not seem like a good thing to do. Fozzie, plz look at this... x3 skill that give you 48m\s on crus while MWD on. And 1600mm plate significantly increase thorax mass... |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
24
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 11:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
Sinzor Aumer wrote: As for over-sizing, lets just increase PG requirements up to a level of appropriate cap-booster, for example XL-ASB would take 1750 MW.
Or reduce PG req for LAR\LAAR to 500. I want oversized armor rep on crus\BC |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
24
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:15:00 -
[19] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:Captain Semper wrote:Sinzor Aumer wrote: As for over-sizing, lets just increase PG requirements up to a level of appropriate cap-booster, for example XL-ASB would take 1750 MW.
Or reduce PG req for LAR\LAAR to 500. I want oversized armor rep on crus\BC You still don't get it ? You may think ASB is overpowered and broken atm. But this is false. ASB is in such state that i actually miss words to describe level of retardness this module provides. Let's say they let you put oversized LAR/LAAR ... and so what ? The most undeserved and broken advantage of ASB is that it requires no cap to use. Be it small asb or XL asb. And your LAR will consume such amounts of cap on your cruiser, that you will have to shutdown it after first cycle. There is absolutely nothing that can be done atm to make AAR as good as ASB. ASB is win / win , no penalties , no drawbacks, no sacrifices, no cap usage, close to joke fitting requirements allowing you to oversize this module almost as much as you want. You may think i whine. And you are 100% right. I do complain. Devs try to fix armor, but they need to deal with shields in first place. Edit: Oh well i'm starting to be tired in my crusade, i could point out advantages of shields on all aspects not only "ancilary". Nah i give up for now. Time to put dem shield skills in training queue and just live with it. Ohoh. Easy man i just kidding. But with ASB that use 0 capa for activation - its ok. So maybe AAR will need 0 capa too at least? |
|
|
|