|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
306
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 20:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
As you did with active shield tanking you have completely ignored the real problems and tried to fix them by introducing new stuff as an alternative... I really, really dislike the way you are ignoring the CORE of the game.
Armor ships with armor rigs still causing ships to be slower, but you can fit an armor rig having different drawbacks than the rest of the group for more active rep in a weird cap injected way as if people didn't have enough slots for active reps already?
This **** is not necesarily wrong but you are ignoring stuff... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
307
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 20:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
All active reps should be boosted 25% and crystal sets changed to hp amount or nerfed to half the bonus. That would make active reps more attractive for everybody and close the gap between poor players and players with crystal sets...
Then you can take a look at rig drawbacks, implement mass reduction skills and look at AAR modules... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
307
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 20:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
Crash Lander wrote:Cyerus wrote:Thank you for removing the speed penalty on armor rigs!!! Where does it say that? Pumps and trimarks are keeping their drawbacks!
They change the drawbacks on the Aux and Nano module, so they are actually removing them on active rep setups... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
314
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 14:11:00 -
[4] - Quote
I can't believe I'm hearing whines about "large shield extenders fit much easier than 1600mm plates" and "shield boosters have much better burst tank than armor reps". Come on guys - shield and armor have always been different and you are forgetting plenty armor advantages like better standard resists, much lower cap consumption on armor reps and bigger plates available than shield extenders. can we have this discussion about the armor tank issues and why these changes are good and bad?
Having cooled down I looked at this again with fresh eyes :
Skillbook reducing plate mass with 25% : I think this will help a little on the skirmish area where shield tankers prevail due to being able to outrun and outmaneuver armor ships. But with velocity drawback still on half the armor rigs armor ships will only have a chance while active tanking and then they will likely be alpha'ed before getting tackle on a shield skirmisher... Interceptors will definately still be better off with a shield extender even if traditionally an armor ship!!
Skillbook enabling active reps to go nuts while overheating : Okay, I guess it's convenient. It has potential to compensate for the slow cycle times on reppers and most active rep ships I've used can spare a rig slot for this. Rigs increasing powergrid? Go go autocannons on all active rep ships without a good racial gun bonus.
Base mass adjustment on plates with exceptions. Just make sure you have a logical pattern on those plates mass. Don't make 1600 and 400 stick out. People only use them because thats the biggest they can fit and not because of their mass penalty.
AAR gives armor tankers a few advantages:
More burst rep because active tanking today doesn't keep up with half the dps people bring. But why not boost active tanking in general because normal shield boosters doesn't work for pvp either unless you go officer mods and crystals with blue pills... Why not focus on the problem instead of making an alternative? It's fine to have mods with an alternate better burst tank, but the normal ones need a boost too, seriously.
Cap injected so basically save a cap booster, but armor tanking already use way less cap pr. hitpoint than shield boosting? There is a reson while armor tankers could run 2 armor reps easier than shield tankers could run a single shield booster and the shield booster needed an amp on top to get decent results when talking about effeciency. And honestly it seems like a cap booster is needed anyway for 2nd repper and most guns - It's not like most armor tankers have issues with enough medslots anyway... which means armor reppers will likely be able to keep their reps going even at 3/4 for normal cap while an ASB tanker just stops to exist because the latest nerf made single ASB useless in order to balance dual ASBs...
Don't think this is all it takes to fix armor tanking - It'll be like the hybrid buff that wasn't finished but just dropped in silence when you started focus on ships rather than looking into why people didn't use railguns and why people rarely used anything but antimatter with a few minor exceptions.
Pinky
PS. sorry for bittervet attitude, I mean it well.. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
314
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 15:16:00 -
[5] - Quote
Buffer tanks just work better than active reps because more people are involved in the fights these days with a bigger server population as well as the dps from each ship has increased a lot the last few years easily overcoming active tanks...
Shield buffers work better than armor buffer for other reasons than a direct comparison: Buffer and RR proofed to be win - but armor rr is dealyed making it a problem with bigger numbers. Shield buffer work better because you don't need to rep up between fights if you have time to wait. Armor buffer can't keep up and dictate range against shield buffer fleets - and speed is important (hence we had a nano nerf) Shield has become in favour because it allows damage mods going full gank. full gank with numbers are better than heavily tanked armor buffers with little dps. This is a result of more people fighting.
So don't go flat out thinking shield buffer is better than armor buffer on a 1 to 1 comparison. It's the added benefits when you have large numbers that gives the image of shield fleets we have today...
Pinky |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
315
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 01:25:00 -
[6] - Quote
I would just like to say there is NOTHING wrong with resist bonus as long the ship doesn't have too many tank slots. I.e 5 medslot Ferox is hardly uber, but a 7 lowslot prophecy might end up getting abused... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
317
|
Posted - 2013.01.26 17:04:00 -
[7] - Quote
ASB fittings are stupid, but that's no excuse to want stupid fittings for armor tankers... Keep the issues seperated plz |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
334
|
Posted - 2013.01.31 14:19:00 -
[8] - Quote
I would love for ASB and AAR to copy the fitting requirements of their "vanilla" counterparts... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
334
|
Posted - 2013.02.01 22:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sinzor Aumer wrote:What's the use of MWD if 1 scram switches it off? Getting fast into combat with short range weapons and/or being able to kite outside web/scram range on slower ships? |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
335
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 19:24:00 -
[10] - Quote
The problem is that even if we have AAR and ASB, normal active tanking doesn't provide you half the lifespan of buffer fits. Simply put I still believe all armor reppers and shield boosters should give ~20% more hitpoints repaired pr minute than currently. Obviously balanced with a look into wether cap use should be changed with it...
I would at the same time look into pirate implants and nerf them to about 50% of what they give today. 50+ % armor buffer or shield boosting is tipping the game balance and I think Snakes, Slaves and Crystals would still be hugely attractive doing half what they do now. You know in todays game all armor supers/titans HAVE to use slaves and crystals are actually the only time active shield boosting gets viable in pvp when combined with faction gear...
Pinky |
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
335
|
Posted - 2013.02.04 02:30:00 -
[11] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Why would anyone bother with a ~13% snake set when a single implant in the 6th slot (currently taken by Omega) can provide 8%? Add CAs and a cheap-ass combination of 3 implants already outperforms a full pirate set. lol?
Also, Crystals don't work on capitals. If anything, they can give the same treatment to the rest of sets, if that is such of a big issue.
Seems you've missed the key failure of ASBs - they are such a bad game concept precisely cause they lack any high-end variations and everyone is forced to use the same expendable solution even when fitting a faction ship, which is sheer moronity.
It's a long time since I looked at snake numbers - but 13% for a LG set and 25% for HG set seems fine... Obvisouly you cannot balance something without having to do minor adjustments to other things. We had this discussion before but I still think it's a shame to require faction mods, implant sets and pills to be pvp competitive and only the most elitist can afford to pvp with those outside empire and lowsec. And elitist people should not be allowed to pay for 50% more armor or shield boost where most players can't. All other modules are built up about giving MINOR advantages for a big cost... Pirate implants aren't just giving you a minor advantage. Nothing should be balanced just because it cost a lot.
Also I never said crystals work at capitals - I know they don't...
And the Key failure for ASB is the balance. 1 minute reload is more than most fights take from the beginning. Thats because they balanced them so dual ASB setups wouldn't be too powerfull - however suddenly doing a single ASB setup as originally intended isn't competitive with buffer tanks and you might as well buffer tank. As a result the potential buff to active shield tanking from no longer being dependant on a cap booster is useless. I don't get why they didn't just made it a single module pr ship and adjusted the amount of cap boosters.
Besides I am sure when ASB's are deemed balanced more meta and faction variants...
ASB and AAR are still the most horrible attempta to fix active tanking though. They would be great alternative on top of a generic boost, however as single shot solutions the game play around active tanking is still in a sorry state.
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
339
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:15:00 -
[12] - Quote
It will definately make it easier to balance - test the most powerfull option and then introduce full scale with the less powerfull but easier to fit options later... Will CCP Soniclover be debating the ASBs again in a near future? They are really hard to use unless you use 2 - Then suddenly your only real drawback is one less medslot and some fitting... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
339
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 18:38:00 -
[13] - Quote
Yavax Zavro wrote:What's the point in reducing plates mass? I don't get it. 1600mm is so popular because of it's HP bonus, changing smaller plates mass won't make them popular (I guess it's the main reason of doing so). People still will be trying to fit 1600mm in their ships anyway .
Currently shield/nano fleets pretty much dominate all subfleet pvp except station games. Reducing the mass on armor buffer fits and removing the rig velocity penalty on active repair rigs will help close the gap a little...
Unfortunately the tacklers from all races will likely still be forced to fly with shield extenders, but it's still a buff... Still waiting for a buff to active tanking though. Normal armor repairers and shield boosters are so underpowered for pvp these days they could really need a solid boost without threatening the balance except a few exceptions.. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
341
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 19:36:00 -
[14] - Quote
Funky Lazers wrote:I see there is no change about active armor tanking with normal T2/faction reppers. So my question is simple, why my 4 slot tank Golem tanks 25-30% better than my 4 slot tank Kronos? Moreover, tanking mods on my Golem are 2 times cheaper then Kronos's ones.
Will that be fixed someday?
comparing armor tank DIRECTLY with shield tank is bad mkay? Especially when the 2 ships are not designed to tank the same, but are designed to be somewhat balanced against eachother taking many stats into consideration... |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
341
|
Posted - 2013.02.08 14:10:00 -
[15] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:comparing armor tank DIRECTLY with shield tank is bad mkay?
Whatever you do it's not a good idea to compare armor tanking and shield tanking directly based on the Kronos vs the Golem.
Kronos/Golem are the same ship class and overall pretty much balanced against eachother, however they are not supposed to have identical tank, or identical anything for that matter... Just because the Golem tanks perhaps 30% better than the Kronos it doesn't necesarily mean all shield tanking is 30% better. Thats all I said and my opinion won't change on that...
Between those two ships the Kronos has several other nice advantages making up for the smaller tank in some situations. Just look at the latest tournaments. You should really find other examples of why you think armor tanking is worse than shield tanking.
On the normal scale the effeciency of both seems pretty balanced. Shield tankers always complained about not having slots for tackle and armor tankers always complained about not having enough slots for damage mods. So lets focus on the things that seemingly pull in favour of shield tanking :
- Armor plates increasing mass making them slower
- Armor rigs reducing velocity enabling shield fleets to kite way too easy
- Tracking Enhancers having a way too powerfull range bonus making Tracking Computers unattractive
- Some ships having huge amount of dps making damage mods and tracking enhancers very important
- Active shield having no delay, while armo has to wait for end of cycle
- Being able to overload Invulnerability Fields, but not EANM
PS. And never forget active tankers get more tackle/ewar while traditionally having more lowslots available than shield tankers have medslots. |
|
|
|