These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 1.5

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Edward Pierce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#681 - 2013-01-23 23:21:04 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Resist Bonus vs Rep Bonus
There's a couple issues here that I'd like to address.
I completely understand that resist bonuses are stronger than active tanking bonuses. Resist bonuses are just about the most powerful bonus we ever give T1 ships in fact. That being said ship balance can incorporate bonuses of varying degrees of power as long as the complete ships end up in the right place. The desire to move rep bonuses back to 7.5% comes from the desire to ensure that active tanking is at least somewhat viable on non-bonused hulls. I would rather see active tanking mods and effects balanced to the point where 7.5% bonuses are enough than rely on the bonuses entirely and essentially disallow active tanking elsewhere.
In addition, my comment about the power level of active bonuses applying to remote reps was both unclear and exaggerated which was a mistake on my part. I have absolutely no desire to increase the effectiveness of T2 Logistics ships in fleets beyond their current state, or to push fleet warfare further in the direction of alpha being the only resort for breaking reps. Filling in the lower-end with less powerful repping ships that provide an upgrade path is another story, but I don't want to move beyond the current maximum. The extension of active rep bonuses to remote reps is something I feel would take fleets in the wrong direction, and if anything I am investigating ways to make resist bonuses a bit less powerful in those environments.

The main weakness of the local rep bonus is not that it is too low, it's that it is too restrictive in fitting style.

I took the fact that there were no T1 cruisers with a local rep bonus after the rebalancing as a sign you would move away from this, but then you give both Gallente BCs a local armor rep bonus, and one that is only marginally better than a resist bonus for active tanking, no less. If you insist on leaving this bonus in its current, sad, state, at least give the Brutix another weapon bonus.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Differences between Shield and Armor tanking as a whole
There has been a lot of discussion around the major differences between shield and armor tanking. The use of lowslots vs midslots, reps hitting at the start vs end of cycle, sig vs mass, crystals and slaves are some of the splits that separate armor and shield tanking and that can seriously complicate balancing. I am of the opinion that as much as possible the armor and shield tanking need to stay distinct, but this does not mean there are not areas where changes must happen. The gap between low and midslot tanking is affected by the balance between low and midslot modules such as for instance the TE and TCs. The rep at the start of the cycle is a major advantage for shield tanks that needs to be countered by corresponding advantages for armor tanks and armor tanking ships. Both signature and speed play major roles in the tracking formula, but the ability for the faster ship to dictate range, control the engagement and manipulate transversal more effectively make speed the much more important attribute overall. Getting signature where it needs to be in more situations is a longstanding desire of mine that is going to take time. These changes as proposed do not get us all the way there, will likely require changes before release and even then will only be one step forward that must be followed up on later.

One problem I constantly see with armor tanked ships is that in order to benefit from the lower sig radius, you need to sacrifice the MWD, making the reduced speed an even bigger problem. Gallente get hit by this pretty bad since blasters require you to be in close.

An extra hit to sig radius from shield rigs isn't particularly painful after you've already taken a 500% hit from the MWD. Maybe for frigs or cruisers fighting capital ships? But that's about it.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#682 - 2013-01-23 23:22:11 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
A few updates:

We're switching the AAR to use nanite repair paste instead of cap boosters. What we're looking at now is for them to hold 8 reps worth of paste, with the smalls eating 1 per cycle, the mediums eating 5 and the larges eating 10.

I'm also investigating our options for reducing the base powergrid need for medium and large armor reps a bit.

We're aiming to have all of this on Sisi before the weekend. Please note that just because things are on Sisi doesn't mean they can no longer change. It just means we want to give people a chance to try it out in the game client.


thats awesome you implimented my idea...

now what do you think about my other one?

Quote:
To expand on my previous post about changing how the 5% to resists bonus will work...

My idea is to take away the base 25% to armor or shield resistance and replace it with making a 25% bonus to Passive resistance mods... This would mean the bonus would not work on lets say an Adaptive Inul or a EX hardner II... but the bonus would work on an energized adaptive resist...

This would make the skill better for armor (armor needs something to be better) as there is no passive invul for shields plus it would not make the bonus op either...

if you do this then the bonus will be brought inline with an active tanked bonus...

now a Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II with max skills on an abbadon will do 31.25% increase to resistances.

or an em ward amp II on a ferox will do 58.59375%

pretty much this will make the 5% bonus make passive mods eq to an active but not need any cap to run...

this will make the bonus usefull and not op anymore...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#683 - 2013-01-23 23:30:19 UTC
One thing that is moslty forgotten are the astronautic rigs, the armor reduction they give really limits armor ships even more and i dont see why it should be so.
Irya Boone
The Scope
#684 - 2013-01-23 23:47:51 UTC
So to summarize, for a little equilibrate between tanking and shield tanking armor, the armor tanker will learn new skills to ...

Seems legit ....
Sometimes, sometimes .....

CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!

you shall all bow and pray BoB
blarggg
MuffinMen
#685 - 2013-01-23 23:48:12 UTC  |  Edited by: blarggg
This is my two cents and its probably not even worth one but here goes anyway why does everyone want things to be equal shields and armor are supposed to be different. Shields have higher Repair but can only do it for 5min armor is supposed to be the o hay I can take damage for 5min without repairing cause I have so much armor. At least that’s what it seemed like in the old descriptions of things.
-shield
Pro: Repair fast
Con: Low amount( granted on cruisers this is not true because of the large shield extenders being so easy to equip but not going into that)
-armor
Pro: Massive amount of Armor(which doesn't Exist currently)
Con: slow to repair
Now maybe this is not supposed to be true but it’s what I would like to see.
So Maybe give a boost to base armor on AAR large gets 1600mm plate hp boost or something. Ill let people who know things like Fozzie figure out amounts I just thought I would say it.

-P.S. all the things proposed do sound interesting and usefull for pvp

I like armor for the sake of not active tanking which at the moment means im Active shield fitting cause Navy megathron and my vindi work so much better that way. Unless you have slaves set. so i gess im really just asking for some PVE armor love maby instead of pvp.

And sry about spelling.

Edit: Fixed to make it my complaint more clear
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#686 - 2013-01-24 00:05:28 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

1. Does it rep at the lower 3/4 level while it reloads or does it deactivate?


While reloading the module cannot cycle.


I'm under the impression it does NOT need to be "loaded" to cycle.... and you don't have to reload it when it runs out of charges.. Just like the ASB's can run without being loaded, and you can turn auto-reload off to let it continue running (until you run out of cap..)
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#687 - 2013-01-24 00:23:40 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Everyone is bitching that the AAR can't be used while reloading. This is the simplest possible problem to solve: Turn off auto-reload for the module. You can keep using it straight and pulsed for as long as you want after its charges are gone, and choose to start reloading it whenever you desire.

It's not that complicated, people.

And then when you need the burst rep, you have to wait 60 seconds for it to load; which is guaranteed to be 59 seconds too long for it to do you any good.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#688 - 2013-01-24 00:31:18 UTC
blarggg wrote:
-armor
Pro: Massive amount of Armor



The heck!!!

What massive amount of armor do you get in something else than a 7 low slots golden armor resist bonus brick???

YOU DON'T !! -that's the problem they need to fix in the first time.

Active tanking should make your ship lighter, faster, agile and compensate the punishment taken while getting in range to use his extremely short range weapons, with a DECENT rep amount/cycle considering you're USING MWD and thus increasing your sign radius for 500% (that's capital size even a blind guy can hit)

As long as this strange design of shortest range weapons+plates+pack-boat agility/speed is forced in to players style there's no point on using it over something more agile, as much if not much more tank, dictating range and still able to burst rep incoming dmg (XL-ASB !!)
Everything else you can come with is nothing more than another buff to graveyard camping (gates/Stations) and incoming duel system.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
NetheranE
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#689 - 2013-01-24 00:46:46 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
A few updates:

We're switching the AAR to use nanite repair paste instead of cap boosters. What we're looking at now is for them to hold 8 reps worth of paste, with the smalls eating 1 per cycle, the mediums eating 5 and the larges eating 10.

I'm also investigating our options for reducing the base powergrid need for medium and large armor reps a bit.

We're aiming to have all of this on Sisi before the weekend. Please note that just because things are on Sisi doesn't mean they can no longer change. It just means we want to give people a chance to try it out in the game client.



Sweet holy lord christ of the righteous god that he is, Fozzie, I will have all your blessed babies.

Thank you for listening to the player base, you now have my eternal support.
Perihelion Olenard
#690 - 2013-01-24 00:54:59 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Everyone is bitching that the AAR can't be used while reloading. This is the simplest possible problem to solve: Turn off auto-reload for the module. You can keep using it straight and pulsed for as long as you want after its charges are gone, and choose to start reloading it whenever you desire.

It's not that complicated, people.

And then when you need the burst rep, you have to wait 60 seconds for it to load; which is guaranteed to be 59 seconds too long for it to do you any good.

You don't have to fit the ancillary armor repairer if you don't like it.
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
#691 - 2013-01-24 01:02:38 UTC
NetheranE wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
A few updates:

We're switching the AAR to use nanite repair paste instead of cap boosters. What we're looking at now is for them to hold 8 reps worth of paste, with the smalls eating 1 per cycle, the mediums eating 5 and the larges eating 10.

I'm also investigating our options for reducing the base powergrid need for medium and large armor reps a bit.

We're aiming to have all of this on Sisi before the weekend. Please note that just because things are on Sisi doesn't mean they can no longer change. It just means we want to give people a chance to try it out in the game client.



Sweet holy lord christ of the righteous god that he is, Fozzie, I will have all your blessed babies.

Thank you for listening to the player base, you now have my eternal support.


For the small small price of making the AAR even more mediocre.

An updated graph.
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#692 - 2013-01-24 01:34:28 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

1. Does it rep at the lower 3/4 level while it reloads or does it deactivate?


While reloading the module cannot cycle.

maybe it should be able to, that would be a nice distinction from the asb

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
Miguel Duran
Silver Lining Project
#693 - 2013-01-24 01:37:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Miguel Duran
Well I screwed that post up...
Second try but a lot smaller:

If I agree that the bonuses and entire ship should be looked at together, can you explain to me why both the Myrmidon and the Brutix have a rep bonus? Can you explain to me why Amarr and Caldari tank bonused ships have a superior tank bonus in large fleets that Gallente and Minmatar ships have no equivalent for, but have a bonus that is only useful in fits that are only viable in solo to small, logiless gangs? I'm all for keeping different ships and races unique but having that much of a slant seems a bit much.
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
#694 - 2013-01-24 01:52:52 UTC
Miguel Duran wrote:
Well I screwed that post up...
Second try but a lot smaller:


ALWAYS copy any significant post before submitting or previewing it, this forum system is awful and the draft-saving is half baked at best.
Perihelion Olenard
#695 - 2013-01-24 01:53:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
Rented wrote:

For the small small price of making the AAR even more mediocre.

An updated graph.

That's why you fit more than one armor repairer.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#696 - 2013-01-24 01:57:46 UTC
Bubanni wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

1. Does it rep at the lower 3/4 level while it reloads or does it deactivate?


While reloading the module cannot cycle.

maybe it should be able to, that would be a nice distinction from the asb



this.

no seriously

this.
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Rented
Hunter Heavy Industries
#697 - 2013-01-24 02:07:47 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Rented wrote:

For the small small price of making the AAR even more mediocre.

An updated graph.

That's why you fit more than one armor repairer.


You're kidding, right? Not only is the AAR inferior, it can't be stacked. ASBs can be stacked. And your solution is to stack even-more-inferior modules on top of this?

I don't even... what are you... how do you... in what alternate version of reality does this make sense to you?
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#698 - 2013-01-24 02:08:01 UTC
Medium armour reps need a buff full stop.

Small armour reps are the only ones that are reasonable, medium are just plain terrible, despite this new aar, but you can't even fit two of those things. You need to be able to get a 600dps tank with a dual rep fit without bonuses, or there's just no bloody point. These days you never end up fighting less than 3-4 people when your out soloing and when you nerf off grid boosts, it will be impossible unless active tanking is buffed.

You say "eve is a social game, get friends" well why would you have any ship at all with an active tank bonus unless it's for solo, because in any gang situation what so ever, it's completely useless.

Incidently that's how everyone was telling you to balance ASB's by making them only have one fittable, but instead you nerfed them so hard they're terrible for everything but frigs now.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
Perihelion Olenard
#699 - 2013-01-24 02:10:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
Rented wrote:
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Rented wrote:

For the small small price of making the AAR even more mediocre.

An updated graph.

That's why you fit more than one armor repairer.


You're kidding, right? Not only is the AAR inferior, it can't be stacked. ASBs can be stacked. And your solution is to stack even-more-inferior modules on top of this?

I don't even... what are you... how do you... in what alternate version of reality does this make sense to you?

Do you not realize how absurdly overpowered it would be if the large ancillary armor repairer was as powerful as the x-large ancillary shield booster with how many more tanking slots armor gets? Your graph is meaningless as armor tanks differently. It's just as meaningless as the guy's image comparing the medium ancillary armor repairer to the x-large ancillary shield booster.
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#700 - 2013-01-24 02:20:00 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Rented wrote:
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Rented wrote:

For the small small price of making the AAR even more mediocre.

An updated graph.

That's why you fit more than one armor repairer.


You're kidding, right? Not only is the AAR inferior, it can't be stacked. ASBs can be stacked. And your solution is to stack even-more-inferior modules on top of this?

I don't even... what are you... how do you... in what alternate version of reality does this make sense to you?

Do you not realize how absurdly overpowered it would be if the large ancillary armor repairer was as powerful as the x-large ancillary shield booster with how many more tanking slots armor gets? Your graph is meaningless as armor tanks differently. It's just as meaningless as the guy's image comparing the medium ancillary armor repairer to the x-large ancillary shield booster.


Except you can fit a medium AAR to a BC and you can also fit an XL ASB to a BC. It's about the maximum tank you can fit, are you slightly mong?

Not to mention the shield tanker get's damage and tracking mods. Even regular shield boosters, you can fit an xl to a bc with not much problem, the sizes are irrelevant, what matters is how much tank you can fit while still doing 500 dps or more.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8