These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Improving the Reactive Armor Hardener

Author
Perihelion Olenard
#1 - 2013-03-02 02:25:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
I have a suggestion that may improve the reactive armor hardener. Increase the base resistance for each damage type before it starts adapting. However, create a limit of how low each resistance can get down to.

This will make the module more appealing for PvP since you're more likely to take 3-4 damage types than 1-2 at once. It becomes more effective than before when taking several damage types. Also, if you do take damage on 1-2 damage types it does provide some resistance to the damage types you're not taking, yet. The minimum resistance for each damage type prevents the module from becoming overpowered when taking 1-2 damage types at once. Adjust the minimum resistance so adapting to one damage type gives the same resistance as before.

The capacitor requirement of the module still seems a bit high. Perhaps increase the benefit of the skill to reduce more capacitor per level than 5%. Maybe increase it to 7.5% or 10% per level. Or better yet, implement the change on the module itself.
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#2 - 2013-03-02 05:54:33 UTC
this has already been talked abotu befor, all we need is t2 version, insted of t1 at 15/15/15/15 t2 would be 20/20/20/20

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]

Perihelion Olenard
#3 - 2013-03-02 09:56:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
That won't work without some kind of limitation; otherwise you'll get 80% damage reduction against one damage type. That would be ridiculous, especially when combined with other resistance modules.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#4 - 2013-03-02 10:42:41 UTC
Several discussions have been had in Dodixie regarding that skill. What we've decided upon is that the skill would be better if the duration bonus were left as-is but the cap drain reduction was increased from 5% to 10%.

As it stands right now, that skill still gives you a net increase in capacitor drain when trained to 5. I would hope at the very least for the capacitor drain at 5 to be the same as at 0, although being more cap-efficient would of course be preferable to that.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#5 - 2013-03-02 16:45:03 UTC
The main problem with it, is that it adapts very stupidly.

Lets say I am being by a hamdrake doing 800 kinetic damage. It also has a flight of warriors doing say, 80 dps explosive.

The hardener will shift to 30% kinetic resist, 30% explosive resist. It will do this regardless of what hardeners I already have on.

Basically, it needs to adapt based on damage taken of each type, instead of just checking to see if a certain type has hit it.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#6 - 2013-03-02 20:03:29 UTC
I was always under the impression that it would, under that kind of circumstance, shift to 50% kin, 10% explo. If it does a 30/30 split like that despite the staggering imbalance between incoming damage types then I agree that's just no good at all.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#7 - 2013-03-03 20:38:26 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
I was always under the impression that it would, under that kind of circumstance, shift to 50% kin, 10% explo. If it does a 30/30 split like that despite the staggering imbalance between incoming damage types then I agree that's just no good at all.


I thought that as well, but I tested it a couple days ago (sac shooting nova missiles + hobgoblins at my proph), and it adjusted to 30/30
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#8 - 2013-03-04 18:34:09 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
The main problem with it, is that it adapts very stupidly.

Lets say I am being by a hamdrake doing 800 kinetic damage. It also has a flight of warriors doing say, 80 dps explosive.

The hardener will shift to 30% kinetic resist, 30% explosive resist. It will do this regardless of what hardeners I already have on.

Basically, it needs to adapt based on damage taken of each type, instead of just checking to see if a certain type has hit it.


This is the change that's really needed... but it would be hard to program...
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2013-03-04 19:43:20 UTC
Reactive hardner needs to die. We should instead get active armor invulnerability.
Notorious Fellon
#10 - 2013-03-04 19:54:50 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The main problem with it, is that it adapts very stupidly.

Lets say I am being by a hamdrake doing 800 kinetic damage. It also has a flight of warriors doing say, 80 dps explosive.

The hardener will shift to 30% kinetic resist, 30% explosive resist. It will do this regardless of what hardeners I already have on.

Basically, it needs to adapt based on damage taken of each type, instead of just checking to see if a certain type has hit it.


This is the change that's really needed... but it would be hard to program...


Knowing your incoming Damage by type is as simple as it gets. Adjusting the ratio of the Reactive to the ratio of incoming damage is simple math.

Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.

Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-03-04 19:57:44 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Reactive hardner needs to die. We should instead get active armor invulnerability.



Well technically the adaptive invulnerability shield hardener doesn't actually adapt its entirely static so in reality that should be changed to behave like the reactive armour hardener.

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#12 - 2013-03-04 20:14:09 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
sabre906 wrote:
Reactive hardner needs to die. We should instead get active armor invulnerability.



Well technically the adaptive invulnerability shield hardener doesn't actually adapt its entirely static so in reality that should be changed to behave like the reactive armour hardener.

Yeah, but if we're talking about "should be" and "in reality", then techincally the Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane and the Adaptive Nano Plating would also act in the same way, and should be changed to be like the RAH.
But we're talking about balance in a game, so things are the way they are. And the RAH isn't balanced and needs to get fixed up so it isn't so bad.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#13 - 2013-03-04 22:56:21 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The main problem with it, is that it adapts very stupidly.

Lets say I am being by a hamdrake doing 800 kinetic damage. It also has a flight of warriors doing say, 80 dps explosive.

The hardener will shift to 30% kinetic resist, 30% explosive resist. It will do this regardless of what hardeners I already have on.

Basically, it needs to adapt based on damage taken of each type, instead of just checking to see if a certain type has hit it.


This is the change that's really needed... but it would be hard to program...


Nah, its really simple math.
Nagnor
The Happy Shooters
#14 - 2013-03-09 16:53:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Nagnor
I propose to introduce a skill which provide for smarter logic for Reactive Armor Hardener:

Advanced Armor Resistance phasing
Prerequisite: Armor Resistance phasing IV
Training time multiplier: 6x

Benefits at level
  1. Proportional Resistance distribution: Hardener distributes its resistance proportional to amount of received damage per type ( using 20-50 hit history)
  2. Preemptive phasing: Hardener starts phasing based on all hits to ship, including those absorbed by the shields.
  3. Total Resistance optimization: Hardener distributes its resistance in such a way that the total Armor Resistance distribution of the ship is optimal for the received damage


Explanation:
Level 1 matches with what has been suggested before in this thread.
Level 3 improves by having the hardener already in good distribution when the shields fail
Level 5 takes into account the base resistance of the ship and resistances of other modules. Eg. A ship which is hit 50/50 for Therm and Kinetic and has 60% Therm resist and only 30% Kin wouldn't have the Reactive hardener go 30%/30% but more 10%/50% or even 0% Therm /60% Kin (haven't run the number but you get the idea)

I can also see a level having Cap control; in case of running out of cap and having multiple hardeners, the one giving the fewest benefit is shut down in favor of the ones giving more benefits (50% T1/55% T2 vs 60% Reactive) even if those hardeners are mid cycle. This should be an addition to Total Resistance optimization. Placing Total Resistance at skill lvl 4 and Cap Control at lvl 5 would most likely never lead to training of lvl 5 given the small benefit of the Cap control addition
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#15 - 2013-03-09 17:01:39 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The main problem with it, is that it adapts very stupidly.

Lets say I am being by a hamdrake doing 800 kinetic damage. It also has a flight of warriors doing say, 80 dps explosive.

The hardener will shift to 30% kinetic resist, 30% explosive resist. It will do this regardless of what hardeners I already have on.

Basically, it needs to adapt based on damage taken of each type, instead of just checking to see if a certain type has hit it.


This is the change that's really needed... but it would be hard to program...

Not so much it would check incoming damage, and if only 13% of the incoming damage is EM then 13% of the next shift goes to EM.
The module needs to constantly shift, not shift till all points are distributed then stop.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#16 - 2013-03-10 04:55:33 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The main problem with it, is that it adapts very stupidly.

Lets say I am being by a hamdrake doing 800 kinetic damage. It also has a flight of warriors doing say, 80 dps explosive.

The hardener will shift to 30% kinetic resist, 30% explosive resist. It will do this regardless of what hardeners I already have on.

Basically, it needs to adapt based on damage taken of each type, instead of just checking to see if a certain type has hit it.


This is the change that's really needed... but it would be hard to program...

Not so much it would check incoming damage, and if only 13% of the incoming damage is EM then 13% of the next shift goes to EM.
The module needs to constantly shift, not shift till all points are distributed then stop.


I understand the math... but it really depends on how the module works....

My gut feeling, and the reason it doesn't proportionally shift already, is that during a module cycle it only checks what types of damage it received that cycle. It then adjusts based on damage types received... This would use minimal resources...

To make it proportionally shift, it needs to keep track of the total amount of incoming damage, as well as the incoming damage from each type. Then it would be simple math to proportionally change it... However, this change would take more resources to implement...

Only CCP truly knows how easy this would be.... but my gut feeling tells me it's not easy, or the change would have already been implemented..
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#17 - 2013-03-10 08:02:24 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The main problem with it, is that it adapts very stupidly.

Lets say I am being by a hamdrake doing 800 kinetic damage. It also has a flight of warriors doing say, 80 dps explosive.

The hardener will shift to 30% kinetic resist, 30% explosive resist. It will do this regardless of what hardeners I already have on.

Basically, it needs to adapt based on damage taken of each type, instead of just checking to see if a certain type has hit it.


This is the change that's really needed... but it would be hard to program...

Not so much it would check incoming damage, and if only 13% of the incoming damage is EM then 13% of the next shift goes to EM.
The module needs to constantly shift, not shift till all points are distributed then stop.


I understand the math... but it really depends on how the module works....

My gut feeling, and the reason it doesn't proportionally shift already, is that during a module cycle it only checks what types of damage it received that cycle. It then adjusts based on damage types received... This would use minimal resources...

To make it proportionally shift, it needs to keep track of the total amount of incoming damage, as well as the incoming damage from each type. Then it would be simple math to proportionally change it... However, this change would take more resources to implement...

Only CCP truly knows how easy this would be.... but my gut feeling tells me it's not easy, or the change would have already been implemented..

The biggest thing is that it needs to always be checking the incoming damage, right not it does not once the "pool" has been depleted it just burns cap to stay on, and if a new damage type comes in tough.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Boris Amarr
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2013-03-10 08:20:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Boris Amarr
Reactive Armor Hardener must be available for all ship types including frigates. I propose decrease capacitor usage down to 1 like Damage Control has.

Look! Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane (with armor compensation skills) has resists 25/25/25/25. Reactive Armor Hardener has resists:
4 damage type - 15/15/15/15
3 damage type - 20/20/20
2 damage type - 30/30
1 damage type - 60

But 1 damage type has nobody!!! You always get 2 or more damage types. In this cases Reactive Armor Hardener is worse then Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane (even for 2 damage types because EANM gives 25% resists instantly). Why module that is absolutely useless has capacitor usage like 1/2 of Large Armor Repair???

Also Reactive Armor Hardener need T2 edition.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#19 - 2013-03-10 09:53:33 UTC
If the cap use dropped rather than raised the higher your skill in the module was, & if it consumed less cap any cycle it didn't adapt, the module would be great as is.
That 30/30 split doesn't stack with the EANM's, so is a great addition
Sigras
Conglomo
#20 - 2013-03-15 10:24:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
Boris Amarr wrote:
Reactive Armor Hardener must be available for all ship types including frigates. I propose decrease capacitor usage down to 1 like Damage Control has.

Look! Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane (with armor compensation skills) has resists 25/25/25/25. Reactive Armor Hardener has resists:
4 damage type - 15/15/15/15
3 damage type - 20/20/20
2 damage type - 30/30
1 damage type - 60

But 1 damage type has nobody!!! You always get 2 or more damage types. In this cases Reactive Armor Hardener is worse then Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane (even for 2 damage types because EANM gives 25% resists instantly). Why module that is absolutely useless has capacitor usage like 1/2 of Large Armor Repair???

Also Reactive Armor Hardener need T2 edition.

the trick is that it doesnt stack nerf against the other modules except the DCU,
so its true that one EANM gives you 25%, two give you 46.75% and three give you 61%, so that third module is really only giving you 14.25%

This means that even if youre taking 4 different damage types, its still better to have a RAH and 2 EANMs than 3 EANMs

Though I do agree, they need to give the cap usage a bigger discount . . . something like 12.5% per level