Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Not sure about this... I'm sure the shield boosters needed it, but armour reps across the board?

Pantheon Triage RR needs a buff?

And have you ever tried to kill a punisher or incursus in another t1 frigate without kiting?
What about those crazy tanking dual rep Amarr AFs?

Seems like some stuff will get imbalanced and broken, but we'll see after testing. Cheers.

^^
except when they nerf OGBs at the same time.

Yes, I agree a boost to local tanks is a boost to OGBs, but consider the following:

the local tank boost is a 15% boost, the OGB nerf is a 25% nerf so the result is that OGB links are 10% less effective.

Also youre forgetting the biggest thing that OGB links are used for, RR, which isnt getting a boost at all so this is a straight nerf to OGBs

or are you somehow trying to say that the gap between OGB and non OGB local tanking is somehow bigger after this proposal? Because you can say that, but youd be unambiguously wrong

What about rebalancing Energized Armor Layering ???

It's good thing they are looking for ways to remove OGB. Isn't that good?

Shield boosting is already far superior to armor tanking, why buffing it even more?! As someone here stated, buff armor for 20% or leave it at 15% but reduce cap, and give shield like 10% buff tops

This is a great change; I always thought local reppers were lacking....

Good stuff!

One of the points I was trying to make to our talented devs was that its rather important to consider value of items as well as effects, and that changing local reps and pushing remotes and drones to later seems like something that will just make things more messy.

When kill boards are measured in values killed, it becomes pretty important to not rock the status quo too much or miss balance one type over another.

This was why I wanted some sort of statement from Fozzie that hints to how their philosophy and considereations are in that regard..

Personally I get the feeling that many changes are more based on tournament and big fleet fight considerations, and not the the underlying logistics and industrial system. Its as if there are quite a lot of "invisible" factors that gets pretty unbalanced from lack of larger perspectives? I could be overreacting, but from a market oriented player I see some rather strange results in supply and demand and profitability. Since CCP kinda promised this yeah would be dedicated to fixing some of these issues, I was just dropping that consideration in here..

But he did, passive omni resists (only armor has that) and a "cap less active reps".
His whole paragraph is about armor tanking.

Whenever someone suggests this, it proves they don't understand when to use shield and when to use armor, and want their preferred tanking method to do everything.

Shield buffer tanking is inherently weaker than armor buffer tanking because shield buffers inflate signature radius significantly, negating some of the benefit of the buffer. Also, your shield buffer will usually be thinner than the armor buffer equivalent anyway. This is why Slaves exists to further augment armor buffer tanks, because that is where the natural strength of armor tanking lies.

As for active shield tanking, it is quite nice. Shield boosters provide an excellent local tank on a ship with such a bonus, and the fact that these arrive at the start of the cycle means that you are more likely to save yourself (or someone else if you're a logi) than with an armor rep. Crystal implants play into this natural strength of shield tanking.

But if you do want a Crystal set for armor reps, I want a Slave set for shield buffer. Fair is fair.

I don't understand the need for nerfing links, or the people crying for them to get nerfed. If you don't like it plex another account and get some yourself.