These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Shield buffer implants
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Isbariya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2012-08-24 11:25:20 UTC
Dear CCP, do you have any news regarding the promised shield buffer implant set ?
For those who don't know what I'm talking about, they wanted to implement a counterpart to the slave implant set which gives a bonus to armor hit points.

I'd like to see them implemented as it would even the gap between shield supers and armor supers and a lot of other shield ships, too.
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#2 - 2012-08-24 11:41:39 UTC
I want a set too, would make a rattlesnake even more op!

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar
Mandos2k
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2012-08-24 11:48:48 UTC
Who cares for shield buffer implants? I want active armor implants! Give me my armor Crystals! Big smile
TheBreadMuncher
Protus Correction Facility Inc.
#4 - 2012-08-24 11:52:25 UTC
You can have your shield buffer when they make armor tanking as good as shield tanking.

"We will create the introduction thread if that is requested by the community. Also, we will have an ISD Seminar about the CCL team in the coming weeks in which you can ask your questions about the CCL team and provide some constructive feedback to us." - Countless pages of locked threads and numerous permabanned accounts later, change is coming.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#5 - 2012-08-24 11:54:02 UTC
I need to get some for my noctis. I usually don't fit a tank on it, so some shield slaves would make up for that.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Cede Forster
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#6 - 2012-08-26 07:55:10 UTC
TheBreadMuncher wrote:
You can have your shield buffer when they make armor tanking as good as shield tanking.


if you think armor tanking is inferior, why use it?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-08-26 08:26:30 UTC
There is absolutely no need to homogenize tanking any further.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Isbariya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-08-26 09:49:31 UTC
it's not homogenizing the tanking methods, it's simply even the support options.
If you say it's too powerful to have such a buff to shields then maybe the slave set should be deleted as it would be just as powerful. For those who would cry out that shield tanks have the crystal set, well i have no problem with a similar set for armor, as long as it wont affect capital modules like the original crystal set, or let both affect capitals.

But I'm still waiting for a response from CCP
illirdor
Upper Class Goat
#9 - 2012-08-26 11:33:35 UTC
the thing about shield slaves would be that it not only give more shield buffer but it also boost shield regen so it would be almost like slave and crystal in a nice little package...

Soooo this is my sig.... 
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#10 - 2012-08-26 15:18:11 UTC
TheBreadMuncher wrote:
You can have your shield buffer when they make armor tanking as good as shield tanking.


Hmmm CCP is going to get in a time machine and give us shield buffer implants a long time ago, that's what you're saying? Because armor tanking is just fine. In low-sec there are way more armor tanked boats than shield tanked boats. That wouldn't be the case if armor tanking was as bad as you would like people to believe.
TheBreadMuncher
Protus Correction Facility Inc.
#11 - 2012-08-26 17:07:34 UTC
Cede Forster wrote:
if you think armor tanking is inferior, why use it?


Because I Armor Tanked before it was cool. If I have a good armor tanking skillset, I'm going to get ships that armor tanked to a decent level of competence before I switch to shield tanking. Doesn't mean I don't think it's inferior. Next time, don't try to be clever.

"We will create the introduction thread if that is requested by the community. Also, we will have an ISD Seminar about the CCL team in the coming weeks in which you can ask your questions about the CCL team and provide some constructive feedback to us." - Countless pages of locked threads and numerous permabanned accounts later, change is coming.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-08-26 17:30:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
I would rather a shield version of an ENAM (Passive across the board resists) module before a shield slave version.

The current drawback to shield tanking is the necessity for cap. Passive tanking with armor is what makes it superior as there is no drawback.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Garreth Vlox
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2012-08-26 19:16:39 UTC
Isbariya wrote:
it's not homogenizing the tanking methods, it's simply even the support options.
If you say it's too powerful to have such a buff to shields then maybe the slave set should be deleted as it would be just as powerful. For those who would cry out that shield tanks have the crystal set, well i have no problem with a similar set for armor, as long as it wont affect capital modules like the original crystal set, or let both affect capitals.

But I'm still waiting for a response from CCP



LOL shields have a huge advantage when kiting and range dictating in an engagement because the tank on an armor ships slows it down. You can have your implants when they add a cap booster fueled armor rep to the game.

The LULZ Boat.
Skorpynekomimi
#14 - 2012-08-26 19:43:28 UTC
Zagdul wrote:
I would rather a shield version of an ENAM (Passive across the board resists) module before a shield slave version.

The current drawback to shield tanking is the necessity for cap. Passive tanking with armor is what makes it superior as there is no drawback.


And that's what differentiates it from shield tanking! Isn't game balance wonderful?

Because if shield and armour were identical, everyone would just use whatever took up slots they didn't want to put stuff in, or whatever the logi nearby was set up for.

Economic PVP
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#15 - 2012-08-26 19:58:05 UTC
This is kind of a non issue for me as I am pretty good at getting my combat pilots podded pretty regularly. They generally have no implants at all.

Now if I was in, say, Neg 10 for example and just sat on a gate all day in a pimp Mach that I will never lose (let alone get podded) since I only fight haulers, it might be different. But I'm not, so I don't actually see the need to buy expensive implants that will only last a day or so.

Mr Epeen Cool
Dr Nefarius
Syndicate Society
#16 - 2012-08-26 20:21:12 UTC
A shield buffer implant with similar stats to the slave set would make passive shield tanks insane.
Still, just add a penalty to shield recharge time equal to the % increase in shield HP,
and it would be a nice addition imo.
Verone
Veto Corp
#17 - 2012-08-26 20:44:57 UTC

Shield tanking already has massive benefits over armor tanking.

True it's more cap intensive but at the same time, the hitpoints come at the start of the cycle, the cycles are way faster and for quickfire engagements its a far more effective and stable method of defence.

In the end, shield and armor tanking are designed to be different from the ground up. They're designed to offer solutions to two different play styles and two different mentalities when it comes to PvP.

Creating a set of implants like this just blurs the line between shield and armor tanking, and is pointless.

Verone CEO & Executor Veto Corp WWW.VETO-CORP.COM
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2012-08-26 22:40:54 UTC  |  Edited by: NEONOVUS
Zagdul wrote:
I would rather a shield version of an ENAM (Passive across the board resists) module before a shield slave version.

The current drawback to shield tanking is the necessity for cap. Passive tanking with armor is what makes it superior as there is no drawback.

THey are called adaptive invuln 2s with maxed out shield compensation.
And they are nice, but I prefer to turn them on and get some significantly more tank.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#19 - 2012-08-26 23:12:45 UTC
Chribba wrote:
I want a set too, would make a rattlesnake even more op!


Wasn't there once a time when there was no stacking penalties and the scorpion line of bs were op'ed? Can't imagine what the forums looked like then. Still, some new shield imps would be nice none the less.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
Isbariya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#20 - 2012-08-30 21:52:08 UTC
and still no word from CCP ...
12Next page