Player Features and Ideas Discussion

OT I know.... But...

What about a skill to reduce the Sig Radius penalty from Shield Extenders?

OK... Back to your regularily scheduled Armor tanking buff.... *slips back into the shadows*

Why?

i think im more getting at at hat the new aar mechanic makes alot more since than the current asb mechanic.
also whith the aar atm your going to need to use some of the rig slots for buffing the aars rep while the asb your free to fit other rigs and have same rep. this lets an asb based ship[s use there rigs for more reists/fiting ect. add on top of that that these are amour ships were its verry much a direct trad eoff of damage mods to tank mods.

that all said with some testing i think the aar might work out well for ships like the new brutix(ie the ones that already have the rep bonus so might get away without rep rigs) but be comply usless for ships like the gimped new harb.

I also echo the concern that balancing could have been more easily done by

- reducing armor rep cycle time (reps happen at the end of cycle anyway)
- reducing armor rep fitting costs
- reducing armor rep cap usage
- increasing armor rep hull bonuses to 10%

This proposed solution forces armor tankers to learn another new skill (we just had to train RAH skill), increases the already massive fitting cost imbalance even further while doing nothing to the cap issue or making the 7.5% hull bonus any more worthwhile.

Most cap fleets are either armor tank only or armor tank biased. Most subcap fleets are moving from shield to armor.

The meta is changing, and I think you are behind rather than in front of it.

I'm not proposing to equalize their speeds - just making gap between them smaller from both sides. Caldary have longer reach and more tank than minmatar - so it makes sense that they are a bit slower. Thats balance and you can win if you exploit your strong sides and weak ones of your enemy. But there is nothing to exploit if your hostile have similar tank + 200-300 m/s speed and twice your optimal range. That is the reason why armor tanking is so rarely seen - there are a lot of ships so fast and with so much reach, that you cant do **** to them in most armor tanked (and mostly short range) platforms. unless ofcourse you start and end at 10-20 km range - then you have some chances.

tl/dr speed boost is good but imo not sufficient. Passive sield tank should have similar penalties becouse right now sigboost is nowhere near as important as speed-reducing one. And no amount of plate mass boosting would let them be as efficientand pleasant as shield extenders. Please, if you really care about balance of shield and armor tanking dont do fast jobs - change them together and with much cosideration.

also i would like to note that no armor (or shield) changes should go without looking on racial active and resist bonuses. Why the hell they are still not divided in three bonunes - amount, remote rep, local rep? it is clear as day that resist bonus would make ship better with active, passive and remote repping, while bonus on local reps only helps you in one way. Now you have different roles - give diferent bonuses to hulls and please forget about outdated racial ****. Remember hics for the love of quaffe!

Is this going to be the same cap booster madness as ASBs, where you want the smallest one possible?

I'm not sure if this comes up during 'playtesting' or whatever, but on a solo roaming ship, I like to not have to dock up loads. My active tanking setups are generally the kind that don't use cap boosters. This is mostly a frigate thing and sometimes cruisers. There's value in being able to just engage, win/escape, then continue roaming. It really sucks when after every engagement, you have to go stock up on two different types of cap boosters (as the other guy just said), repair your modules because your rig tells you to overload all the time, and get more heavy drones for your cruiser because people explode them within seconds of them being launched (gallente aren't allowed spares).
I guess I'm saying the appeal of buffer shield tanking for me is the convenience. Pure buffer armour tanking sucks because you have to go rep in station (as well as all its other flaws), and this non-hybrid type of cap boosted active tanking is about as bad. You need a station with repair facilities, and one with the right cap boosters for sale.

I don't think any thought goes into this when deciding how to make whatever gallente ship 'good at solo', or fixing active tanking. I'll probably continue just kiting with a MSE kestrel/thrasher/whatever. All I need is ammo and a little stack of paste and I can roam until I die. Sucks that there aren't any rep-bonused t1 cruisers, btw. I don't really get that decision.

I hear a lot of unhappiness about the cargohold changes, but two questions about the AAR's

a) Can you load at least one load of cap charges into the AAR in station? So just like ASB's, a loaded AAR takes no additional cargo space.

b) While reloading the AAR, does it have to be inactive like the ASB?

Fozzie, can we please get the armor rep to occur at the beginning of the cycle, or the shield rep to occur at the end of the cycle? One or the other, but right now, Armor tanking and shield tanking become further and further unequal the larger the fight gets, and once TiDi kicks in, shield tanking has a massive advantage with shield logi getting their reps in almost instantly.

If TiDi is here to stay, and I think its a great addition, than something needs to change with the armor reps and shield reps occuring at opposite ends of the cycle.

What is your opinion of this? I can show some pretty interesting evidence as to why shield tanking is just massively overpowered compared to armor tanking whats TiDi kicks in, especially at high TiDi levels.

People need to click "Like" on this guy!