Player Features and Ideas Discussion

With a 3% PG implant I would make the Brutix:

High:
Neutron Blasters II x 7
Mid:
Experimental MWD
Small cap booster II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler
Low:
MAAR
DC II
EANM II x 2
MFS II x 2
Rigs:
Armor nano pump
Armor overheat rig x 2

With damage implants and drones you can get 700-900 DPS between Null and Void. The small cap booster along with the considerable cap buff will insure you get your 9 charges worth out of the MAAR and keep your guns firing. Balls out like a proper Gallente ship.

What kind of tank do you get out of it? I'm guessing it's something approaching 600-700 overheated?

-Liang

Hummmmm..... I need to play with it.

-Liang

Ed: Still kinda skeptical. But I'll withhold judgment.

double post

I don't have sufficient knowledge on all applications of armor tanking, so speaking only from the perspective of medium-sized repairer use in low-to-med SP PVE.

Both active tanks (shield and armor) are severely inferior to passive shield tanking. Even against EM/thermal rats passive tank is either same as or better than the active armor tank on most ships. The reason for this, as I see it, is either the bad capacitor efficiency of the repair systems, or low per-module repair ammount. If you fit many repair modules, you can repair enough DPS but run into severe capacitor issues that you cannot compensate even by sacrificing all the spare slots you have left. If you fit few repair modules, you can't get a DPS tank comparable to passive shields even if you use everything you have for tank support mods.

And if this brings a though of nerfing passive tanking, by doing that you would just hurt low-SP PVE pilots, which I think don't need to be hurt any more.

As for the PVP, main reason I'm avoiding armor tanks in there is how armor rigs hurt ones mobility. In my experience, mobility is the key to survival, so hurting that in favor of EHP doesn't seem to help much. Maybe with the changes to the armor repair rigs I'll have options of using armor tank in PVP, but I'd really like seeing the resistance rigs penalty changed as well.

Finally, I know how it is a special thing about armor tank and all, but having some options to augument armor tank with med slots would be VERY helpful. And no, not by capacitor boosters. Right now you have med+low slots helping you with your shield tank, and only low slots helping with armor. This is an obvious inferiority.

A 10% speed penalty and a 10% increase in sig radius have an identical effect on the tracking calculation.

Of course, it's not quite that simple. Mass doesn't affect nominal max speed, but it does significantly affect agility and max speed under prop mod. For added fun, the % affect to max prop mod speed is less than the % affect to the ship's mass, though it gets closer the greater the mass of your ship.

In contrast, an increase in sig has no affect on ship handling, though it does also make the ship easier to lock.

Except small armor repairers aren't bad and the issue with large armor repairers is the ridiculous fitting requirements that require you to downgrade to the smallest class of large guns. Only medium armor repairers scale poorly (as evidenced by the need to fit triple reps on the Myrm to make it a competitive ship). The other issue is that the speed/agility penalty of armor plates inhibits solo work (which the current proposal seems to address). Buffing resists across the board is just nonsensical and serves only to make buffer armor stronger, which is completely unneeded as they already reign superior to a lot of shield setups in fleet doctrines (Zealot/Abaddon fleets will be ridiculous).

I see a lot of good in this change. I like the addition of the new rig, and the changes to the current active tanking armor rigs, the new skill and plate changes will make armor tanking a lot more viable, but I don't think the problem is solved by the addition of a new module. Sure, the AAR provides a nice burst tank, and it invites comparison between it and the ASB. If you do want to differentiate between burst and sustained tank so much, then they should both be limited to one per ship rather than just having ASBs capable of getting around the reload times with multiple fit modules, but that's just a gripe about inconsistent application of a philosophy towards tanking.

This doesn't fix the 'sustained' armor repairers. It does make active tanked ships more agile and, certainly, faster, but it will still take 2-3 active modules to be able to withstand any reasonable dps, on a ship with bonuses. Maybe this is the intent, but that is a huge chunk of your lowslots devoted to this, and that's before consideration of something like damage mods or armor resist mods.

Rather than this new module, I'd rather see 'sustained' armor reppers get a little buff. Nothing huge, mind you, just enough to make them viable.

I've not fully digested all these changes and the impact it will have on pvp yet so I can't really comment on the changes.

However I'd like to make a more general point :

You have consistently boosted the average tank of most ships, either passive, resists or active tanks with new modules, better gang boosts (from T3) etc...

Why can't you look at and give some boosts to 'Gank' fits - specifically the offensive rigs with horrible penalties, stacking penalties, and calibration points that make them far less useful than just adding more tank via a trimark/shield extender or whatever that isn't stacking penalised.

It seems to me after the changes the soloists out there will be looking at even more pvp grinds that become more a matter of who runs out of cap booster charges first. Gank fitting should be a viable option too and right now it is rarely close to winning against a tank setup - not to mention turning most 'fights' into bait 'n' ganks due to the ease of over-tanking.

Just a broader point. Cheers.

awesome.. but I think there is one more little thing to make active armortanking in line with active shield tanking..


..teh pirate implant set