Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Buffer armor will still be the same brick, since the buff we get for training new skill does nothing significant. ~20m/s on BC with 1600 plate.

AAR wont change anything, you will just swap one repairer for it. Not a single fit will change. And it 100% wont free you any slots, dont really understand what led you to that conclusion. It is just a straight, flat armor repair boost that will cost us incredibly boring cargohold management. And buffer&active tank combo is not really that good idea, dont get your hopes up.

A single AAR is not equivalent to a dual rep fit.

-Liang

One should also never miss the fact how this AAR comes in one version only. The idea of having the same level of investement applied to aVindicator and a plain Megathrone is very dubious. Hardly anyone fits this way at actual TQ PvP, it's usually considered reasonable to invest some isk in better gear if your ship isn't free. And now we are forced to use free mods even at hulls which cost isk, like faction battleships. Meh.

Why are people so concerned about fitting problems with the new rigs? It's not nearly as bad as people think. Tech 2 armor repairers use more PG than the tech 1 and replacing one of the tech 2 repairers with the ancillary armor repairer will lower the PG used, anyway.

In a previous dual or triple repairer setup you can drop two regular armor repairers, then put in the ancillary armor repairer and the reactive armor hardener. Suddenly you free up a lot of PG, use less capacitor, and tank better than before. It can get even better when tanking less damage types with that RAH.

Edit: Deleted the part about the navy cap boosters. It appears that they will no longer use navy cap boosters. However, instead of 9 reps, it's nerfed down to 8. I suppose that's OK given that we have rigs that directly increase the repair amount and we can easily run other repairers in addition to the AAR.

I can't really comment on the overloading rig since it depends greatly on the layout of the active tank whether it will be better over the aux nano pump. That is, until the penalties take over.

One thing I don't like: Not reducing the base mass of a couple plates just because they're used more often is unnecessarily inconsistent to me. That said, it's nice that we get a skill that reduces the penalty of all plates. In addition to improving maneuverability, it will also increase the MWD speed of plated ships a little.

Good call on all counts .. although the consumption rates are a bit low considering how much pew'ing power the AAR represents, could easily double or triple it with no objections from the handful of people in Eve who still armour tank in PvP.

Also, remember to get us info on the revised heating rig as soon feasible.

MAAR = 1,68 * MAR2
That's not exactly twice, but considering fitting and slots (AAR should have fitting req of a T1 AR), you can really consider using one AAR instead of 2 AR. That would effectively free you one low slot.

The AAR work for 7 to 9 cycles. On a MAAR, that will be 63 to 81 seconds (std vs navy cap charges), which mean that you don't need more than that time of capacitor, because at the end, you will reload and don't need so many cap. Notice too that 81 seconds will often be the end of the fight. That mean you don't need this cap booster as much as with a standard active tank fit, or at least that a small one will be enough, saving you fitting space if not a med slot.

If you are not in that case, it's a sustained tank case. But even here, you will be 10 to 16% faster than before, just because of the rigs. That's not meaningless.

And finaly, the AAR on any ship is better than one rep on an incursus for example ; considering that 10%/lvl bonus was seen to be a solution to AR problem, I think we can consider AAR viable for almost any ship. That mean you can now actually tank your ship with an AAR and still sig/speed tank, because your speed is not killed anymore. That is game changing.

And plates being 25% lighter is not meaningless either : that's almost the difference between T2 and rolled tungsten plates. That is about half a second of align time, and the difference will be even larger with smaller plates. You are still heavier than a shield ship, but the difference will be between 25 and 32% lower. Agility matter too.

The question is more what do you, moaners, want armor tanking to be ? Shield need to still be viable after that.

I think it's fine that the ASB still uses tiny cap boosters as it's free to run. Armor needs that space for big boosters since their repair modules aren't free.

Dear CCP Fozzie and Yitterbium,
did one of you by any chance took a look at my recent proposal?
And if yes, what do you think? I didn't want armor tankers to take over New Eden but I also would like to a larger Incursus some day

As for numbers, I'm glad I was able to catch up after being away for a day.

Anyway I like numbers, I hope you do too?

Right now our medium armor repair module I needs 150 powergrid and the tech2 one needs 175 powergrid, so don't we meet in the middle and say that AAR would need powergrid in a range of 155-165 powergrid and we would go a tiny bit lower on the tech1 and tech2 module in a range of let's say

Medium Armor Repairer I -> 130 powergrid and the
Medium Armir Repairer II -> 145 powergrid and maybe this summer we get some nicer numbers on the larger ones too?

Large Armor Repairer I -> 1600 powergrid (no battlecruiser or Tengu will be able to fit this anyway)
Large Armor Repairer II -> 1850 powergrid?

As with any information you read here, these are merely suggestions and I am not in charge of things!

Reducing medium and large armor rep cycle time is definitely an option, either for 1.1 or in a subsequent iteration.

I don't really see why active tanking has to be more expensive than everything else, but w/e.