These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 1.5

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#1021 - 2013-01-29 13:17:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
Weasel Leblanc wrote:
Sinzor Aumer wrote:
Looks like we're not getting any extra bonuses on existing mudules, reposting from the other thread:

CCP Greyscale wrote:
We're not, in general and with exceptions, fans of multi-function modules. EVE fitting is about trade-offs, not about having your cake and eating it.


...He says that, and yet the ASB is a thing.

Well, given that it is the same dude who buffed 1600mm plates right at the middle of these 'we need to make active tanking more viable' talks... v0v

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
TravelBuoy
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1022 - 2013-01-29 15:16:26 UTC
Roime wrote:
Captain Semper wrote:

Well 2 LSE, i invul, EM rig and 2 core ext rigs - and you have pretty nice shield pool with not bad resists.


Cool if that works for you, I personally wouldn't even let that in the fleet because you don't have any kind of tackle, can't fit Neutrons and it has the sig of a battleruiser.

800mm Rax looks awesome after the mass reductions.



For a noob looks awesome
Lebaneur
Tribal Core
#1023 - 2013-01-29 16:41:59 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Lebaneur wrote:
As far as I could tell nothing to test yet on Sisi after todays patch... No new mods, skills or changes apparent.
Any ETA on geting these into testing?



As far as I can tell the power grid changes to medium and large armor reppers have gone through however the pen change on active armor rigs is still speed instead of grid pen. This seems a bit counter productive to me...


At least the skill and changes to the rigs was updated on the second patch today. No new mods yet.
Dredastttarm
0x31A9D8F2
#1024 - 2013-01-29 16:53:57 UTC
Just me or are these ancillary armor reps going to cost a ton to keep online? its going to cost 100k isk for 1 rep cycle of the medium rep and 200k for the large one, this is outrageous, ccp needs to stop being lazy and make a new ammo type for the ancillary armor reps... Or they could just change nanite paste blueprint to make 100 per run so the price goes down to something reasonable... Otherwise this armor rep will cost ridiculous amount of isk to keep running...

I make YouTube videos and so on... Watch me do silly things here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Internetzspacezshipz?
Perihelion Olenard
#1025 - 2013-01-29 17:48:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
Dredastttarm wrote:
Just me or are these ancillary armor reps going to cost a ton to keep online? its going to cost 100k isk for 1 rep cycle of the medium rep and 200k for the large one, this is outrageous, ccp needs to stop being lazy and make a new ammo type for the ancillary armor reps... Or they could just change nanite paste blueprint to make 100 per run so the price goes down to something reasonable... Otherwise this armor rep will cost ridiculous amount of isk to keep running...

People kept asking for it, now we have to suffer the consequences of it. At least it doesn't take up much space.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#1026 - 2013-01-29 18:18:03 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Dredastttarm wrote:
Just me or are these ancillary armor reps going to cost a ton to keep online? its going to cost 100k isk for 1 rep cycle of the medium rep and 200k for the large one, this is outrageous, ccp needs to stop being lazy and make a new ammo type for the ancillary armor reps... Or they could just change nanite paste blueprint to make 100 per run so the price goes down to something reasonable... Otherwise this armor rep will cost ridiculous amount of isk to keep running...

People kept asking for it, now we have to suffer the consequences of it. At least it doesn't take up much space.
It's not cost that worries me about this module, it's their lack lustre performance.

I only hope changes will be made to improve things. But I do believe they intend on changes regarding PI and this could lower the cost of paste.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
#1027 - 2013-01-29 18:35:34 UTC
Luc Chastot wrote:
CCP Fozzie, now that you're at it (fixing armor tanking), is there something you could do with Layered Platings? They are so terribly bad, that not even fail-fitters use them.

The only things I can think of that could find them useful are caps, but even then, EANMs could prove to be a better option.



+1

I found a use for them on a Legion but that's just 1 ship out of hundreds

Oderint Dum Metuant
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1028 - 2013-01-29 18:56:35 UTC
Hey guys, all the changes in the OP are now on Sisi, with two exceptions:

  • AARs are not on the market yet. In the meantime I dropped some cans and wrecks outside the station with some for people to test right now, they should be on the market next update.

  • AARs can currently be fitted multiple to a ship. We have this fixed internally but that fix did not get into this recent Sisi update.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
fukier
Gallente Federation
#1029 - 2013-01-29 20:33:52 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey guys, all the changes in the OP are now on Sisi, with two exceptions:

  • AARs are not on the market yet. In the meantime I dropped some cans and wrecks outside the station with some for people to test right now, they should be on the market next update.

  • AARs can currently be fitted multiple to a ship. We have this fixed internally but that fix did not get into this recent Sisi update.


hmm droping them in a can outside of the station?

lmao that will end well i am sure of it...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#1030 - 2013-01-29 20:35:40 UTC  |  Edited by: fukier
Dredastttarm wrote:
Just me or are these ancillary armor reps going to cost a ton to keep online? its going to cost 100k isk for 1 rep cycle of the medium rep and 200k for the large one, this is outrageous, ccp needs to stop being lazy and make a new ammo type for the ancillary armor reps... Or they could just change nanite paste blueprint to make 100 per run so the price goes down to something reasonable... Otherwise this armor rep will cost ridiculous amount of isk to keep running...



too expensive eh?

and whats the cost of loosing the ship vrs the 3 million in paste?

oh and you do know you can allways do PI and get it for free?!
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#1031 - 2013-01-29 20:44:39 UTC
Luc Chastot wrote:
CCP Fozzie, now that you're at it (fixing armor tanking), is there something you could do with Layered Platings? They are so terribly bad, that not even fail-fitters use them.

The only things I can think of that could find them useful are caps, but even then, EANMs could prove to be a better option.


i still say a skill bonus to these mods would be awesome... be it a ship skill or a separate one would be sick...

infact i would have prefered CCP made these mods better witha new skll then reducing mass for plates as a new skill...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Wivabel
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#1032 - 2013-01-29 20:50:21 UTC

to bad CCP didnt use one of the underused PI products for fuel but ehh.

I tested out the Medium AAR today. I was in a Deimos with 1 t2 medium rep and an AAR. It did pretty Good but the Long armor rep cycle time Kinda defeats the idea of a burst tank. I will say cap stability was better since I did not have the AAR actively running. I think it is better but im not sure if it is good enough.

The fitting changes however made a huge difference active fits will be much easier to fit. Bigger guns better range etc etc etc

I am not sure if I am going to log in anymore.......
JamesCLK
#1033 - 2013-01-29 20:51:52 UTC  |  Edited by: JamesCLK
Confirming making your own nanite paste is free! Lol

e: Not that I'm complaining. Armour 1.5 may just be a band-aid at this point, but it's still much appreciated Fozzie. <3

-- -.-- / -.-. .-.. --- -. . / .. ... / - --- --- / . -..- .--. . -. ... .. ...- . / - --- / ..- -. -.. --- -.-. -.- / ... - --- .--. / .--. .-.. . .- ... . / ... . -. -.. / .... . .-.. .--. / ... - --- .--.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#1034 - 2013-01-29 21:00:56 UTC
Wivabel wrote:

to bad CCP didnt use one of the underused PI products for fuel but ehh.

I tested out the Medium AAR today. I was in a Deimos with 1 t2 medium rep and an AAR. It did pretty Good but the Long armor rep cycle time Kinda defeats the idea of a burst tank. I will say cap stability was better since I did not have the AAR actively running. I think it is better but im not sure if it is good enough.

The fitting changes however made a huge difference active fits will be much easier to fit. Bigger guns better range etc etc etc


i am curious how it will look on a buffer fit domi...

i used to fit buffer fit domi with sentry and nuets...

i would probs use the laar without paste and only put some in if i needed the extra boost to kill the target...

or you can always go duel armor reps but have one as an aar... and burst it if needed
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1035 - 2013-01-29 21:06:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
Wivabel wrote:
I tested out the Medium AAR today. I was in a Deimos with 1 t2 medium rep and an AAR. It did pretty Good but the Long armor rep cycle time Kinda defeats the idea of a burst tank. I will say cap stability was better since I did not have the AAR actively running. I think it is better but im not sure if it is good enough




First issues first, this is the major problem with this fix, straps on a broken wood leg.

-active armor tanking -yes?

-sustainability -it's not, it was not and doubt it will be without lol fits just good for pve after changes, slightly better, not balanced.

-smaller buffer relying on speed and higher dmg to get rid of enemy ships:
*problem one resist profile (low values with V skills)
*problem 2 speed
*problem 3 capacitor sustainability (sustainability armor tanking? -is this a joke?)
*problem 4 is as long as active shield/ASB tanking offers everything you need for pvp armor doesn't, there's no point on fitting armor mods on your ship point blank, even if it spits 1 gigadps at 500m will still be just good at shield buffer tank for barges/freighters gank and lol stuff. It's getting better but imo it's not balanced and adding more skills is not helping with this perception.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
#1036 - 2013-01-29 22:47:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Aralieus
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I dropped some cans and wrecks outside the station


Reported for spamming cans Pirate

Edit: Quick question to Fozzie: Not sure if this has been asked yet but will the skills Nanite Operation and Nanite Interfacing have any effect on reppers?


Second Edit: New skill is called 'Armor Honeycombing' (3x)

Skill at installing upgraded armor plates efficiently and securely, reducing the impact they have on agility and speed. Grants a 5% reduction to armor plate mass penalty per level.

Oderint Dum Metuant
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#1037 - 2013-01-29 23:15:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
Problem : So, one small AAR needs 1 nanite to run one cycle.
One ASB needs 1 cap booster 50 for this very same cycle.

Taking in consideration that a ASB cycle is roughly 2.5 times short than an AAR, let's compare things :

One ASB needs then 2m3 per cycle, while an AAR needs 0.01m3 per cycle.
Increase the gap by 2.5 and you have the possibility for an AAR to run 500 times longer than an ASB before emptying one's cargohold.

Hmm.. Seriously ?

Solution : A new item, nanite pack booster small, medium, large.

For the same rep size, one charge has the same volume than it's shield counterpart. Still keeping in mind that cycles are 2.5 times longer, it should be already enough.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
mental maverick
Percussive Diplomacy
Sedition.
#1038 - 2013-01-29 23:43:52 UTC
So I did some testing with the Ancillary Armor Repairer on the test server tonight and my first impression is that it is pretty awesome.

Previously i've mainly flown dual rep setups whenever I have gone for an armor tank, pretty much tried craming 2 reppers on every hull imaginable, but for the AARs I figured the plate/rep setup would be the best so thats what i've tested tonight. Used no implants or links and I have no EFT numbers or anything, this was just flying around pvping and getting the feel of it.

I tested mainly with a BS buffer/repper setup since I figured that kind of hybrid tank would be the one benefitting most from the AAR. Without implants or links I still felt it performed better then I expected, and this was on a Tempest and a Mega which neither have any kind of armor bonus. With just 1 cap booster, thus freeing up a mid slot, I still felt I had plenty of cap to spare for repositioning, semi kiting, smartbombing drones, neuting while at the same time running my repper, a luxury I usually dont have when running dual reps.

One thing I noticed a lot of times though is when I get 1 target tackled and I know he has friends incoming, I want to run my repper so he doesn't whittle away my buffer before his friends arrive but if I do that I use my "Nanite boost" before I really need it. So it's either having a low buffer when the gang lands but still have my "Nanite boost" available or have a topped up buffer but only maybe half of my Nanites left.

Would it make the AARs totally overpowered if we had the ability to turn the "Nanite boost" on and off in order to save it for when it's needed?


PS. sry about the "nanite boost" thingy, didn't know wtf to call it What?
Mariticide
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1039 - 2013-01-30 00:37:10 UTC
Altrue wrote:
Problem : So, one small AAR needs 1 nanite to run one cycle.
One ASB needs 1 cap booster 50 for this very same cycle.

Taking in consideration that a ASB cycle is roughly 2.5 times short than an AAR, let's compare things :

One ASB needs then 2m3 per cycle, while an AAR needs 0.01m3 per cycle.
Increase the gap by 2.5 and you have the possibility for an AAR to run 500 times longer than an ASB before emptying one's cargohold.

Hmm.. Seriously ?

Solution : A new item, nanite pack booster small, medium, large.

For the same rep size, one charge has the same volume than it's shield counterpart. Still keeping in mind that cycles are 2.5 times longer, it should be already enough.


What we gain in cargohold we lose in the ISK equation. Nanites are much more expensive than cap boosters, even navy ones. In addition, while the modules are similar, there needs to be some difference in the two tanking methods. An armour tanker with an AAR must also have cargohold free to use standard cap boosters to run not only the AAR, but other modules. Since the ASB doesn't use cap at all, this is a lesser concern to shield tankers. AAR users must manage cap being used by the AAR module (which is significant) and also run prop, ewar, guns, et. al.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#1040 - 2013-01-30 01:09:57 UTC
dont see this mentioned but on sisi the skill armor resistance phasing now reduces RAT by 10% for cycle and 5% to cap usuage per level
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.