These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Shpenat
Ironman Inc.
Transgress
#1421 - 2013-02-15 07:45:31 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
http://localectomy.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/circles-in-metagame.html

As i read it, we will go through the same problems with AAR's as we had with ASB's. The Incursus with a heated AAR and a heated SAR II, legion boosts (not uncommon) will achieve Godlink levels of tanking - with even LESS reliance on capacitor to run the reps, and be less likeely to be capped by a neutraliser.

This is absolutely ridiculous. The Incursus is already the most tanky frigate in the game by a gigantic margin. The AAR will break this so badly Fozzie should be embarassed.

I am glad the heat rig got dropped. it is a stupid idea. Absolutely stupid, as it would stack with everything else, and escpeciallly on a uber-resist T3 such as a Legion or Proteus, it could get out of hand with AAR + MARII setups - considering the coolant injector subs reduce heat damage.

I like the concept. But there is no balance in this appparent "balancing"pass on Armour - just another cycle of stupid + exploitation + nerf + abandonment.

And yes, ASB's are crap now. i actually went and said it.


How is AAR making you more imune to neutralizer?

incursus will be able to tank a lot for as long as his repper is loaded. Then its tank will drop qiote considerably. (AAR provides 50% more rep than T2 when loaded and about half when not loaded)
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1422 - 2013-02-15 08:45:21 UTC
Shpenat wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:
http://localectomy.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/circles-in-metagame.html

As i read it, we will go through the same problems with AAR's as we had with ASB's. The Incursus with a heated AAR and a heated SAR II, legion boosts (not uncommon) will achieve Godlink levels of tanking - with even LESS reliance on capacitor to run the reps, and be less likeely to be capped by a neutraliser.

This is absolutely ridiculous. The Incursus is already the most tanky frigate in the game by a gigantic margin. The AAR will break this so badly Fozzie should be embarassed.

I am glad the heat rig got dropped. it is a stupid idea. Absolutely stupid, as it would stack with everything else, and escpeciallly on a uber-resist T3 such as a Legion or Proteus, it could get out of hand with AAR + MARII setups - considering the coolant injector subs reduce heat damage.

I like the concept. But there is no balance in this appparent "balancing"pass on Armour - just another cycle of stupid + exploitation + nerf + abandonment.

And yes, ASB's are crap now. i actually went and said it.


How is AAR making you more imune to neutralizer?

incursus will be able to tank a lot for as long as his repper is loaded. Then its tank will drop qiote considerably. (AAR provides 50% more rep than T2 when loaded and about half when not loaded)


It gives 100% more while its loaded..

Also the incursus will still rep a bit more then a unbonused frigs after i think..

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#1423 - 2013-02-15 10:48:54 UTC
Quote:

    Ancillary Armor Repairer
  • Not the same mechanic as the ASB, please read to the end.
  • Always uses the same cap as a normal (T1/T2/Named) Armor Repper
  • When not loaded with Nanite Repair Paste, has 3/4 the rep amount as a T1 Armor Repairer
  • When loaded with Nanite Repair Paste triples rep amount (so reps 2.25x a T1 repairer when loaded)
  • Same cycle time and fittings as T1 reps
  • Smalls use 1 paste per cycle, mediums 4, larges 8. Can hold 8 cycles worth of paste at a time. Reload time is 1 minute just like an ASB, but the longer cycle time of armor reps means it goes longer between reloads
  • Limited to one per ship



Please read the OP before claiming things.

My Condor costs less than that module!
Mund Richard
#1424 - 2013-02-15 11:03:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
It gives 100% more while its loaded..
125% more than T1 meta0, 87.5% more than meta4, less than 70% more than T2.

I do hope everyone is space-rich enough to fit meta4 SARs on an Incursus (Rollsee below), so you are not getting +100% even while it's loaded.

Unloaded you get 62.5% that of a meta4, and 56.25% of a T2.

Trinkets friend wrote:
We will see armour tanking philosophy of one AAR and one normal repper paired up; for example, an Incursus will have AAR and Small Armour Repairer II, and will have effectively 3.25 reps loaded
Once more, only compairing it to a pairing of a meta0 and a T2.
Only reason I can see for that is being deep in null, and having no meta variant on hand (and not wanting/being able to downgrade guns).
Compared to double T2, you get a bit more fitting room, and 2.69's worth, while loaded, and 1.57 afterwards.
Trinkets friend wrote:
As i read it, we will go through the same problems with AAR's as we had with ASB's. The Incursus with a heated AAR and a heated SAR II, legion boosts (not uncommon) will achieve Godlink levels of tanking - with even LESS reliance on capacitor to run the reps, and be less likeely to be capped by a neutraliser.
Do hope you see the error now.
But to point it out just in case:
Small T1 T2 repairers and the SAAR have the same cap consumption.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1425 - 2013-02-15 11:27:11 UTC
Shiii, people are checking the numbers i randomly spout now?

So i have to start to actually do math before i talk? damn it >_<

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Mund Richard
#1426 - 2013-02-15 11:31:03 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Shiii, people are checking the numbers i randomly spout now?

So i have to start to actually do math before i talk? damn it >_<

Collateral damage, sorry. Twisted

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Gitanmaxx
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1427 - 2013-02-15 15:57:26 UTC
The biggest problem with armor tanking is definitely the speed. I'm trained up for armor with as many sp as i possibly can and when i fit a tormentor or an executioner (the two frigs i'm using to pvp) I can always get the same amount of tank with twice the speed by fitting shields instead of armor. Leaving me no real reason to use armor that i've spent so much sp on.
Kittel
Knights.of.Elysium
#1428 - 2013-02-15 17:33:51 UTC
I think there should be a shield skill reducing sig rad as well as change shield rigs to be cpu or pg pen as well. Changing the armor to these new values but leaving the penalties for shields intact is unjust and damaging to shield tanks while buffing armor penalties to useless penalties. Why not just remove shields all together and everyone can be armor tanks...
deepos
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1429 - 2013-02-15 18:02:09 UTC
Kittel wrote:
I think there should be a shield skill reducing sig rad as well as change shield rigs to be cpu or pg pen as well. Changing the armor to these new values but leaving the penalties for shields intact is unjust and damaging to shield tanks while buffing armor penalties to useless penalties. Why not just remove shields all together and everyone can be armor tanks...


you are bad and you should feel bad for trolling an interesting thread.

Don't let the door hit you on your way out.
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#1430 - 2013-02-15 21:24:16 UTC
Honestly I think armor repairers in general should use a decreased amount of capacitor, otherwise buffer tanks will always reign alone. Neuts be crazy.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.
Jonas Nerub
Verteidiger des wahren Bloedsinns
#1431 - 2013-02-16 03:58:18 UTC
got a quick idea for the anchillery mods.....

i want a switch, (maybe a extra bottoun on the module) where i can change between own cap and the carges without to eject the charges

that would be also a bit more helpfull to time the 1min reload


i think thats an awsome idea^^!
Mund Richard
#1432 - 2013-02-16 04:58:29 UTC
Jonas Nerub wrote:
got a quick idea for the anchillery mods.....
i want a switch, (maybe a extra bottoun on the module) where i can change between own cap and the carges without to eject the charges
that would be also a bit more helpfull to time the 1min reload
i think thats an awsome idea^^!

Do you expect CCP to make a new button for modules when they haven't made a simple countdown timer visible for reload?

Also, what kind of "own cap" are you talking about? ASB?
For the AAR, being able to tell the module not to consume charges would be nice, but see my first line.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#1433 - 2013-02-16 09:44:45 UTC
Gah!!!!

Why didn't I have this idea earlier?!?

Rather than huge rep, huge reload as it is at the moment, how would the AAR behave if it made use of a slightly different base mechanic than the ASB?

Fitting as current, Capacity as current, Unloaded Rep Amount as current, No charges used for normal operation.

Increase Overheating bonus by 250%, all heat generated by the module - sunk to nanite repair paste reservoir.

So you hit the module and you get an ordinary, T1 armour rep. Overheat the module however and it pumps out crazy rep, burns through its paste (which would eventually require the 1 minute reload) but doesn't burn out and doesn't spread heat to the rest of the rack (until its paste is exhausted).

While the ASBers are burning through Navy cap charges because their passive recharge can't handle a frigate the AAR is more conservative, tanks away on cap as normal but has an "OMG button"...


That. would be Awesome....
Mund Richard
#1434 - 2013-02-16 10:16:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Jacob Holland wrote:
So you hit the module and you get an ordinary, T1 armour rep. Overheat the module however and it pumps out crazy rep, burns through its paste (which would eventually require the 1 minute reload) but doesn't burn out and doesn't spread heat to the rest of the rack (until its paste is exhausted).

If it would spread heat but somewhat (not fully) eased the heat on the module, I'd like the idea more.

ASB removing a critical part of the equation of active tanking was bad enough once.
No need for another one. And need to rework the one already present.
imho

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1435 - 2013-02-16 16:27:27 UTC
Why the use of Nanite Repair Paste with the AAR's...? That's ridiculous, your "fix" to the armor tanking problem might work but it will be a hell of a lot more expensive when compared to ASB's. The fact that Active Armor Tanking, with this module, can -still- be influenced heavily by Cap Warfare when the ASB isn't makes it less appealing as a whole.

I'm paying more to have faster repair on a system that DOES NOT automatically come with passive repairing (like shield recharge)
I'm paying more to have faster repair on a system that DOES get influenced by Capacitor Warfare
I'm paying more to have system that only certain ships will truly benefit from (as far as the Gallente line)

Let's be real, with Gallente you're either an Armor Tanker, a Drone Fighter or a Brawler. With these changes, you're effectively neutering the Armor Tankers by having them spend vastly more for their "fuel" than those who use ASB's and further more by basically forcing them to have the module (such is their style) you're technically increasing the price on those ships.

Proposed Solution: Find a different fuel for the AAR or find a way to reduce the price of Paste.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
#1436 - 2013-02-16 17:37:46 UTC
On SiSi the Incursus rep bonus is 7.5% but ship description still says 10%. Would be nice if the correct description goes into 1.1.
Garr Earthbender
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1437 - 2013-02-16 17:39:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Garr Earthbender
Seems this whole thread is TL:DR for me to find the answer to my question.

So with my horrible math skills, I'm thinking that the 800 plate will get a total of a 45% reduction with the 20% reduction in mass and lvl 5 armor honeycombing skill right?

With some epic EFTing to get the right amount of plates on my maller to get roughly the same mass as the new 800 plate, the base speed change (all lvl 5) is 215m/s with current build and 244 m/s. That really doesn't seem much of a difference. Put a MWD on there, and the difference is 1281 m/s current build and 1504m/s.

Question is, how effective do you guys think this is gonna be?

Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too.

-Scissors is overpowered, rock is fine. -Paper
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#1438 - 2013-02-16 17:51:13 UTC
Garr Earthbender wrote:
Seems this whole thread is TL:DR for me to find the answer to my question.

So with my horrible math skills, I'm thinking that the 800 plate will get a total of a 45% reduction with the 20% reduction in mass and lvl 5 armor honeycombing skill right?

With some epic EFTing to get the right amount of plates on my maller to get roughly the same mass as the new 800 plate, the base speed change (all lvl 5) is 215m/s with current build and 244 m/s. That really doesn't seem much of a difference. Put a MWD on there, and the difference is 1281 m/s current build and 1504m/s.

Question is, how effective do you guys think this is gonna be?

Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too.

40% reduction. It's a 20% base reduction (1 * 0.8 = 0.8, then 0.8 * 0.75 = 0.6). And do you not think a 30m/s increase in speed is nice, and a >200m/s difference when MWDing is nice? It's not going to let you outrun nano ships, or anything. But now you can go a little faster, and control the battlefield just a little better. It's not a huge change, but it's nice.

Now lets say you catch the kiting ship on warp in. It'll be stuck in your optimal range a little longer. Lets say you catch a brawler at the edge of your range and they burn at you to get under your guns? Same thing, it'll take them longer to catch you and apply their damage.
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#1439 - 2013-02-16 18:50:47 UTC
Garr Earthbender wrote:
Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too.

It you've removed them from EFT because you think they'll lose their penalty, at the moment that's incorrect.

Only the active tanking armour rigs are having their penalty changed so far as I've read.
Garr Earthbender
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1440 - 2013-02-16 20:33:15 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:
Garr Earthbender wrote:
Seems this whole thread is TL:DR for me to find the answer to my question.

So with my horrible math skills, I'm thinking that the 800 plate will get a total of a 45% reduction with the 20% reduction in mass and lvl 5 armor honeycombing skill right?

With some epic EFTing to get the right amount of plates on my maller to get roughly the same mass as the new 800 plate, the base speed change (all lvl 5) is 215m/s with current build and 244 m/s. That really doesn't seem much of a difference. Put a MWD on there, and the difference is 1281 m/s current build and 1504m/s.

Question is, how effective do you guys think this is gonna be?

Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too.

40% reduction. It's a 20% base reduction (1 * 0.8 = 0.8, then 0.8 * 0.75 = 0.6). And do you not think a 30m/s increase in speed is nice, and a >200m/s difference when MWDing is nice? It's not going to let you outrun nano ships, or anything. But now you can go a little faster, and control the battlefield just a little better. It's not a huge change, but it's nice.

Now lets say you catch the kiting ship on warp in. It'll be stuck in your optimal range a little longer. Lets say you catch a brawler at the edge of your range and they burn at you to get under your guns? Same thing, it'll take them longer to catch you and apply their damage.



5% per level =25 % for the honeycombing. So that +20% from the mass reduction for the 800 plate = 45% reduction total. Right?

Jacob Holland wrote:
Garr Earthbender wrote:
Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too.

It you've removed them from EFT because you think they'll lose their penalty, at the moment that's incorrect.

Only the active tanking armour rigs are having their penalty changed so far as I've read.


derp. you are correct. You are correct good sir!

-Scissors is overpowered, rock is fine. -Paper