These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

AAR = Devs Completely Shield Biased
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Marcus Gideon
Triglavian Assembly
#1 - 2013-02-16 00:06:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Gideon
Call me crazy, but I'm kinda getting the impression that CCP Devs really hate Armor.

Like... really... hate... armor...

ASB In General - Fit as many as you want, we don't give a crap. Oh, and while they're loaded with charges, they are Capless. So use 2-3 and offset the reloads for RIDICULOUS PERMATANK!!!1!1!one!

Small ASB - 8x Cap 25s = 3200 ISK to load.
Medium ASB - 8x Cap 50s = 8000 ISK
Large ASB - 8x Cap 150s = 24,800 ISK
XL ASB - 8x Cap 400 = 32,000 ISK

AAB In General - Only fit 1 at a time. Sorry, you're not cool like Shields. Oh, and regardless of charges, you still burn Cap. Sucks if you get neuted, but you knew that anyway.

Small AAB - 8x Nanite Paste = 240,000 ISK (considering each Paste costs as much as a single reload on an XL ASB)
Medium AAB - 32x Nanite Paste = 960,000 ISK
Large AAB - 64x Nanite Paste = 1,920,000 ISK (2 MILLION ISK per reload)
XL AAB... oh wait, doesn't exist.

First off, whose idea was it to burn Paste? A rather rare and valuable Farmville Planetary Interaction commodity.

Then add in the continued Cap draw. Justified as "we don't want armor tanking to be like shields"

And tack on "limited to one" just for extra oomph. Justified as "we saw how powerful that made ASBs, and rather than go fix ASB, we're going to pre-nerf AABs"
Whitehound
#2 - 2013-02-16 00:14:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
They are also removing the passive resists on all hardeners (shield + armor). This means all tanks will become more sensitive to cap warfare.

The AAR seems to require only little extra cargo space for its nanites and most of the cargo space can still be used for cap charges to feed a cap booster.

The ASB will have to share cap charges with a cap booster and cargo space becomes a significant factor.

It appears the AAR was not implemented as a 1:1 counter to the ASB, but rather is the more enduring version of it.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-02-16 00:20:02 UTC
You must be the only person who uses T1 cap charges in a large or XL ASB.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#4 - 2013-02-16 00:31:36 UTC
Nope dev's don't hate armour.

They deffinately don't want to make arour tanking the same a shield tanking that is all.

You are comparing car to motorbikes because they bothe have engines and wheels and operate on the road. They are different and opperate differently yet both do a similar job (get you from A to B)

Get over it allready.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2013-02-16 01:19:54 UTC
Forget paste cost. Compared to XL ASB, LAAR repairs less, needs more grid, and oh yeah, consumes cap. It consumes cap, lol. What's the point of this again?

Of course, it's unfair to compare XL to L, after all, one fits better. I like how Winmatar BCs can easily fit XL ASB with plenty of room to spare, using no cap, while Myrm is stuck with medium sized AARs because larges don't fit, and proceeds to cap itself out.Lol

Hey, anyone remember the Reactive Hardner? It's gonna have company.Lol
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#6 - 2013-02-16 01:53:39 UTC
I'm thinking of taking up full-time shield tanking. It's not because I think shield tanking is all that much better, it is purely so I can no longer be associated by these whiney over-entitled armour tankers. I mean good god people, can't you just imagine the same thread as a tantrum from a 3 year old, complete with stamping of feet and screaming?

Grow up.
Marcus Gideon
Triglavian Assembly
#7 - 2013-02-16 02:04:17 UTC
Over-entitled, what?

Shields have passive regen.
Shields have active omni resist mods.
Shields leave plenty of space for damage mods.

Oh, and more on topic... Shields can throw as many ASB as they want on a ship, chain the reloads, and tank forever...

Yeah, Armor guys are living it up...
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#8 - 2013-02-16 02:08:50 UTC
I love my armour incursus and LOL in local as my targets whine consistantly about thow they can't break my tank!!

And I only use a single repper and no cap boost!

Armour is fine and getting better! If you don't know how to do it properly then go find out rather than whinging on the forums!

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#9 - 2013-02-16 02:17:39 UTC
Marcus Gideon wrote:
Over-entitled, what?

Shields have passive regen. - Armour has bigger buffer
Shields have active omni resist mods. - Armour has passive omni-resist mods.
Shields leave plenty of space for damage mods. - Armour leaves plenty of room for EWAR.

Oh, and more on topic... Shields can throw as many ASB as they want on a ship, chain the reloads, and tank forever... - Assuming by 'forever' you mean until they run out of cap charges

Yeah, Armor guys are living it up...


I said you're whiney over-entitled armour tankers. I also compared you to a 3 year old throwing a tantrum. My other responses in bold.
Inkarr Hashur
Skyline Federation
#10 - 2013-02-16 06:28:51 UTC
My one and only issue with the new Ancillary Armor Reppers is they will massively drive up demand for what is currently a somewhat uncommonly traded commodity. Nanite, which is already somewhat expensive, is going to become much more so very soon.
sabre906
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-02-16 07:07:07 UTC
Inkarr Hashur wrote:
My one and only issue with the new Ancillary Armor Reppers is they will massively drive up demand for what is currently a somewhat uncommonly traded commodity. Nanite, which is already somewhat expensive, is going to become much more so very soon.


You're assuming ppl will start using AARs. Why?Roll
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#12 - 2013-02-16 07:27:09 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Inkarr Hashur wrote:
My one and only issue with the new Ancillary Armor Reppers is they will massively drive up demand for what is currently a somewhat uncommonly traded commodity. Nanite, which is already somewhat expensive, is going to become much more so very soon.


You're assuming ppl will start using AARs. Why?Roll

Because some people still use reps, and an AAR reps ~67% better than a T2 repper, even if for just 30-60 seconds?
To mare
Advanced Technology
#13 - 2013-02-16 07:27:49 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Inkarr Hashur wrote:
My one and only issue with the new Ancillary Armor Reppers is they will massively drive up demand for what is currently a somewhat uncommonly traded commodity. Nanite, which is already somewhat expensive, is going to become much more so very soon.


You're assuming ppl will start using AARs. Why?Roll

because they are damn good especially with the other changes made to rigs and fitting requirements, still dont see the problem of seeing nanite paste price going to the roof
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#14 - 2013-02-16 07:45:48 UTC
nanite paste is expensive because the demand isn't high enough to push production.

They have already stated that they may look at the requirements to make it so chill and see what happens when there is a higher demand for it.


Higher demand
Initial higher prices
Higher manufacturing to follow demand/prices
prices will stablise to match supply demand curve.

How markets work!

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.
Elena Thiesant
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2013-02-16 08:23:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Elena Thiesant
Marcus Gideon wrote:
First off, whose idea was it to burn Paste? A rather rare and valuable [strike]Farmville[/strike] Planetary Interaction commodity.


Several players who commented in the thread in F&I. The initial design of the AAR (which can be seen in the quote in https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2499731#post2499731) used cap charges. Several players asked that the charge be changed to nantite paste.

Starting here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2499345#post2499345
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#16 - 2013-02-16 09:28:41 UTC
I do think that AARs will be used less than ASBs were when they were first deployed...

But I think they will be an ancillary module rather than a primary. I envisage armour ships which normally run dual rep (or triple rep) set-ups loading a cap booster (because rep, blasters and lasers...) a T2 rep (or two) and then their AAR. Most of the time they'll run on the chargeless, efficient, T2 rep but when that isn't enough then the AAR kicks in and gives them three times the rep they had.

I'm imagining quad rep Myrms (effectively), triple rep Brutix and Hyperions... Fortunately I'm not imagining dual rep heavy plated Abaddons - that would just be painful...
chris elliot
Treasury Department
Plug N Play
#17 - 2013-02-16 09:47:28 UTC
Paikis wrote:
I'm thinking of taking up full-time shield tanking. It's not because I think shield tanking is all that much better, it is purely so I can no longer be associated by these whiney over-entitled armour tankers. I mean good god people, can't you just imagine the same thread as a tantrum from a 3 year old, complete with stamping of feet and screaming?

Grow up.



Dude, its ships and modules. 99% of the drivel in here is people stamping their feet and screaming.
Whitehound
#18 - 2013-02-16 10:06:05 UTC
sabre906 wrote:
Inkarr Hashur wrote:
My one and only issue with the new Ancillary Armor Reppers is they will massively drive up demand for what is currently a somewhat uncommonly traded commodity. Nanite, which is already somewhat expensive, is going to become much more so very soon.


You're assuming ppl will start using AARs. Why?Roll

Why should anyone tell you?! Lol

Shield tankers cannot fit modules like tracking disruptors, sensor dampeners and ECM jammers or just an ECCM. A single tracking disruptor with range disruption script reduces the DPS of projectile weapons by half! What is there left to tank?! To counter it do you need 2 TEs in the lows for what an armor tanker only needs a single mid-slot. Maybe you want us to tank your tears when a set of ECM drones are jamming you again... So the ASB needs to be better, because otherwise you could not fit MWD, web+scram, cap booster and still have a tank.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#19 - 2013-02-16 12:45:12 UTC
Taoist Dragon wrote:
I love my armour incursus and LOL in local as my targets whine consistantly about thow they can't break my tank!!


You show an example of what a terrible balance is, you know the 10% is getting a nerf stick to 7.5%.

And your example doesn't prove on anything armor tanking is balanced, very far from there, the only armor tanking that got a real good buff is buffer tanking = aka Amarr.

1v1 fights and lol duels incoming got buff? -hell yeah, awesome...

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2013-02-16 12:59:18 UTC
OP is forgetting that active tanking armour rigs are being changed by trading off speed penalty for repper's grid penalty, and armour reppers are getting their grid usage dropped to compensate.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
123Next pageLast page