These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey 1.1] Local Armor and Shield repair module changes

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#181 - 2013-08-02 05:30:55 UTC
Roime wrote:
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
Gallente ships are tipically close range brawling fits that required MWD to get in range.

Armor Reppers are CAP intensive

MWD Nerfs total cap capacity, thus cap recharge rate.

Gallente ships are the only ships to get an armor repper bonus (Incursus, BC, Command Ships and Hyperion)


Am I the only one that sees the problem?



Yes, you are. Rest of us fit cap boosters.

So it is fine that the "sustained" tanking system requires 3 modules and 2 rigs to do what Burst tanking can do with 2 modules and 2 rigs?

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#182 - 2013-08-02 05:43:11 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Roime wrote:
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
Gallente ships are tipically close range brawling fits that required MWD to get in range.

Armor Reppers are CAP intensive

MWD Nerfs total cap capacity, thus cap recharge rate.

Gallente ships are the only ships to get an armor repper bonus (Incursus, BC, Command Ships and Hyperion)


Am I the only one that sees the problem?



Yes, you are. Rest of us fit cap boosters.

So it is fine that the "sustained" tanking system requires 3 modules and 2 rigs to do what Burst tanking can do with 2 modules and 2 rigs?


Um, yes. Sustained tanking is, well, sustained whereas burst runs out pretty fast. Sustained should be harder to fit and/or run.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#183 - 2013-08-02 05:51:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Omnathious Deninard
Zappity wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Roime wrote:
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
Gallente ships are tipically close range brawling fits that required MWD to get in range.

Armor Reppers are CAP intensive

MWD Nerfs total cap capacity, thus cap recharge rate.

Gallente ships are the only ships to get an armor repper bonus (Incursus, BC, Command Ships and Hyperion)


Am I the only one that sees the problem?



Yes, you are. Rest of us fit cap boosters.

So it is fine that the "sustained" tanking system requires 3 modules and 2 rigs to do what Burst tanking can do with 2 modules and 2 rigs?


Um, yes. Sustained tanking is, well, sustained whereas burst runs out pretty fast. Sustained should be harder to fit and/or run.

Shield boosting will sustain longer than armor repairing in this case.
Edit:

Shield Booster
1 X-Large Shield Booster II
1 Shield Boost Amplifier II
1 Core Defense Operational Solidifier I
1 Core Defense Operational Safeguard I
Will rep 816HP in 4.25s for 342GJ

Armor Repair
2 Large Armor Repairer II
1 Nanobot Accelerator
1 Auxiliary Nano Pump
Will rep 1840HP in 9.562s for 800GJ

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Job Valador
Professional Amateurs
#184 - 2013-08-02 06:52:38 UTC
I want your children fozzie

"The stone exhibited a profound lack of movement."
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#185 - 2013-08-02 07:48:48 UTC
as i have posted many times before:

armor needs to be changed to a 3 second cycle time. with levels, change the amount repped.
drop the repped amount and cap drain per cycle, but speed it up.

we dont need more rep here or there, just balance them out so armor doesnt have to wait 15 seconds to get their armor.
its not balanced that shield gets theirs immediately and then again every 3 seconds and we have to wait so long.

i dont care if u wanna leave it at the end of the cycle, but it needs to cycle quicker.
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#186 - 2013-08-02 08:20:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
I am concerned about the impact of this change on frigates - buffer-tanking isn't in a good place as is (unless you run with a HG Slave set) and this change will only make matters worse.

Where is the problem that you are trying to fix by giving small armor repairers a 15% boost? Is the dual-rep Incursus, Vengeance, ... too weak as is or are you just trying to make these ships unkillable? Do you want active tank to be the only option on brawling frigates?

edit: Single MSE buffer-tanked frigates are already simply not viable. In a 400mm plated frigate with slave set I can barely outlast dual ASB setups, without slave set I would lose such fights 7 times out of 10. Contrary to public belief the vast majority of FW players does not have Tengu or Legion at hand. Compensating for a nerf to fleet boosters by giving an increase to all active reps will shift the balance of power even further away from buffer setups. Go out and actually try frigate pvp - the majority of enemies will already be active tanked and most of the rest run entirely tankless setups (kiting destroyers, dampening condors, ...). Try flying a buffer-tanked frigate without 3b in implants and report the results, there's a reason why almost nobody is flying buffer tank as is.

.
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#187 - 2013-08-02 08:27:50 UTC
Dear Foz et all,

Please break the Mindset that Rep bonuses have to be race specific. Rep bonuses, while giving a nice boost to very few specific situations/roles, take away from the general usage of the ship they're plastered to. There are a multitude of problems associated with a rep bonus ship.

-The Rep bonus is a bonus to a utility module. To utilize the bonus you have to give up a Mid(shield) or low(armor) slot.
-The Bonused Rep module is not strong enough alone to be effective. This means you have to dedicate additional slots in the same rack to gain viability.
-The additional slots required to gain viability compete with other modules that increase your effectiveness. Armor Rep competes with Weapon/Hull/Prop Upgrades. Shield Boost competes with Propulsion/Tackle/Ewar for slots. Both of them require capacitor upgrades that can compete with either mid, low or rig slots.
-The Rep bonus steers your ship's fitting towards a specific tanking type.
-The Rep bonus ships are less effective for Logistic supported Fleets.
-Because of the previous statement, some races lack viable ship classes to compose a fleet with completely. (i.e. Gallante combat BCs)

To effectively utilize a Rep Bonus a ship must give up too much of it's Utility. Not utilizing the Bonus Wastes basically half the time you spent training your ship skill. Gallente and Minmatar are plagued with these problem ships.

Either spread rep bonuses and resist bonuses around throughout the different race ships or completely replace it with something else. Even from a realism perspective it doesn't make sense. Gallente and Minmatar are gimped in Large fleet battles vs the Caldari and Amarr because Caldari and Amarr have much better Fleet comp ships.

Resist bonuses stand alone perfectly effective. A resist bonus will passively increase local and remote rep effectiveness. You can't unfit a resist bonus.
Rep bonuses require supplement. A rep bonus will not affect any other attribute/module. They require additional resist to function properly as well as capacitor modules/rigs. You can unfit a rep bonus and lose 50% of why you trained your ship skill beyond level 1.

There is no Balance for Rep VS Resist. There is no Fix for Rep vs Resist. Change them or spread them out between the races. I personally believe in Rig bonuses instead of module bonuses as i mentioned here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=262880&find=unread Rigs are already very well balanced and functional. They would require seemingly minimal effort to prime for a change like this.

You guys are already in this mindset.
CCP Fozzie wrote:

All the command ships have two unbonused highslots that can be used for two gang links, or as general utility highslots. The tension between the two free highslots and the three simultaneous link role bonus is intentional, giving people options to make tradeoffs.

All ships have 2 or 3 rig slots. If you bonus 2 or 3 rig lines (armor/shield/hybrids/missiles/etc) per ship instead of just the specific modules with specific bonuses, then there's your "giving people options to make tradeoffs."
Shpenat
Ironman Inc.
Transgress
#188 - 2013-08-02 08:52:26 UTC
I am bit concerned about the reduction of Armored Warfare Link - Damage Control effectiveness reduction as it is not being projected into the local repper changes. This module actually helped a lot be be cap stable.

Will you consider factoring reduction of cap usage into the modules a well.
(I may suggest 0% for small, 5% for medium and 10% for large repair modules capacitor reduction)
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#189 - 2013-08-02 09:46:11 UTC
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
Gallente ships are the only ships to get an armor repper bonus (Incursus, BC, Command Ships and Hyperion)


Paladin

Note that this ship was also designed to use most cap intensive weapons: Tachs.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#190 - 2013-08-02 10:46:00 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Roime wrote:
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
Gallente ships are tipically close range brawling fits that required MWD to get in range.

Armor Reppers are CAP intensive

MWD Nerfs total cap capacity, thus cap recharge rate.

Gallente ships are the only ships to get an armor repper bonus (Incursus, BC, Command Ships and Hyperion)


Am I the only one that sees the problem?



Yes, you are. Rest of us fit cap boosters.

So it is fine that the "sustained" tanking system requires 3 modules and 2 rigs to do what Burst tanking can do with 2 modules and 2 rigs?


Yeah, more slots = more tank.

I've been very vocally supporting armour tank fixes, and tbh this buff addresses the main issue, and does it in style. RAH+MAAR fits are going to be viable, and it's fantastic for solo and small gang. Same for shield boosters, this balancing act quite simply provides us with more options.

I'm very satisfied with the HAC 2nd version, CS and link changes and look forward to more good fights.

.
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#191 - 2013-08-02 11:08:37 UTC
ofukyes.
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#192 - 2013-08-02 11:15:14 UTC
Local armor reps need more rep amount, otherwise +1 internets for Fozzie.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#193 - 2013-08-02 11:20:17 UTC
Overall these are good changes, but I feel a bit meh about including AAR and not ASB. Imo there is too much hype around how ASB are overpowered or anything, while in reality using them is both dangerous (ASB continuing without charges I'm talking to you !) and cargohold omfgwtf consuming. Also, they are only slightly better than shield extenders, for a noticeable difference in CPU/PW usage.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

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

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#194 - 2013-08-02 11:26:04 UTC
Altrue wrote:
Overall these are good changes, but I feel a bit meh about including AAR and not ASB. Imo there is too much hype around how ASB are overpowered or anything, while in reality using them is both dangerous (ASB continuing without charges I'm talking to you !) and cargohold omfgwtf consuming. Also, they are only slightly better than shield extenders, for a noticeable difference in CPU/PW usage.


Look at it this way:

- You can only fit one AAR
- You can fit as many ASBs as you like
Perihelion Olenard
#195 - 2013-08-02 11:26:12 UTC
Good to see that active armor tanking may be reliable again, if we don't come across one of the so many people with neuts.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#196 - 2013-08-02 11:28:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Vera Algaert wrote:
I am concerned about the impact of this change on frigates - buffer-tanking isn't in a good place as is (unless you run with a HG Slave set) and this change will only make matters worse.

Where is the problem that you are trying to fix by giving small armor repairers a 15% boost? Is the dual-rep Incursus, Vengeance, ... too weak as is or are you just trying to make these ships unkillable? Do you want active tank to be the only option on brawling frigates?

edit: Single MSE buffer-tanked frigates are already simply not viable. In a 400mm plated frigate with slave set I can barely outlast dual ASB setups, without slave set I would lose such fights 7 times out of 10. Contrary to public belief the vast majority of FW players does not have Tengu or Legion at hand. Compensating for a nerf to fleet boosters by giving an increase to all active reps will shift the balance of power even further away from buffer setups.



Given that legion links makes armor rep mods = god mode buffing the armor reps even more is a poor choice. Why put even more distance between those with ogbs and those without?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Mr Doctor
Star Nation
Goonswarm Federation
#197 - 2013-08-02 11:36:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Doctor
ASBs need to be limited to 1 per ship, a buff for them is insane and stupid.

edit: ok..... I was replying to someone pages back Lol
IkeIV
Doomheim
#198 - 2013-08-02 11:39:00 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Sabrina Scatterbrain wrote:
CCP once again fixing what is not broken. How about ya'll devote all resources to recoding the entire game into something other than single threaded hell?


You don't want me rewriting the server code.



If that's what it would take hell yeah Attention

It's been said above me few times , anyway WTS Thanatos , you just shipped it to hell it was already half dead but now it's gonna be a ratting ship or a 5 th choice ship Cry
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#199 - 2013-08-02 11:46:57 UTC
This change is smart and appropriate. I do wonder why Deadspace/Officer boosters aren't being buffed a little bit though to bring them in line with cost/efficiency? Is there any reason I've overlooked as to why they shouldn't be?
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#200 - 2013-08-02 11:51:22 UTC
Buhhdust Princess wrote:
This change is smart and appropriate. I do wonder why Deadspace/Officer boosters aren't being buffed a little bit though to bring them in line with cost/efficiency? Is there any reason I've overlooked as to why they shouldn't be?


Gist C/B/A-Types.