These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

T2 reactive hardener

Author
Solutio Letum
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2013-08-14 23:04:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Solutio Letum
TL;DR:
Reactive hardeners have known bugs ans get stuck.
Fix it or put a module better but more expansive in fitting & skills that can do it.

_____

Ok so first off, lets start to why the Reactive hardener hardener does not work really well, now maybe it's a bug, but after this long i am sure its not, its a feature to not make it over powered.

So the issue is that the Meta 1 reactive only flips damage not being shot anymore to put it into damage that is being shot, if lets say, you had a 20 40 00 00 resistance shifted, and that there was more incoming damage coming from EM out of no where, its stuck you cant have more EM damage has long has the Thermal damage keeps coming.
If you are for example fighting against blaster ships, and just turned it on, the damage should be set, 15 15 15 15, up to 00 30 30 00, this means after this 30/30 they cant put more damage in thermal or kinetic.

Thats not the worst i had my guardian out testing it, i had put extra explosive resistance to test this and started shooting explosive and thermal at the same time, somehow it got stuck under 00 06 00 54, giving me a useless resistance of 50 73 84 96?
I tried forcing it out of this stuck by shooting 75% and 25% explosive instead of 50/50, but no it was stuck.

A way to avoid this is to train the skill up to V so you have the shortest cycle possible, that means you'll get more polution down there and will be able to get little 1 - 2 % on your kinetic and EM, that means they can be switched from EX to EM or/& KI to TH in my case.

So my idea would be a module that would not need a third resistance to be applied, instead it switch's with only 2 resistance. Thats about it. Altho it requires more cap and + 10~ cpu. and requires the skill for the module to be trained to V (or IV what ever you guys wants)

Sing in the post for the fix or adding a module that requires a bit more SP and fitting space.(you only have to agree with the switching not the idea of making it T2 even. Tell us if you think its a fix or an upgrade)
Luc Chastot
#2 - 2013-08-14 23:24:24 UTC
Just remove the module, CCP will never fix it.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#3 - 2013-08-15 02:24:39 UTC
I like them, but I don't really PvP much. They make it a bit easier when dealing with missions with mixed types and such.

Perhaps a more useful approach could be weapon specific hardeners.

Mirrored Plating-- For defense against Lasers, 35% EM/Therm resist.
Semi-fluidic insulation- For Hybrid Defense, 35% Kin/Therm
Shock-Absorbent Substrate- For Projectile Weapons, 35% EXP/Kin resist
Whitehound
#4 - 2013-08-15 06:02:59 UTC
It is a sloppy implementation, probably focused too much on doing a minimal job and then ended up being a goofy module. Straight

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Cade Windstalker
#5 - 2013-08-15 07:36:41 UTC
So, I just tested this and I think whatever you used to test is a bit off. Had someone shoot me with half kin, half therm, and it shifted nicely to 30/30. Then had him shoot me from there to 4 therm, 1 kin, 1 therm and the resists stabilized at 24 EM 36 Therm.
Whitehound
#6 - 2013-08-15 08:36:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Cade Windstalker wrote:
So, I just tested this and I think whatever you used to test is a bit off. Had someone shoot me with half kin, half therm, and it shifted nicely to 30/30. Then had him shoot me from there to 4 therm, 1 kin, 1 therm and the resists stabilized at 24 EM 36 Therm.

So you shot it with kinetic damage and it stabilized on EM and thermal, and you cannot see anything wrong with it?!? The least you should recognize is that you have made a mistake and that it should have build up a kinetic resistance and not an EM resistance. Roll

Anyhow, it does not matter if you shoot it with half kinetic and half thermal damage, but it looks at the damage after resistances. When you then have 65%/35% thermal/kinetic resistance from other modules on your ship and shoot with 50%/50% thermal/kinetic at it then the reactive hardener should not shift into a 30%/30% pattern.

In comparison, an EANM II gives you 25% on all resistances without needing any cap or time to adjust first. A 30%/30% pattern is hardly worth the wait or the cap.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Cade Windstalker
#7 - 2013-08-15 08:54:43 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
So, I just tested this and I think whatever you used to test is a bit off. Had someone shoot me with half kin, half therm, and it shifted nicely to 30/30. Then had him shoot me from there to 4 therm, 1 kin, 1 therm and the resists stabilized at 24 EM 36 Therm.

So you shot it with kinetic damage and it stabilized on EM and thermal, and you cannot see anything wrong with it?!? The least you should recognize is that you have made a mistake and that it should have build up a kinetic resistance and not an EM resistance. Roll

Anyhow, it does not matter if you shoot it with half kinetic and half thermal damage, but it looks at the damage after resistances. When you then have 65%/35% thermal/kinetic resistance from other modules on your ship and shoot with 50%/50% thermal/kinetic at it then the reactive hardener should not shift into a 30%/30% pattern.

In comparison, an EANM II gives you 25% on all resistances without needing any cap or time to adjust first. A 30%/30% pattern is hardly worth the wait or the cap.


Maybe I wasn't clear, it started with Kin/Therm and ended with EM/Therm but no kinetic. It started with being shot by Kin/Therm and ended with being shot by 4 EM, 1 kin, 1 therm.

I should probably also mention that I was using a Deimos for the test.

Overall, no, I don't really have a problem with this. As near as I can tell it moved in a way that maximized my resist profile against the incoming damage.

The point of the Reactive Hardener isn't to be flat better than an EANM it's to be situationally more useful, such as against an enemy who can swap damage types or when you aren't sure what you're going to be tanking but know it's going to be a lot of damage in one place.

I actually had a friend of mine show me a screen shot of a Reactive Hardener that was almost maxed out on, I think Thermal with a little kinetic. He was in a Bhaalgorn being shot by a Nagalfar and wouldn't have done as well with an EANM.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#8 - 2013-08-15 09:03:27 UTC
EANM II, DCU II, RAH, MAAR, four slot active armor tank of win.

Replacing RAH here with EANM wouldn't give you 25%, and it never gives you 60%, which is godmode against missile tards.

Yes, there are quirks with the module, but that's something Fozzie and Rise can't fix so don't hold your breath, no actual coding devs work on EVE anymore.

.

Cade Windstalker
#9 - 2013-08-15 09:40:12 UTC
Roime wrote:
Yes, there are quirks with the module, but that's something Fozzie and Rise can't fix so don't hold your breath, no actual coding devs work on EVE anymore.


Where the crap did you get this little gem of factual inaccuracy from? xD
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#10 - 2013-08-15 12:48:32 UTC
I've never had a problem with the RAH. In my experience, it always works just like it says in the description. So... to the best of my knowledge it's not broken and there's no need for a T2 version.

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.

Solutio Letum
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-08-15 15:04:24 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
So, I just tested this and I think whatever you used to test is a bit off. Had someone shoot me with half kin, half therm, and it shifted nicely to 30/30. Then had him shoot me from there to 4 therm, 1 kin, 1 therm and the resists stabilized at 24 EM 36 Therm.

So you shot it with kinetic damage and it stabilized on EM and thermal, and you cannot see anything wrong with it?!? The least you should recognize is that you have made a mistake and that it should have build up a kinetic resistance and not an EM resistance. Roll

Anyhow, it does not matter if you shoot it with half kinetic and half thermal damage, but it looks at the damage after resistances. When you then have 65%/35% thermal/kinetic resistance from other modules on your ship and shoot with 50%/50% thermal/kinetic at it then the reactive hardener should not shift into a 30%/30% pattern.

In comparison, an EANM II gives you 25% on all resistances without needing any cap or time to adjust first. A 30%/30% pattern is hardly worth the wait or the cap.


Maybe I wasn't clear, it started with Kin/Therm and ended with EM/Therm but no kinetic. It started with being shot by Kin/Therm and ended with being shot by 4 EM, 1 kin, 1 therm.

I should probably also mention that I was using a Deimos for the test.

Overall, no, I don't really have a problem with this. As near as I can tell it moved in a way that maximized my resist profile against the incoming damage.

The point of the Reactive Hardener isn't to be flat better than an EANM it's to be situationally more useful, such as against an enemy who can swap damage types or when you aren't sure what you're going to be tanking but know it's going to be a lot of damage in one place.

I actually had a friend of mine show me a screen shot of a Reactive Hardener that was almost maxed out on, I think Thermal with a little kinetic. He was in a Bhaalgorn being shot by a Nagalfar and wouldn't have done as well with an EANM.



No you don't under ok? let me explain you in another way quickly, first off you need use weapons who do the same amount of damage but can switch resistance, used missiles on a unbonused ship, ok so lets start here, lets say you shoot out only EM at the start of them fight, for 20 seconds the RAH will switch up to 60% or close EM resistance, then you switch leaving behind one missile shooting EM meaning its gonna hold the EM resistance up, then you shoot at the EX resistance being the lowest one of the ship, and the module being stupid, will not raise the Explosive resistance being lowest because it needs a third resistance to be shot at.

Its not there to replace ENM i agree, but at less make it so it does what hes description says.
Its supposed to switch damage by whats shooting at you, not be half effective at doing it, on paper i think giving a 15 15 15 15, on a module without even increasing hull, or shield like damage control makes AND making sure you cant fit more then one is perfectly balance if it worked.
In allot of cases you are just hiding your holes instead of increasing over all resistance, ENM increases the over all resistance.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#12 - 2013-08-15 15:51:59 UTC
you know you can turn if off and back on to reset it at 15/15/15/15 right? not hard to do if the ships attacking you suddenly change, or you kill that one ship hitting you with the big explosive damage, keeping your resists to the blasters down.
Solutio Letum
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2013-08-15 15:59:44 UTC
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
you know you can turn if off and back on to reset it at 15/15/15/15 right? not hard to do if the ships attacking you suddenly change, or you kill that one ship hitting you with the big explosive damage, keeping your resists to the blasters down.


Then its gonna get stuck in 30 30 instead
PavlikX
Scan Stakan
HOLD MY PROBS
#14 - 2013-08-15 17:17:32 UTC  |  Edited by: PavlikX
Not only T2 variant needed. Meta1-4, Meta8, Meta 10-14
Each meta level till 4th decreases cap usage, meta 5 (t2) gives 16% to each resist, faction gives 16% and decreased cap usage, ded space 17% or something similar