These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

armor plates, a different approach.

Author
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2011-11-12 08:36:25 UTC
Armor plates are used on ships that have heavy cap use. Thus, it shouldn't hurt the weapon system it is normally paired with. Thus my idea keeps the balance of armor plates making your ship thicker while keeping a steep penalty. The goal is simple find a drawback that doesn't hurt using blasters or lasers, that still keeps the feeling of 2nd guessing if you should fit one more plate.

Armor plates not adding mass

Armor plates don't need to add mass. Yeah it doesn't make sense but who cares. They should however reduce agility extremely. If you can make it full speed in a straight line but go slower when turning, how cares, awesome. This would have the side benefit of booster blasters as the slower you orbit the better your tracking.

Remove the mass penalty . or reduce it by 90% and increase the agility draw back by a bit.

Armor plates make you more obvious

lets face it, slapping armor plate on your hull is not very ninja like. This makes it much easier to figure out where you are. It also makes you easier to scan and to lock down. Now i feel having armor plates increase sig radius leads to the same issue as mass increase. They can lock you faster than who cares if your faster. So instead armor plates stop your senors from being as effective. Senor strength is decreased by 10% across the board no matter what size you equip.

This adds an element of fitting ECM to counter the new super fast buffer blaster ships and long range run away laser ships.

This doesn't stop blaster boats from being useful in normal situations, it jut adds a counter other than "haha I have autcannons"

Armor plates forever

A new option to expel armor plates would be awesome. You get in lase and jammed, so what do you do? the hell with it! you blasts those ******* plates off the port bow! this allows you to change to a speed tank when close, or to get back your lock. This last part is more just for fun.


Anyways hopefully this gets a lot of support and CCP will hear about it!

if not tell me why I'm a dumbass that shouldn't post ideas and I will take it into account so my future posts don't overlook any obvious balance issues.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Solo Player
#2 - 2011-11-12 09:35:23 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
Yeah it doesn't make sense but who cares.


Some of us do. And I don't see the benefit of reducing plausibility that way.

Agreed on sig radius, though, and I really like the expel armor bit.
Goose99
#3 - 2011-11-12 16:34:42 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
it shouldn't hurt the weapon system it is normally paired with


^That's the problem. It should. That's why it's called a "drawback."
Lykouleon
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#4 - 2011-11-12 18:47:40 UTC
Armor plates adding mass is logical since...they're heavy.

Increased sig radius doesn't make sense since you're simply reinforcing the internal structure of the ship, not magically gluing more thingymabobs and doohickies to the external structure. From a practical standpoint, even if you were gluing on additional plates, the sig radius change would be so minimal that it wouldn't be worth coding in.

And to turn off armor plates, there's a simple function called "Offline Module" already implemented in the game. Though why you'd ever consider doing that is beyond me.

Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER so I can hit them with my sword

Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
#5 - 2011-11-13 15:01:08 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
Yeah it doesn't make sense but who cares


You don't make sense, and we care.

Give me your stuff.

Biomass queue is over Arrow

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||

MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2011-11-13 18:54:19 UTC
Jack Carrigan wrote:
MotherMoon wrote:
Yeah it doesn't make sense but who cares


You don't make sense, and we care.

Give me your stuff.

Biomass queue is over Arrow




lol how doesn't it make sense?

the mass increase is makign them boost blasters.

However blasters and armor tanking don't work togetehr.

So istead of mass, it makes you easier to jam. the more plates the easier it is for ECM to work on you.


I know it's not perfect, but i don't think my idea doesn't make sense or is without reason behind it.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Lykouleon
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#7 - 2011-11-13 20:00:43 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
However blasters and armor tanking don't work togetehr.


Yes, they do. It just requires you to think a different way and fly for armor tanking blaster boats rather than for something else.

Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER so I can hit them with my sword

MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2011-11-13 20:09:21 UTC
Lykouleon wrote:
MotherMoon wrote:
However blasters and armor tanking don't work togetehr.


Yes, they do. It just requires you to think a different way and fly for armor tanking blaster boats rather than for something else.


That seems to be the opposite of the test forums opinion. You can't close range in an armor tanked blaster boat. You move far too slow. In the time you get to them your blaster dps isn't enough to catch up with all the damage you took, even flying in at an angle to keep your transversal up.

If you fly in a straight line to close range faster, you'll take every single hit.

Either way the mass increase should at least be lowers by 30%.

My op might not be the solution. it might even be a bad idea. but don't try to sit there and say that blaster boats don't have issues. Also I should clearfly that blaster frigates are pretty much bomb. cruisers are questionable but with changes in winter are useful. But blaster fitted battleship don't need to lose 300m/s while MWD because they have a tank fit.



I personaly am not for the huge dps increase most player seems to want. I think that's pushing it too far for the ships that CAN fit blasters and active tank without cap issues.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Smiling Menace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2011-11-14 10:21:17 UTC
Blasters and blaster ships in general do leave a lot to be desired if you are flying solo (flying solo in a MMO? Don't you have any friends??).

If you are in a small gang or a fleet with fast tackle to get you a close warp in, blasters will melt the face off anything out there as they stand. After the patch, heaven help you if any blaster ship lands on you at 0m.

I would like to see a buff to blasters and a little love for the Gallente ships in general but not to the extent they become an IWINEVE button.

Having blasters do insane damage should and must come at a cost. Lack of speed and agility is that cost.

Learn to use your ships to their advantage and you will be fine.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2011-11-14 12:04:22 UTC
also fix caldari sig radius