Player Features and Ideas Discussion

We have passive tanking.
We have active tanking.
We have active resistance mods.
We have passive resistance mods.
We have generic damage controls, which combine multiple resistance effects.
We have shield extenders and armor plates.

We have a mess.

What if we took a different approach, one that enabled a hybridized approach to tanking?

A ship has one big tank, but no specific resistance bonuses.
The ship counters damage with an active repair module, that is designed for either specific damage type repair, (MOST efficient), or multiple type repair, (LEAST efficient, but saves slots).

Example: Rather than have a shield mod that gives an additional 35% resistance to EM damage, equip a shield repper that restores normal damage plus 35% additional EM damage, bonus to be computed against EM damage before considering other damage to maximize effect.
(The bonus gets priority to be applied, in the event multiple damage types are present)

These reppers would cost 1/2 the PG and CPU, as well as only using half the capacitor of a regular repper module.
Want to cover all damage types? You want 4 reppers, one for each.

An omni repper could be a fallback solution for some players, offering a 10% bonus to each damage type instead.

POINT of Note: These would not stack with each other, or any resistance modules outside of possibly a damage control.
This eliminates the concept of 4 omni reppers being more effective than 1 of each type.

What questions or points can be asked?

Assumptions regarding difficulty in coding are not reasonable considerations.
We cannot know what is or is not difficult, so assuming this is beyond reason is outside our ability to know.

To counter, we already track three areas of damage, as well as 4 types each having different resistance levels, on each ship.

Shields / Armor / Hull, each have different resist figures for the 4 damage types.
Since we KNOW that the number is used already to compute the damage being applied, having it remain as being defined rather than a single figure is not a great leap.

But then, we are not considering coding difficulty here.

What you are suggesting is to make things infinitely more complicated than they are now. So, no.

Hi Luc, had to like your post, you present interesting points.

No, not infinitely. It actually simplifies things on many levels.

Rather than a shield repper and shield resist mods / shield extenders plus shield resist mods
(Equivalent for armor sets as needed)

You equip one set of mods.

It actually doesn't require exclusive game presence, it simply becomes a separate fitting philosophy.
Right now we have PvP fit ships, and PvE fit ships.
Trying to do one task with the fitting meant for the other is awkward, if not pointless, in many circumstances.

I want that missioning / ratting ship to have a realistic chance if it is attacked.
On the flip side, if I have buddies doing ratting while I mine, I want them to be in a solid fit for PvP if that should be unexpectedly available.

And with hostiles less and less certain HOW someone else fit their ship, they can either risk it or run.

As to logi, the reppers for remote use would need to be discounted against existing resistance bonuses, or they would be stacked.
If they expected logi, then they are more likely to fit a passive tank with resists, meaning the logi should probably stick to normal reppers. The bonuses that the logi get would be reduced for aspected damage reppers, I would expect, to balance them.

They just fix the damage, yes and no.

Different damage has different effects.
Explosive damage tends to stretch and fragment an object. The repper for it has advanced routines to compensate.
Thermal damage tends to bake and melt objects. The repper for this... etc etc...

The idea is, just like the resistance mods are good against specific types just to prevent damage, these reppers are good at undoing the damage.
The reason they would not stack, is that the resistance mods effectively neutralize the unique qualities of the damage to a more generic form.
(The thermal was not baked and melted, but it still was burned and a hole punched through)

How does it simplify things? Now we have:

HP pool.
Damage reduction.
Damage repair.

The three concepts are very simple, compared to what you seem to be suggesting:

HP pool.
Damage repair that behaves differently relative to damage types.

Explaining the current syste to a new player would go like this:

1. There are 4 damage types in EVE.
2. There are 4 damage resistance types relative to each type of damage. They are percentage based.
3. Damage resistances reduce damage received by a percentage, the damage that is not reduced is substracted from an HP pool.
4. There are modules that increase your resistances.
5. There are modules that increase your HP pool.
6. There are modules that restore HP.
7. There are 3 different HP pools for a ship. Shields, armor and hull. All of the above applies for each of them separately. Your ship is destroyed when the 3 pools are emptied.

I would like to see you explain your system in a similar way.

Wrong.

Could you possibly elaborate?

You asked a question, and the answer seems illogical to judge in a right / wrong context.

I appreciate your taking time from your busy schedule to respond, in that case.

Please keep in mind I would be very interested in a more detailed explanation of your views, when you do find the time.