Player Features and Ideas Discussion

yeah yeah i know the joke, i know there's several threads about it, but i think it would be a cool feature to have in the game, we have some modules anyway right now.

so, for the people who doesnt know, there's a partial way of tanking implemented in the game, its Hull Tanking, which focuses in the use of modules to cover a ship's structure instead of focusing in armor or shield.

there are right now two ways of hull tanking, similar to armor repping, which are:

active:

using a hull repping module or remote hull repping module (the normal module goes up to T2, and from S to L)

pros:

1. less cap requirements than an armor repairer

2. use midslots

3. doesnt consume much powergrid

cons:

1. only capital, medium and small remote hull repping modules are implemented right now, the blueprints are only obtainable from Carthum Conglomerate (looks like its the only corp that sells the blueprints, in all its stations according to EVE Central databases)

2. hull repper modules are slower than armor repairers

3. althought being midslot modules, they eat more CPU, powergrid and cap than shield boosters

4. armor skills help to improve the amount of repping and the cycle time of hull reppers but its not enough in practical situations

buffer:

its the increment of the overall structure hitpoints using modules such as reinforced bulkheads

pros:

1. less powergrid requirement than armor plates

2. the amount of HP given is based in a percentage of the structure, instead of a fixed amount of HP

3. less volume than plates

4. no mass penalty, they have a fixed mass

5. no signature radius increase as shield extenders do

6. less CPU and powergrid requirements than shield extenders

cons:

1. intertia increased and maximum velocity reduced

2. consumes lowslots

3. has to be repaired be it by remote assistance or in repair facilities

4. higher CPU requirement than plates


aditional notes:

1. natural hull, the natural hull doesnt have resistances, basically all damage applied to the hull is 100% efective

2. there are no hull resistance modules, things like energized platings or nanoplatings dont exist for structure

3. damage control modules only give an omnitank of 60/60/60/60, there's no way to increase that

4. there are no hull rigs so now way to expand the hull more apart from bulkheads

5. there are no skills that help to reduce the inertia and max velocity penalties


the propositions:

Bastion. Just saying.

I don't see how Hull tanking can be as good as the 2 previous defensive layers all ships already have.

You have an energy layer, the shields, and a physical one, the armor, why would you bypass those two mechanisms of defense?

The only ship that've seen using Hull tanking is the Orca, and even in that case usually it's a shield and Hull tanking combination.

deleted

deleted

next, comparing hull repper modules with shield boosters. skills lvl 0 and T2 modules again (T1 for the capital one):

small:

-shield: 2s cycles, 35 HP repaired

-hull: 24 seconds cycle, 30 HP repaired

cycle times between them have a relation of 1 to 12, repping amount is of 1,17 to 1

medium:

-shield: 3s cycles, 104 HP repaired

-hull: 24 seconds cycle, 60 HP repaired

medium shield boosters are 1 second slower in cycle than smaller ones, but repair 3 times that amount (aprox)

cycle time between both have a 1 to 8 relation, repping amount relation is 1,73 to 1

large: (and XL)

-shield: 4s cycle, 276 HP repaired

-XL shield: 5s cycle, 690 HP repaired

-hull: 24 seconds cycle, 120 HP repaired

large shield boosters again follow the +1s pattern, and repair 2,65 times the amount of the medium one

XL shield boosters too, and repair 2,5 times the amount of the large one

cycletime relation for all is 1 to 6 and 1 to 4.8 , repping amount relation is 2,3 to 1 and 5,75 to 1

capital:

-shield: 10s cycles, 7200 HP repaired

the capital shield booster is double the time of the XL, and repairs more than 10 times that amount.

a capital hull repper following the logic of the others would be of a 24 seconds cycle and 240 HP amount repaired.

cycletyme relation would be 1 to 2.4 and repping amount relation would be 30 to 1

conclusions:

the shield booster is designed to be a fast module that repairs shield at the start and with a short cycletime. this at the expense of capacitor.

the shield booster healls less than the armor module but still is a larger amount than the hull module.

both modules consume mid slots.

now that theres this information i can conclude that the above proposition for balancing the hull repping modules is completely correct. and the three modules would be organized like this:

-shield: the most energy dependant, the fastest cycles, less repping amount than the others

-armor: less energy dependant than shield, longer cycle than shield, more repping amount than the shield one

-hull: the most energy saving module, the longest cycle, balances this repping more than armor and shield

it is to take in account that maybe, if i am correct, there could potentially be a downside of of this. because if hull modules were balanced that way, it could potentially overcome that midslot based hulls, as are Caldari and Minmatar could potentially be very good for active hull tanking, due to better slot placement. meanwhile, lowslot based hulls, like Amarr and Gallente would get benefied from buffer hull tanking. with a bit of active repping in the case of needing it.

more research is required, the next thing on the list will be the creation of the new skills for these modules

Hit the breaks on the train for a second.

Can you provide a quick summary of where hull tanking would fit in relative to existing tank profiles?

Currently in terms of tank types we have:
Active Shield
Shield Passive Regen
Shield Buffer
Active Armor
Armor Buffer

So this will be lowslots like armor, with no passive regen like armor, and either buffer or active tank like armor, and the downside is slowing your ship down like armor.... So how will this be distinct from armor tanking, other then it being done in structure?

another point to take in account is the chance of module damage when hull tanking, the best proposition for this is that CCP get rid of that, and leave module damage as something only related to overheating.

i want to make the third layer to be a valid (but risky) option, RP point of view well, i dont know if the Dust mercs have an equivalent in their game, but for a ship of 30k years in the future the materials for ships should be powerfull enough to tank damage for a long time....i didnt figured out the lore standpoint but gameplay wise it could give interesting ways of gameplay...

-1

It wouldn't really add anything, and it really doesn't make sense. Way too much CCP work for nothing really new added to the game. Keep wishing.