These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ASB (Ancillary Shield Booster) Mechanics
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#1 - 2014-02-17 22:06:25 UTC
  • ASBs can use more than 1 size of cap booster charge, but at the moment there is no advantage in using the larger of the available charges.

  • In fact, there is a distinct disadvantage in using them because you can't fit as many in the module and thus get fewer rep cycles before you have to reload (which takes 60 seconds and often results in your fiery death).

    • I suggest changing the ASB mechanics in such a way that there are viable reasons for choosing larger cap booster charges. I don't think "bigger = better" would be a good solution because we'd still have the same situation where there is only 1 good choice of cap booster charge.

    Here are a few potential ideas I was toying with:

    • Bigger charges have a faster reload time e.g. with an XL-ASB: Cap Booster 400 has a 60s reload time, but Cap Booster 800 has a 40s reload time
    • Bigger charges provide better overload bonuses e.g. with an XL-ASB: Cap Booster 400 provides 10% Overload Shield Boost Bonus, but Cap Booster 800 provides 20% Overload Shield Boost Bonus
    • Using bigger charges reduces the activation cost of running the module without any charges e.g. with an XL-ASB: Cap Booster 400 leaves the default activation cost of 1,320 GJ but Cap Booster 800 reduces this to 1,000 GJ

    Those are just a few ideas from the top of my head. Does anyone in the audience have any ideas about how to make other cap booster charge sizes viable for use with ASBs?

    Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.
    Vaju Enki
    Secular Wisdom
    #2 - 2014-02-17 22:07:42 UTC
    My ony problem with the ASB's, you can fit more then one of them on ships.

    The Tears Must Flow
    SIrera Artrald
    Titans Rising
    #3 - 2014-02-18 00:21:45 UTC
    Vaju Enki wrote:
    My ony problem with the ASB's, you can fit more then one of them on ships.


    This is a problem?

    I like this idea OP I've always wondered about it myself. . . But I still think if you use a bigger cap charge it will give you a higher shield rep amount. if you can still fit less but it heals roughly the same amount after the full payload is used then you could use larger charges to rep more over less time or smaller charges to rep less over an extended amount of time. Also why not open it up to all sizes just that a cap booster?

    Life is a bitch but she's totally doable. She may be a beauty but life, life is a bitch.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #4 - 2014-02-18 00:27:30 UTC
    Vaju Enki wrote:
    My ony problem with the ASB's, you can fit more then one of them on ships.

    Yeah, that is a tad unfair.

    I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
    Kimmi Chan
    Tastes Like Purple
    #5 - 2014-02-18 00:29:41 UTC
    The OP brings up a good point. Currently, there is no advantage to using the larger charges. In fact, the advantage is to use the smaller booster charge as you can fit more in the module as well as carry more in the cargo hold. These attributes apply to the Ancillary Armor Repairer as well I believe.

    Perhaps, and this is just speculation, the purpose of the larger booster charges is for actual cap boosters where the larger charges apply a greater effect and the smaller ones are intended for use with the ASB and AAR.

    "Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

    www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!
    Edwin McAlister
    Empire Hooligans
    #6 - 2014-04-18 15:52:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Edwin McAlister
    I will use the Medium Ancillary Shield booster as an example... the same can apply to the large and extra large

    ie. Medium Ancillary Shield Booster.. Can use Cap Booster 50, 75, and 100 as fuel

    The amount boosted is the same no matter what fuel is used, however the quantity of boosters that can be loaded is still limited by the module itself

    A medium ancillary shield booster will hold X x cap booster 50, and X x Cap booster 75 and X x cap booster 100

    yes, folks will say "just use the smallest one and get the most boosts"

    i would suggest that the booster scale with the size of cap that is loaded... the end result of the total quantity boosted will be similar, because the quantity loaded will scale down based off size of the booster... the 60 second reload would still be in effect...

    so a Medium loaded with Cap 50 will boost 146 shield hp / 3.00 s (base stats) w/ 7 standard charges... 1022 shields boosted over 21 seconds for 48.7 shp/sec

    a medium loaded with cap 75 will boost 146 x 1.5 = 219 shield hp / 3.00 s w/ 4 standard charges .. 876 shields boosted over 12 seconds for 73.0 shp/sec

    a medium loaded with cap 100 will boost 146 x 2.0 = 292 shield hp / 3.00 s w/ 3 standard charges ... 876 shields boosted over 9 seconds for 97.3 shp/sec

    Advantage... quicker bigger boosts over shorter period of time...
    Disadvantage... out of caps sooner and roll into the 60 second reload
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #7 - 2014-04-18 16:01:33 UTC
    i just think 60 seconds is an excessive reload time... for any module

    800's are just unfeasibly large for most ships too have a decent amount for reloads even if you managed too find a use for them in ASB's although i don't see how..

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
    Derath Ellecon
    University of Caille
    Gallente Federation
    #8 - 2014-04-18 16:08:34 UTC
    Kimmi Chan wrote:
    These attributes apply to the Ancillary Armor Repairer as well I believe.


    The armor ones use nanite paste.
    Daichi Yamato
    Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
    #9 - 2014-04-18 16:33:01 UTC
    pretty sure it was made this way for a good reason. ASB's were designed as burst tankers, with a large boost but short life span. Now normal shield boosters are barely used outside of missions because burst tanking is that much better in PvP. This takes it to an even greater extreme and is probably overpowered, which is why CCP chose to make it this way in the first place.

    EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

    Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
    Mike Voidstar
    Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
    #10 - 2014-04-18 17:29:06 UTC
    The only reason I can see having the option to use various sized boosters is to allow flexibilty on long deployment. It may have changed, but last time I was in nullsec the rats dropped charges of various sizes all the time.

    ASB's need some attention, but any sort of buff is out of the question. Perhaps a nerf to repair amount when using smaller charges.

    I always thought the idea was good, but the module should be a true ancillary, rather than superior alternative to regular boosters.

    They should have been a seperate module that when active provided buffs to the standard booster. It would be simpler to balance as the cycle time on the ancillary module could be adjusted seperately from the booster itself, while preserving whatever passes for balance among faction/deadspace/officer boosters.
    Hopelesshobo
    Hoboland
    #11 - 2014-04-18 17:38:06 UTC
    Mike Voidstar wrote:


    They should have been a seperate module that when active provided buffs to the standard booster.


    Already exsists: Shield Boost Amplifier

    Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
    Gizznitt Malikite
    Agony Unleashed
    Agony Empire
    #12 - 2014-04-18 17:47:28 UTC

    In their current form, I like the fact that small charges are preferred over larger charges.

    If using cap boosters, you almost always use the largest charge that fits well. The ASB mechanic, where you fit the smallest charge to get the most boosts helps balance the demand for cap charges of various sizes.

    While we can toy with ASB's to make larger charges do something interesting, I certainly don't consider it a priority. At the moment, ASB's are pretty nicely balanced, offering excellent boosts without too much. Also, I don't have an issue with multiple ASB's on the same ship, as their fitting requirements usually results in a gimp in other ways, and they can still be destroyed.
    Mike Voidstar
    Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
    #13 - 2014-04-18 18:05:10 UTC
    Hopelesshobo wrote:
    Mike Voidstar wrote:


    They should have been a seperate module that when active provided buffs to the standard booster.


    Already exsists: Shield Boost Amplifier


    Yes, but those do not lend themselves to the burst tanking that was the goal in creating the ASB.

    The ASB could have granted faster cycles, reduced or removed cap use, and greater hp return to standard boosters when active just as an ASB does, but would have been better balanced in its use by not replacing current boosters.

    It would also have been nice if the acillary armor rep had been comparable. The current situation is goofy.