These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

X-Large Shield Extenders
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Matthew Dust
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2015-11-18 08:02:56 UTC
Would like to see some X-Large Shield Extenders, putting 2 Large on a battleship is stupid. I can put 2 Large on a Stabber easy. It's literally almost half the HP of a 1600mm plate.

It won't break the game. I'm just saying a Large Shield Extender on a battleship is like putting a small shield extender on a stabber.

#CCPSHIELDS
Valtem Akin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2015-11-18 08:09:18 UTC
Sounds legit
Jebi Vjetar
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#3 - 2015-11-18 08:11:50 UTC
Yes this is a good idea. We need them big shield extenders.
Iain Cariaba
#4 - 2015-11-18 08:37:04 UTC
Matthew Dust wrote:
Would like to see some X-Large Shield Extenders, putting 2 Large on a battleship is stupid. I can put 2 Large on a Stabber easy. It's literally almost half the HP of a 1600mm plate.

Except a 1600mm plated ship doesn't have a passive armor regen based on its total shield HP, so you cannot really compare shield extenders to armor plates like that.

Matthew Dust wrote:
It won't break the game. I'm just saying a Large Shield Extender on a battleship is like putting a small shield extender on a stabber.

Just because it allegedly won't break the game doesn't make it a good idea.
Matthew Dust
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5 - 2015-11-18 08:46:38 UTC
It's a great idea, passive regen is next to insignificant, not to mention all ships have passive regen to include armor ships. So what's the point of bringing up passive regen as some sort of worthwhile thing?
Ix Method
Doomheim
#6 - 2015-11-18 10:13:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Ix Method
It might not break the game but it would significantly change it. Regen rates would have to be nerfed into the ground as another interesting distinction between armour and shield sails off into the deep blue... space. And the subsequent mooing to get XL Armour Reppers would give me a headache.

Ships are balanced around existing modules, do you think they'll just shove something like this in and hope for the best or rebalance everything all over again for one module?

Travelling at the speed of love.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2015-11-18 10:19:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Also need 3200mm armor plate. Both of these need to be too big for a battlecruiser to reasonably fit. You know, big enough for a battleship to actually consider that much powergrid a sacrifice.

Matthew Dust wrote:
It won't break the game. I'm just saying a Large Shield Extender on a battleship is like putting a small shield extender on a stabber.

More like putting a medium shield extender on a Stabber. But the point remains the same--I can put a medium shield extender on a Rifter just fine, and it's very nearly a waste of a slot on a Stabber.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#8 - 2015-11-18 11:07:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Matthew Dust wrote:
Would like to see some X-Large Shield Extenders, putting 2 Large on a battleship is stupid. I can put 2 Large on a Stabber easy. It's literally almost half the HP of a 1600mm plate.

It won't break the game. I'm just saying a Large Shield Extender on a battleship is like putting a small shield extender on a stabber.

#CCPSHIELDS


I'm sure the sig bloom those things would have on a BS would be horrendous not to mention the PWG/CPU requirements. I would rather have CCP buff all shield extenders sizes to fit favorably into their propose meant for ship class.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2015-11-18 11:52:53 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
I'm sure the sig bloom those things would have on a BS would be horrendous not to mention the PWG/CPU requirements. I would rather have CCP buff all shield extenders sizes to fit favorably into their propose meant for ship class.

Large shield extenders ARE meant for cruisers. You get more hit points at the cost of powergrid and signature radius. It's a trade-off between offense and defense, and the sig radius bloom is just to prevent using them for nano exploits. You can fit a medium shield extender (frigate size) to your cruiser to get less shield hit points, but at a negligible cost to powergrid and sig radius. The medium on a cruiser primarily costs only the slot.

Frigates can fit a medium as a trade-off, or a small if they can't spare fitting.

Battleships don't get that choice. The only option for battleships is the weak one that costs barely any powergrid or sig radius (relatively speaking).

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Bobb Bobbington
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#10 - 2015-11-18 13:50:31 UTC
Guys, not everything is meant to be equal. Armor plates are designed to be more for buffer, and shields more for active tanking. That's why armor has an extra plate size, but shield boosters have an extra shield booster size. It'd be boring if everything was equal.

This is a signature.

It has a 25m signature.

No it's not a cosmic signature.

Probably.

Btw my corp's recruiting.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#11 - 2015-11-18 14:07:42 UTC
Bobb Bobbington wrote:
Guys, not everything is meant to be equal. Armor plates are designed to be more for buffer, and shields more for active tanking. That's why armor has an extra plate size, but shield boosters have an extra shield booster size. It'd be boring if everything was equal.


Issue is, there are no dediated BS+ sized bufermods, you're just throwing multiple cruiser sized mods on there (500PG out of 21k...)

XL shield boosters compare to large armor reps btw.
Bobb Bobbington
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#12 - 2015-11-18 15:49:50 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Bobb Bobbington wrote:
Guys, not everything is meant to be equal. Armor plates are designed to be more for buffer, and shields more for active tanking. That's why armor has an extra plate size, but shield boosters have an extra shield booster size. It'd be boring if everything was equal.


Issue is, there are no dediated BS+ sized bufermods, you're just throwing multiple cruiser sized mods on there (500PG out of 21k...)

XL shield boosters compare to large armor reps btw.


Lol, XL shield boosters in no way compare to large armor reps. Just because they fit the same doesn't mean they are the same. A large armor repairer does 920 hp every 15 seconds with base skills (61.3/second), whereas an XL shield booster does 690 every 5 seconds (138/second). All taken with base stats from evelopedia.

So, an XL shield repper does 2.25x the hp/second than a large armor repper, while a 1600mm plate (4800 hp) does 1.83x more than a large shield extender (2625). A little uneven, but as it is they seem pretty balanced to me.

Personally, I don't see a need for battleship sized plates. Battleships do need a pass, but people are already complaining about logi OP, and bigger plates would only increase the problem due to more alpha needed to kill them before reps land. You'd also have to go through and balance a ton of other stuff while you're at it.

This is a signature.

It has a 25m signature.

No it's not a cosmic signature.

Probably.

Btw my corp's recruiting.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2015-11-18 16:05:36 UTC
Bobb Bobbington wrote:
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Bobb Bobbington wrote:
Guys, not everything is meant to be equal. Armor plates are designed to be more for buffer, and shields more for active tanking. That's why armor has an extra plate size, but shield boosters have an extra shield booster size. It'd be boring if everything was equal.


Issue is, there are no dediated BS+ sized bufermods, you're just throwing multiple cruiser sized mods on there (500PG out of 21k...)

XL shield boosters compare to large armor reps btw.


Lol, XL shield boosters in no way compare to large armor reps. Just because they fit the same doesn't mean they are the same. A large armor repairer does 920 hp every 15 seconds with base skills (61.3/second), whereas an XL shield booster does 690 every 5 seconds (138/second). All taken with base stats from evelopedia.

So, an XL shield repper does 2.25x the hp/second than a large armor repper, while a 1600mm plate (4800 hp) does 1.83x more than a large shield extender (2625). A little uneven, but as it is they seem pretty balanced to me.

Personally, I don't see a need for battleship sized plates. Battleships do need a pass, but people are already complaining about logi OP, and bigger plates would only increase the problem due to more alpha needed to kill them before reps land. You'd also have to go through and balance a ton of other stuff while you're at it.


Agreed the entire way. Also worth noting: shield reps get the advantage of an optional shield amp mod so your reps get even better. Costs a midslot, yes, but it's something you can't quite duplicate with armor. Again with the differences between armor and shield, with shield you get a relatively easy-to-fit mod that dramatically increases your active tank. You can equip and de-equip it at will because it's a mod. Rigs allow you to decrease the capacitor used when repping, or rep faster.

Armor gets no module to equip or de-equip at will to enhance repping. However, this ability is available in a rig, which means you are stuck with that until you destroy the rig for something else. That's a more permanent investment than a simple module. Armor also gets access to a rig that lets you rep faster.

And when it comes to ancillaries, shield gets outright capless repping that still works with the shield rep amp, which falls in line with the rig that decreases cap use (as a theme). Armor gets a boost to rep amount but still uses the same cap as a normal repper, keeping in line with it's rig that allows for more potent reps (as a theme).

These differences are what makes EvE interesting. It's a good, nuanced system and I don't want that system unbalanced by huge shield buffer mods, as that's armor's territory.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2015-11-18 20:25:32 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
Agreed the entire way. Also worth noting: shield reps get the advantage of an optional shield amp mod so your reps get even better. Costs a midslot, yes, but it's something you can't quite duplicate with armor.

Shield boost amplifiers are not nearly as useful as people seem to think. When you consider it's using a slot and CPU that could be spent on a hardener, a lot of times it only barely comes out on top in terms of net shield boost amount while not assisting your EHP at all. It's certainly no huge boon to active tanking and sometimes has little use beyond saving capacitor.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
To mare
Advanced Technology
#15 - 2015-11-18 21:01:37 UTC
yes the day when we get an x-large armor repairer
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#16 - 2015-11-18 22:03:24 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Also need 3200mm armor plate. Both of these need to be too big for a battlecruiser to reasonably fit. You know, big enough for a battleship to actually consider that much powergrid a sacrifice.

Matthew Dust wrote:
It won't break the game. I'm just saying a Large Shield Extender on a battleship is like putting a small shield extender on a stabber.

More like putting a medium shield extender on a Stabber. But the point remains the same--I can put a medium shield extender on a Rifter just fine, and it's very nearly a waste of a slot on a Stabber.


Armor battleships would need their grid tweaked in that case, because most fitted battleships are tight on grid even with plates only needing 500ish grid.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2015-11-18 23:20:45 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Khan Wrenth wrote:
Agreed the entire way. Also worth noting: shield reps get the advantage of an optional shield amp mod so your reps get even better. Costs a midslot, yes, but it's something you can't quite duplicate with armor.

Shield boost amplifiers are not nearly as useful as people seem to think. When you consider it's using a slot and CPU that could be spent on a hardener, a lot of times it only barely comes out on top in terms of net shield boost amount while not assisting your EHP at all. It's certainly no huge boon to active tanking and sometimes has little use beyond saving capacitor.
Consider that the only armor alternative is a 2nd rep aside from rigs, costing a low slot, PG and CPU, with a considerably higher comparative cap investment.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2015-11-18 23:26:01 UTC
Templar Dane wrote:
Armor battleships would need their grid tweaked in that case, because most fitted battleships are tight on grid even with plates only needing 500ish grid.

They're only tight with top-end weapons. Try fitting some Dual Heavies and you'll free up thousands of megawatts. Then you can fit that huge plate, but it comes at a cost.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#19 - 2015-11-19 00:17:30 UTC
Matthew Dust wrote:
It's a great idea, passive regen is next to insignificant, not to mention all ships have passive regen to include armor ships. So what's the point of bringing up passive regen as some sort of worthwhile thing?


because shield tanked ships have much higher resistances on top of an larger HP + the regen that comes with it, CAN simply make SOME ships too powerful

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-11-19 00:26:53 UTC
Ellendras Silver wrote:
because shield tanked ships have much higher resistances

That is patently false.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
123Next pageLast page