These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Possible improvement for reactive armour

Author
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2017-01-30 11:25:34 UTC
How about upgrading the reactive Armour hardener BPC's to allow for invention to a tech II variant.

This would use charge scripts to preset the resists to a given profile (e.g. 40/40 against Therm/Kin for anti-hybrid).

The charge script gives a boost to the usual maximum split of resists, but this is lost if the resists shift due to incoming damage types, reverting back to the normal resists (perhaps slightly higher as it's tech II)

Charge script reload times would need to be balanced to not allow boost shifts too quickly.

To avoid a sudden glut of tech II's due to the huge number of junk BPC's already in hangars these would be automatically converted to tech II BPC's on a 1-whatever basis as determined by the actual numbers in existence. The tech II BPC's would then naturally seed the markets with tech II modules over a few days.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2 - 2017-01-30 12:25:55 UTC
I really don't like the idea of making the RAH scriptable, but I wouldn't be opposed to seeing a T2 or Faction variant.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2017-01-30 12:38:03 UTC
I'm certainly open to suggestions, it was just a thought on a possible way to improve the utility of the module and make the BPC's useful and actually worth finding.

A further thought on the scripting side would be that the script works like a boosting charge by resetting the resists to 40/40 (or whatever is appropriate) at the start of each cycle. Subsequent hits then re-balance the RAH as usual to the normal levels between cycles.

Making it Faction rather than tech II might be a better idea actually, then the components come from the same sites as the BPC's and gives explorers more to find in the data sites.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#4 - 2017-01-30 12:43:11 UTC
as for the script idea no that is far to powerful for this sort of mod (just look at how nerfed the capital ones that do this are)


as for t2 or faction if they were added i guaranty the T1 would get nerffed near unusable the T2 would be about or exactly as good as the current one and the faction would just be slightly better. then i can almost guaranty they would be subject to stacking penalties making them all worse over all than the current model.
Althalus Stenory
Flying Blacksmiths
#5 - 2017-01-30 13:04:12 UTC
You already have something that adapts its resistances to the incoming damage, without any stack penalty, and you want something scriptable ?

I'd rather say, a tech2 version with better cycle time and / or a better resistance pool (let's say 80 total instead of 60) but with fitting needs much bigger, why not.

But IMO, the reactive hardener actually need no changes...

EsiPy - Python 2.7 / 3.3+ Swagger Client based on pyswagger for ESI

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#6 - 2017-01-30 13:05:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
as for the script idea no that is far to powerful for this sort of mod (just look at how nerfed the capital ones that do this are)

as for t2 or faction if they were added i guaranty the T1 would get nerffed near unusable the T2 would be about or exactly as good as the current one and the faction would just be slightly better. then i can almost guaranty they would be subject to stacking penalties making them all worse over all than the current model.

Arent RAHs alread subject to stacking penalties? Maybe having a T1-T2-Faction with the T2 taking on the current characteristics wouldn't be such a bad idea...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Althalus Stenory
Flying Blacksmiths
#7 - 2017-01-30 13:07:26 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
as for the script idea no that is far to powerful for this sort of mod (just look at how nerfed the capital ones that do this are)

as for t2 or faction if they were added i guaranty the T1 would get nerffed near unusable the T2 would be about or exactly as good as the current one and the faction would just be slightly better. then i can almost guaranty they would be subject to stacking penalties making them all worse over all than the current model.

Arent RAHs alread subject to stacking penalties?

No, Damage control, RAH and normal hardener can be put together without stack penalties

EsiPy - Python 2.7 / 3.3+ Swagger Client based on pyswagger for ESI

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2017-01-30 13:21:35 UTC
Althalus Stenory wrote:
You already have something that adapts its resistances to the incoming damage, without any stack penalty, and you want something scriptable ?


Actually I like the module, I just don't see it on fits very often so assumed it wasn't popular (I'm an indy player more than PvP).

I was merely trying to suggest possible improvements and will leave it to those better equipped to discuss the necessity and nature of improvement

Althalus Stenory wrote:

I'd rather say, a tech2 version with better cycle time and / or a better resistance pool (let's say 80 total instead of 60) but with fitting needs much bigger, why not.

But IMO, the reactive hardener actually need no changes...


That's more my thinking, make a tech II or faction module and collapse existing useless BPC's down. Make it worthwhile finding the BPC and give the module a more realistic cost compared to utility.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#9 - 2017-01-30 14:34:52 UTC
I like this mod very much. In fact, I would never fit my Sacrilege without one. A t2 variant would sound intriguing but then would make it mandatory.

I am not opposed to one but in some combinations you can get a resistance shift to 99% already.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#10 - 2017-01-30 22:25:07 UTC
If CCP were to do a T2 RAH, I'd like it to resist the top three types of damage (in situations where all four damage types are applying).

Appropriate T2 fitting/cap costs. No other changes.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#11 - 2017-01-30 23:25:05 UTC
Right now the reactive hardener bpc's are only available as loot drops - you can't buy a bpo so a T2 version is unlikely, and would arguably be overpowered. The RAH gives you resists where you need them with 1 slot as long as you expect the fight to last long enough to complete its shift. It is stacking penalized with the DCU but not other hardeners