These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Shield Compensation Skills - Useless vs Non-existant
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Skurja Volpar
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#1 - 2014-05-11 22:19:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Skurja Volpar
So before the nerf, these skills were borderline useless, aside from the neuted factor. Now they are pretty much redundant. Passive resistance amps are some of the most niche mods in the game, especially when compared to the passive armor mods which compliment their respective skills nicely, and are some of the most widely used mods out there. Passive shield mods just aren't really a thing and haven't been outside of some very specific pve for a long time.

Maybe it's time to give these 4 skills a wider role/benefit (as opposed to removing the single small benefit they gave) or alternatively, just scrap them altogether. You could build the bonus into the resist amps themselves, and people would most like still go for the active versions.

CCP have been working on making the skill categories less arbitrary, but pointless skillbooks (that the new isis system still tracks) seem like a bigger issue. I actually think buffing the old bonus to un-activated active mods would have been better idea for these skills.

And lets not even talk about tactical shield manipulation.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#2 - 2014-05-11 22:28:07 UTC
Tentatively agree but isn't it customary to post an idea in your OP?

Perhaps yes scrap the passives and make those skils affect dcu shield resist strength or something. Totally unique and beneficial to anyone that trains them.
Skurja Volpar
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#3 - 2014-05-11 22:34:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Skurja Volpar
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Tentatively agree but isn't it customary to post an idea in your OP?



No need you have my back. My book of armchair game design is in for servicing. But traditionally DCUs bonuses are separate from resist mods so I don't see it happening.

But thinking about it, maybe something like increasing the resist bonus when overheated would be great.

That would also potentially help shield caps as i hear the ability to O/H your resist mods is one of their main benefits (although admittedly I know **** all about caps).

Would be a bonus worth training for in a tight spot.
Linkxsc162534
Apollo United Systems
#4 - 2014-05-11 23:40:09 UTC
Make an omni passive resist mod like armor has. These skills by extension will boost this module, and that mod might make its way into some PVP fits that are worried about cap-use.

After that's in perhaps play around with it from there.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-05-11 23:48:32 UTC
The cross between Shields and Armor is fine, no need to change it.
They can start to do stuff to benefit shields when I get passive armor, for an armor reps that works on JUST Cap charges (given that armor ships are more cap dependent than the shield counterparts to begin with..)

For now, if you don't need em, don't train em..
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2014-05-11 23:49:30 UTC
Skurja Volpar wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Tentatively agree but isn't it customary to post an idea in your OP?



No need you have my back. My book of armchair game design is in for servicing. But traditionally DCUs bonuses are separate from resist mods so I don't see it happening.

But thinking about it, maybe something like increasing the resist bonus when overheated would be great.

That would also potentially help shield caps as i hear the ability to O/H your resist mods is one of their main benefits (although admittedly I know **** all about caps).

Would be a bonus worth training for in a tight spot.

personally i just say reintroduce the neuted-tank bonus for shield-based resist mods, and then give an actual bonus to the modules when active (but only half toa thrid the bonus given to armor since shield isnt about straight buffer) on top of the neut bonus (which would be buffed slightly from where it was before).

Because personally i dont see any way to make the passive shield hardeners better without making the actives questionable (unless, like armor, it was not as good but for extremely lowered fitting reqs)
Linkxsc162534
Apollo United Systems
#7 - 2014-05-11 23:58:23 UTC
Sniper Smith wrote:
The cross between Shields and Armor is fine, no need to change it.
They can start to do stuff to benefit shields when I get passive armor, for an armor reps that works on JUST Cap charges (given that armor ships are more cap dependent than the shield counterparts to begin with..)

For now, if you don't need em, don't train em..


They're the kind of things that you trained years ago when you were flying a drake, only to find out they're completely worthless on anything but that ship and a handful of extremely limited other fits.

And you can have passive armor, when I get a shield extender that puts out ~4000 shield HP in a single module (paralleling the 1600mm plates)

Also a 200mm plate equivalent would be nice too while your at it (we have an SSE thats a 100mm plate, and an MSE thats the 400, but no 200. Some ships could be that much more with the different fitting reqs/sig penalty)
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#8 - 2014-05-12 00:00:10 UTC
FWIW a t2 active hardener gives 55% resists, a t1 gives 50%, a level V compensation t2 passive gives 49%?

If you're tight on cap or likely to be neuted then a properly skilled passive hardener is the way to go. Of course this only applies to ships with t2 resists really - caldari can fit 1x EM 1x explosive and gain some fairly impressive stats as a result although whether it is objectively better than t2 invuls (which can be neuted out) is a question I leave open.
Linkxsc162534
Apollo United Systems
#9 - 2014-05-12 00:15:20 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
FWIW a t2 active hardener gives 55% resists, a t1 gives 50%, a level V compensation t2 passive gives 49%?

If you're tight on cap or likely to be neuted then a properly skilled passive hardener is the way to go. Of course this only applies to ships with t2 resists really - caldari can fit 1x EM 1x explosive and gain some fairly impressive stats as a result although whether it is objectively better than t2 invuls (which can be neuted out) is a question I leave open.

More like

55% active T2
37.5% passive T2
46.88% passive T2 (L5 skill)

The point is there. The passive ones can be quite effective. But lets mull over your average shielded ship in PVP.
Extender rigs (sometimes 1 EM resist rig). And an omni or 2. Then an LSE.
Theres no passive omni option for shields,which is silly. Also the lack of armor active omni is also BS in my book, but thats a story for later, also the RAH kinda makes me LOL. Also the severe inability to make an equally powerful buffertank is rather annoying and is partially the cause for the extreme armor-heavy doctrines prevalent across New Eden
Ix Method
Doomheim
#10 - 2014-05-12 02:02:46 UTC
Resist bonus + fitting bonus? Might give them more of a niche with frigs/cruisers. Maybe.

Travelling at the speed of love.