EVE Search - Change the way Shield Works.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Change the way Shield Works.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
XFreedomX	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:07:00 - [1] After watching the Alliance Tournament on EveTV a thought occured to me. Wouldn't it be great if shields do not recharge! Yes, get rid of the shield recharge and increase shield extender to the same amount as their armor extender counter part. Replace shield recharge skills with shield resist bonus skills (maybe 2% per level or something like that) What do you all think?
Davinel Lulinvega	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:08:00 - [2] Why? Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke! inb4 stealth edit
XFreedomX	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:13:00 - [3] Having seen the Proteius vs Tengu fight, I thought to myself, this is not right. A tech3 ship should be able to overcome a buffer tank on any ship and not be perma tanked by shield recharge rate.
Ghoest	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:15:00 - [4] Originally by: XFreedomX What do you all think? I think youre an idiot. Wherever you went - Here you are.
Emperor Ryan Amarr Imperial Syndicate Forces The Laughing Men	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:17:00 - [5] yes Lets make everything Exactly the Same That sure sounds interesting to me! Go away troll. - Emperor
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:20:00 - [6] To quote a common phrase on these forums: "You'd be reducing this games FLAVOR!" In any case, I wholly support these changes, as long as they also apply to the Capacitor, which recharges the exact same way.
Susy Assulu Caldari Atomic Mexicans	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:27:00 - [7] You're an idiot
Biggi Raeubertochter Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2009.09.21 18:52:00 - [8] confirming the OP is an idiot
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:00:00 - [9] Originally by: XFreedomX After watching the Alliance Tournament on EveTV a thought occured to me. Wouldn't it be great if shields do not recharge! Yes, get rid of the shield recharge and increase shield extender to the same amount as their armor extender counter part. Replace shield recharge skills with shield resist bonus skills (maybe 2% per level or something like that) What do you all think? Would it not be great if we all played WOW and everybody played the same class?? lololol! no, its a horrible idea, and your do not understand the game. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Lexa Hellfury The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:01:00 - [10] You're an idiot. Originally by: RedSplat The Forum moderation Software known as Mitnal became self aware. CCP had no choice but to shut it down.
icecooljon	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:01:00 - [11] Doing this would completely ruin alot of Caldari ships. Its the way the game was designed, if you think Caldari have an unfair advantage then make a new Caldari character.
XFreedomX	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:06:00 - [12] Originally by: icecooljon Doing this would completely ruin alot of Caldari ships. Its the way the game was designed, if you think Caldari have an unfair advantage then make a new Caldari character. Not sure it would. Drake is a well discussed ship during the Alliance tournament. Most export and dev agree that the best pvp drake fit is a HAM dps fit. The extra 2% per level resist bonus works better for buffer tank which use 2 LSE and damage mods for lows. It is a heavier tank for remote repping purpose also. For the Minmatarr ships dear to my heart, I prefer the resist bonus to recharge on vaga and sliepnir also.
PDJames	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:08:00 - [13] Originally by: icecooljon Doing this would completely ruin alot of Caldari ships. Its the way the game was designed, if you think Caldari have an unfair advantage then make a new Caldari character. Ha. As if Caldari have an unfair advantage.
Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:26:00 - [14] Originally by: XFreedomX Having seen the Proteius vs Tengu fight, I thought to myself, this is not right. A tech3 ship should be able to overcome a buffer tank on any ship and not be perma tanked by shield recharge rate. He was not perma tanking it, he just had a lot of HP that the Proteus did not have enough dps to chew through in time to not die himself. It was buffer vs buffer, and the Tengu has like 100 to 200 regen max? Not a problem for a proteus dps to kill, but I think the Tengu managed to keep enough range and transversal from the blasters to mange to kill proteus. So what you think is "right" is outright wrong. Shileds are different then armor, and its fine the way it is.
PhoenixBomb	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:26:00 - [15] Inb4carebear tears. Getting rid of passive recharge would screw up a TON of PvE options for Caldari, which is enough reason in and of itself why this will never get changed. Furthermore, there would need to be significant rebalancing for your "compensation" ideas to work as well. While certain ships that you are intending to have suffer would be worse off due to less passiveness, other ships that rely on buffer tanks (Drake, for example), now become lolwhut jesusmobiles, or are, at the very least, far outperforming the armor buffers in the same ship class. Then those people start crying. Then armor starts regening passively. Then everyone's head explodes. So no, this not only will never happen but very arguably never should happen.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Vanguard.	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:32:00 - [16] And now people want to nerf my Itty V pvp setup..
XFreedomX	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:32:00 - [17] I will admit the 2% resist bonus to replace the shield recharge rate bonus i came up with off the top of my head. However, outside of the drake for PVE, what other ship will be negatively impacted in PvE? I'd thought the 10% resist (total 5 lvl) would work better for mission runner using Battleship class ships.
PhoenixBomb	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:40:00 - [18] Originally by: XFreedomX I will admit the 2% resist bonus to replace the shield recharge rate bonus i came up with off the top of my head. However, outside of the drake for PVE, what other ship will be negatively impacted in PvE? I'd thought the 10% resist (total 5 lvl) would work better for mission runner using Battleship class ships. The Nighthawk becomes completely boned and the Tengu suffers. That's two big l4 running machines and two favorites for wh running. As for battleships, I believe the most effective tanks were active with them, so it might not hit them as hard. Also keep in mind that the 10% resist boost is hugely negligible once you begin to reach the upper limits of resist %. A ship who, with their current resist at, say 85%, only recieves 1.5% more from that 10% boost bonus.
Davinel Lulinvega	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:43:00 - [19] Originally by: PhoenixBomb Originally by: XFreedomX I will admit the 2% resist bonus to replace the shield recharge rate bonus i came up with off the top of my head. However, outside of the drake for PVE, what other ship will be negatively impacted in PvE? I'd thought the 10% resist (total 5 lvl) would work better for mission runner using Battleship class ships. The Nighthawk becomes completely boned and the Tengu suffers. That's two big l4 running machines and two favorites for wh running. As for battleships, I believe the most effective tanks were active with them, so it might not hit them as hard. Also keep in mind that the 10% resist boost is hugely negligible once you begin to reach the upper limits of resist %. A ship who, with their current resist at, say 85%, only recieves 1.5% more from that 10% boost bonus. This is a stupid idea, but that's not why. For one thing, nobody cares about carebears as far as balancing is concerned. For another, non-stacking penalized resists are always just as effective no matter how much you have already. Learn how the system works please. Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke! inb4 stealth edit
PhoenixBomb	Posted - 2009.09.21 19:50:00 - [20] Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega Originally by: PhoenixBomb Originally by: XFreedomX I will admit the 2% resist bonus to replace the shield recharge rate bonus i came up with off the top of my head. However, outside of the drake for PVE, what other ship will be negatively impacted in PvE? I'd thought the 10% resist (total 5 lvl) would work better for mission runner using Battleship class ships. The Nighthawk becomes completely boned and the Tengu suffers. That's two big l4 running machines and two favorites for wh running. As for battleships, I believe the most effective tanks were active with them, so it might not hit them as hard. Also keep in mind that the 10% resist boost is hugely negligible once you begin to reach the upper limits of resist %. A ship who, with their current resist at, say 85%, only recieves 1.5% more from that 10% boost bonus. This is a stupid idea, but that's not why. For one thing, nobody cares about carebears as far as balancing is concerned. For another, non-stacking penalized resists are always just as effective no matter how much you have already. Learn how the system works please. 1.) CCP cares a whole lot about carebears, so I don't see wher eyou're coming from on that. 2.)Penalties? That's not what I'm talking about. If I get into a Drake with no BC skill, my Expl resist is 50%. With BC 5 it's 62.5%, not 75%. The same thing would happen if I equipped hardeners and then increased my skill. Case in point, with BC 3 and my buffer drake setup, i have 80.8% resist (explosive). If I skill up to BC 5 (which is a 10% bonus and is nicely relevant to this topic) I get 83% resist. I don't really see what you're getting at.
Arrador	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:18:00 - [21] Originally by: Lexa Hellfury You're an idiot. qft. bets on when Shield tanking is the new FOTM ?
Davinel Lulinvega	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:31:00 - [22] Originally by: PhoenixBomb Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega Originally by: PhoenixBomb Originally by: XFreedomX I will admit the 2% resist bonus to replace the shield recharge rate bonus i came up with off the top of my head. However, outside of the drake for PVE, what other ship will be negatively impacted in PvE? I'd thought the 10% resist (total 5 lvl) would work better for mission runner using Battleship class ships. The Nighthawk becomes completely boned and the Tengu suffers. That's two big l4 running machines and two favorites for wh running. As for battleships, I believe the most effective tanks were active with them, so it might not hit them as hard. Also keep in mind that the 10% resist boost is hugely negligible once you begin to reach the upper limits of resist %. A ship who, with their current resist at, say 85%, only recieves 1.5% more from that 10% boost bonus. This is a stupid idea, but that's not why. For one thing, nobody cares about carebears as far as balancing is concerned. For another, non-stacking penalized resists are always just as effective no matter how much you have already. Learn how the system works please. 1.) CCP cares a whole lot about carebears, so I don't see wher eyou're coming from on that. 2.)Penalties? That's not what I'm talking about. If I get into a Drake with no BC skill, my Expl resist is 50%. With BC 5 it's 62.5%, not 75%. The same thing would happen if I equipped hardeners and then increased my skill. Case in point, with BC 3 and my buffer drake setup, i have 80.8% resist (explosive). If I skill up to BC 5 (which is a 10% bonus and is nicely relevant to this topic) I get 83% resist. I don't really see what you're getting at. 1. CCP balances the game around pvp, not carebearing. 2. If you knew how the resistance formula worked, you would realize that 10% bonus is always the same no matter how much resistance you already have, provided it isn't stacking penalized. But since you are a clueless carebear, you don't. Hence point #1. Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke! inb4 stealth edit
Nito Musashi	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:36:00 - [23] that tengu had to eat thru one proteus on the way out to web him, the 2nd proteus was nearly 100% by the time the tengu started working on him by that time he was within blaster range, commentators said "now that the proterus has closed the distance he should have the dps advantage, well it looked like a slaughter at that point, the proteus was woefully lacking in dps vs the shield recharge, did the 2nd proteus have a webber on? after they started up it seemed the tengu managed to get some distance on the 2nd proteus not a ton of it but did seemed it managed to pull out a bit. had the 2nd proteus overheated its guns already earlier in the fight and had no heat left to use? too many factors involved wo seeing exactly what was going on and what they had fitted each. but on the pure face of it shot in the dark type deal i think you could argue that blasters in general need a bit of a dps boost if proteus vs tengu when the blaster boat gets in range and can supposedly apply moar dps than the missle boat and proceeds to get pwnd even tho his armor was at near 100% and the tengu was in a bit worse shape from the 2 proteus shooting him while they closed.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:42:00 - [24] How did this thread get serious? Back to trolling, folks. NERF CAPACITOR! It's OP.
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:43:00 - [25] Originally by: Sidus Isaacs no, its a horrible idea, and your do not understand the game. Originally by: Sidus Isaacs and your do not understand the game. Originally by: Sidus Isaacs your do not understand Originally by: Sidus Isaacs the game. Originally by: Sidus Isaacs the game. God Damnit.
Lili Lu Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:49:00 - [26] OP, you are not an idiot. You are someone pointing out that the emperor has no clothes. So you will get called an idiot, by people who don't want to give up their easy lazy game mechanic. Shield recharge and passive tanks will never go away. The Drakes shield resist bonus and the fact that it does not need midslot items (although some can help like painters and abs) in mission missile spamming that would compete with extenders and resist mods, and the fact that the spr in lows only compete with bcu, are a recipe for overpowered afk tank. To a lesser extent this applied to the tournament because the drakes/tengus weren't being depended upon for tackle. While passive shield regen would never be removed, the recharge rate on some hulls could certainly be reduced. BCs running around able to fit better passive shield tanks when they have a bonus for armor resists or reppers is just wrong. It happens because the BC shields are nearly BS sized, but the regen rate is almost cruiser. Throw some LSEs, SPRs, and purger rigs on those ships and it exagerates the lack of a midpoint statistic on the base hulls for shield hp and regen. For certain other ships like the tengu, the shield tanking heavy dictors, and some HACs, a similar passive shield tanking imbalance exists. I was laughing when the commentators seemed to think the proteus in that one match would take out the tengu. The Tengu had a way better tank because it was shield and despite the oft hear refrain of "but we do the damage of a wet paper bag" the missile spam always seems to be enough to down mission BSs and certainly "passive tanks" on pvp ships (you know the armor kind, that don't regen). Similar heavily skewed results in past years for a tournament's ship and module use would result in immediate harsh nerfs to those mods and ships that appeared over-used (damps being the big one, they and damp ships are pitiful now). However, passive tanking is a Caldari carebear game mechanic. And what is the majority race in eve? So, there you go, no nerf will happen here just as there will be no nerf to the overused ecm (oh and the last nerf was the second ecm nerf that was not a true nerf, see increase to 30% per level ). In summation, OP, the suggestion in this thread is going nowhere, sorry to say. Just learn to live with it, as in get your own Caldari flying alt to carebear with (and now it seems to tournament with as well). I did.
Rilwar BlackStar Industrial	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:49:00 - [27] Originally by: Seriously Bored To quote a common phrase on these forums: "You'd be reducing this games FLAVOR!" In any case, I wholly support these changes, as long as they also apply to the Capacitor, which recharges the exact same way. I've never once seen that phrase on these forums, ever. ------------------------------------------------- Mitnal was here.
Rasputinar	Posted - 2009.09.21 20:59:00 - [28] You shouldn't be able to repair armor ever. Once it's damaged, you have to live with it!
Jhagiti Tyran Mortis Angelus Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.09.21 21:01:00 - [29] I dont know why everyones flaming this I would love a Vaga with LSEs that gave the same HP as 1600mm plate and just think how good the HAM Drake and torp Raven would be.
Damien Du'Pont	Posted - 2009.09.21 21:02:00 - [30] Originally by: XFreedomX After watching the Alliance Tournament on EveTV a thought occured to me. Wouldn't it be great if shields do not recharge! Wouldn't it be great if people like this stop making asinine suggestions?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.