Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Retribution Amarr 7th Fleet
69
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 00:45:00 -
[61] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:it needs a t2 variant with 80% total resistance to spread around rather than 60%
otherwise its complete **** as t1 version A module that potentially gives 80% unstacked resistance is far too powerful. Improved variants should have shorter cycle times (leading to quicker damage type adaptation)
ya and considering the fact that this current one is only as strong as a regular ass hardener. take about 2 minutes to be fully res'ed properly (90% of the fights in this game are done in under 2 minutes) takes up WAY to much cap.
it simply would be only FOOLISH to not use them in longer fights and besides buffer armor tanking has needed a revamp for god dam years |
Jerick Ludhowe
Suicides-R-Us Celsetial Being
93
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 14:50:00 -
[62] - Quote
Module is a good idea however it's rather pre nerfed sadly... For the module to be viable it's going to need a rather significant reduction to it's cap usage as well as a cap usage reduction attached to the skill that decreases duration.
|
Jayrendo Karr
Suns Of Korhal Terran Commonwealth
197
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 15:47:00 -
[63] - Quote
Maybe it would work on cap ships? I know nothing about those but maybe thats how they wanted it used? Like I said, i dunno **** about capships. |
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
184
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 16:01:00 -
[64] - Quote
The adaptation time is too long.
That the cap usage increases with higher skill is stupid. Increasing a skill should never have a direct drawback.
I don't trust the algorithm behind it to make the best choice when different sources of damage are incoming. Or does it actually calculate which damage type does the most damage?
In other words, I think this module would work better with scripts and no adaptation time. |
Lexa Hellfury
Adversity.
101
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 16:15:00 -
[65] - Quote
Reicine Ceer wrote:Funky Lazers wrote:Hey there. Today I tested Reactive Armor Hardener and came to this:
- With the new skill it keeps draining cap very fast so I see no reason to fit it on something smaller then a BC
- Resistance bonus is really small: usually you get damaged by 2 types of damage which means your hardener sets 2 resists to ~30%. Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II gives almost the same resist bonus with no build time and cap drain. As for resists when you compare it to *Nano Membrane II there is usually 2-3% difference when 2 resists are set to 30%.
So is this mod useful? "- With the new skill it keeps draining cap very fast so I see no reason to fit it on something smaller then a BC" Then Vs Than - funnily enough, NOT THE SAME WORD.Please. For the love of whatever deities you believe in, start using the language correctly. I actually stopped reading after this failure of a sentence; what you basically said was (in other words for purposes of clarification) - "With the new skill it keeps draining cap very fast so i see no reason to fit it on something smaller after a BC" Did that make the slightest bit of sense? No. Should you feel bad? Yes. There are a lot of Amerrukans that do this, and i've noticed it far more in recent times - it doesn't matter whether you think "Derp, its the same thing/i can say what i want/you knew what i meant/I AM AMERRUKAN! I SAY WHAT I WANT OR -snip- !!!1/etc - it is still completely wrong.
ITT arrogant American douchebag assumes English is the first language of the entire world and judges people based on that assumption.
|
Hideo Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 21:09:00 -
[66] - Quote
Was most likely a typo |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
774
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:07:00 -
[67] - Quote
CrazySpaceHobo wrote:Don't forget, it IS a t1 module and should be compared as such. CCP said that once they've determined if the new modules are balanced, we'll see Meta and T2 versions, which I can only assume will be competitive with t2 EANM's.
The day that thing gets balanced you'll probably be retired and at least 2 grand grand children brb |
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
518
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:19:00 -
[68] - Quote
The problem OP is that you assume an even distribution of damage between two types. If the damage is primarily of one type then it shoots way, way ahead of an EANM after a short time.
Most individual ships will be doing one damage type primarily...A few exceptions (Hybrids with AM will do a decent mix of kin/therm). Furthermore, you're comparing them to EANMs. I suspect that these would actually be more useful on a ship that needs to fill a resist hole...If you start getting hit in the hole the mod will compensate, while not being a wasted slot against every other type (Though this is risky; only doable if you're in a ship that will last a little while).
Also, as said before, it's a T1 mod |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
540
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 12:28:00 -
[69] - Quote
unstack its bonuses like a dcu.
Done. http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
Tankn00blicus
sleep Deprivation INC. LLC Ethereal Dawn
22
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 01:11:00 -
[70] - Quote
Muad 'dib wrote:unstack its bonuses like a dcu.
Done. Reactive Armor Hardener already doesn't stack with regular hardeners (it does stack with DCUs though). |
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance
1314
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 11:50:00 -
[71] - Quote
Kahega Amielden wrote:The problem OP is that you assume an even distribution of damage between two types. If the damage is primarily of one type then it shoots way, way ahead of an EANM after a short time. Even in the undesirable case of two even damage types, it's only a little worse than the EANM and costs less CPU.
Most individual ships will be doing one damage type primarily...with a few exceptions (Hybrids with AM will do a decent mix of kin/therm). Furthermore, you're comparing them to EANMs. I suspect that these would actually be more useful on a ship that needs to fill a resist hole...If you start getting hit in the hole the mod will compensate, while not being a wasted slot against every other type (Though this is risky; only doable if you're in a ship that will last a little while).
Also, as said before, it's a T1 mod
AFAIK it doesn't need even damage distribution, it reacts to all damage types equally even though one would only account for 1% of damage.
Unfortunately there are very few engagements on the smaller scale where all the opponents fly the same ship and do just one damage type, limiting this module to large fleet engagements where the other party is flying Amarr. Furthermore typical small gang fights are over well before this reactive hardener reaches it's full potential.
In PVE all rats do at least two damage types.
It seems that this module was only introduced to fool people into thinking that CCP actually cares about armor vs shield balance in the game.
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
775
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 15:00:00 -
[72] - Quote
Jayrendo Karr wrote:Maybe it would work on cap ships? I know nothing about those but maybe thats how they wanted it used? Like I said, i dunno **** about capships.
When you see cap ships with EANM's+hardeners+hull resist p/lvl you can assume this module becomes interesting but I'm not really sure it's wise thinking.
+15% armor is 1slot , takes no cap and at this point (cap ships having very little HP right?) the physical HP increase might as well be more interesting. It's not the RAH bonus or reactivity timer (2min) that will save that capital taking fire from every single dmg type by huge amounts. brb |
|
ISD TYPE40
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1527
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 16:05:00 -
[73] - Quote
Thread has been cleaned of needless insults, troll posts, foul language and flaming. Stay on topic please - ISD Type40. ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Gerrick Palivorn
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
331
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 04:58:00 -
[74] - Quote
I'd be interested to see the results of testing the RAH on Armor Caps. I can imagine that a triage carrier or super would benefit greatly when flying against uniform fleet configurations (nobody flies those anyway). I would also like to test the amount the module changes the resists by, whether they are uniform or distribute according to amounts of damage of a certain type.
Edit: I'm interested to see what the T2 numbers are. MMOs come and go, but Eve remains.-á -Garresh- |
Marcus Gideon
Federal Defense Operations Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
34
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 06:09:00 -
[75] - Quote
Last time I fiddled with one, I noticed a few things. However, these could have changed since then...
If you start taking laser fire, it will shift towards 30 EM/ 30 Therm. Regardless of whether you're taking fire from Multi or Microwave, so long as there's some EM and some Therm, it'll shift equally. It does however, try to even out your EM and Therm resists as best it can. So if it needs to send a little more towards one or the other to level them out, it will do so.
Once its made the adjustment to EM and Therm, it tends to lock. That means a smart (and patient) opponent could swap for Missiles and shoot through the unprotected Kin/Exp hole.
The only way to fill the hole is to turn the module off and back on, starting back at base resists.
As has already been addressed, the key problem with the module as is... is the skillbook associated with it. Sure, it makes the module cycle faster. That means it'll adapt faster. But it does nothing for the Cap draw. And considering how hungry the module is to start with, compared to other active hardeners... speeding it up also makes it gobble Cap quicker. Training the skillbook is like giving every opponent you face from now on, a Neut to use against you.
Sure, we get it... its a prototype. Now let's see the real thing. Less Cap draw, or at least reduced draw as the skill trains. Let it continue to adapt, if the incoming damage profile shifts. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1397
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 09:25:00 -
[76] - Quote
Why don't they have the skill that affects the module reduce the cap usage by 10% as well as the cycle time? Seems like a very simple code edit and would not throw the module into the "OMFWTFBBQPWNZOR!!!!" zone. It could easily make the winter expansion.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Habris
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.14 10:29:00 -
[77] - Quote
It would be nice if the RAH would use a base cap use of like 5-10GJ per cycle when on "idle" which would make it a bit more inline with DCU and when your ship is engaged have it bump up to 30-40.The higher usage could remain constant as long as the ship was taking fire and then taper back down to the idle consumption once the hostilities ceased.
I haven't had much time using this module but from reading this thread and others perhaps the reactivity timer could be reduced to say %20-25 recalibration per cycle. That way with the skill maxed out at 5 the player can expect this module to be functioning within 20-25 seconds, but could it atleast be under a minute. I really like the idea of this module so I am keeping it on my ship but just a few changes would make this a great module for armor tankers. It would also make sense to me to replace the duration overheat bonus with a resistance boost to be inline with other hardeners. My rationale is with the skill trained to level 4-5 is it really ok to have a module that has a cycle time of 4.25 and an end cap usage of 9.8 cap a secound?
Also does the RAH start calibrating as soon as the ship is fired upon over once you start taking armor damage? I was just out letting a little rat shoot me for about 5 minutes and it did not fluctuate at all. Would be nice if it would configure to the incoming fire before it starts knocking on the hull.
To conclude I am excited about this mod but it needs a little love, not to the level of the ASB but just enough to make it shine and be relevant. |
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
194
|
Posted - 2012.10.15 17:11:00 -
[78] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:I feel like you'd be better off with an armor hardener that just took scripts instead of this terrible module. I agree.
I have tested this mod and just can't seem to find a configuration where the cap drain is worth the extra 2-3% resists. Which is not actually 2-3% resists as it takes time for them to adjust.
An omni resists armor hardener that can be scripted would be way better. Say have a script for each race that adjusts the resists to best plug the resist holes of that race. Or maybe a scrip for each rat type that sets the resists to the two primary damage types for that specific rat faction.
A T2 version of the mod might give a little better resists, but will suck even more cap. having it give 30% resists to the two main incoming damage types while ratting is nice. but the cap costs just seem to high to justify the benefit. Might be worthwhile on a buffer tanked armor BS for PVP but then again most good PVPer will just compensate by adjusting damage types. |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 17:43:00 -
[79] - Quote
Now that the next expansion is coming out soon is this module going to be worth it at all? |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 17:46:00 -
[80] - Quote
Now that the next expansion is coming out soon is this module going to be worth it at all, especially in PvP? |
|
Bernard 2007
The Scarlet Storm
14
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 18:22:00 -
[81] - Quote
T1 version no, and in case you were wondering, this is the T1 version of the module. T2 one coming later. |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 20:34:00 -
[82] - Quote
So it'll take another half-year to get some use out of it (tech 2)? |
Jerick Ludhowe
The Nyan Cat Pirates Nyanpire
191
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 20:35:00 -
[83] - Quote
t2 version will be beast for sure. |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 20:42:00 -
[84] - Quote
The reason I bring this up is because I want armor tanks (active, specifically) to be more viable. I already did the shield tanking in small-to-medium group PvP a few years ago with minmatar and caldari and I made this character to armor tank. |
Jerick Ludhowe
The Nyan Cat Pirates Nyanpire
191
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 21:26:00 -
[85] - Quote
Perihelion Olenard wrote:The reason I bring this up is because I want armor tanks (active, specifically) to be viable. I already did the shield tanking in small-to-medium group PvP a few years ago with minmatar and caldari and I made this character to armor tank.
I personally don't see this being as effective on active tanks as passive simply because of the cap usage and extra low that active tanking takes compared to passive. I think a t2 eanmII would be a better choice in most cases.
|
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 22:36:00 -
[86] - Quote
Makes me wonder why this module was even created. |
Songbird
61
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 23:17:00 -
[87] - Quote
I'm wondering something else - the new module for shields was so overpowered it had to be restricted in tournament to 1 per ship. The new module for armor - well I'm a gallente pilot and I have yet to buy 1.
Ancillary shield boosters are like spitting in the eye of local armor tank which was already much worse than shield.
Shield tank has boost amp module, invulns , working in the beginning of cycle rather than the end, much shorter cycles , and of course the dead space boosters(esp pithum) which have some ridiculous bonuses compared to t2 or compared to deadspace armor reps. And I'm not even talking about the implant set which could raise your local shield boosting by another 50% . On top of that they had to add a shield booster that works with no cap, boosts twice as much as any other shield booster and is arguably broken.
And for armor they give us some module which , if the other side plays it's cards well, might actually be of no benefit for you.
Don't you guys feel like it should've been ancillary armor repper and reactive shield hardener? I think they switched them out by mistake. |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 23:51:00 -
[88] - Quote
It's part of the reason why some gallente ships are now shield tanked, even the ships with an armor repair bonus. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
94
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 23:55:00 -
[89] - Quote
The skill is getting a 5% per level cap reduction and the module is being changed to adapt twice as much per cycle for retribution.
Will still need testing to see if it is worth it but these changes may push it into viable on passive fits and fits with cap injection. |
Pobunjenik
Delsu Foundation skylian Verge
64
|
Posted - 2013.01.27 04:03:00 -
[90] - Quote
It's good for closing gaps should your lowest resistance ever be attacked. But if you already have >80% in a resistance and that's the one you're been hit at, it doesn't help much.
Although increasing resi from 80% to 85% is good - you cut enemy DPS by another 25%. Or am I just eftwarrioring? Neka mi se jave na+íi igra-ìi zainteresovani za ++ivot u WH. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |