| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Phasics
   |
Posted - 2004.12.08 01:25:00 -
[1]
Breifly
Damage reduction would be a ships ability to shrug off superfical damage without it accumulating
e.g. a dmg reduction of 5 would mean a hit of 100dmg would only do 95dmg and a hit of 20dmg would only do 15dmg.
Obviously such mods would be quite powerful when used in tandem with resistence mods
e.g. 50dmg 80% resistence => 10dmg - 5 dmg = 5 dmg
but could be an interesting addtion.
Now why would such a mod be useful ? simple
It would bring Projectile back into usefulness.
becuase someone with a high damage reduction will be able to handle alot of low damage hits, but will be vunerable to a low number of high damage hits
e.g.
First ship 20dmg ROF 2sec
Second ship 100dmg ROF 10sec
after 20 seconds first ship has fired 10 shots for 200dmg and second ship has shot twice for 200dmg
if the defending ship has a damage reduction of 5dmg
then the firs ship will cause 150dmg while the second ship will cause 190dmg
Thus a projectiles low ROF but high dmg now has a very important role in overcomming damage reduction
So my Question is why is it not in the game ?
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 01:25:00 -
[2]
Breifly
Damage reduction would be a ships ability to shrug off superfical damage without it accumulating
e.g. a dmg reduction of 5 would mean a hit of 100dmg would only do 95dmg and a hit of 20dmg would only do 15dmg.
Obviously such mods would be quite powerful when used in tandem with resistence mods
e.g. 50dmg 80% resistence => 10dmg - 5 dmg = 5 dmg
but could be an interesting addtion.
Now why would such a mod be useful ? simple
It would bring Projectile back into usefulness.
becuase someone with a high damage reduction will be able to handle alot of low damage hits, but will be vunerable to a low number of high damage hits
e.g.
First ship 20dmg ROF 2sec
Second ship 100dmg ROF 10sec
after 20 seconds first ship has fired 10 shots for 200dmg and second ship has shot twice for 200dmg
if the defending ship has a damage reduction of 5dmg
then the firs ship will cause 150dmg while the second ship will cause 190dmg
Thus a projectiles low ROF but high dmg now has a very important role in overcomming damage reduction
So my Question is why is it not in the game ?
|
djubrica
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 01:34:00 -
[3]
Edited by: djubrica on 08/12/2004 01:37:17
I see what you're saying but I think it would throw things out of balance. This would basically be a nerf to blaster and drone users and no way in hell I want to see that.
|
djubrica
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 01:34:00 -
[4]
Edited by: djubrica on 08/12/2004 01:37:17
I see what you're saying but I think it would throw things out of balance. This would basically be a nerf to blaster and drone users and no way in hell I want to see that.
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 01:43:00 -
[5]
Perhaps but it depends there are some things which could make it work
damage reduction mods are damage type specific so it would be nearly impossible to make an uber resistence/reduction mod simple beucase u wont ahve enough med/lo slots
new armour and shield piercing ammunition that ignores damage reduction but does less damage than normal. which all guns can use.
I grant that it would require a semi-major overhaul of the current combat balence.
But at least mabe there'd be somthing else to look for other than the best DOT, it would breathe some life into current weapons that simply arnt used because there is a better DOT alternative.
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 01:43:00 -
[6]
Perhaps but it depends there are some things which could make it work
damage reduction mods are damage type specific so it would be nearly impossible to make an uber resistence/reduction mod simple beucase u wont ahve enough med/lo slots
new armour and shield piercing ammunition that ignores damage reduction but does less damage than normal. which all guns can use.
I grant that it would require a semi-major overhaul of the current combat balence.
But at least mabe there'd be somthing else to look for other than the best DOT, it would breathe some life into current weapons that simply arnt used because there is a better DOT alternative.
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 02:51:00 -
[7]
Hell you could even do it by having damage reduction effectiveness inversly proportional to weapon size
so BS dmg reduction mod is 100% effetive vs Large weapons but only 50% effective vs Medium Guns and 25% effective vs small guns and only 10% effective for drone guns.
Crusier would be 50% vs Large 100% vs Medium 50% vs small etc etc etc,
or some similar balence combo's
dmg reduction is specific to deal with a certain size/power of weapon, smaller tighter explosions lessen its effectiveness
Thus Blaster/Drone users are not gimped but projectiles are given some lovin 
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 02:51:00 -
[8]
Hell you could even do it by having damage reduction effectiveness inversly proportional to weapon size
so BS dmg reduction mod is 100% effetive vs Large weapons but only 50% effective vs Medium Guns and 25% effective vs small guns and only 10% effective for drone guns.
Crusier would be 50% vs Large 100% vs Medium 50% vs small etc etc etc,
or some similar balence combo's
dmg reduction is specific to deal with a certain size/power of weapon, smaller tighter explosions lessen its effectiveness
Thus Blaster/Drone users are not gimped but projectiles are given some lovin
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 03:38:00 -
[9]
Just adds more strain on the server CPU to not much additional fun. I would rather they devote that CPU to AI that doesn't suck.
--------------------------------------------------
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 03:38:00 -
[10]
Just adds more strain on the server CPU to not much additional fun. I would rather they devote that CPU to AI that doesn't suck.
--------------------------------------------------
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 03:51:00 -
[11]
fair point but I'd dissagree with u on increased strain.
having a -value at the end of the normal dmg equation is hardly going to use any additonal CPU.
However I agree there are other things that warrent more of CCP time at the moment.
I just wonder why it wasent put in with resistence mods at the begining of EVE.
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 03:51:00 -
[12]
fair point but I'd dissagree with u on increased strain.
having a -value at the end of the normal dmg equation is hardly going to use any additonal CPU.
However I agree there are other things that warrent more of CCP time at the moment.
I just wonder why it wasent put in with resistence mods at the begining of EVE.
|
MooKids
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 05:26:00 -
[13]
This would never see internal discussion. And use the idea forum next time, it is there for a reason.
--------------------------------
CCP can patch away bugs, but they can't patch away stupidity. |
MooKids
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 05:26:00 -
[14]
This would never see internal discussion. And use the idea forum next time, it is there for a reason.
--------------------------------
CCP can patch away bugs, but they can't patch away stupidity. |
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 05:47:00 -
[15]
 Originally by: MooKids
This would never see internal discussion. And use the idea forum next time, it is there for a reason.
This is not an idea
I was asking why it was not put in when damage resistence was put in
thus it does not belong in the idea forum
|
Phasics
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 05:47:00 -
[16]
Originally by: MooKids
This would never see internal discussion. And use the idea forum next time, it is there for a reason.
This is not an idea
I was asking why it was not put in when damage resistence was put in
thus it does not belong in the idea forum
|
MooKids
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 05:49:00 -
[17]
Edited by: MooKids on 08/12/2004 05:51:55
It sure as hell looks like an idea to me. With the amount of detail you put in, you are implying that it is an idea.
--------------------------------
CCP can patch away bugs, but they can't patch away stupidity. |
MooKids
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 05:49:00 -
[18]
Edited by: MooKids on 08/12/2004 05:51:55
It sure as hell looks like an idea to me. With the amount of detail you put in, you are implying that it is an idea.
--------------------------------
CCP can patch away bugs, but they can't patch away stupidity. |
Vegeta
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 06:52:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Phasics
Originally by: MooKids
This would never see internal discussion. And use the idea forum next time, it is there for a reason.
This is not an idea
I was asking why it was not put in when damage resistence was put in
thus it does not belong in the idea forum
It's an idea for sure.
2005.04.25 16:40:42 combat Your 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II perfectly strikes LawrenceNewton [WARAG], wrecking for 2706.9 damage.
|
Vegeta
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 06:52:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Phasics
Originally by: MooKids
This would never see internal discussion. And use the idea forum next time, it is there for a reason.
This is not an idea
I was asking why it was not put in when damage resistence was put in
thus it does not belong in the idea forum
It's an idea for sure.
2005.04.25 16:40:42 combat Your 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II perfectly strikes LawrenceNewton [WARAG], wrecking for 2706.9 damage.
|
Karch
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 07:00:00 -
[21]
looks like an idea to mke o_O
-value x 12,000 people every time they fire. think that might cause a touch of CPU usage
the % resistance is there for that exact reason that reduction is not used. its perfect the way it is. if you had a reduction mod to refuse damage below 5 hp you would get AFK miners in 0.8 systems tanking the rats. bad idea
---
Was it good for you? |
Karch
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 07:00:00 -
[22]
looks like an idea to mke o_O
-value x 12,000 people every time they fire. think that might cause a touch of CPU usage
the % resistance is there for that exact reason that reduction is not used. its perfect the way it is. if you had a reduction mod to refuse damage below 5 hp you would get AFK miners in 0.8 systems tanking the rats. bad idea
---
Was it good for you? |
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 07:42:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Discorporation on 08/12/2004 07:47:50
It's an idea allright.
Crap one at that.
Dmg reduction. Ain't d&d, bub..
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 07:42:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Discorporation on 08/12/2004 07:47:50
It's an idea allright.
Crap one at that.
Dmg reduction. Ain't d&d, bub..
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 08:53:00 -
[25]
Is angstier a word?
If not, it should be. It kinda goes.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 08:53:00 -
[26]
Is angstier a word?
If not, it should be. It kinda goes.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:09:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Is angstier a word?
If not, it should be. It kinda goes.
Fear my teenage angst!
technically I'm not a teenager anymore, but ohh well 
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:09:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Is angstier a word?
If not, it should be. It kinda goes.
Fear my teenage angst!
technically I'm not a teenager anymore, but ohh well
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:10:00 -
[29]
I'm 26 but I have the body of a teenager.
Under my bed, wrapped in plastic.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:10:00 -
[30]
I'm 26 but I have the body of a teenager.
Under my bed, wrapped in plastic.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:11:00 -
[31]
nice 'n putrid, ehh :p
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:11:00 -
[32]
nice 'n putrid, ehh :p
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:12:00 -
[33]
My response to that is unfit for general forums \o/
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:12:00 -
[34]
My response to that is unfit for general forums \o/
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:21:00 -
[35]
To the eve-i mobile!
(kidding, i dont like eve-i =[)
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:21:00 -
[36]
To the eve-i mobile!
(kidding, i dont like eve-i =[)
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:36:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Pottsey on 08/12/2004 09:40:25
"you would get AFK miners in 0.8 systems tanking the rats. bad idea"
You already get AFK miners in 0.8+ systems tanking rats.
But it does seem like a bad idea. Unless they make it so you cannot use resistanceÆs at the same time. I would like it as an option over resistanceÆs.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:36:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Pottsey on 08/12/2004 09:40:25
"you would get AFK miners in 0.8 systems tanking the rats. bad idea"
You already get AFK miners in 0.8+ systems tanking rats.
But it does seem like a bad idea. Unless they make it so you cannot use resistanceÆs at the same time. I would like it as an option over resistanceÆs.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Domalais
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:45:00 -
[39]
Worst
Idea
Ever
|
Domalais
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 09:45:00 -
[40]
Worst
Idea
Ever
|
Kalfu
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 10:26:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Domalais
Worst
Idea
Ever
I've seen worse.
|
Kalfu
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 10:26:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Domalais
Worst
Idea
Ever
I've seen worse.
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 10:38:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Kalfu
Originally by: Domalais
Worst
Idea
Ever
I've seen worse.
There's a whole forum section for them, actually
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.08 10:38:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Kalfu
Originally by: Domalais
Worst
Idea
Ever
I've seen worse.
There's a whole forum section for them, actually
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |