| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Thread Trollington
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
0
   |
Posted - 2012.07.14 10:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
I hope this have not been proposed before (and buried ).
The cap booster charge fueled active tank kind of module for armor could be a low slot module which gives a significant amount of resist for a short period of time. Kind of like a shield invul.
It should give significantly more armor resists than a T2 eanm, as for the fitting requirements, no idea.
There should also be some way to prevent this module to be too good on supercaps ( there is no such problem with ASB )
... couse giving armor tankers an armor repairer which works exactly like an asb, but for armor, would be a super boring solution, this game has seen too much balancing of the kind which makes everything the same (and boring) as it is... |
NiGhTTraX
FISKL GUARDS
Nulli Secunda
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 10:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Thread Trollington wrote:I hope this have not been proposed before (and buried ).
Stopped reading. Use search.
I'd like to be able to implement all the stupid ideas people suggest. Then go on TQ and ruin their day with them. Uber tractor beams? Sure, I'll tractor you around with me. Uber bubbles? Sure, I'll bubble you in Jita. Uber punishments for pirates? Sure, I'll make everyone not buy your minerals anymore. |
serras bang
Lucien Coven
6
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 10:29:00 -
[3] - Quote
tbh you armour tankers have the shifting resist percentages you dont need a armour reper like shields. |
Kitt JT
League of Non-Aligned Worlds
Nulli Secunda
44
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 10:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
armour and shield tankers are not equal
shields have XL rep
Armour have XL plate
shields now have an ancillary booster
armour now have both a passive AND an active multi-resist mod (invuln, eanm, w/e) (remember shield only has an active) |
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
129
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 11:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kitt JT wrote:
armour and shield tankers are not equal
No one disputing that.
Kitt JT wrote:
Armour have XL plate
And what does it have to do with ACTIVE tanking?
Kitt JT wrote:
armour now have both a passive AND an active multi-resist mod (invuln, eanm, w/e) (remember shield only has an active)
 shield invul is stronger than eanm but costs cap - check
shield invul is much better than RAH in 99% situations - check
shield invul takes 2-3 times less cap than RAH - check
shield invul does not require new dedicated skill to operate - check
shield invul does not need to adapt - check
shield active tanking by means of ASB uses no cap - check
shield active tanking tanks MUCH more than active armor tanking - check
active armour tanking uses a lot of cap while the boats it is supposed to be used on in most cases also use a lot of cap for weapons - check
plates/rigs impose severe drawbacks on armor tankers ( especially Gallente ) - check
extenders/rigs impose minor drawbacks on shield tankers - check
To sum up - all is well and working as intended.
ONLY positive side of RAH is that is not prone to stacking penalties ( you can still fit only one though ) |
Paikis
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
69
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 12:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote:To sum up - all is well and working as intended.
Glad we got that out of the way. Can we close this thread now?
I'm seriously going to make a copy+paste response to this topic, it's getting ridiculous. "I want to have better buffer and be just as good at active tanking, and I want it now!" |
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
129
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 13:18:00 -
[7] - Quote
Paikis wrote:
I'm seriously going to make a copy+paste response to this topic, it's getting ridiculous. "I want to have better buffer and be just as good at active tanking, and I want it now!"
So what you say is this :
Armour has better buffer so it needs to have MUCH worse active tank.
Where's logic in that?
Shouldn't both styles of tanking( buffer/active ) be viable on both armour and shield ( just in different scenarios ) ?
Also - when you undock you are either buffer tanking of active tanking so you can't really have both at the same time can you.
Many dedicated armour tankers are much better while using their shields for tanking. That is just wrong and no discussion is to be had here.
I would like to see ALL tanking styles viable and share similar effectiveness. That does not mean that I would like to make them identical. |
Reisen Udongein Inaba
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 13:26:00 -
[8] - Quote
Medium slot active damagemods? Fit both amazing armor buffer and damage, as shieldtanks can fit amazing activetank and damage. Moar damage takes medslots GåÆ no capboosters GåÆ no activetank. |
Corina Jarr
Spazzoid Enterprises
Purpose Built
1040
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 14:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
Remember though that the ASBs are talked about getting a nerf, and remember that the adaptive things for armor don't have a T2 yet. |
mxzf
Blackened Skies
1938
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 14:21:00 -
[10] - Quote
Well, atleast this specific idea (super armor resist mod) hasn't been proposed previously. It's still a bad idea, but atleast it's not the same idea that everyone has seen before.
The issue with it is that, depending on how it was implemented, it would likely be an insane buff to armor mods. It sounds like you're asking for a cap-booster fueled overheated active omni hardener. The problem is that this would be a massive boost to armor tanks. Part of the tradeoffs of having armor tank is that you can either have strong active hardeners or omni EANMs, I don't see how adding a strong active omni hardener would do anything but make armor tanks a bit OP. |
|
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
55
|
Posted - 2012.07.14 17:31:00 -
[11] - Quote
It does occur to me that the reason the reactive armour hardener is broken for frigates and cruisers is the high cap cost.
It could be changed to run on cap boosters like the ASB. With auto reload off you could run it past the minute or so the cap boosters last at least for a time. May make the mod viable for pvp fits. |
Thread Trollington
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.07.15 15:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
Well, armor tanking in general has the possibility of having a large buffer, but the majority of armor tanked ships can't have more buffer than the majority of shield tanked ships.A large amount of shield tanked ships have a large buffer, and regen (check the most used ships on killboards). Not to mention that a large armor buffer have serious penalties on your ship, making it useless for other than a bait in many cases.
The adaptive armor resist is just really bad. |
cBOLTSON
Star Frontiers
THORN Alliance
66
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 12:30:00 -
[13] - Quote
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote:[quote=Paikis]
SNIP****
I would like to see ALL tanking styles viable and share similar effectiveness. That does not mean that I would like to make them identical.
This 100000000 times!
Give them slight variations but an ideal system would be a tweaked version of what we have allready.
Armor tank:
Active - good (Sustained)
Passive/Buffer - great (no recharge of course)
Shield tank:
Active - great (Not so sustainable)
Pasive/buffer - good (But recharge included)
But dont make the diffrence SO great that its an obvious choice like it is now. Make subtle but noticeable diffrences.
"Were not elitists, were just tired of fail" - The Sorn |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
350
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 13:57:00 -
[14] - Quote
armor is not the same as shield. So there is no ASB for armor but other modules.
Stop requesting all the same model. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
55
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 14:12:00 -
[15] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:armor is not the same as shield. So there is no ASB for armor but other modules.
Stop requesting all the same model.
Are you responding to the OP? If you read the proposal it merely suggests using the direct cap injecting of a module for a resistance mod not an ASB armour duplicate.
to quote the op
Thread Trollington wrote:
... couse giving armor tankers an armor repairer which works exactly like an asb, but for armor, would be a super boring solution, this game has seen too much balancing of the kind which makes everything the same (and boring) as it is...
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |