| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
57
   |
Posted - 2012.09.19 17:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Does this mean we will get navy cap booster 50s? 50s are what people use in medium ASBs. Maybe even navy cap booster 25s for small ASBs, even though they arent used much.
As well, i dont think increasing cap need of ASBs is necessary, they already are crippling in 1-2 rounds without charges
and no, limiting 1 per ship is a crappy idea. ASBs are a good concept and it helps active tanking as it should, it just needs to not be able to perma tank through reloads with 2 boosters. (While one is reloading, you should only have enough charges in the second booster to last 1/2 or 2/3 of the reload from the first, when receiving the full DPS that your ship can tank with a single ASB)
Out of interest however, i think they should not limit resistance shifting hardeners to a single one. Maybe 2 or 3 will make them more useful in more circumstances. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
57
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 17:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:Warde Guildencrantz wrote:Does this mean we will get navy cap booster 50s? 50s are what people use in medium ASBs. Maybe even navy cap booster 25s for small ASBs, even though they arent used much. Most like not at this time.
So does that mean medium ASBs won't be able to fit 9 charges, only 7? Sorry if the cap booster sizes are messing me around here. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
57
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 17:34:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:Yes, until we do the navy 50 version. Which I think we're going to do at some point, I just don't think it will make it into the winter expansion. But I've been wrong before 
Ahhhhh my hawk becomes possible to kill for a couple of months!
:P |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
57
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 17:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
Aliventi wrote:You only need to change 1 thing about them: 1 size booster per ASB. Right now the XLASB gets the same boost no matter if it uses an 800 or a 400. So everyone uses the 400 to get more cycles off. Which means it takes longer to run out of charges and they can fit more charges in their hold. That's the only thing unbalanced about them.
The point behind it is to get people to use the smaller charges. You aren't supposed to use the larger ones, those are for cap boosters, not ASBs. They want cap booster 200s, 150s, 100s, 50s, and 25s to actually sell on the market, thats why they made the boost the same as long as you had the right size of cap booster in there. I thought it was a good way of getting those charges to be useful in PvP. The only cap charges people used for PvP prior to the expansion was navy 400s in small cap boosters, navy 800s in medium cap boosters, and 800s/navy 800s in large cap boosters. Now people use 25s in small ASBs occasionally, 50s in medium asbs, 150s/200s in large asbs, and standard 400s in XL ASBs. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
57
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 18:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
Natalia de Sade wrote:
Why not implement stacking penalty on multiple ASBs instead of imposing a hard limit of one per ship?
See I'm not the only one that thinks a stacking penalty is better.
Hopefully just to the capacity of the booster, really their boost amount should be left alone. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
61
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:
Also 1 KEY feature I know you HAVE to adjust is the double overheat bonus.
Currently you don't only get a bonus to cycle time which makes you tank more but also making you run out of cap boosters faster - But at the same time you get an 10% extra hitpoint pr cycle... You MUST remove this as long people use oversized ASB.
I've seen people with oversized and double ASB master this to an advantage where the heat almost doesn't build up at all...
Thats the case for all boosters, ASB or not. Making them cycle faster would nerf them by overheating, which is stupid, they are supposed to get better for a burst period while overheating, not worse. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
61
|
Posted - 2012.09.19 21:18:00 -
[7] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:You need to limit the ASB's to 1 booster per ship hard limit. Keep them as is and just do that.
The reason for this is simple, if you run a NORMAL booster and an ASB you can get some good tanking. If you run a BUFFER fit and an ASB you can get some good results. As the ATX showed, you can get some great results in a fleet with a Logistics ship supported by ASB fits.
Running 2 simultaneously is where the problem becomes a huge issue.
This is why a stacking penalty to fitting multiple ASBs would be the best solution.
edit: crap doublepost |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 14:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Regarding the one-per-ship, this is still on the table, but we want more testing/feedback on the existing changes. Editing it to be one-per-ship is a very quick and easy thing to do, so we're not under any time pressure to make a decision on this quite yet.
Just do stacking penalties!! (Pleaaaaaase)
just make it so having two boosters will result in both of them functioning at a 75% boost amount, or three boosters with each of them functioning at 50% boost amount.
or maybe less drastic, like 85% and 65% |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
152
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 15:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:Warde Guildencrantz wrote:CCP SoniClover wrote:
Regarding the one-per-ship, this is still on the table, but we want more testing/feedback on the existing changes. Editing it to be one-per-ship is a very quick and easy thing to do, so we're not under any time pressure to make a decision on this quite yet.
Just do stacking penalties!! (Pleaaaaaase) just make it so having two boosters will result in both of them functioning at a 75% boost amount, or three boosters with each of them functioning at 50% boost amount. or maybe less drastic, like 85% and 65% I'm not sure stacking penalties would do much, as they would only really affect ASBs if you have two or more active at the same time. Stacking penalties do not check how many modules are fitted, only how many things are affecting the same stat (that has been flagged to use stacking penalty) at any given time. So you could still get maximum efficiency out of dual-ASBs as long as you only use one of them at a time, which is the normal case anyway. It would be possible to do some pseudo-stacking penalty based on number of modules fitted, but it would be a dirty hack.
Possible future version then if it requires a bit of a new method for coding. Doesn't have to be for retribution, but I really think just reducing total boost amount based on how many boosters are fit is a good way to do it. The real problem is the fact that they can run so powerfully no matter how many boosters are fit. Having a single one run powerfully for a period isn't all that broken. On bonused ships, it gets a bit ridiculous, but it's not impossible to fight. |
| |
|