| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |
Dzajic
100
   |
Posted - 2013.01.21 23:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
Niceiiish.
But no cigar. For med reps and up rigs will make your reps eat even more grid, and armor reps already devour grid. I can't degrade further from electrons, can I?
And really really bad for not doing anything about existing armor reps!
People have been saying for years that active armor tank is sub par, and you mostly leave it alone and add one more new and unnecessary module. Again one with so contrived mechanics that you have to limit it to 1 per ship. You still need cap booster, you are just eating charges much faster and in two places, and its either limited duration boost and than sub part to t1 meta 0 repper or you have additional "normal" armor reps on. |
Dzajic
108
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 11:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
There are still many pointless modules completely unaddressed by this change!
50mm and 100mm plates remain a useless joke. Old "regenerative" now layered plating and energized layered plating are still pointless. Why ever use them when omni resist modules give more.
Back to rig changes. Bad bad bad. With new rigs and if you fit all 3 rigs for active tank you will have LAR II take 2650 grid , and MAR II take 200 grid. Dual or triple rep setups become ridiculously tight on gird. So to go around new "helpful" rig change, you have to drop one tanking rig for ACR to get some extra grid. If your setup wasn't already tight enough that it needed a acr.
While at same time effects/bonuses of modules and rigs are unchanged.
As with ASBs, new ancillary module because mandatory base of all setups, and its standard reps that become auxiliary help to keep you alive while new gimmicky module is on reload. |
Dzajic
109
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 12:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
And trololo oversized shield extenders? All frigs use medium extenders, all cruisers use large extenders. Would you also love to have frigs limited to small shield extenders? Cruisers only to fit MSE? |
Dzajic
109
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 13:02:00 -
[4] - Quote
I would take this chance to be boring and repetitive and remind everyone that proposed changed do very little if we don't look only at new gimmick module.
Standard armor reps remain exactly the same, rig bonuses remain exactly the same, one kind of crippling penalty is changed to another crippling penalty (should I be slow as snail or should I downgrade all my guns or swap tank rigs for grid rigs?). Only changes that even touch active armor tank are change of penalties and new overheat rig (That is in current version worse than nanobot accelerator), everything else about active armor tank remains the same subpar old self. |
Dzajic
109
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 15:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Larger reply is still coming but I just want to quickly note that we're pulling the Overheating rig from this proposal until further notice.
As always thanks for all your comments on it. I started off with an early mistake with this rig and we're not going to re-add it unless it's properly balanced.
Can you please also reconsider Incursus nerf till further notice? It would be terrible shame if AARs got delayed or changed to something more reasonable and the little frig got its bonus nerfed for no reason. Please! :( |
Dzajic
109
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 15:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Just to note, with OH rigs currently off the table, only change conventional active armor tank receives is trading a lot of grid for some speed. |
Dzajic
110
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 16:30:00 -
[7] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Dzajic wrote:Just to note, with OH rigs currently off the table, only change conventional active armor tank receives is trading a lot of grid for some speed. Its an absolutely TINY amount of grid.
Please tell me how is 350 more grid per LAR II (if you fit 3 tank rigs) "tiny"? And that is with rigging 5. |
Dzajic
110
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 16:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
I think its 10% penalty base and 5% with armor rigging at 5. Could have screwed up the math ofc. |
Dzajic
110
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 17:08:00 -
[9] - Quote
PVE circumstances have to be 2nd tier priority. In PVP rigging skills at 5 are still a luxury, but level 4 is near mandatory. But its still a god damn tough hit on grid. |
Dzajic
110
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 17:57:00 -
[10] - Quote
But then you literally make them into armor ASB. And we don't want armor and shield tank to be same... for whatever reason, but everyone keeps saying we don't want that. |
Dzajic
111
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 23:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
1. Resist bonuses.
Stronger resist bonuses than existing would be just a boon for logistics and large fleets.
Irrelevant to armor tanking vs buffer tanking debate.
Fact is that people have shown the math over and over that current resist bonuse hulls get active tank some 3% less than active tank bonused ships. Shield is alleviated from this by having ASBs in their entire broken glory.
Let me repeat that, resist bonused hulls get active armor tank a tiny percentage worse tank than active bonused hulls.
While at same time being desirable for fleets, something that active bonsued ships aren't desired for. Changing active tank bonus to resist bonus would make those hulls equally capable of active tank and being fleet ships.
But yes that is bad and homogenizes stuff. So buffing active bonuses above 7.5% could actually make them better at active tank than resist bonused hulls by more than 2.5%
2. Powergrid.
Giving armor tank grid penalty is simply unfair. Only rigs in game that have grid penalty are weapon rigs, and its uniform for all.
All shield tank goes as it is. Armor buffer and resist tank remains as it is.
But active armor tank is now penalized and drains more grid. Thank you very much but I'd like to keep my speed penalties. With proposed changes I can either downgrade guns, downgrade tank itself, sacrifice a damage mod or tank module to fit a RCU or PDS or switch one tank grid for anciliary.
Considering that normal armor tank modules are not getting even a tiniest boost (and Incurus is getting nerfed!) this leads to getting either less tank or less gank than before the "armor tank fix".
3. AAR and all about it
Without this one module you are not doing anything about active armor tank, no wait, you are actually nerfing those fits powergrid. Outside of this one module active armor tank isn't getting anything positive.
4. Overheating rigs and modules.
Only positive news here. Will be looking forward to it, but can't say anything without exact talk about numbers and mechanics.
5. Nerfing links and boosting actual local stats
Please for the love of god prioritize this. |
Dzajic
111
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 23:23:00 -
[12] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:for instance the TE and TCs when is this getting fixed all you have to do is drop TEs to 7.5% falloff or something Pretty please?
And blasters get nerfed hard again. Thank you very much. NO! Leave TEs, if you have to do something change minmatar ammo and ship bonuses. |
Dzajic
113
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 12:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:javascript:__doPostBack('forum$ctl00$Preview','')
What? What? Whaaaat!? |
Dzajic
113
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 12:20:00 -
[14] - Quote
On tech1 and on non pimped T2 ships up to certain size, cargohold full of nanite paste will cost several times more than ship + fittings. Are you really certain you'd like that? |
Dzajic
114
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 20:45:00 -
[15] - Quote
1 nanite per cycle, 9 for full for frigs. Ok reasonable. It will be more expensive than cap boosters, but yes vastly lower volume.
Ofc, changing PI formula to cut nanite paste prices say in half would be doubleplusgood. |
Dzajic
114
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 22:10:00 -
[16] - Quote
AAR still mandates at least one more "Standard" rep on board. Being 3/4 of T1 rep it is nearly completely useless when not loaded. Yes ASBs will destroy your cap if left on, but you can fit more than one of ASBs.
Grid usage reduction should be near mandatory with rig penalty changes, irregardless of how AAR is and works.
Reducing cycle times of MAR and LAR is a very nice idea. With rep coming at end of cycle you want it as soon as possible and then somewhat before that. It would be awesome if you gave MAR and LAR a tiny buff of rep while at it, so that new modules are maybe 3 to 5% better than old ones. Very minor buff. With implants and links and drugs it could scale badly, so nerf the god damn links ASAP.
To CCP Fozzie and all here. Please remember that single or multiple ASB fits are completely viable and maybe still a bit too strong without cystals, links or blue pill.
For "serious fights" on everything other than Incursus currently active armor tank is damn near useless if you are not running all the force multipliers. (drugs, implants, links).
So yes, small buff to MARs and LARs while you are changing other things. But for the love of god whatever you do reduce grid requirements or change rig penalty into something else. |
Dzajic
114
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 22:28:00 -
[17] - Quote
So overheated it would consume nanites and do megaboosted reps? But if it "loads" nanite paste it would still need a reload. But i guess you could switch it from OH mod to slow mode and use those 8 mega rep cycles over a longer period of time, when they are really god damn needed. Still tricky with rep coming at end of cycle.
Still a very contrived module, especially compared to moron friendly nature of ASBs. |
| |
|