Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny
Zombie Ninja Space Bears
92
   |
Posted - 2013.01.22 21:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
maybe i have a way to simplistic point of view,
but why not simply reduce the PG needed for medium and large armor reppers and keep the proposed changes for the active armor rigs? this way ships fitting for active armor have more PG to fit larger weapons, as they miss the slots to fit dmg-mods.
newPG need of reppers plus rigs should settle around the PG needed atm the moment, i guess.
then ditch the the AAR and apply it's mechanic (with tweaked numbers and boost upfront the cycle) to the ASBs. Limit to one per ship. it should get a noticable longer cycle time so normal shield boosters would have the incentive of a "quick" fix while the newASB is more like a panic button with a huge but more scarcely boost. so newASB providing a different flavour instead of beeing the same but with less requirements.
change the penalty of passive armor rigs directly to agility (and maybe tweak the numbers). this way (buffer)armor ships still would be as graceful as an elephant and still be very cumbersome to fly, but the speed would only be reduced by the plates (which is quite extensively already). this way manual piloting would be a bigger factor in fights between armor and shield tanked ships. a charging bull comes into mind ^^ |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny
Zombie Ninja Space Bears
95
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 22:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
Roime wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
Powergrid usage penalty on active rigs
When looking for a replacement for the speed penalty on active tanking rigs our goal was for the penalty to be something significant (useless penalties are something we want less of) without being onerous. The rep PG penalty had the advantage of being much easier to work around through fitting adjustments than the speed penalty, while being significant enough that it could not be completely ignored. I'm open to possible changes to that mechanic, either through changing the penalty itself or adjusting the PG use of medium and large reps a bit.
The PG penalty is the most logical one, but what are the fitting stats for AARs? Medium and large reppers are extremely expensive to fit, also because you always need a cap booster with them, and one repper is never enough. Furthermore the ability to fit larger guns is important, as armor tank means you won't have free slots for dmg mods.
medium and especially large armor reppers seriously need there PG use toned down.
if this is done reasonably, then its ok for active armor rigs to amp up the PG use of armor reppers, as it then demands the choice between extra tank and maybe a weapon downgrade or less effective tank and better dmg more grid for other stuff.
how about shield rigs increase the CPU needed for extenders and boosters, instead of messing with the signature?
i always had the feeling, the increase in signature was no real issue, atleast above cruiser size.
to keep things "consistent" with armor rigs, active shield rigs increase CPU use of shield boosters (and maybe hardeners) while passive shield rigs reduce the speed-bonus gained from MWD or AB due to energy diverted from the cap to the shields or stuff.
|