EVE Search - [Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

[Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 2.0

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 45 post(s)
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 41	Posted - 2013.01.23 09:15:00 - [1] - Quote I came. I saw. It sucked really bad. (j/k, but it is disappointing) CCP Fozzie wrote: Reduce the base mass penalty on all 800mm, 200mm and 50mm plates by 20% If these modules had no mass penalty at all, they still wouldn't be used much. The instances where you can have any meaningful reallocation of fitting resources to any reasonable benefit are few and far between, so you always fit the largest plate reasonably possible. In this light this change, while having the noble cause of making these modules more appealing, comes across as stupid... because they're still just mostly-terrible mods. It's like getting a cast for your broken pinky finger while doing nothing for your broken arm... sure it helps... but it also seems pretty stupid. CCP Fozzie wrote: Add a new skill to the game called Armor Upgrades. Your belief that new must-train skills don't increase the power-gap between old and new players is simply wrong. Anytime such a skill is added you've added more 'power' into the game, and while new players must cycle through training many such skills to low levels, veterans can divert their training from far less vital skills and max it as soon as possible. This does increase the gap, it is inevitable but you could at least stop misrepresenting it as otherwise. And you're aware that by forcing players to train into your balance changes in this fashion you're essentially just shifting imbalance from one hand to another? You're taking something weak, and instead of buffing it you're replacing that weakness with the burden of additional training over the alternative (shield tank). Armor tanking, which you already recognize as inferior to shield tanking (thus attempting to buff it), is already more skill-heavy than shield tanking is; why would you seek to make it more so? This pattern of CCP throwing a new skill at every single thing in total isolation is somewhat disturbing. And now on to the real [sarcasm]gem[/sarcasm]. CCP Fozzie wrote: Ancillary Armor Repairer Not the same mechanic as the ASB, please read to the end. Always uses the same cap as a normal (T1/T2/Named) Armor Repper When not loaded with a cap booster, has 3/4 the rep amount as a T1 Armor Repairer Loaded cap boosters triple rep amount (so reps 2.25x a T1 repairer when loaded) Same cycle time and fittings as T1 reps Same capacity, charge restrictions and reload time as an ASB, but the longer cycle time of armor reps means it goes longer between reloads Limited to one per ship Lets break this down into a AAR-ASB comparison- It also requires additional capacitor. (worse) Its terrible without cap charges. (same) It cannot operate at full capacity without charges no matter what. (worse) Its repair rate is lower. (worse) It cycles slower. (worse) It lasts longer. (better) It repairs in larger 'chunks'. (worse) It repairs at the end of cycle. (worse) Limited to one. (worse) There's not much to be said about it except it's clearly a rather crappy ASB for armor. And when you take into account the whole 'repairs less but lasts longer' bit, it still appears incredibly mediocre. Behold, crappy graph magic!
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 46	Posted - 2013.01.23 20:52:00 - [2] - Quote Takeshi Yamato wrote: The say a picture is worth a thousand words... here is a graphical comparison of the AAR and the ASB http://i.imgur.com/j0CLZs5.jpg Please correct any mistakes I have made. Please note that I gave the AAR 3x rigs to help it out a little bit. I didn't include the Overcharge rig because the exact mechanics have not been clarified. You forgot to emphasize that the AAR also takes longer to repair less.
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 46	Posted - 2013.01.23 21:19:00 - [3] - Quote Perihelion Olenard wrote: Takeshi Yamato wrote: The say a picture is worth a thousand words... here is a graphical comparison of the AAR and the ASB http://i.imgur.com/j0CLZs5.jpg Please correct any mistakes I have made. Please note that I gave the AAR 3x rigs to help it out a little bit. I didn't include the Overcharge rig because the exact mechanics have not been clarified. Comparing a single medium AAR to the x-large and large ASB is pretty pointless. You'd be better off comparing small apples to extremely large oranges. You say this almost as if there was any meaningful difference in fitting requirements between the medium AAR and the large ASB. It's almost as if you believe the medium AAR can be stacked.... which it can't, or that the large ASB can't be stacked.... which it can. And perhaps you believed the armor tank wasn't taking up more slots and using up all the rig slots, which it was.
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 46	Posted - 2013.01.24 01:02:00 - [4] - Quote NetheranE wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: A few updates: We're switching the AAR to use nanite repair paste instead of cap boosters. What we're looking at now is for them to hold 8 reps worth of paste, with the smalls eating 1 per cycle, the mediums eating 5 and the larges eating 10. I'm also investigating our options for reducing the base powergrid need for medium and large armor reps a bit. We're aiming to have all of this on Sisi before the weekend. Please note that just because things are on Sisi doesn't mean they can no longer change. It just means we want to give people a chance to try it out in the game client. Sweet holy lord christ of the righteous god that he is, Fozzie, I will have all your blessed babies. Thank you for listening to the player base, you now have my eternal support. For the small small price of making the AAR even more mediocre. An updated graph.
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 46	Posted - 2013.01.24 01:52:00 - [5] - Quote Miguel Duran wrote: Well I screwed that post up... Second try but a lot smaller: ALWAYS copy any significant post before submitting or previewing it, this forum system is awful and the draft-saving is half baked at best.
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 46	Posted - 2013.01.24 02:07:00 - [6] - Quote Perihelion Olenard wrote: Rented wrote: For the small small price of making the AAR even more mediocre. An updated graph. That's why you fit more than one armor repairer. You're kidding, right? Not only is the AAR inferior, it can't be stacked. ASBs *can* be stacked. And your solution is to stack even-more-inferior modules on top of this? I don't even... what are you... how do you... in what alternate version of reality does this make sense to you?
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 46	Posted - 2013.01.24 02:51:00 - [7] - Quote Perihelion Olenard wrote: So what? That ASB becomes almost useless once it's out of charges. An armor tank will now easily outlast that and easily tank your 500 DPS BC. After these changes a myrmidon will be able to tank as well as a battleship used to. The hyperion will be able to deal and tank over 1.1k DPS, if you have good skills. Even better if you overload things, especially with that new rig. Quit trying to make the ancillary armor repairer a godly module. CCP isn't stupid. Holy crap, the man can't read. No wonder everything appears meaningless to him. You appear to be under the impression that the AAR is better than an ASB in the long run. It isn't. If you could read and apply the slightest bit of math you would know this. You also appear to be under the impression that hitpoints of armor are more valuable than hitpoints of shield, in any meaningful way, they aren't. Indeed you appear to believe a cap-reliant AAR tank ship would have more lasting power than a cap-independant ASB ship, which is very amusing. I've got some bad news. The cap boosters you're running will empty your cargohold of charges just as fast and faster than an ASB will empty its cargohold of its charges. Not to mention an ASB ship inherently does more DPS by simple virtue of your 'so many more slots for armor tank' not having many, if any, space for damage modules. Obviously the AAR is better, but that doesn't exclude it from being terrible. - /facepalm
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 46	Posted - 2013.01.24 03:05:00 - [8] - Quote Perihelion Olenard wrote: Again, you are comparing ONE large AAR to ONE XL ASB and saying armor sucks because of it. Are you two really that stupid? Armor does not tank the same way shields do. That ASB will go through it's loaded boosters well before the armor tank breaks in this magical 1v1. That shield ship will die before it reloads it's ASB, but the armor tank wouldn't need to reload yet. Feel free to compare 1x large AAR + 2x LARs to 2x XL-ASB if you'd like.
Rented Hunter Heavy Industries 52	Posted - 2013.01.30 12:51:00 - [9] - Quote fukier wrote: dont see this mentioned but on sisi the skill armor resistance phasing now reduces RAT by 10% for cycle and 5% to cap usuage per level As it has for months, on tranquility no less.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.