Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 53 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 45 post(s) |
Mund Richard
325
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:25:00 -
[1411] - Quote
Tursarius wrote:I think that it is time to retire the active bonuses. This limits the use of the ships in some areas, whereas t1 ships are supposed to be a little more generalized. A raw hp bonus has been mentioned and I think that if it was applied to both shield and armor it would be well balanced. As far as hull bonuses and their use go... Active rep : Local rep HP : Buffer Resist: Buffer, Local rep, Remote rep
One of the three is not restricting your choices in gameplay (as long as you don't tank the other way), the other two however ARE (assuming you want to make use of the bonus). The resist one is the one really doing something for remote reps by increasing the EHP worth of every cycle they spend on you. A buffer 'only' increases your time to live before a rep lands (which resist does as well, if at a lesser degree), but not it's EHP worth.
So if you are worrying of limiting the use of a ship, resist is the way to go.
Quote:while a TE gives 3 bonuses even if they are slightly less. Last time I checked, a range scripted TC is only equal to a TE, while not giving any tracking. It does pull ahead in tracking, but then you suffer in the range department in return. >> "We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Including NPC EWAR getting the stacking penalty? Would be awesome to have a cap on how far they can reduce my lock range (not 10km from 100 in a BS) or optimal+falloff with TD. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
3989
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:43:00 -
[1412] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Fozzie... Still no response on the imbalance in progression of dead space shield boosters vs armor reppers? What's the deal man? Should I simply assume that you and your team think the current implementation of these modules is working at intended? If so, then I've come to the conclusion that simple mathematical comparisons are not exactly your strong suite. Please prove me wrong.
I know I keep posting about this specific topic... However this is what I consider the MAJOR issue in balance between the tanking types, please take a stance on this one way or the other.
There are a ton of things with broken balance in this game, and yes the balance between high metalevel shield and armor mods is one of them.
However since I can't really commit to any timing for anything beyond next Tuesday I've been trying to focus on discussing the changes we have ready for 1.1.
So yes we know it's a problem, but I can't say anything more without setting unreasonable expectations. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
37
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:58:00 -
[1413] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Fozzie... Still no response on the imbalance in progression of dead space shield boosters vs armor reppers? What's the deal man? Should I simply assume that you and your team think the current implementation of these modules is working at intended? If so, then I've come to the conclusion that simple mathematical comparisons are not exactly your strong suite. Please prove me wrong.
I know I keep posting about this specific topic... However this is what I consider the MAJOR issue in balance between the tanking types, please take a stance on this one way or the other. There are a ton of things with broken balance in this game, and yes the balance between high metalevel shield and armor mods is one of them. However since I can't really commit to any timing for anything beyond next Tuesday I've been trying to focus on discussing the changes we have ready for 1.1. So yes we know it's a problem, but I can't say anything more without setting unreasonable expectations. It is a completely legitimate concern though and I agree with you that it's a problem.
Thanks Fozzie, good to know that at least you know deadspace/faction repers should be better. HAHAHA glad i did stack good amount of those items :D.
But on serious note ... this why difference in price is so big. Reps are garbage and worse in every aspect. But hell yeah i hope i will profit on this too ;). |
Goldensaver
Marsuud And Sons Industries
133
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:07:00 -
[1414] - Quote
Jalxan wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:[Compared to using faction boosters with an ASB the cost of the AAR use is not unreasonable. Remember that armor repairers cycle more slowly than shield boosters, and therefore use their charges more slowly and an ASB. True, but this isn't a faction module, and it's a continuous cost. Hence why I wanted to bring it up. I just think it'll be more useful if the charges for it didn't cost 200,000 a cycle, which is vastly more than anything currently on the market, even when counting faction items. It's up to you. I just wanted to give you my point of view, as I know I'll likely never use it unless it's a super-expensive ship or there's an extremely high need. At least, unless the cost of the charges were made less in some way or another. He's not talking about a faction shield booster. He's talking about the fact that nobody's stupid enough to use standard charges in their ASB's. You used the price of a standard Cap Booster Charge. Nobody uses those except in MASB's (and SASB's, but nobody uses those either). For a full booster of navy 150's/400's the cost is much more comparable. Of course the balance is completely skewed (ASB's OP!) but the fact remains that for a full load the cost is comparable (if still somewhat more expensive for the AARs.) |
Goldensaver
Marsuud And Sons Industries
133
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:20:00 -
[1415] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Fozzie... Still no response on the imbalance in progression of dead space shield boosters vs armor reppers? What's the deal man? Should I simply assume that you and your team think the current implementation of these modules is working at intended? If so, then I've come to the conclusion that simple mathematical comparisons are not exactly your strong suite. Please prove me wrong.
I know I keep posting about this specific topic... However this is what I consider the MAJOR issue in balance between the tanking types, please take a stance on this one way or the other. There are a ton of things with broken balance in this game, and yes the balance between high metalevel shield and armor mods is one of them. However since I can't really commit to any timing for anything beyond next Tuesday I've been trying to focus on discussing the changes we have ready for 1.1. So yes we know it's a problem, but I can't say anything more without setting unreasonable expectations. It is a completely legitimate concern though and I agree with you that it's a problem. Thanks Fozzie, good to know that at least you know deadspace/faction repers should be better. HAHAHA glad i did stack good amount of those items :D. But on serious note ... this why difference in price is so big. Reps are garbage and worse in every aspect. But hell yeah i hope i will profit on this too ;).
Oh certainly Faction/Deadspace should be better than simple Meta 0-5 equipment. My question is by how much? Personally I don't believe that they should be as significantly better as they are now. The way things are now is that Deadspace is required to active tank for many ships (if you want any chance of winning, that is.) The Incursus works, but anything larger struggles without Deadspace reps. Same thing applies on the shield side, except for the fact that the ASB broke things.
Personally I'd like to see the margin between Meta 0-5 and deadspace reduced. Deadspace should give you a definite advantage, but piloting skill should be able to make up for it. |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
825
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:21:00 -
[1416] - Quote
maybe after next week you can get kil2 to write a nice dev blog about the future of balancing for the spring expansion... tbh i just want to know what his dev name is... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
37
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:26:00 -
[1417] - Quote
@Goldensaver
Well and this not entierly true. Armor reps give slight advantage - there is no huge gap you are talking about. Another story is with shield boosters. Gap is tremendous. Either give reps same treatment or reduce boosters power.
Also i wouldn't reduce gap between tech 2 and faction/deadspace. It's not like it's easy to obtain deadspace stuff compared to tech 2. What you are asking is repeating sad story of faction guns. Higher meta , higher price but noone wants this stuff. |
Goldensaver
Marsuud And Sons Industries
133
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:35:00 -
[1418] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:@Goldensaver
Well and this not entierly true. Armor reps give slight advantage - there is no huge gap you are talking about. Another story is with shield boosters. Gap is tremendous. Either give reps same treatment or reduce boosters power.
Also i wouldn't reduce gap between tech 2 and faction/deadspace. It's not like it's easy to obtain deadspace stuff compared to tech 2. What you are asking is repeating sad story of faction guns. Higher meta , higher price but noone wants this stuff. True. I did kinda forget the gap between T2 and Deadspace reps. Shields need to be brought down hard (or - CCP willing - T2 shield, reps and Deadspace reps brought up.) |
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
37
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:46:00 -
[1419] - Quote
I must say that after my initial rage, i'm getting a bit more calm atm. Looks like they at least know that problems still exist and are willing to fix this. Price of pithi/gistii a- type booster is not only based on shield being popular. It's based on huge advantage over a - type small rep in every aspect. Seems like i can now change my forum warrior style to peaceful and patient player :D. And i do prefer to act this way. But when problem arises i must fight hard for what i deserve hehe.
I was mostly afraid that in all those changes - standard non AAR reps are getting no love in future. Seems they actually will receive love on faction/deadspace/officer level. Better than nothing i guess :D. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
893
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 01:28:00 -
[1420] - Quote
http://localectomy.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/circles-in-metagame.html
As i read it, we will go through the same problems with AAR's as we had with ASB's. The Incursus with a heated AAR and a heated SAR II, legion boosts (not uncommon) will achieve Godlink levels of tanking - with even LESS reliance on capacitor to run the reps, and be less likeely to be capped by a neutraliser.
This is absolutely ridiculous. The Incursus is already the most tanky frigate in the game by a gigantic margin. The AAR will break this so badly Fozzie should be embarassed.
I am glad the heat rig got dropped. it is a stupid idea. Absolutely stupid, as it would stack with everything else, and escpeciallly on a uber-resist T3 such as a Legion or Proteus, it could get out of hand with AAR + MARII setups - considering the coolant injector subs reduce heat damage.
I like the concept. But there is no balance in this appparent "balancing"pass on Armour - just another cycle of stupid + exploitation + nerf + abandonment.
And yes, ASB's are crap now. i actually went and said it. Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed. http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
|
Shpenat
Pafos Technologies
35
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 07:45:00 -
[1421] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:http://localectomy.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/circles-in-metagame.html
As i read it, we will go through the same problems with AAR's as we had with ASB's. The Incursus with a heated AAR and a heated SAR II, legion boosts (not uncommon) will achieve Godlink levels of tanking - with even LESS reliance on capacitor to run the reps, and be less likeely to be capped by a neutraliser.
This is absolutely ridiculous. The Incursus is already the most tanky frigate in the game by a gigantic margin. The AAR will break this so badly Fozzie should be embarassed.
I am glad the heat rig got dropped. it is a stupid idea. Absolutely stupid, as it would stack with everything else, and escpeciallly on a uber-resist T3 such as a Legion or Proteus, it could get out of hand with AAR + MARII setups - considering the coolant injector subs reduce heat damage.
I like the concept. But there is no balance in this appparent "balancing"pass on Armour - just another cycle of stupid + exploitation + nerf + abandonment.
And yes, ASB's are crap now. i actually went and said it.
How is AAR making you more imune to neutralizer?
incursus will be able to tank a lot for as long as his repper is loaded. Then its tank will drop qiote considerably. (AAR provides 50% more rep than T2 when loaded and about half when not loaded) |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
560
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 08:45:00 -
[1422] - Quote
Shpenat wrote:Trinkets friend wrote:http://localectomy.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/circles-in-metagame.html
As i read it, we will go through the same problems with AAR's as we had with ASB's. The Incursus with a heated AAR and a heated SAR II, legion boosts (not uncommon) will achieve Godlink levels of tanking - with even LESS reliance on capacitor to run the reps, and be less likeely to be capped by a neutraliser.
This is absolutely ridiculous. The Incursus is already the most tanky frigate in the game by a gigantic margin. The AAR will break this so badly Fozzie should be embarassed.
I am glad the heat rig got dropped. it is a stupid idea. Absolutely stupid, as it would stack with everything else, and escpeciallly on a uber-resist T3 such as a Legion or Proteus, it could get out of hand with AAR + MARII setups - considering the coolant injector subs reduce heat damage.
I like the concept. But there is no balance in this appparent "balancing"pass on Armour - just another cycle of stupid + exploitation + nerf + abandonment.
And yes, ASB's are crap now. i actually went and said it. How is AAR making you more imune to neutralizer? incursus will be able to tank a lot for as long as his repper is loaded. Then its tank will drop qiote considerably. (AAR provides 50% more rep than T2 when loaded and about half when not loaded)
It gives 100% more while its loaded..
Also the incursus will still rep a bit more then a unbonused frigs after i think.. |
TehCloud
Carnivore Company Honey Badger Coalition
36
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 10:48:00 -
[1423] - Quote
Quote: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 Nanite Repair Paste, has 3/4 the rep amount as a T1 Armor Repairer
- When loaded with Nanite Repair Paste triples rep amount (so reps 2.25x a T1 repairer when loaded)
- Same cycle time and fittings as T1 reps
- Smalls use 1 paste per cycle, mediums 4, larges 8. Can hold 8 cycles worth of paste at a time. Reload time is 1 minute just like an ASB, but the longer cycle time of armor reps means it goes longer between reloads
- Limited to one per ship
Please read the OP before claiming things. My Condor costs less than that module! |
Mund Richard
327
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 11:03:00 -
[1424] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:It gives 100% more while its loaded.. 125% more than T1 meta0, 87.5% more than meta4, less than 70% more than T2.
I do hope everyone is space-rich enough to fit meta4 SARs on an Incursus, so you are not getting 100% even while it's loaded.
Unloaded you get 62.5% that of a meta4, and 56.25% of a T2. >> "We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Including NPC EWAR getting the stacking penalty? Would be awesome to have a cap on how far they can reduce my lock range (not 10km from 100 in a BS) or optimal+falloff with TD. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
560
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 11:27:00 -
[1425] - Quote
Shiii, people are checking the numbers i randomly spout now?
So i have to start to actually do math before i talk? damn it >_< |
Mund Richard
327
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 11:31:00 -
[1426] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Shiii, people are checking the numbers i randomly spout now?
So i have to start to actually do math before i talk? damn it >_< Collateral damage, sorry. >> "We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Including NPC EWAR getting the stacking penalty? Would be awesome to have a cap on how far they can reduce my lock range (not 10km from 100 in a BS) or optimal+falloff with TD. |
Gitanmaxx
Viziam Amarr Empire
84
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 15:57:00 -
[1427] - Quote
The biggest problem with armor tanking is definitely the speed. I'm trained up for armor with as many sp as i possibly can and when i fit a tormentor or an executioner (the two frigs i'm using to pvp) I can always get the same amount of tank with twice the speed by fitting shields instead of armor. Leaving me no real reason to use armor that i've spent so much sp on. |
Kittel
Caldari Navy Urpiken Security
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 17:33:00 -
[1428] - Quote
I think there should be a shield skill reducing sig rad as well as change shield rigs to be cpu or pg pen as well. Changing the armor to these new values but leaving the penalties for shields intact is unjust and damaging to shield tanks while buffing armor penalties to useless penalties. Why not just remove shields all together and everyone can be armor tanks... |
deepos
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 18:02:00 -
[1429] - Quote
Kittel wrote:I think there should be a shield skill reducing sig rad as well as change shield rigs to be cpu or pg pen as well. Changing the armor to these new values but leaving the penalties for shields intact is unjust and damaging to shield tanks while buffing armor penalties to useless penalties. Why not just remove shields all together and everyone can be armor tanks...
you are bad and you should feel bad for trolling an interesting thread.
Don't let the door hit you on your way out. |
Felsusguy
Nuevo Atlas Corporation
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 21:24:00 -
[1430] - Quote
Honestly I think armor repairers in general should use a decreased amount of capacitor, otherwise buffer tanks will always reign alone. Neuts be crazy. Try-Cycle Mining Industry recruiting! |
|
Jonas Nerub
Verteidiger des wahren Bloedsinns Universal Constant Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 03:58:00 -
[1431] - Quote
got a quick idea for the anchillery mods.....
i want a switch, (maybe a extra bottoun on the module) where i can change between own cap and the carges without to eject the charges
that would be also a bit more helpfull to time the 1min reload
i think thats an awsome idea^^!
|
Mund Richard
327
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 04:58:00 -
[1432] - Quote
Jonas Nerub wrote:got a quick idea for the anchillery mods..... i want a switch, (maybe a extra bottoun on the module) where i can change between own cap and the carges without to eject the charges that would be also a bit more helpfull to time the 1min reload i think thats an awsome idea^^! Do you expect CCP to make a new button for modules when they haven't made a simple countdown timer visible for reload?
Also, what kind of "own cap" are you talking about? ASB? For the AAR, being able to tell the module not to consume charges would be nice, but see my first line. >> "We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Including NPC EWAR getting the stacking penalty? Would be awesome to have a cap on how far they can reduce my lock range (not 10km from 100 in a BS) or optimal+falloff with TD. |
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
127
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 09:44:00 -
[1433] - Quote
Gah!!!!
Why didn't I have this idea earlier?!?
Rather than huge rep, huge reload as it is at the moment, how would the AAR behave if it made use of a slightly different base mechanic than the ASB?
Fitting as current, Capacity as current, Unloaded Rep Amount as current, No charges used for normal operation.
Increase Overheating bonus by 250%, all heat generated by the module - sunk to nanite repair paste reservoir.
So you hit the module and you get an ordinary, T1 armour rep. Overheat the module however and it pumps out crazy rep, burns through its paste (which would eventually require the 1 minute reload) but doesn't burn out and doesn't spread heat to the rest of the rack (until its paste is exhausted).
While the ASBers are burning through Navy cap charges because their passive recharge can't handle a frigate the AAR is more conservative, tanks away on cap as normal but has an "OMG button"...
That. would be Awesome.... |
Mund Richard
329
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 10:16:00 -
[1434] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:So you hit the module and you get an ordinary, T1 armour rep. Overheat the module however and it pumps out crazy rep, burns through its paste (which would eventually require the 1 minute reload) but doesn't burn out and doesn't spread heat to the rest of the rack (until its paste is exhausted). If it would spread heat but somewhat (not fully) eased the heat on the module, I'd like the idea more.
ASB removing a critical part of the equation of active tanking was bad enough once. No need for another one. And need to rework the one already present. imho >> "We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Including NPC EWAR getting the stacking penalty? Would be awesome to have a cap on how far they can reduce my lock range (not 10km from 100 in a BS) or optimal+falloff with TD. |
Nomistrav
Maverick Conflict Solutions
151
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 16:27:00 -
[1435] - Quote
Why the use of Nanite Repair Paste with the AAR's...? That's ridiculous, your "fix" to the armor tanking problem might work but it will be a hell of a lot more expensive when compared to ASB's. The fact that Active Armor Tanking, with this module, can -still- be influenced heavily by Cap Warfare when the ASB isn't makes it less appealing as a whole.
I'm paying more to have faster repair on a system that DOES NOT automatically come with passive repairing (like shield recharge) I'm paying more to have faster repair on a system that DOES get influenced by Capacitor Warfare I'm paying more to have system that only certain ships will truly benefit from (as far as the Gallente line)
Let's be real, with Gallente you're either an Armor Tanker, a Drone Fighter or a Brawler. With these changes, you're effectively neutering the Armor Tankers by having them spend vastly more for their "fuel" than those who use ASB's and further more by basically forcing them to have the module (such is their style) you're technically increasing the price on those ships.
Proposed Solution: Find a different fuel for the AAR or find a way to reduce the price of Paste. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
53
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 17:37:00 -
[1436] - Quote
On SiSi the Incursus rep bonus is 7.5% but ship description still says 10%. Would be nice if the correct description goes into 1.1. |
Garr Earthbender
Justified Chaos
138
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 17:39:00 -
[1437] - Quote
Seems this whole thread is TL:DR for me to find the answer to my question.
So with my horrible math skills, I'm thinking that the 800 plate will get a total of a 45% reduction with the 20% reduction in mass and lvl 5 armor honeycombing skill right?
With some epic EFTing to get the right amount of plates on my maller to get roughly the same mass as the new 800 plate, the base speed change (all lvl 5) is 215m/s with current build and 244 m/s. That really doesn't seem much of a difference. Put a MWD on there, and the difference is 1281 m/s current build and 1504m/s.
Question is, how effective do you guys think this is gonna be?
Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too. -Rock is overpowered, Scissors is fine. -Paper |
Goldensaver
Marsuud And Sons Industries
140
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 17:51:00 -
[1438] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote:Seems this whole thread is TL:DR for me to find the answer to my question.
So with my horrible math skills, I'm thinking that the 800 plate will get a total of a 45% reduction with the 20% reduction in mass and lvl 5 armor honeycombing skill right?
With some epic EFTing to get the right amount of plates on my maller to get roughly the same mass as the new 800 plate, the base speed change (all lvl 5) is 215m/s with current build and 244 m/s. That really doesn't seem much of a difference. Put a MWD on there, and the difference is 1281 m/s current build and 1504m/s.
Question is, how effective do you guys think this is gonna be?
Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too. 40% reduction. It's a 20% base reduction (1 * 0.8 = 0.8, then 0.8 * 0.75 = 0.6). And do you not think a 30m/s increase in speed is nice, and a >200m/s difference when MWDing is nice? It's not going to let you outrun nano ships, or anything. But now you can go a little faster, and control the battlefield just a little better. It's not a huge change, but it's nice.
Now lets say you catch the kiting ship on warp in. It'll be stuck in your optimal range a little longer. Lets say you catch a brawler at the edge of your range and they burn at you to get under your guns? Same thing, it'll take them longer to catch you and apply their damage. |
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
127
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 18:50:00 -
[1439] - Quote
Garr Earthbender wrote:Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too. It you've removed them from EFT because you think they'll lose their penalty, at the moment that's incorrect.
Only the active tanking armour rigs are having their penalty changed so far as I've read. |
Garr Earthbender
Justified Chaos
138
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 20:33:00 -
[1440] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote:Garr Earthbender wrote:Seems this whole thread is TL:DR for me to find the answer to my question.
So with my horrible math skills, I'm thinking that the 800 plate will get a total of a 45% reduction with the 20% reduction in mass and lvl 5 armor honeycombing skill right?
With some epic EFTing to get the right amount of plates on my maller to get roughly the same mass as the new 800 plate, the base speed change (all lvl 5) is 215m/s with current build and 244 m/s. That really doesn't seem much of a difference. Put a MWD on there, and the difference is 1281 m/s current build and 1504m/s.
Question is, how effective do you guys think this is gonna be?
Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too. 40% reduction. It's a 20% base reduction (1 * 0.8 = 0.8, then 0.8 * 0.75 = 0.6). And do you not think a 30m/s increase in speed is nice, and a >200m/s difference when MWDing is nice? It's not going to let you outrun nano ships, or anything. But now you can go a little faster, and control the battlefield just a little better. It's not a huge change, but it's nice. Now lets say you catch the kiting ship on warp in. It'll be stuck in your optimal range a little longer. Lets say you catch a brawler at the edge of your range and they burn at you to get under your guns? Same thing, it'll take them longer to catch you and apply their damage.
5% per level =25 % for the honeycombing. So that +20% from the mass reduction for the 800 plate = 45% reduction total. Right?
Jacob Holland wrote:Garr Earthbender wrote:Edit: and this is also with removing the trimarks on the new build cause of the change to how the rigs work too. It you've removed them from EFT because you think they'll lose their penalty, at the moment that's incorrect. Only the active tanking armour rigs are having their penalty changed so far as I've read.
derp. you are correct. You are correct good sir! -Rock is overpowered, Scissors is fine. -Paper |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 53 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |