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) |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
69
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 00:41:00 -
[211] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Brutix will be the new Cyclone? I think AAR will be awesome in combination with some buffer to help it survive the reload. Except you'll never be able to have a dual AAR Brutix vs the dual ASB Cyclone
|
fukier
RISE of LEGION
746
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 00:56:00 -
[212] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Brutix will be the new Cyclone? I think AAR will be awesome in combination with some buffer to help it survive the reload.
ok so what are you thinking for a brutix?
aar and 1600?
upon reflection the aar might be usefull with a buffer tank... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
746
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 00:57:00 -
[213] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Brutix will be the new Cyclone? I think AAR will be awesome in combination with some buffer to help it survive the reload. So you're thinking AAR+800 plate? Interesting, but I'm not sure where you're going to find the grid for that. -Liang
assuming that the aar with be eq or less to a medium armor rep i can fit electrons with a 1600 At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Anarchy Manifesto
The Riot Formation Unclaimed.
3
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:03:00 -
[214] - Quote
I would have liked to have seen a buff to active armor tanking via the already existing armor repper modules in game, personally. Regular old fashioned sustained active shield tanking will still be wildly superior to sustained active armor tanking. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2776
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:05:00 -
[215] - Quote
fukier wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Brutix will be the new Cyclone? I think AAR will be awesome in combination with some buffer to help it survive the reload. So you're thinking AAR+800 plate? Interesting, but I'm not sure where you're going to find the grid for that. -Liang assuming that the aar with be eq or less to a medium armor rep i can fit electrons with a 1600
~electrons~ Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
fukier
RISE of LEGION
746
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:13:00 -
[216] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:fukier wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Brutix will be the new Cyclone? I think AAR will be awesome in combination with some buffer to help it survive the reload. So you're thinking AAR+800 plate? Interesting, but I'm not sure where you're going to find the grid for that. -Liang assuming that the aar with be eq or less to a medium armor rep i can fit electrons with a 1600 ~electrons~
its not that bad with heat on and hamerheads i get 660 dps
plus 50k ehp so not bad
i can fit the rig thing if i have a plus 3 pg inplant plus a pg rig...
i dunno i am trying to make the best out of the situation i guess At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
29
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:16:00 -
[217] - Quote
fukier wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Brutix will be the new Cyclone? I think AAR will be awesome in combination with some buffer to help it survive the reload. ok so what are you thinking for a brutix? aar and 1600? upon reflection the aar might be usefull with a buffer tank... I'll have to wait for stats to see if they fit, but I imagine it'll be useful even in combination with an 800. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
490
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:16:00 -
[218] - Quote
Incursus will be impossible to kill .. utterly impossible .. if it changes one repairer and installs the new rig.
Each cycle will pull back 315 points of armour, hilariously more than half the base armour of the hull .. for as long as the repper has charges it will in essence behave as if it had a dedicated Inquisitor supporting it (almost anyway) ..... and it still has room for a second vanilla repper as well as injector.
Is that really the intention?
As for plates .. severely disappointed to be honest, lower mass penalty is good but had hoped you'd tweak the fittings upwards a tad .. they are stupidly easy to fit compared to active rep, so easy in fact that oversizing is the norm and has been for a long time, it is not uncommon to see frigs with 400's, cruisers with 1600's and BC with 2-3x1600. Keep in mind that active rep on a 'pro' level requires cap support (injector) for most fights other than ganks and as insurance against neuting.
So now that we know what the idea/concept is, lets discuss a replacement for the Gallente repair bonus |
Dominia Yizkor
The Imperial Fedaykin
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:22:00 -
[219] - Quote
Richard Stallmanu Stallmania wrote:Fozzie, I truly love you for the new ship balances.
But allow me to speak my mind here.
The new push towards "Ancillary"/Burst tank mods does one thing, it leaves the "traditional" form of that tanking in the dust. Ancillary booster's killed traditional active shield tanks. Ancillary Armor Reppers will kill traditional active armor tanks.
Remember ASB Cyclones/Slieps/Maelstroms? Yeah. No one wants that to come back. It was boring, and generally stupid.
What will happen post AAR's? Same stuff. One fit that has silly numbers and that everyone will be using.
In addition, CCP is listening to the foaming at the mouth forum posters that believe "Off-grid links" are "super mega overpowered", when in reality, like everything else in Eve, are an advantage gained via SP investment and ISK investment. So once that change rolls into effect, there will be ZERO reason to use any traditional active tank, as off-grid links were the only thing that made them viable.
Please buff the TRADITIONAL style of active tanking. All the necessary mods, ships, fittings, and skills are already in place.
How do you do this? Easy.
Reduce cap usage on traditional shield boosters. Reduce cycle time on armor repairers.
This makes both types of tanking very similar in function, but those with armor tanks will have the "Crowd-Control" provided by utility mid-slots, and active shield will boast more DPS at the cost of "Crowd-Control".
Adding new modules invalidates the use of the old.
I would like to bump this and see if Fozzie would kindly address these points (not the links part ofc) since I think this guy has some decent ideas, or at least ideas worth being addressed. |
Vess Starfire
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:25:00 -
[220] - Quote
I don't think the problems with armour tanking in PVE are adequately addressed by these changes. Let me explain...
Solo PVE in armour is currently worse than shield because the "gank" of armour ships is limited by the need for a reasonable "tank". Unlike a shield ship where the gank & tank use different slots armour ships complete to fit both in the lows, and in PVE the mids are relatively useless. So armour needs a big boost to hit parity with shield.
And how to do this? I think you have the right idea because your changes are focused on reducing the number of lowslots that an armour tank needs. This leaves more room for damage mods. Two of your proposed changes help solo PVE:
Firstly, since active tanks no longer have a speed penalty let's assume you can replace a hardener with AB to speed/sigtank instead. Yay, one free low slot for gank! But of course when you're flying with hybrid or laser turrents AB reduces your DPS too, and it really only reduces incoming damage from BS rats. Speed tanking helps drone boats but not hybrid/laser boats.
Secondly I guess you expect the AAR to be used in PVE sites to tank full room aggro while killing primary DPS sources. Then once the charges are gone the ongoing damage is low enough that your 0.75 repper can sustain. Nice idea! It means dual rep ships can become single-AAR and frees up another lowslot. But the AAR needs to reload occasionally, and you can't stop repping for 60secs in PVE unless you've cleared the room. That's fine, but what about PVE content without rooms, like anoms and other exploration types? Suddenly the AAR is not going to work.
In conclusion I feel there are two potential savings in lowslots for solo PVE players who armour tank. But both have limited applicability and are not easy gains for armour tankers. High SP characters in Ishtars can take advantage of both, but low-SP chars in turrent-based t1 cruisers & BCs are no better off than before. Aren't these changes meant to help them too?
My suggestions for additional improvements: Straight buff to RAH cap usage (3.2 same as invuln so cruisers can use it), max resist (75%, stack with hardeners) and shift amount (10%, so it becomes effective in 20-30secs rather than halfway through your AAR cycle). Rework AAR mechanics so that it can be useful in PVE which doesn't have rooms where you can idle on a gate reloading. |
|
Dominia Yizkor
The Imperial Fedaykin
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:25:00 -
[221] - Quote
Dominia Yizkor wrote:Richard Stallmanu Stallmania wrote:Fozzie, I truly love you for the new ship balances.
But allow me to speak my mind here.
The new push towards "Ancillary"/Burst tank mods does one thing, it leaves the "traditional" form of that tanking in the dust. Ancillary booster's killed traditional active shield tanks. Ancillary Armor Reppers will kill traditional active armor tanks.
Remember ASB Cyclones/Slieps/Maelstroms? Yeah. No one wants that to come back. It was boring, and generally stupid.
What will happen post AAR's? Same stuff. One fit that has silly numbers and that everyone will be using.
In addition, CCP is listening to the foaming at the mouth forum posters that believe "Off-grid links" are "super mega overpowered", when in reality, like everything else in Eve, are an advantage gained via SP investment and ISK investment. So once that change rolls into effect, there will be ZERO reason to use any traditional active tank, as off-grid links were the only thing that made them viable.
Please buff the TRADITIONAL style of active tanking. All the necessary mods, ships, fittings, and skills are already in place.
How do you do this? Easy.
Reduce cap usage on traditional shield boosters. Reduce cycle time on armor repairers.
This makes both types of tanking very similar in function, but those with armor tanks will have the "Crowd-Control" provided by utility mid-slots, and active shield will boast more DPS at the cost of "Crowd-Control".
Adding new modules invalidates the use of the old. I would like to bump this and see if Fozzie would kindly address these points (not the links part ofc, since this is all about the tanking) since I think this guy has some decent ideas, or at least ideas worth being addressed.
|
Zarnak Wulf
In Exile.
965
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:30:00 -
[222] - Quote
With a 3% PG implant I would make the Brutix:
High: Neutron Blasters II x 7 Mid: Experimental MWD Small cap booster II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler Low: MAAR DC II EANM II x 2 MFS II x 2 Rigs: Armor nano pump Armor overheat rig x 2
With damage implants and drones you can get 700-900 DPS between Null and Void. The small cap booster along with the considerable cap buff will insure you get your 9 charges worth out of the MAAR and keep your guns firing. Balls out like a proper Gallente ship. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2779
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:39:00 -
[223] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote: [Brutix, ] Medium Armor Repairer I 800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Damage Control II 2x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Warp Scrambler II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I [empty med slot] choose your poison .. would go for twin or TD .. ~50 grid left
7x Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
2x Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I (place holder for new rig)
Funny thing is the repairer, just 4 heated cycles and it adds more armour than a 1600 plate would have added .. kind of nasty.
Yeah I was talking to Zarnak about a fit like that. It feels like burning 2 rig slots for Neutrons and not even having enough grid left for a cap booster on an active tank fit is a bad plan.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2779
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:41:00 -
[224] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:With a 3% PG implant I would make the Brutix:
High: Neutron Blasters II x 7 Mid: Experimental MWD Small cap booster II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler Low: MAAR DC II EANM II x 2 MFS II x 2 Rigs: Armor nano pump Armor overheat rig x 2
With damage implants and drones you can get 700-900 DPS between Null and Void. The small cap booster along with the considerable cap buff will insure you get your 9 charges worth out of the MAAR and keep your guns firing. Balls out like a proper Gallente ship.
What kind of tank do you get out of it? I'm guessing it's something approaching 600-700 overheated?
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Zarnak Wulf
In Exile.
965
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:46:00 -
[225] - Quote
It will fit if you skip the plate. You will get about 1300 out of each of your 9 cycles. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2779
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 01:49:00 -
[226] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:It will fit if you skip the plate. You will get about 1300 out of each of your 9 cycles.
Hummmmm..... I need to play with it.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:00:00 -
[227] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Xenuria wrote:I have a question, what about 1600mm Plates? Why are they excluded from the bonus? I personally never use anything smaller than those for plates. The fact that nobody uses anything other than 1600mm and 400mm plates is why they are excluded from the bonus The 800mm and 200mm change is to help narrow that gap a bit (I know it doesn't narrow it all the way) and the 50mm change is there just to keep OCD people happy. 1600s still get the benefit of the new skill.
since you are messing with these modules are you going to change them in a way the T2 becomes better than a M4, because nowadays since bonus are the same (4200) but M4 fitting requirements are mutch better, everyone fits M4 plates instead of T2
t2 plates sucks, please fix them
Allow us to change characters of the same account without the need to logout and put the password again. |
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:07:00 -
[228] - Quote
double post Allow us to change characters of the same account without the need to logout and put the password again. |
fukier
RISE of LEGION
747
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:07:00 -
[229] - Quote
Unforgiven Storm wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Xenuria wrote:I have a question, what about 1600mm Plates? Why are they excluded from the bonus? I personally never use anything smaller than those for plates. The fact that nobody uses anything other than 1600mm and 400mm plates is why they are excluded from the bonus The 800mm and 200mm change is to help narrow that gap a bit (I know it doesn't narrow it all the way) and the 50mm change is there just to keep OCD people happy. 1600s still get the benefit of the new skill. since you are messing with these modules are you going to change them in a way the T2 becomes better than a M4, because nowadays since bonus are the same (4200) but M4 fitting requirements are mutch better, everyone fits M4 plates instead of T2 t2 plates sucks, please fix them
they already did tech II 1600 gives 4800... try reading patch notes it helps... At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box. |
Colman Dietmar
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
12
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:10:00 -
[230] - Quote
I don't have sufficient knowledge on all applications of armor tanking, so speaking only from the perspective of medium-sized repairer use in low-to-med SP PVE.
Both active tanks (shield and armor) are severely inferior to passive shield tanking. Even against EM/thermal rats passive tank is either same as or better than the active armor tank on most ships. The reason for this, as I see it, is either the bad capacitor efficiency of the repair systems, or low per-module repair ammount. If you fit many repair modules, you can repair enough DPS but run into severe capacitor issues that you cannot compensate even by sacrificing all the spare slots you have left. If you fit few repair modules, you can't get a DPS tank comparable to passive shields even if you use everything you have for tank support mods.
And if this brings a though of nerfing passive tanking, by doing that you would just hurt low-SP PVE pilots, which I think don't need to be hurt any more.
As for the PVP, main reason I'm avoiding armor tanks in there is how armor rigs hurt ones mobility. In my experience, mobility is the key to survival, so hurting that in favor of EHP doesn't seem to help much. Maybe with the changes to the armor repair rigs I'll have options of using armor tank in PVP, but I'd really like seeing the resistance rigs penalty changed as well.
Finally, I know how it is a special thing about armor tank and all, but having some options to augument armor tank with med slots would be VERY helpful. And no, not by capacitor boosters. Right now you have med+low slots helping you with your shield tank, and only low slots helping with armor. This is an obvious inferiority. |
|
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:12:00 -
[231] - Quote
fukier wrote:Unforgiven Storm wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Xenuria wrote:I have a question, what about 1600mm Plates? Why are they excluded from the bonus? I personally never use anything smaller than those for plates. The fact that nobody uses anything other than 1600mm and 400mm plates is why they are excluded from the bonus The 800mm and 200mm change is to help narrow that gap a bit (I know it doesn't narrow it all the way) and the 50mm change is there just to keep OCD people happy. 1600s still get the benefit of the new skill. since you are messing with these modules are you going to change them in a way the T2 becomes better than a M4, because nowadays since bonus are the same (4200) but M4 fitting requirements are mutch better, everyone fits M4 plates instead of T2 t2 plates sucks, please fix them they already did tech II 1600 gives 4800... try reading patch notes it helps...
ups, I was getting this info from here http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/1600mm_Reinforced_Steel_Plates_II
totally outdated them
/ignore Allow us to change characters of the same account without the need to logout and put the password again. |
Debir Achen
The Red Circle Inc.
39
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:12:00 -
[232] - Quote
ghost st wrote:I think that the speed penalties for armor tanking are much more potent than the signature radius penalties for shield tanking.
I mean if you look at turret tracking, speed (well Transvaal) is much more important than signature radius. You can have a high sig radius but be relatively unaffected if you can still move. But if you cant move, even a ludicrously small sig radius wont help you.
Giving armored ships more speed is making armor more like shields imo, but really doesn't make up for the discrepancy.
My solution would be to make signature radius play a bigger part in calculating hits and damage.
If not that how about a module that reduces shield recharge/hit points in exchange for a smaller sig radius.
Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature? |
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
86
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:17:00 -
[233] - Quote
Galatea Galilei wrote:Coming from a PvE perspective, active armor tanking is not unusable, but it's so bad relative to shield tanking that I can easily fit a cap-stable shield tank on my Myrmidon that tanks more DPS than a cap-stable twin-MAR armor tank, even though the Myrm has bonuses for armor tanking! You're better off ignoring the bonuses and fitting a shield tank to maximize your sustained tank.
The new rig only helps when overheating, and besides I can't very well use it when I need three CCC rigs, two cap rechargers, and a cap power relay just to make the dual MAR fit stable. The other rig changes just remove the speed penalty, and do nothing to affect the fact that even a twin-MAR setup on a bonused ship doesn't heal as much damage as a passive shield tank on a ship that doesn't even have resist bonuses.
The proposed changes don't seem to come anywhere close to putting a dent into the inferiority of armor tanking... Pretty much this. This whole set of changes seems like just throwing a weird, needlessly tweaky and kinda useless new module and yet another batch of one-off "must train to V" skills at the problem instead of just making a balance pass on the fundamentals.
If you wanted to get armor tanking back on track, you should have been looking at fundamentals like:
- Having the rep hit at the start instead of the end of the cycle - Making standard reppers run faster with the same cap use, or just rep more - Buffing hull active rep bonuses across the board to 10% - Buffing base armor resist values across the board to give armor tanking some sort of basis for seriously competing with shield features like passive recharge and dual/triple/quad/lolASB tanking
If you wanted to get clever dealing with the speed disparity, how about something really nice like a role bonus for some hulls that negates 80% of the armor rig / plate speed penalty for the designated buffer tank / PvP boats?
As it is, this doesn't feel like "balance" at all, just a random set of things that will bring a bunch of unintended consequences, aggravate the already out of control SP bloat that is going on with the "rebalancing," and not even touch the fundamental issues that have been discussed over and over here for ages. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
29
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:25:00 -
[234] - Quote
Freighdee Katt wrote:Galatea Galilei wrote:Coming from a PvE perspective, active armor tanking is not unusable, but it's so bad relative to shield tanking that I can easily fit a cap-stable shield tank on my Myrmidon that tanks more DPS than a cap-stable twin-MAR armor tank, even though the Myrm has bonuses for armor tanking! You're better off ignoring the bonuses and fitting a shield tank to maximize your sustained tank.
The new rig only helps when overheating, and besides I can't very well use it when I need three CCC rigs, two cap rechargers, and a cap power relay just to make the dual MAR fit stable. The other rig changes just remove the speed penalty, and do nothing to affect the fact that even a twin-MAR setup on a bonused ship doesn't heal as much damage as a passive shield tank on a ship that doesn't even have resist bonuses.
The proposed changes don't seem to come anywhere close to putting a dent into the inferiority of armor tanking... Pretty much this. This whole set of changes seems like just throwing a weird, needlessly tweaky and kinda useless new module and yet another batch of one-off "must train to V" skills at the problem instead of just making a balance pass on the fundamentals. If you wanted to get armor tanking back on track, you should have been looking at fundamentals like: - Having the rep hit at the start instead of the end of the cycle - Making standard reppers run faster with the same cap use, or just rep more - Buffing hull active rep bonuses across the board to 10% - Buffing base armor resist values across the board to give armor tanking some sort of basis for seriously competing with shield features like passive recharge and dual/triple/quad/lolASB tanking If you wanted to get clever dealing with the speed disparity, how about something really nice like a role bonus for some hulls that negates 80% of the armor rig / plate speed penalty for the designated buffer tank / PvP boats? As it is, this doesn't feel like "balance" at all, just a random set of things that will bring a bunch of unintended consequences, aggravate the already out of control SP bloat that is going on with the "rebalancing," and not even touch the fundamental issues that have been discussed over and over here for ages. Except small armor repairers aren't bad and the issue with large armor repairers is the ridiculous fitting requirements that require you to downgrade to the smallest class of large guns. Only medium armor repairers scale poorly. The other issue is that the speed/agility penalty inhibits solo work. Buffing resists across the board is just ******** and serves only to make buffer armor stronger, which is completely unneeded as they already reign superior to a lot of shield setups in fleet doctrines (Zealot/Abaddon fleets will be ridiculous). |
General Foom
Exodus Combined Industries
1
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:27:00 -
[235] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Zarnak Wulf wrote:It will fit if you skip the plate. You will get about 1300 out of each of your 9 cycles. Hummmmm..... I need to play with it. -Liang Ed: Still kinda skeptical. But I'll withhold judgment.
dudes
the new brutix has 7 lows and 50 extra grid |
Cethion
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
12
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:28:00 -
[236] - Quote
I see a lot of good in this change. I like the addition of the new rig, and the changes to the current active tanking armor rigs, the new skill and plate changes will make armor tanking a lot more viable, but I don't think the problem is solved by the addition of a new module. Sure, the AAR provides a nice burst tank, and it invites comparison between it and the ASB. If you do want to differentiate between burst and sustained tank so much, then they should both be limited to one per ship rather than just having ASBs capable of getting around the reload times with multiple fit modules, but that's just a gripe about inconsistent application of a philosophy towards tanking.
This doesn't fix the 'sustained' armor repairers. It does make active tanked ships more agile and, certainly, faster, but it will still take 2-3 active modules to be able to withstand any reasonable dps, on a ship with bonuses. Maybe this is the intent, but that is a huge chunk of your lowslots devoted to this, and that's before consideration of something like damage mods or armor resist mods.
Rather than this new module, I'd rather see 'sustained' armor reppers get a little buff. Nothing huge, mind you, just enough to make them viable. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
582
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:35:00 -
[237] - Quote
As an Incursion PvE armour fleet pilot I'm unimpressed with everything announced here narrowing the differences between shields getting thier reps at the beginning of thier cycles and being to load up on damage mods in thier lo's... they even have a tracking enhancer mod which goes in the low too which is the equivenant of the tracking computer mod in the mid.
OUR LOGS SHOW NOTHING |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
244
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:41:00 -
[238] - Quote
I've not fully digested all these changes and the impact it will have on pvp yet so I can't really comment on the changes.
However I'd like to make a more general point :
You have consistently boosted the average tank of most ships, either passive, resists or active tanks with new modules, better gang boosts (from T3) etc...
Why can't you look at and give some boosts to 'Gank' fits - specifically the offensive rigs with horrible penalties, stacking penalties, and calibration points that make them far less useful than just adding more tank via a trimark/shield extender or whatever that isn't stacking penalised.
It seems to me after the changes the soloists out there will be looking at even more pvp grinds that become more a matter of who runs out of cap booster charges first. Gank fitting should be a viable option too and right now it is rarely close to winning against a tank setup - not to mention turning most 'fights' into bait 'n' ganks due to the ease of over-tanking.
Just a broader point. Cheers. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2779
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:43:00 -
[239] - Quote
General Foom wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Zarnak Wulf wrote:It will fit if you skip the plate. You will get about 1300 out of each of your 9 cycles. Hummmmm..... I need to play with it. -Liang Ed: Still kinda skeptical. But I'll withhold judgment. dudes the new Brutix has 7 lows and 50 extra grid
I must have missed the +2 low slots.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Shaak'Ti
Shirak SkunkWorks
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.22 02:43:00 -
[240] - Quote
awesome.. but I think there is one more little thing to make active armortanking in line with active shield tanking..
..teh pirate implant set |
|
|
|
|
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 |