| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ElGuapo
   |
Posted - 2005.07.19 20:08:00 -
[1]
Under the current system there is little diffrence between a shield tank and an armor tank. There may be a few variables that are diffrent here and there but the fundamental way in which they work is the same. I like the way shields work but I think changing up how armor works could add a lot to the game.
Imagine shooting at a (RL) tank with a pistol 1000 times. It is in no way comparible to shooting it 1 time with a bullet that does 1000 times the damage. Each pistol shot will bounce off of the armor but most of the energy from the large shell will get through.
Instead of boosting the resistance of the armor to a certain damage type, subtract (or fancier formula) a certain amount off the damage dealt. Instead of armor resist mods change then to knock off more of the damage from the top.
This would have several major changes in game play. Now DOT isnt as important when attacking an armor tank, doing fewer but more damaging shots would be the way to go. While attacking the shield tank would optimally consist of volume of fire.
Frigs would have a much harder time attacking BSes though but this would give (a modified) stealth bomber the perfect role.
Any further ideas or development would be welcome.
|
Kal'Zera
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 14:10:00 -
[2]
The problem I agree with. I think actually armor resistance should determine how much damage is ABSORBED by the armor and reduces armor points and the rest of the damage should go directly to structure. This would create infact a more realistic impression and add to gameplay. Also armor repairing should take longer and be way slower than shield boosters...
There are already differences between shields and armor, but I think many people use the armor as kind of a shield with the much more effective armor repairer to save cap... that should not be its purpose.
|
Markie
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 14:51:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Markie on 20/07/2005 14:53:49
This is a hard topic to sort out coz if you started to mess with it there would be all sorts of problems,
I belive that in R/L a shield should last untill the power generating it has goneas the power is constantley flowing to maintain it's form, so if you messed with it then it's going to go all wrong.
Armor is also a hard one as in R/L you either penetrate the armor or you don't. I know you kinda touched on it but there is no chance a small frig with just turrets could get threw with the exception of mabey Thermal damage as the heat could change the strength of armor.
And there is massive diffrences between shield rep and armor rep aint they?
Sorry m8 but this is one thing that I don't want changing.
Edited to add:
Sorry I have re-read and see what you mean, so yes mabey frigs and alike should not be able to easly do BS, that part signed.
|
Carl Jidona
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 19:32:00 -
[4]
If I am not mistaken the way armor repair works is you have nano machines that repair the armor, where shield boosting takes from the ships power source.
The armor nanites must take material at the moleculer level process it into a material resembling the original armor or maybe actually reproduce same armor so that it is repaired.
The reason I say it takes free floating mater is if it didnt then the armor on ships would start to drop due to material vaporization by being struck by kinetic, explosive, or energy damage.
So from what I can surmise is that the big difference between shield tanking and armor tanking is shield tanking takes from the core the power to shore its fields up where armor tanking takes from free floating materials in space to repair its self and may explaine why a good armor module can repair so much each activation or cycle of it. 
I think the current system is just fine as far as how the different defenses work.
|
Del Narveux
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 19:59:00 -
[5]
Disagreed because wed be back to the old days when fleet combat was *always* BS vs BS, its bad enough as it is.
_________________
[SAK] And Proud Of It!
aka Cpt Bogus
Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? |
Gandthizer
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 22:23:00 -
[6]
I would have to agree with Kal'Zera, Armor should absorb damage to a degree. The way I see it, Armor should be area specific, once the armor is destroyed or punctured in any specific location of the hull there would naturally be a hole, so damage should then bleed into the structure or modules in that section of the ship. Isn't that why the damage control modules were originally created in the first place? And who equips a hull repairer? I can remember the days when damage did bleed into the structure. I don't see how all the armor HPs (or even 75% of them) should apply to one section of the ship before you take structural damage. Of course, I'm thinking perfect or wrecking hits as it applies to this subject.
|
Mather Maelstrom
|
Posted - 2005.07.21 06:59:00 -
[7]
I disagree as missiles are always packing one big punch of damage, but are less frequent they still would totally cripple any ship with an armor tank. To get even with them or to get even with armor tanking ships you are foced to go close range = maximum damage. I like the idea where you are free to choose your set up (rails/blasters).
You do lose 1 slot for a small/medium etc. hull repairer.
Death to all the frigs, now smaller ships wouldn't be doing a good punch vs larger ships anymore.
|
Zaldiri
|
Posted - 2005.07.21 09:01:00 -
[8]
Alternativley armour in eve may not work like rl. Considering even a small railgun is a projectile traveling at about half the speed of light there is no way any material could stop it. However maybe the armour is strengthened by the use of some field which holds the armours molecules in place. The damage wouldn't dispace many molecules but would weaken the field, effectivley making the armour into another shield.
|
sonofollo
|
Posted - 2005.07.21 10:39:00 -
[9]
see the point is shield reps take energy and apply it to the energy field (shield) armour repairers repair i assume by taking Powercore energy and feeding into quick self replicating nanobots. - energy ot matter conversion.
Hull repairers work on same principle
Shiled remote chargers and remote armour reps i assume working on giving extra energy into the target ship and aiding it to work that way
NOS on the other hand take energy from the target ship.
This is a game after all the current version works fine - shield and armour tanking are favourable to certain racial type in game to
|
Kal'Zera
|
Posted - 2005.07.24 10:59:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Kal''Zera on 24/07/2005 11:00:21
See guys, it was not my intention to create a discussion if the system fits real life, What is the intention to make clear that in basic armor and shield are treated imho totally the same in EVE with only minor differences (e.g. in absorption). But I think that it could be a great asset to actually have them work differently in the way I stated. If the shield is penetrated as someone said the armor reduces the damage to the structure... it should not be able to stop it. The concept is indeed that you have nano repairers or whatever... does not matter. But the 250mm railgun bullet that just came along does not simply vaporize in your armor and do nothing. Such a hit even if it does not peentrate the armor is a terrible load to the structure due to the moment it carries. So I think that indeed if the shield is down the structure should get damaged according to armor type and strength. I think it would be a good aspect to do it like that even if it needs definitly new balancing efforts...
|
twoofmany
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 03:49:00 -
[11]
In "RL" There are 2 types of shields, deflector and absorption. See blow for descriptions. But from these the deflector shield either works or it doesnt so you either have 100% shield against something or no shield. The absorption shield basicly absorbs the dmg simular to armor and as the shield is hit it increasingly get easier to break the shield. But it woudl render certain wepons useless. So I dotn think a Realistic approch to shield or armor is a "Good Idea" (TM).
/me put on lab coat and takes a breath of helium....
"Deflector shields work by producing a semi-permeable shielding layer around the ship." This device protects a vessel from impacts by incoming particles through gravity manipulation. Although deflector shields are sometimes colloquially referred to as magnetic shields, there is no relationship because deflector shields exert influences on nonpolar objects.
"The deflector shield will deflect all damage up to its strength value." The graviton is one of the weakest exchange particles, because gravity is the weakest force. With this said, inbound particles are stopped gradually instead of exacting a brute repulsive force. It is this quirk that allows particles moving above a certain velocity threshold to strike the hull.
Deflector shields tax the vessel's powerplant more than its absorption counterparts. It is practicable because its level of protection is constant despite the amount of punishment that it's taken in the past. Unlike absorption shields, deflector shields can continue to overcome incoming particles indefinitely.
The absorption shield uses the power of cold plasma to dissipate hostile particles that venture within its range of effect. "When power is initially supplied to the absorption shield, the shield generator slowly begins to form a protective layer, the absorption shield." Vents installed strategically through the ship's exterior excrete helium-based plasma when the absorption shield is activated. Electromagnets keep the plasma from escaping and an electric charge prevents the plasma from reconstituting into inert helium.
"When an absorption shield is hit by an object or blast, it weakens. The shield regenerators will slowly begin to regenerate the shield. The shield loses effectiveness when its strength reduces to 0, at which point any objects or blasts pierce the shield to the underlying hull." The weakest absorption shield can take more damage than even the most powerful deflector shield, for the first shot only. Unlike the deflector shield, an absorption shield does not exact constant projection. Plasma around a point of impact is reduced, and without recharging, will eventually become ineffectual. Projectiles are ineffective against such shielding due to the shear density of the plasma.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |