|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
242
   |
Posted - 2013.02.16 00:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
Nope dev's don't hate armour.
They deffinately don't want to make arour tanking the same a shield tanking that is all.
You are comparing car to motorbikes because they bothe have engines and wheels and operate on the road. They are different and opperate differently yet both do a similar job (get you from A to B)
Get over it allready.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
243
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 02:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
I love my armour incursus and LOL in local as my targets whine consistantly about thow they can't break my tank!!
And I only use a single repper and no cap boost!
Armour is fine and getting better! If you don't know how to do it properly then go find out rather than whinging on the forums!
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
244
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 07:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
nanite paste is expensive because the demand isn't high enough to push production.
They have already stated that they may look at the requirements to make it so chill and see what happens when there is a higher demand for it.
Higher demand
Initial higher prices
Higher manufacturing to follow demand/prices
prices will stablise to match supply demand curve.
How markets work!
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
249
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 20:22:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Taoist Dragon wrote:I love my armour incursus and LOL in local as my targets whine consistantly about thow they can't break my tank!! You show an example of what a terrible balance is, you know the 10% is getting a nerf stick to 7.5%. And your example doesn't prove on anything armor tanking is balanced, very far from there, the only armor tanking that got a real good buff is buffer tanking = aka Amarr. 1v1 fights and lol duels incoming got buff? -hell yeah, awesome...
LOL
If you didn't get the sarcasm in my post you need to train your reading empathy skill to lvl 5 mate.
And if you think a single SAR incursus is an example of unbalanced armour tanking in small ships Then is suggest you have neither fought of flown them!
Armour tanking is fine and is getting better. Especially for medium/small ship classes. I generall don't comment on bigger classes cos I don't fly them often and real DGAF about them either.
Seriously just leave for even suggesting anything about 'duels' CCP just remade the can flip mechanic to siut crimewatch. I never mentioned 1v1 or any such crap. I rarely get them and often end up outgunned.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
249
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 20:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
Taoist Dragon wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Taoist Dragon wrote:I love my armour incursus and LOL in local as my targets whine consistantly about thow they can't break my tank!! You show an example of what a terrible balance is, you know the 10% is getting a nerf stick to 7.5%. And your example doesn't prove on anything armor tanking is balanced, very far from there, the only armor tanking that got a real good buff is buffer tanking = aka Amarr. 1v1 fights and lol duels incoming got buff? -hell yeah, awesome... LOL If you didn't get the sarcasm in my post you need to train your reading empathy skill to lvl 5 mate. And if you think a single SAR incursus is an example of unbalanced armour tanking in small ships Then I suggest you have neither fought of flown them! Armour tanking is fine and is getting better. Especially for medium/small ship classes. I generall don't comment on bigger classes cos I don't fly them often and real DGAF about them either. Seriously just leave for even suggesting anything about 'duels' CCP just remade the can flip mechanic to siut crimewatch. I never mentioned 1v1 or any such crap. I rarely get them and often end up outgunned.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
249
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 21:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Marcus Gideon wrote:So far I've seen 2 pages of weak arguments trying to say "Hey, don't bash on Armor tanking. It's good already... I mean, it's not Shield Tanking, but it's getting better"
So far, few have addressed my initial complaints (other than saying I should just get over it and quit whining)
- Shield ships can fit SEVERAL ASB, while Armor ships will be hard locked to using just 1 AAB. Again, CCP admits multiple ASB made shields very powerful. But rather than go back and hard lock ASB, they just pre-nerf AAB.
- Shield ASB are Capless, for no particular reason. Ordinary Shields Boosters aren't Capless, but they made a special exception. Ordinary Armor Reppers aren't Capless either, and CCP decided to "stick to their guns" in that regard.
- Shield ASB burn charges that cost as little as 400 ISK each. Armor AAB burn charges that cost 30,000 ISK each. I just went back and updated the OP, since I didn't factor the Paste costs right before. Maybe if people take a look at how expensive it is to run an AAB compared to an ASB...
No there are two pages of people saying that shield tanking =/= armour tanking
And it shouldn't be the same! Stop comparing their modules directly with one another. This is the flaw in your arguments. A car is not a motorbike, 'yet it has wheel and drives on the road so it must be the same' is the argument that you are using.
From a game lore point of view shield use energy to repair or boost themselves so why wouldn't they use cap charges to provide a direct boost to shield in the same way they do the cap of a ship. Armour repairers use nanites to repair armour so why wouldn't they use it to give a direct boost to armour repairing modules. The cap usage is to provide the nanite energy to operate.
From a mechanic point of view the differences in resistances and how damage is applied to shields/armour has long been demonstrated by multiple ships having the same 'tank' either in terms of EHP buffer or passive regen or repair/boost yet one ship dies horribly and the other barely gets a scratch.
So just to be clear
Armour tanking =/= shield tanking stop trying to make them the same!
Giving a bike an extra wheel does not make it a car!
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
249
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 22:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ok you obviously don't understand the use of metaphors and really have no idea what you are talking about.
Triple ASB fit what?! the amount of cap charges that would require is just silly and you would NOT be able to tank 'all day'.
The tankiest thing I have engaged with ASB was dual ASB myrm. Took a while to kill as we were all in novice plex capable T1 frigs but guess what he died pretty easily just slowly because we couldn't bring the DPS to kill him quicker.
Neuting an ASB ship - now what can that do eh? Well it can shut down their weapons (for some reason people seem to forget that caldari have hybrids?!) kill off any hardners they may have fitted (which further gimps their fit), shut down any prop mod or point/scram.
Hmm this my friend is called tactics. If combat in eve is who can out tank/gank in a pure in your face brawl then I can see why you are coming to this conclusion. However it is pretty easy to shut down the actual combat capability of a multi ASB fit ship from BS down. Then all you have to do is chew through the shields and cap charges.....
ASB's are powerful yes. But then again so is a bomb. But guess what they are not all powerful.
You use the right tool for the right job adn it seems OP. Personally I haven't seen many multi ASB fits that down have major drawbacks in their combat capability. In the same way that the dual rep incursus is a total beast in some peoples eyes yet I love killing them cos they seriously gimp their fit to get max tank/gank (on paper at least)
So in regard to your OP.
NO devs are not shield biased they just don't want to make them the same. Get out there and try different tactics and get a different perspective on combat because tank/gank isn't the only factor.
And what is your point in saying armour =/= shield tanking?!? aren't you argueing by directly comparing their direct modules that operate in different ways? It's like arguing that walking diagonal across a road to walking directly across it depending on whether you need to move up or down the street?!
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
249
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 22:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
Cap carges v nanite paste
CCP has already stated it will be looking at the requirements to manufacture it in relation to the supply/demand as time goes on.
paste has been a very limited use item in game and these changes may well increase it use a fair bit thus increasing the demand and people will make it. If it becomes a prohibitive maufactureing process then CCP will address that.
Really don't see why this is an argument for or against AAR tbh. Most pvp'er regularly carry lots around with them anyways. The same and cap heavy fits and charges. except that countering the cost is the much smaller cargo requirements to carry paste.
6 and 2 3's as far as I'm concerned and not a valid argument either way.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
250
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 23:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
I like oompa loompas don't you dare neut my oompa loompas you cruel evil man you!
I won't comment on lvl 5's or such as pretty much the only pve content I've been involved in in the last 18months is exploration or FW button spinning.
True the AAR is still a cap dependent machanic but I think you may be looking at it the wrong way.
ASB is a silly high tank for a silly short time. Dependent on multi fits and large cargo items to make any form of sustainable (really for only a slightly longer time than before really) This also pretty much gimps the fits for combat variance and completely puts it in the tank/spank mode.
AAR give the armour tanker the option of using a module to give a bigger burst tank than the regular reppers but at a cost of nanite etc. I feel the AAR is something that you will fit on your current armour fit ships and not need to fit specifically around them.
I personally think that armour tanking is fine the way it was/is (some of the module penalties are directed at the wrong attribute imo i.e speed rather than agility). But I'm glad some of the penalties are changing. The big thing is the metagame that changes. I remember when if you didn't fly ahac you were pretty much excluded from a lot of fleets.
I feel that tanking in general doesn't scale well and the bigger you go the more tankingis unbalanced. But this may just be me as my experiance in the larger ships is very limited.
I think the bigger things for active armour tanking is the penalty changes and the AAR is kind like a new toy like you said. I like the new toy, it fits with the lore and also give the active armour tanker another option. I don't think active armour tanking will become FOTM with this like ASB's did.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
260
|
Posted - 2013.02.19 03:48:00 -
[10] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Ctzn Snips wrote:Good thing upping the size and using only one is a completely viable option when it doesn't cost any cap. And ships designed for using shields aren't exactly lacking in mid slots. So.... dual rep incursus (SAAR, SAR) vs Merlin (MASB). Who wins? -Liang
Merlin as he just walks away if he can't mitigate the incursus' damage through range control.
hmm....I might actually start flying a dual rep incursus with a web rather than scram hmmm...
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
|
|
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
267
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 05:37:00 -
[11] - Quote
IbanezLaney wrote:Has anyone here tried fighting a duel rep Incursis?
They take 2x Neutron Blaster Merlins to kill if the Incursis pilot is good.
Armor is fine - just stop fail fitting.
Dual Rep incursus is a LM waiting to happen. They have a very limit engagement profile. I love hunting them down.
It definately doesn't take 2 merlins to kill one.
Dual Rep Incursus kill
Another one
And another one
Not posting these to brag, more to show that these ships are not that hard to kill in a variety of other ships.
This probably not the best example to show that armour tankings is fine tbh. Now rail brawling incursus with single SAR.....different argument altogether.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
269
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 22:41:00 -
[12] - Quote
You lot still whinging about the 'differences' in tanking types?!
All the suggestions to balance out armour and shield are just homogising them to being exactly the same.
NO!
Armour is different to shield. Guess what they are both usefull. They are both tanky (either active or passive or buffer).
They have different applications in different scenarios.
FFS give it a rest.
If you don't like armour then FFS don't fly it! But don't whinge when an armourt tanker comes and pawns your shield ship with ewar or some such crap!
If you don't like shield don't fly them then. But don't whinge when you can't catch your targets!
Seriously you lot need to get out more and just have fun.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
|
|
| |
|