| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Devon Weeks
Shapier Industries
Critical-Mass
0
   |
Posted - 2013.04.27 06:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
This is actually my first post ever in the Eve forums, although I've played off and on for about 3 and a half years. I was reading through the thread with CCP_Fozzie talking about changes to armor tanking to make it more comparable to shield tanking in PvP, and I had a thought. It's possible this idea wouldn't work, and I welcome the vetting of it here.
How about we change the armor penalties from armor plates to something entirely different. How about we change it from mass to just a straight agility (acceleration and turning) reduction? Plates stop affecting mass and just affect ship agility. I mean, the biggest disparity between armor and shield tanking is the ability to dictate range and the sheer burst from the ASB, right? So, turning the drawback to agility would make armor ships less capable of keeping tight, fast orbits (a not insignificant hit to blaster boats or heavy tacklers), but still capable of catching kiting ships with ASBs with good manual piloting skills or an opponent that doesn't feel the need to turn (it does happen on occassion).
I know some people make the case that the sig radius penalty on shield extenders is comparable to the mass penatly on armor plates. I just don't see it that way for one reason. There comes a point where you stop caring about how big your signature radius is and resign yourself to getting hit. There is never a point where you stop caring about getting slower. Plus, in order for an armor ship to catch a kiting enemy, he uses a microwarp drive which essentially equalizes the ships since they now both have their signature radii increased.
So, instead of looking at buffing/nerfing a particular stat amount, why not change the mechanic altogether? Why not just simply refund Armor Honeycombing skill points to players that trained it and move the penalty for plates to another stat like agility? What are your thoughts? |
Devon Weeks
Shapier Industries
Critical-Mass
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 16:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
Fair point, but isn't sig radius a pretty meaningless penalty as well? It's also situational and negated by the skills (tracking related skills) and mods ( TE and TC) of the other player. And, once you're over cruiser size, who can't hit you already anyway? I agree agility isn't a huge penalty and that it's situational. That's precisely why I think it's analogous to signature radius. |
Devon Weeks
Shapier Industries
Critical-Mass
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 00:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
Quote:Mass doesn't affect max velocity, only agility. Changing the mass penalty to an agility penalty would only affect their ability to bump ships, and with the current way bumping works, the change would be undetectable.
Are you sure? I see my speed drop when adding a plate. |
Devon Weeks
Shapier Industries
Critical-Mass
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 00:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Quote:Sig radius is a minor penalty when you are fighting anything a lot smaller than you, but it makes a big difference against things your size and it's terrible when things bigger than you boost your sig radius.I can hit a cruiser at 75km in a cormorant using 150mm railguns with spike ammo, while I'm moving perpendicular with my MWD on (orbiting at 75km). But they will be glancing hits. Now say my buddy in a vigil pops the cruiser's sig radius to twice the size, now I am scoring good hits.
But, if he is short range fit, he has to bloom his own signature to catch you with a microwarp drive. So, it's a penalty on BOTH ships, the shield kiter AND the armor brawler trying to catch him. That was my point. If both ships have to embrace a sig penalty to have a fight, the sig penalty isn't exclusive to the shield tanker. Therefore, it's rather meaningless. The armor plate/rig penalty is exclusive to the armor ship and is therefore a meaningful penalty. A so-called penalty on a shield ship that an armor ship has to give himself as well to even get in range isn't a shield penalty at all. That logic forces all armor ships to fit to snipe when one armor race is most decidedly designed to brawl. That is why I could see removing the top speed hit on the plates when used with a microwarp drive or afterburner. |
Devon Weeks
Shapier Industries
Critical-Mass
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 15:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
Right. I should have clarified top speed with prop. That was my mistake.
Agility is pretty important to Gallente and Amarr brawlers. Often cruiser size and up ships can barely maintain an orbit on a moving target within their optimal, especially with blasters. Adding a straight agility penalty to plates would mean forcing blaster boats and even a number of pulse laser boats to fight a little deeper in their falloff thereby reducing their dps, about as meaningful of a penalty as I can think of that stil allows for ships to have an opportunity to engage. It's something to debate. |
| |
|