Autonomous Monster
Paradox Interstellar
19
   |
Posted - 2011.11.10 21:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
If this forum doesn't stop eating my posts, I may have to murder someone.  
Turkatron wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:... The most obvious fix I can see is some method of boosting active tanking's burst repair potential without making it sustainable at those levels. This would only be a "fix" up to the amount of buffer the active tank has. With a burst tank who cares if you can tank 7000dps on paper, if you only have 1000ehp you will die. Burst tanks repair a very large percentage of hp with each cycle. However, this an is interesting idea. Perhaps active tanks (or at least those meant for bursting) could have a repair half-life. Where the first cycle during activation repairs more hp than a sustained repair, then each cycle afterwords decreases repair amount till it hits a pre-defined floor for the module being used.
How about... rather than reps/boosters being active, they're... "reactive". So, when you switch them on, they don't immediately start restoring HP, but go into a "standby" state.
Waiting.
Watching.
Preparing to strike.
When the HP layer they work on is damaged they automatically go into action, sucking down a quart of cap (possibly a sound effect is in order, so you know when your cap has just disappeared) and restoring HPs. And- this is the trick- this happens before damage passes through to the next layer. So, the damage comes in, the layer is reduced, possibly to 0%. The layer being hurt triggers the rep, and it restores HP. Then the rest of the damage, if any, is applied. Special considerations may be needed for bleedthrough. Combine that with deteriorating performance over time, so you have passable resistance to initial spike damage, but avoid the "forever invincible" problem.
Or, going completely gonzo here for a second ( ), what if, for ships with an actively running rep/booster, HP works a la Earthbound; when you take damage, rather than your HP disappearing immediately, your HP slowly (quickly?) runs down, giving you a little time to potentially rep it back up even if you've taken lethal damage.
...hmm, I'm not sure I like either of those overly. Both of them seem to render alpha meaningless, and the first might make active too much like buffer tanking.
This is tricky.
Anyway, can I take Greyscale's posts here as a sign that active tanking is something CCP are looking at? 
CCP Greyscale wrote:This is I think also a major issue with "blasters" - a lot of the blaster platforms have to choose between fitting an active tank which isn't going to help at all half the time, and fitting a passive tank which discards one of their major hull bonuses and slows the ship down to boot.
Blasters- the weapon system where the problem is with everything except the weapons system (note: the problem is also with the weapons system). |