EVE Search - Remove shields from armour tankers

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Remove shields from armour tankers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Galen Silas Gallente Mean Corp	Posted - 2007.03.05 14:03:00 - [31] Well, it sounds interesting but it will never happen. Plainly said
Borasao	Posted - 2007.03.05 14:46:00 - [32] Originally by: Flaming sambuka Edited by: Flaming sambuka on 05/03/2007 12:02:02 Care to name a few ships this idea would hurt? Before the EW 'adjustments' there were armor tanked Ravens. I've seen Pottsey post numerous shield tanked Brutix. I've heard of shield tanked Dominix. I've heard of many armor plated interceptors (not as much anymore since iStabs). Armor plates on various recon ships (that have more mids than lows... for EW). The Curse, that you specifically mention, also is a very good shield tanker. There's quite a list, I think. Your suggestions would severely limit diversity and diversity is good, IMO. You could also say, from a RP perspective, that every ship needs some shields just to keep the armor/hull safe from space dust/junk while flying around.
infraX Caldari Finite Horizon	Posted - 2007.03.05 14:47:00 - [33] I'll have a large bag of whatever it is the op is smoking.
Guer	Posted - 2007.03.05 15:12:00 - [34] Originally by: infraX I'll have a large bag of whatever it is the op is smoking. I think I'll need to smoke myself down to his level to appreciate the hidden humor here. At present this is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen.
Pottsey Gallente Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2007.03.05 15:51:00 - [35] Edited by: Pottsey on 05/03/2007 15:48:10 ôShield tankers have more med slots than low slots, vice versa and bonuses to armour or shields kinda tells you which that ship is meant to be.ö Passive shield tankers can have more low then mid slots and started of on Gallente ships and the Gallante ships with bonuses to armour like the BC's make better shield tanks then amour tanks. So how do you choose whatÆs an amour or shield tanker without messing it up for us passive tankers? What could work is when you build the ship you can use one of 3 blueprints. Normal, less shield more amour or ess amour more shield. I always thought it would be good to get blueprints with very small differenceÆs. I guess thatÆs what rigs where meant to be but they just feel like extra module slots. At least to me they do. Passive shield tanking guide click here
Dr Shameless Skull Soft The Sundering	Posted - 2007.03.05 16:02:00 - [36] certainly not remove one or another but more like with every shield module reduce effectiveness of armour and with every armour module reduce effectiveness of shields, something like this: large shield extender - +1,875 shield hp and newly -1.875 armor hp armor kinetic hardener - +50kinetic resist on armor with -50% kinetic resist on shield ... sounds fair
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.03.05 16:39:00 - [37] While I don't think removing shields completely is such a good idea RP-wise, it would be nice to be able to turn the shields on/off, so armour tanks could have the buffer shield-tankers enjoy (i.e. when your tank is about to be broken, you switch the shields on to give you the buffer to GTFO). FLAMING When you can't think of logical arguments and are too dumb to STFU
Horza Otho Minmatar Infortunatus Eventus	Posted - 2007.03.05 16:40:00 - [38] Edited by: Horza Otho on 05/03/2007 16:40:37 This idea is worse then the introduction of iStabs. Not to mention your 'idea' is so badly thought out and such a poor idea as well.
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:03:00 - [39] Originally by: Horza Otho Edited by: Horza Otho on 05/03/2007 16:40:37 This idea is worse then the introduction of iStabs. Not to mention your 'idea' is so badly thought out and such a poor idea as well. this pretty much sums it up. the idea isnt the best to begin with, but even worse, the way it is thought out... well ... is more than lacking. and people that put that much effort in their ideas are those that are crying for balance and changes all the time... Only you can save mmorpgs - Stop crying for nerfs today!
Arushia Nova Labs	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:10:00 - [40] Read the latest chronicle. Shields are neccessary to prevent collision damage.
Tar Magen Amarr Arx Amarria	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:10:00 - [41] Originally by: Flaming sambuka I want shields completely removed from all armour tanking ships. It makes no sense that a ship that is built around armour tanking would waste resources on shields so lets get real and remove em! Makes sense for shield tankers to still have armour though ofcourse. /discuss... Then give the armor tankers a passive regen for armor.
Aakron	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:11:00 - [42] Why don't we just remove ships. ---
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:20:00 - [43] If you think about it from an RP perspective. Shields are very useful on any ship. First, they prevent micro asteroids from making your outer hull looking like cheese. And they are very usefull in any situation, where pressure or temperature changes. This kind of control over the circumstanses gives considerable flexibility to design, since the shields help keep the structures intact, enabling lighter, cheaper construction of the hull. Also, you don't need to use physical heat shields on the surface for athmoshperic landings and such. All in all, if you can get any kind of low maintanance systems that protect the surfice of the ships, you want to use them, since it reduces general maintanance (paint, fillings etc) on the ship/thigie... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
lofty29 Athanasius Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:22:00 - [44] Originally by: Sokratesz Like, for caldari, cut all armor in half and increase shield amount by 25%. (with a 25% increase in recharge time, too), and for amarr and gallente, the inversed. Minmatar should keep a bit of both. Yes, lets give caldari wtfuber passive tanks (like, thatd be 1.5k on a drake with tech 2) and shaft amarr, gal and minmatar. Woot woot! --- http://static.griefwatch.net/gallery/18028383f236b20e4c0f6d7492e58408.gif Please keep your signature below the 24000 bytes limit.- Thx Pirlouit
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer EVE Animal Control	Posted - 2007.03.05 18:17:00 - [45] Originally by: Flaming sambuka I want shields completely removed from all armour tanking ships. It makes no sense that a ship that is built around armour tanking would waste resources on shields so lets get real and remove em! Makes sense for shield tankers to still have armour though ofcourse. /discuss... REmove shield tankers armor. Frickin **. ---------------------------------------- Friends Forever**
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2007.03.05 18:57:00 - [46] while i do agree that diversity may be affected i agree with making the gaps between shild and aarmor amounts more excessive... amarr = VERY low shield and lots of armor gallante = alot of armor and medium low shield caldari = very low armo an lots of shield minmatar = ballaneced between both. favoring the bonuses and setup tactics. its not about breaking ballence or rp-ing things too much, all ships in game are too samey stat wise. Cap is the same tbh, non cap using races hav very close to the same cap that high cap use and heavy weapon cap use ships hav - but thats another thread for another time.
Hulkmaster ProductionAlt Bart's House of Brats	Posted - 2007.03.05 19:06:00 - [47] I'd agree to this if the removed shield HP was added to armor HP, -and- all armor was removed from shield tankers and added to shields instead.
Hephaesteus Gallente	Posted - 2007.03.05 19:12:00 - [48] And the pointless post of the month goes to..... ----------------------------------------------- Knowing all, when all is unknown.
Sidraket Amarr	Posted - 2007.03.05 19:50:00 - [49] Originally by: Aakron Why don't we just remove ships. No man, no problem.
Crusix Bargoth Amarr Meridian Dynamics FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.05 19:54:00 - [50] your asking that caldari ships are unchanged, yet Amarr and Gallante ships will lose thousands of hit points. Minmatar, how do you determine which minmatar ships are shield tankers and which are armor tankers? And yes its a buffer, but removing it is not a solution to Nanoships....their shields are not the problem. Why would you want to remove those 6211 shield HP from that mega you have there in your sig? It doesn't last long in fleet battles, but in small fights and 1v1 every point is important. Megathron has 7500 Struct+6641 Armor+6211 Shield=20352 Base Hit Points (14141 after your sugested "balance") Raven has 6641 struct+6641 Armor+7500 Shield= 20782 Base Hit Points YAY raven has ~6000 point edge. Brilliant plan smarty, plus the raven is tanking from the get go, the armor tankers have to wait till that buffer is down, then engage the tank. Armor tankers can't run a passive regen tank like shield tankers can. Your idea sucks. Originally by: Kaathar Rielspar nerf ponies!!1one
Xori Ruscuv The Scope	Posted - 2007.03.05 20:09:00 - [51] I have one thing to say. That is: LOL Additionally: Please send a bag of whatever you are smoking to: 275 West Street...
Byzan Zwyth Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.03.05 20:24:00 - [52] love to know why you think it's ok for shield tankers to have armor but you dont want armor tankers to have shields ---------------------- Pointless forum slowing bandwidth hogging signature pic inc?
The Anointed Caldari hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.03.05 20:42:00 - [53] Originally by: Breed Love So curse and pilgrim are now shield tankers? Erm, you mean thats not how you fly them? Think you might be missing out.
SlaveNumber 75389	Posted - 2007.03.05 21:18:00 - [54] Dumbest idea ever... If you want to remove the shield from armor tankers you better replace it with a +50% dmg bonus!
Paladineguru Gallente DAB RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.05 21:58:00 - [55] but but , I LIKE MY SHIELD TANKING NANO DOMI
adiLLL	Posted - 2007.03.05 23:42:00 - [56] I'm sorry flame, but i think this whole idea is really stupid. Kills the diversity ships and makes things a whole lot boring... Kill thread please :)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.06 00:18:00 - [57] Edited by: Goumindong on 06/03/2007 00:18:42 Originally by: Arkanjuca Originally by: Gneeznow It might be worth mentioning that shield tanks are 'forward loading' so to speak, ie: you press your shield booster and shields instantly begin to boost, but armour tanking is 'rear loaded' ie: you press your armour reppers and it runs a cycle before it begins to rep. but do you see the huge difference of the ammount repaired? lets take the Medium Shield Booster, and the Medium Armor Repairer MSB: 60en, 60hp MAR: 160en, 240hp gimme your repair ammount per energy and i will gladly give my cycle to you... Shield tankers already have a rep amount/cap advantage. Stick a single boost amp on there. edit: on another note, i would love for a huge size and recharge reduction for amarr ships. Give us say, 1 second recharge on 1 shield total. Or better yet, zero for zero See who is the passive tank king now! Ill have a 10000 DPS tank on an armageddon no problem. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Removal Tool Black Lance Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.03.06 00:27:00 - [58] Two words: Cookie Cutter I was also going to say something derogatory about roleplayers
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.06 00:43:00 - [59] I can see it now.[setup might not need 3 co-procs, dependant on changes taking place reducing shield amount and recharge.] Armageddon: 7x Megapulse II 2x LSE II, Passive EM hard 3x Coproc, 1 x DCU, 3 x Heat Sink II Therm Rig/Kin Rig/Size Rig Hit Points: 6037.5 Max regen: 15093 hp/s Realistic max regen: 6067.5 hp/s Resists: 49.5/60/58/44 Damage needed to break tank: At least 11235 damage per volley. 1000 DPS. An abaddon would be even more disgusting with the extra mid. A no shield Hyperion would be utterly ridiculous as well. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.06 00:50:00 - [60] Originally by: Shania Eria heh... /me fantasises about Avatars without sheild Why? There are no capital shield extenders so it couldnt really achieve a better passive tank than that and since anything capable of taking down a titan probably will have > 12000 DPS volley damage its not going to do you much good. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.