Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shania Eria
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 04:06:00 -
[1]
Hi forum people, i had the idea that armour peircing ammunition should be implimented into the game. By this i mean ammuntion that can peirce through sheild to armour or armour to hull.. effectivly stopping "leet tanks" and "passive tanks" such as the abaddon and nighthawk. The ammunition itself should have very low damage.. about a third of the damage any other ammo uses and they should be specificly close range.. such that you must be pointblank to use them.
Originally by: Ealiom
Oh yeah and trust me on this you will feel like a complete muppet after youve killed your millionth murloc in a search for 20 pairs of there balls.
|
Vincent Almasy
Gallente The Underground
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 04:13:00 -
[2]
This ammo is too much. And tell me about these 'Leet' tanks and how they work.
|
Lygos
Finis Actum
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 06:09:00 -
[3]
I had a similar idea a rather long while ago. My later inclination was that it might be preferable if a certain small percentage of damage always leaked through to hull. Perhaps about 1% of damage would be appropriate. Certainly less than 3%. 1% is considerable when you consider how much damage base resists mitigate.
In RP terms, you'd expect holes to open up in the maelstrom of the shield, or where the armor nanos haven't reached yet rather than uniform damage all over.
In NPCing, it will eliminate continuous tanking. For piracy, or privateering, it will also make tanking sentries entail a similar situation as well as embracing teamwork.
In PVP, I think it would lend an important answer to the question, "Did I have any effect at all?" The latter, even if unspoken, simply has to affect the morale of novice players. The guy in the frigate that went down would still be able to say, "I left my mark."
Also, midslot hull repairers need to be nerfed, or at least require EXPENSIVE charges. Putting your vessel into a mechanics shop should mean long minutes, possibly hours of repair time depending on the tech level, and the amount of hp in question. T2 Titan might need several fortnights in the shop. Small T1 ship repairs should be fairly rapid for the new players. The general response to this is that most people habitually own multiple ships. The net effect for NPCing is overhead costs that are distinct from simple losses. The tactical effect on PVP is reliance on forward bases or defensive/logistical installations. The aggregate effect of "backup ship" ownership is a more laissez-faire attitude to ship loss. (Oh well, at least I won't have to rep it, lol." The accruing effect for industry is higher demand. And of course, the chaining effect for POS owners is more people relying upon their assets. All net good things.
--- T2 Risk | Corp Divisions |
Reggie Stoneloader
eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 06:22:00 -
[4]
So you want a weapon that deals damage directly to structure, even when shields and armor are at full?
Or do you mean two types of attacks, one which only has to cut through aromor and hull to destroy a ship and one which only has to cut thorugh shield and hull?
Or perhaps you just mean something that goes through armor before going through shield.
I can't imagine a form for this idea to take that I'd support. It turns the fundamental principles of EvE combat on their ear. Originality shouldn't be an end unto itself, it needs to be a means to an end, and this won't bring about anything good.
|
Lygos
Finis Actum
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 07:24:00 -
[5]
If you are referring to my post, 99-100% of damage is applied as normal. 1% of all damage is applied directly to structure.
AFAIK, structure cannot be hardened. Even the most impressive of tanks would be finite.
1% may be too high. It's just a reference amount.
How long should an NPCer's structure withstand a typical bombardment? Depends on how long missions take really, and if they are to be done solo.
For PVP, most tanks should typically have lost all their normal armor/shields several times over in terms of single session damage well before they will have lost their structure to latent damage.
Latent damage is intended to comprise a concern over several successive engagements, or after several enemies in gang warfare.
--- T2 Risk | Corp Divisions |
Thorien Mady
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 11:38:00 -
[6]
there is damage leaking when shields dorop below 25% .. which can be reduced by 5% by skill (tact. shild manipulation). Do u remember star-trek they have been shaking when everybody shoot at them. But they had no worries until theyr shield was up. theyr ship was damaged when shild went down rapidly.
And leaking through armor is nonsense. Thats why armor is fited to everything to restrict breaking up the hull.
Maybe u can add skill which ads 0.05% for lvl to critical hit that can partialy hit hull instead of armor. Like hiting somebody into kokpit or near some weak point on ship is possible with one shot from ten thousands. But not having that devastating impact on ship. but always posible (it will add more calculations in combat.geeez more lag :)) but mayeb u will like that idea. And my own add. When ship is under 30% of hull that mean there must be holes and flames all over the ship. I think it should go down over time... like bleeding in humans. And also another skills than can add auto hull repair. but very slow.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 11:48:00 -
[7]
Though I understand the purpose of the suggestion, the game already sadly has a silver bullet weapon called NOS that can penetrate Shileds, Armour and Hull and suck mana, oops, I mean cap. -AS |
Neuromandis
EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.03.07 12:46:00 -
[8]
Nope. Shield-piercing weapons are called "EM" and armor piercing "Explosive", but to keep any semblance of balance these have to be hardened too (though Caldari and Gallente draw the short straw having to start with 0% and 10% respectively even in T2 ships). Apart from that, it would be quite realistic to have armor only protect a percentage and always have some leak to structure, but it would also be quite unbalancing against armortankers.
So, don't fix something that is not broken.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |