| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] [13]:: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hellek
   |
Posted - 2004.05.03 20:00:00 -
[361]
but that together with shieldboosting would make shields far too strong
|
JoCool
|
Posted - 2004.05.04 21:49:00 -
[362]
Edited by: JoCool on 04/05/2004 21:50:02
So what are the Devs doing atm? Are you guys reconsidering the initial changes which would kill shield tanking b/c they're too harsh or planning to seriously overnerf things again? From what I see the -10% Shield Boosting penalty is orientated at the former penalty of -10% Shield Reloading - which was unbalanced either way and should not be an orientation.
Well, perhaps the values TomB posted were just thought as placeholders, because that's far from balance. -5% for CPR I would still be enough of a penalty not to fit more than 2 or 3 of them. And perhaps keep the Basic Capacitor Power Relays (+10%ish) without penalty at all, then there'll be finally some people who use them.
|
Levin Cavil
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 08:02:00 -
[363]
Edited by: Levin Cavil on 09/05/2004 11:57:48
OK, after spending some time on chaos I've come up with a solution I think would make everyone happy. The proposed solution seems extremely unbalanced toward armor tanking and proper shield tanking becomes basically impossible.
This is probably a good time to mention that when I say "tank" I don't necessarily mean use all available slots for cap/regen. I assume a few mods like sensor boosters, ECCM, damage mods, warp/web, etc. Im not talking about balancing slugfest non-ECM chaos fights, I'm talking about getting TQ setups to the right place. And on TQ you can't go all defence all the time so its necessary to have some mods that do alot of good with little penalty.
Heres my idea:
Make the midslot rechargers do like 40% recharge rate (would need adjusted to make it right, just an arbitrary number) but have a stacking penalty to the medslot module only, so 2-3 are fine to use but 6 on a Raven is retarded. Then leave CPR alone, no change at all and maybe at a later date make recharge rate mean something on BS, or not. On a BS it doesn't matter as you will need something better than natural recharge anyway, no matter how good that natural recharge is. On frigs and such it's still a pain as they don't normally have boosters so the penalty as it is is fine.
This would need some tweaking and such but I think the CPR should remain as is on TQ, shield tanking is about what it should be right now, armor tanking just needs a bit more cap, hard to do that without giving all ships alot more cap but this system would be pretty good. Then Amarr ships will actually armor tank and Caldari can still shield tank.
With this system the Raven's best bet is a shield tank as it should be but Amarr ships can still armor tank very well as they can use a few midslot rechargers and a few relays. The Minmatar and Gallente BS really can afford to choose one or the other, Minmatar especially.
I don't see any balance issues with this at all and it allows a variety of setups, what do you guys think?
------------------------------
<Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 08:26:00 -
[364]
for several reasons which I mentioned dozens of times in other threads, armor tanking should take less cap than shield tanking, not more. but sure that could be easily changed by slightly reducing the needs of armor repairers and at the moment its the case anyway (although the difference is almost 0)
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 11:12:00 -
[365]
 Originally by: Hellek
for several reasons which I mentioned dozens of times in other threads, armor tanking should take less cap than shield tanking, not more. but sure that could be easily changed by slightly reducing the needs of armor repairers and at the moment its the case anyway (although the difference is almost 0)
Dude!
Shield boosters are at 1:1 Capacitor need versus shield HP gain
Armour repairers are at 2:3 Capacitor need versus armour HP gain
Armour tanking takes less capa as it is, only thing is that it takes so damned much powergrid, and the ships that use armour tanking are those in most dire need of powergrid (turret ships).
--
If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please. |
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 12:57:00 -
[366]
yes, currently it needs slightly less cap but read what levin proposed. and besides that, it is not 2:3 if you take amplifier into account. and as there is no XL armor rep you can do that (XL + Amp ~ 2 L reps). With amplifier its about 1:1
|
Arkanis
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 13:38:00 -
[367]
Apologises if this has been mentioned before.
When these changes come through won't they basically make Amarr cruisers worthless?
I know the Maller isn't as good as the thorax/moa/rupture but Amarr characters can't simply stop training their race and move over.
Say after the changes someone buys a maller, throw lasers on it and now are working on the medium and low slots. They need to throw in rcu's so there some low slots gone, now they fit a shield booster with some other fun stuff in medium and now work on the lows. They notice that their weapons use a ton of cap so throw in cap relays, go npc hunting and find out their shield booster is basically a balloon around the ship.
Okay can't shield to armour tanking, although using four named lasers they will still need at least two reactor controls. Throw in a medium armour repairer and they now have three low slots to play with. Although the maller has low power to fit a thermal armour hardener you're going to need another rcu. Down now to two low slots. So do you fit an explosive and thermal hardener or just a thermal and throw a 400mm plate on it? The cap recharge rate will simply be too high for a ship that uses cap like michael jackson uses plastic surgery. Also this is without the ship fitting an mwd so you probably can't go below .3 although that said, I doubt I could trust this set up in a .4
If one of you benelovent souls go on chaos and prove me wrong hopefully? I don't have the disk space to copy my install to go on.
This is what I was using (didn't undock just checking if it would fit) also this is in tranquility
Heavy Anode Particle
Heavy Modal
Heavy Afocal
Heavy Afocal
Peroxide medium cap bat
Cap recharger I (I don't have any II's in this hanger)
Cap recharger I
Medium Armour Repairer I
Reactor Control I
Reactor Control I
Reactor Control I
At the moment the other two low slots are empty.
I don't know why but I'm a sucker for the maller, but it looks like when the changes go through it will just be collecting dust in a hanger.
Thanks,
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 16:28:00 -
[368]
Originally by: Hellek
yes, currently it needs slightly less cap but read what levin proposed. and besides that, it is not 2:3 if you take amplifier into account. and as there is no XL armor rep you can do that (XL + Amp ~ 2 L reps). With amplifier its about 1:1
Hmm, yes. A large shield booster recharges equally fast as a large armour repairer repairs. Some sort of armour repair booster is needed for balance.
As an intresting note:
L Armour: 950 Powergrid 50 CPU
L Shield: 150 Powergrid 100 CPU
XL Shield: 500 Powergrid 200 CPU
It seem to me like the armour repairer is of the same fitting difficulty as the XL shield booster. It's also intresting to note how the shield boosting Caldari is reliant of CPU, while the armour tanking Amarr has difficulties with powergrid. This due to weapons the ships are designed for.
I think a swap in fitting requirements would serve to balance things out, too. Caldari run into CPU problems much faster than powergrid problems...
--
If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please. |
Lucre
|
Posted - 2004.05.10 11:35:00 -
[369]
Originally by: Ithildin
Armour tanking takes less cap as it is, only thing is that it takes so damned much powergrid, and the ships that use armour tanking are those in most dire need of powergrid (turret ships).
Armour tanking may take less cap, but with the extra slot it takes and the need for PDU/RCU instead of relays to make up the extra grid it still (I think) means you have less cap available.
It just makes no sense to me. Push Amarr to use armour tanking, fine. But relative to shield defences, armour tanking takes more grid, reduces cap recharge and frees up cpu. So logically it also pushes Amarr to weapons with lower grid, lower cap but higher cpu than lasers. Which means railguns!
If this is the effect, I can't help but think something is very wrong...
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.10 16:02:00 -
[370]
Ithildin: While your idea of swapping fitting reqs seems good at the first glance, the problem is that even when armor tanking, the Apoc runs into CPU problems as it has the lowest CPU of all Tier2 BS. I think a total swapping would be too much but a small decrease in grid reqs and small increase in CPU reqs on the armor reps would be good.
Furthermore I think that a XL armor rep should be introduced, or the XL SB should be removed. I see no reason why XL should exist for SBs but not for Reps. Sure, with 2 large repairers and repair systems lvl5 you can get the same amount repaired as XL + SB but besides the long training which is necessary, armor tanking has loads of drawbacks which should be evened out. Besides that, as I often said, the Apoc needs 3 armor hardeners as otherwise (with 2 hardeners) its lowest resistance would be 35% thermal which is unbearable in a fight. When using 2 shield hardeners, the lowest resistance is 40% kinetic which is not that bad. Please don't forget that base resistances vary from ship to ship and its i.e. not the same for the Megathron.
|
|
|
ClawHammer III
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 01:23:00 -
[371]
I think now that the changes to missiles and turrets have been announced that the changes to CPRs and Cap Rechargers are unnecessary.
If battleships have to use Siege Launchers to use cruise missiles and torpedoes then they will likely have difficulty fitting XLarge Shield Boosters in their tanking setup. I think that alone is the best solution so far to limit the power of shield tanks.
Also, if the Cap Recharger 2s are changed back to 15% then Ravens won't be able to run 2x Large Armor Repairers pretty much indefinitely like they can on Chaos.
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 21:12:00 -
[372]
I guess, as the topic was unstickied, we can see the proposed change as a fact now?
|
JoCool
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 21:13:00 -
[373]
Edited by: JoCool on 11/05/2004 21:18:37
I second what Clawhammer said.
|
ClawHammer III
|
Posted - 2004.05.12 02:12:00 -
[374]
Originally by: Hellek
I guess, as the topic was unstickied, we can see the proposed change as a fact now?
I surely hope not. 
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] [13]:: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |