| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
42
   |
Posted - 2012.04.27 13:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
ItGÇÖs a complicated issue. Splitting Active Armour rigs and Active shield rigs out form the Buffer rigs is probably a good idea, it is the rig penalties that would apply to each group that is probably the sticking point Active armour and Active shield should remain is separate groups with different drawbacks. There would also be a need to adjust rig calibration usage and introduce more rigs into each category to provide different options.
As others have said though rig penalties and calibration costs need looking at across the board some rigs are underused or even not worthwhile.
It does seem to bring us back to the Gallente problem Armour rigs punish speed that they need for the short range weapons systems and astronautics rigs that give speed punish armour tanking.
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.02 12:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
Agree with many of the comments that suggest that active tanking needs looking at as a whole. Still that is not a reason to not iterate on the rigs.
How about Penalties to the layer below the active layer punishing the ship more should the active tank fail.
Modifying ship internal structures to provide conduit access for Armour repair energy wastage to be fed back through the ships engines have allowed the removal of the speed disadvantages provided by previous Armour repair enhancements
Active Armour Rigs - Penalty to Structure
+Sig reducing rig
+Rig to reduce power needs of armour repairerGÇÖs Low calibration so does not compete with ACR
Recent advancements have allowed the modification of armour surface layers to better absorb the energy residue produced by enhancing certain shield capabilities, this modification results in slightly decreased surface armour strength while allowing for better shield boosting performance.
Active Shield Rigs - Penalty to Armour
+weak Omni shield resist rig
+Rig to reduce CPU
Passive Shield and Armour Rigs stay as is.
|
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.03 13:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
Although I do not like the changes in the current form, people keep bringing up the problem of active tanking and a drawback increasing sig radius, at level 4 a 6% increase in sig radius would not counteract bonus of an armour rig or really even change the quality of incoming hits, also the ship would be faster and this is also factored into the missile and turret formula. Plus this is already a drawback for active shield tanking.
A thorax with a 6% increase in sig including microwarpdrive sig bloom would change from 840m to 884m yet gain 92m/s over the current armour version. At Afterburner speed the change in sig is even smaller.
Cap, speed and fitting are the problems with active armour.
|
| |
|