DUST Search - 1.4 Scanning Change = Salvation for Armor and more?

Galvan Nized wrote:

Jathniel wrote:

Oso Peresoso wrote:

Beren Hurin wrote:

Any medium suit has to sacrifice a valuable lowslot (speed/PG/CPU/armor regen) in order to hide from an STD scanner (46dB) ... These slots are a lot more valuable on a shield oriented suits as they have very few lowslots to spare and low base armor amounts.

You're claiming that lowslots are more important to shield tankers than they are to armor tankers.

I don't need to read the rest of this thread at all.

They're a lot more valuable to shield oriented suits because low slots use regulators.

Without regulators shields are almost useless.

His point stands.

An armor suit doesn't have to use all of it's low slots for armor. It can do cardiac regulators, kinetic catalyzers, armor plates, or reppers. An armor suit has flexibility in this regard. It can afford to put on a single profile dampener. Where as shield suits can't.

Either way, a profile dampener just to hide from an active scanner is a waste, depending on your role.

Also, the Minmatar medium suits should have the lowest profiles of the bunch if any adjustments are to be made.

Everything relating to profiles is just fine as it is, imho. Don't want to get caught by a scanner, then pay the low slow cost.

Lows are MUCH more important to Armor tankers, I mean it's not even close. Regulators are great but are no means a requirement to be a good shield tank. I'll trade cardiac regulators and kin cats for shield regulators any day.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 1020	Posted - 2013.08.07 19:38:00 - [1] - Quote And indirectly vehicle survivability buff...and mass driver nerf...and scout buff...? Currently... Any medium suit has to sacrifice a valuable lowslot (speed/PG/CPU/armor regen) in order to hide from an STD scanner (46dB) (or have dampening 'V' trained). Even then, to hide from a regular ADV (36 dB) scanner (or the AUR STD one), they would need dampening V and a PRO dampener, OR dampening IV and 2 dampening mods. These slots are a lot more valuable on a shield oriented suits as they have very few lowslots to spare and low base armor amounts. Some people have addressed armor balance by suggesting shields include a profile penalty. I think this gets messy as this would also harm armor tankers, as you'd probably equip at least one or more shield mod, increasing your own profile. So if you do anything, rather than putting a penalty on shield modules, modify base suits' dB. There are already some pretty interesting trade offs given the distribution of slot balance to different suit's tanking preferences. But if you WOULD add profile penalties to shield, you should reduce armor suits' base profile just a bit to compensate. My suggestions for suits non assuming a shield profile penalty: I think Gallente medium suits should start at 45 dB, Amarr 46 dB, Caldari 52, and Minmatar would stay 50. Light and heavy suits would be modified by the same proportions. This means they would have values at dampening V of 40.5/41.4/46.8/45 respectively. IOW, even with dampening V, Caldari suits would have the disadvantage of STILL showing up on STD scanners while other medium suits would not. I really think this scanning change is going to have a very different 'feel' to battle. The element of suprise will be a much bigger factor in a squad's success. So lets say that armor tankers start going around also equipping w/o dampeners in their lowslots with the buff/nerfs I'm suggesting... Gallente and Amarr medium suits would be able to avoid detection from other non-skilled medium profile suits... At dampening V Gallente and Medium suits could avoid the STD scanners. @ dampening V + basic dampener they both can avoid ADV (36 dB) scanners. @ dampening V + PRO and ADV dampener they can avoid all PRO (28 dB) scanners but the Duvolle Focused (15 dB) @ dampening V + 4x PRO dampeners they can avoid all scanners. This would also advantage armor scouts much earlier in thier tier/skill progression by making gallente/amarr scouts able to avoid ADV scanners (36dB) with just dampening lvl 1 and a STD dampener. They could hide from all PRO 28 dB scanners with a PRO dampener. They would need 3x PRO dampeners then to hide from everything. In these scenarios, -LAVs or dropships could drive around dropping off armor squads that are pretty difficult to protect. Letting them set traps so that their higher DPS from damage mods and bit of stealth lets them get the jump on a crowd of shielded assaults. -Vehicles in general will be more difficult to detect and see, because scanners will be the only way to show them to your squad.
Kira Lannister Ancient Exiles Negative-Feedback 1019	Posted - 2013.08.07 19:40:00 - [2] - Quote Nerf Mass Drivers.
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 1020	Posted - 2013.08.07 19:44:00 - [3] - Quote Kira Lannister wrote: Nerf Mass Drivers. Think of the incoming scanning changes this way: Mass drivers "work" right now because of all of the red dots that that player can see. They know where to spam their splash. When stealth is 'easier' because fewer people can see you, MD users will have to think twice about lighting off their firecracker when they don't have certainty about where the other team is.
Cat Merc DUST CORE DARKSTAR ARMY 3945	Posted - 2013.08.07 20:16:00 - [4] - Quote Passive scanning sucks. If our bonus relates in any way to scanning then we will be underpowered, simple as that. Also, why wouldn't shields have a penalty? Sure, armor tankers get hit with it too, but less. Just like some shield tankers use plates.
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 1021	Posted - 2013.08.07 20:45:00 - [5] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Passive scanning sucks. If our bonus relates in any way to scanning then we will be underpowered, simple as that. Also, why wouldn't shields have a penalty? Sure, armor tankers get hit with it too, but less. Just like some shield tankers use plates. I intentionally didn't mention passive scanning. The place I copied this from I explicitly said this really doesn't have anything to do with it. I've really been looking at scanning/dampening math as it is right now, and if all they did was give increased profile from shields they could implement it two ways. One way would hurt dual tankers the most by just leaving the base profiles the way they are and increasing profile from shields. This way, you could be slow and have a huge profile. Armor tankers could choose damage and stealth at the same time have an okay buffer, but without logi support they couldn't have buffer AND regen like shield tankers. If 2 complex shields meant that a medium suit couldn't hide from the STD scanner that sees 150m, that is a huge advantage. That makes shield suits MUCH more vulnerable at long range if your scanners can see them before they see you. My main points were that I"m looking forward to what these scanning changes are going to do, and that a profile penalty to shield could hurt the current buffer tanking meta forcing you to choose armor OR shield HP and rarely both. It would be a huge liability to be both slow and easily detectable.
Maximus Stryker Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 581	Posted - 2013.08.07 21:00:00 - [6] - Quote I would like to see shield extenders add to the suits profile. Armor plates have a speed penalty Shield extenders have a profile penalty Seems to makes sense, armor = slower and shield = more visible.
Oso Peresoso RisingSuns 564	Posted - 2013.08.07 21:15:00 - [7] - Quote Beren Hurin wrote: Any medium suit has to sacrifice a valuable lowslot (speed/PG/CPU/armor regen) in order to hide from an STD scanner (46dB) ... These slots are a lot more valuable on a shield oriented suits as they have very few lowslots to spare and low base armor amounts. You're claiming that lowslots are more important to shield tankers than they are to armor tankers. I don't need to read the rest of this thread at all.
Galvan Nized Deep Space Republic Top Men. 206	Posted - 2013.08.07 21:17:00 - [8] - Quote While it sounds like it could be a great buff to Armor it is really not. Maps are too wide open for sneaking around, you'll get dropped off and immediately spotted without any kind of scanning required. The most effective Armor setup will still revolve around DMG mods.
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 1022	Posted - 2013.08.07 21:45:00 - [9] - Quote Oso Peresoso wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: Any medium suit has to sacrifice a valuable lowslot (speed/PG/CPU/armor regen) in order to hide from an STD scanner (46dB) ... These slots are a lot more valuable on a shield oriented suits as they have very few lowslots to spare and low base armor amounts. You're claiming that lowslots are more important to shield tankers than they are to armor tankers. I don't need to read the rest of this thread at all. Sigh What's up with people just assuming that everyone is dumber than them. My point is that when you have 2 lowslots vs. 4 you are much less likely to make that slot a dampener. It just wouldn't return the same value as an endurance mod, regulator, or armor repairer. If you have 3-4 slots on the other hand, you are much more willing to part with one to slap a dampener in there.
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 1022	Posted - 2013.08.07 21:45:00 - [10] - Quote Galvan Nized wrote: While it sounds like it could be a great buff to Armor it is really not. Maps are too wide open for sneaking around, you'll get dropped off and immediately spotted without any kind of scanning required. The most effective Armor setup will still revolve around DMG mods. Still I'm saying this POV is TBD. I think these new scanning changes are going to feel VERY different.

BL4CKST4R WarRavens League of Infamy 972	Posted - 2013.08.07 22:14:00 - [11] - Quote I really dont think scanning is the "fix" for armor. If it is I think that will be the end of this game for me.
Jathniel G I A N T EoN. 758	Posted - 2013.08.07 23:39:00 - [12] - Quote Oso Peresoso wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: Any medium suit has to sacrifice a valuable lowslot (speed/PG/CPU/armor regen) in order to hide from an STD scanner (46dB) ... These slots are a lot more valuable on a shield oriented suits as they have very few lowslots to spare and low base armor amounts. You're claiming that lowslots are more important to shield tankers than they are to armor tankers. I don't need to read the rest of this thread at all. They're a lot more valuable to shield oriented suits because low slots use regulators. Without regulators shields are almost useless. His point stands. An armor suit doesn't have to use all of it's low slots for armor. It can do cardiac regulators, kinetic catalyzers, armor plates, or reppers. An armor suit has flexibility in this regard. It can afford to put on a single profile dampener. Where as shield suits can't. Either way, a profile dampener just to hide from an active scanner is a waste, depending on your role. Also, the Minmatar medium suits should have the lowest profiles of the bunch if any adjustments are to be made. Everything relating to profiles is just fine as it is, imho. Don't want to get caught by a scanner, then pay the low slow cost.
Galvan Nized Deep Space Republic Top Men. 206	Posted - 2013.08.07 23:48:00 - [13] - Quote Jathniel wrote: Oso Peresoso wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: Any medium suit has to sacrifice a valuable lowslot (speed/PG/CPU/armor regen) in order to hide from an STD scanner (46dB) ... These slots are a lot more valuable on a shield oriented suits as they have very few lowslots to spare and low base armor amounts. You're claiming that lowslots are more important to shield tankers than they are to armor tankers. I don't need to read the rest of this thread at all. They're a lot more valuable to shield oriented suits because low slots use regulators. Without regulators shields are almost useless. His point stands. An armor suit doesn't have to use all of it's low slots for armor. It can do cardiac regulators, kinetic catalyzers, armor plates, or reppers. An armor suit has flexibility in this regard. It can afford to put on a single profile dampener. Where as shield suits can't. Either way, a profile dampener just to hide from an active scanner is a waste, depending on your role. Also, the Minmatar medium suits should have the lowest profiles of the bunch if any adjustments are to be made. Everything relating to profiles is just fine as it is, imho. Don't want to get caught by a scanner, then pay the low slow cost. Lows are MUCH more important to Armor tankers, I mean it's not even close. Regulators are great but are no means a requirement to be a good shield tank. I'll trade cardiac regulators and kin cats for shield regulators any day.
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 1025	Posted - 2013.08.08 01:35:00 - [14] - Quote Galvan Nized wrote: Jathniel wrote: Oso Peresoso wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: Any medium suit has to sacrifice a valuable lowslot (speed/PG/CPU/armor regen) in order to hide from an STD scanner (46dB) ... These slots are a lot more valuable on a shield oriented suits as they have very few lowslots to spare and low base armor amounts. You're claiming that lowslots are more important to shield tankers than they are to armor tankers. I don't need to read the rest of this thread at all. They're a lot more valuable to shield oriented suits because low slots use regulators. Without regulators shields are almost useless. His point stands. An armor suit doesn't have to use all of it's low slots for armor. It can do cardiac regulators, kinetic catalyzers, armor plates, or reppers. An armor suit has flexibility in this regard. It can afford to put on a single profile dampener. Where as shield suits can't. Either way, a profile dampener just to hide from an active scanner is a waste, depending on your role. Also, the Minmatar medium suits should have the lowest profiles of the bunch if any adjustments are to be made. Everything relating to profiles is just fine as it is, imho. Don't want to get caught by a scanner, then pay the low slow cost. Lows are MUCH more important to Armor tankers, I mean it's not even close. Regulators are great but are no means a requirement to be a good shield tank. I'll trade cardiac regulators and kin cats for shield regulators any day. I don't think you get the argument.... If person A has 5 dollars, and person B has 25 dollars. Who will feel more of a loss when I take 3 dollars from them? If 'profile tanking' becomes necessary because of scanning (YES ITS A BIG IF) this will be MORE of a problem for shield suits, those people who naturally have fewer armor slots.


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