|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The-Errorist
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
271
   |
Posted - 2013.10.08 19:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
A standard armor plate takes up 10CPU and 1PG. That ratio is completely backwards. In EVE online and for vehicles it's fine but for dropsuit modules, its messed up. One reason why this is bad is that dropsuits that are better suited for armor tanking get more PG and suits that are better suited for shield tanking get more PG.
This also hurts weapon PG/CPU balance. (Here's a thread about that) |
The-Errorist
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
272
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 19:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
Zeylon Rho wrote:The-Errorist wrote:A standard armor plate takes up 10CPU and 1PG. That ratio is completely backwards. In EVE online and for vehicles it's fine but for dropsuit modules, its messed up. One reason why this is bad is that dropsuits that are better suited for armor tanking get more PG and suits that are better suited for shield tanking get more PG. This also hurts weapon PG/CPU balance. (Here's a thread about that) In at least one case (Amarr suits), the extra PG seems to be to help handle laser weapons, which have much higher PG reqs. I wouldn't be averse to having suit stats adjusted to better support a specific kind of tanking role though. It definitely seems easier for everyone to dual-tank right now, which isn't particularly interesting. It might be better to solve the problem with suit bonuses than item stats, since almost everything you slot in the game is weighted towards higher CPU than PG (because of the way suit stats are designed). Of course, everyone also DIES super-quick now, which might be part of people dual-tanking to begin with.
Lasers have High PG req, not PG. |
The-Errorist
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
273
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 19:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
Zeylon Rho wrote:The-Errorist wrote:Zeylon Rho wrote:The-Errorist wrote:A standard armor plate takes up 10CPU and 1PG. That ratio is completely backwards. In EVE online and for vehicles it's fine but for dropsuit modules, its messed up. One reason why this is bad is that dropsuits that are better suited for armor tanking get more PG and suits that are better suited for shield tanking get more PG. This also hurts weapon PG/CPU balance. (Here's a thread about that) In at least one case (Amarr suits), the extra PG seems to be to help handle laser weapons, which have much higher PG reqs. I wouldn't be averse to having suit stats adjusted to better support a specific kind of tanking role though. It definitely seems easier for everyone to dual-tank right now, which isn't particularly interesting. It might be better to solve the problem with suit bonuses than item stats, since almost everything you slot in the game is weighted towards higher CPU than PG (because of the way suit stats are designed). Of course, everyone also DIES super-quick now, which might be part of people dual-tanking to begin with. Lasers have High PG req, not PG. I'm not sure I'm following you.
You said the Amarr have higher PG to use laser weapons and that lasers take up more PG. Its the other way around. Scrambler rifles though take up more PG and CPU too. |
The-Errorist
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
273
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 21:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
Zeylon Rho wrote:The-Errorist wrote:Zeylon Rho wrote:
I'm not sure I'm following you.
You said the Amarr have higher PG to use laser weapons and that lasers take up more PG. Its the other way around. ... yeah, you may have lost me.
The laser based rifle called the "Laser rifle" takes up a ton of CPU. Also I was saying that the Amarr have more CPU compared to the other races for their basic and assault medium frames. Their are tied with Minmatar in CPU for logi though. |
The-Errorist
Mannar Focused Warfare
Gallente Federation
273
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 21:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
XANDER KAG wrote:this would hurt Amarr suits a bit though, their scrambler rifles take up ridiculous amounts of pg.
If this was done too, Amarr suits wouldn't get hurt that much. |
|
|
| |
|