Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
4188
   |
Posted - 2013.12.16 10:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Armour vs Shield....it seems to me that the Shield tanks have become the stand and deliver HAV as opposed to the hit and run like they were supposed to be. I say this because all damage modules are in high slots, as well as propulsion modules. I would have assumed that in order to use the hit and run style more effectively you would need speed and fire power to hammer your target hard. Yet considering the modules effectiveness I find it hard to imagine this is case.
Shield tanks need to fill the high slots with our tank, so we can't bring damage or propulsion mods without sacrificing durability. Any such upgrades will come at the cost of a Hardener, Extender or Booster. Armour tanks can have full tank in their low slots AND stack a couple of damage mods, making them both durable AND deadly, something shield tanks can't achieve as effectively.
Quote:Armour hardening modules are weaker that their shield counter parts and by far more susceptible to the majority of AV fire than shields. Apart from the plates which simply give a larger base HP I feel that shield modules top armour modules in every way. The Hardeners are 20% better, standard shield recharge is immeadiately better than the passive armour repper, which is essentially like having a repper for free with a 60% resist to top it off.
Armour mods provide less protection, but armour has a "buffer" before taking damage to your main tank. On top of that, armour modules have a more pilot-friendly duration/cooldown balance. And reppers may not give you as high a regen value, but unlike shield recharge, damage doesn't interrupt your armour repair.
Quote:Shield HAV have vastly superior handling and torque which makes them exceptionally nice to handle in combat, with the capacity to turn the tank faster than turret turning speed, while stationary, as opposed to the slow, forward back wards turn of the armour tank. In most combat scenarios I have found this to be the determining factor of whether or not I have lost or won the engagement.
Shield tank handling is better, but armour tanks have an advantage in straight-line movement. The extra agility allows for shield tanks to fill the hit-and-run role easier because they can go from the "stand and shoot" position into a full retreat much quicker than armour tanks can. Armour tanks can move into position from the rear lines faster, but once in position, they don't really want to be moving on until the enemy has been cleared.
Quote:In terms of fitting modules I also seems like the Shield HAV wins out. I have heard tell of people fitting Sica with shield extenders, resists, armour reppers, etc.....however seems to me that I can barely fit a turret, Armour resist, and repper to my Soma. Is this supposed to be the case? Seems to me that I can get everything better in a shield tank.
Hybrid turrets are easier to fit on armour tanks, because of the PG/CPU balance between the two. With a Missile Turret, and a decent amount of SP investment, a Sica can be fitted rather well, but the same goes for a decently-skilled player with a Soma and a Blaster or Railgun Turret.
Quote:Now I'm not QQing I'm just wondering if people can explain to me the purpose of the Soma/Maddy in the new build? Am I supposed to make a glass Cannon Maddy? Or can the Maddy still be run as a stand and deliver tank?
As mentioned, a Madrugar with damage mods still has all its low slots open for tank, making it FAR from a glass cannon. |