The hardners do have a stacking penalty but the issue is the penalty isn't high enough and if you think about it shield hardners are 60% resistance I really don't think they should be allowed 2 hardners on at the same time regaurdless of the penalty simply because thats high enough for them and same thing to the 40% that the maddie has since as a maddie you always have a passive rep going non stop

Well, if you think about it, with 2 hardeners on at the same time, they only have 30 seconds before they go into CD(gunnlogi). With a stacking penalty that increases CD time, they trade the extra defense for extra downtime.

The 4 steps to tank balance:

Step 1. Stop hardner stacking. Simple enough, and a popular choice around here.

Step 2. Make hardners have drawback effects. Armor hardners, when activated, should slow your movement speed by 80%. Shield hardners should cancel all shield regeneration until the hardner goes off.

Step 3. Increase the strength AND duration of STD hardners by 3%, ADV hardners by 5% & PRO hardners by 10%

Step 4. Slight damage buff to light AV and 'nades (around 10% for light AV, around 5% for AV grenades) to compensate for repair stacking fits (to ensure AV weapons are capable of keeping up with the rep cycle)

Results: Tanks actually have waves of opportunity, militia hardners are trash compared to good hardners, hardners used intelligently are great but used poorly are worthless, and there are finally huge differences between shield and armor tanking besides just the fittings. Armor becomes "stand and deliver", shields become "hit and run" just like they were always meant to be.

yeah but I was jsut pointing it out and sometimes that extra defence is all they need

I agree but there are people who use 2 shield hardners at one time or even 3 and I've seen my proto railgun do nothing to which alone would say to much resisitance if the strongest av gun in the game is doing so little to them it causes a problem since everything else can't even touch it

I can tell you for a fact, a proto railgun with a single damage mod, will very much hurt a double hardener setup. Without the hardener, I can 2 shot a gunnlogi, with 2 activated, it takes roughly 4 -7 shots to drop. It is NOT TOO much resistance.

I myself run this setup

Gunnlogi
2x Hardeners
1x Damage mod or Speed boost
1x Armor hardener or armor repair

Proto rails


Do you want to just 2 shot tanks with a rail? I want long, engaging combat. Not a system where everything dies in just a few seconds. I've had forge gunners, severely **** me up with a single hardener active. I know for a fact, from my experience, that a double hardener setup is NOT immune to a proto rail.

And did you read my post in its entirety? There are many things that can be done to hardeners, that suggestion was just my favorite.

My theme is balance, in order to gain in one area, you must lose in another

So to have 60% resistance we need to lose something in the process. Sure you can have that resistance, but let's say you lose overall damage in the process. So the mod would look something like this.

60% resistance at the cost of 15% overall damage. Want defense, then you trade offensive capabilities.

ok for one I was agreeing with you and two I was talking about without a dmg mod we all know the dmg mods make the railgun way mroe powerful I actually wish they would take them out for railguns I had said if he had 2-3 see 2-3 hardners on with out a damage mod doens't hurt him much I don't know how many times I've seen a gunnlogi I hit him 1 time and for whatever reason did no damage for a direct hit now this could be the hardners or maybe a glitch however way it is I'm speaking from experiance nothing more and I am in no way disagreeing with you

Ah, well yes, without a damage mod, you don't do too much damage to a double hardened gunnlogi. But I know I still apply a healthy amount of damage. But I do think that is a healthy thing. I think a bigger part of the problem is the fact that a double hardened gunnlogi does not have enough downtime.

And I did mention tweaking the numbers on hardeners a bit. 60 + 60 = 120%. But CCP has stacking penalties I would think apply to the hardeners, you are right, now I know what you were saying with penalties lol.

And now that I sit here trying to figure out the strength of the second hardeners, I'm a little dumbfounded. I know the second mod, is above 50% strength when you calculate. But in this case, anything above 55% strength equal 100%.

So, how do they calculate stacking penalties I wonder with hardeners. Even if the second is at 50% strength, that's still 90% resistance on the second.

I'm not against having this high a number for resistance(It does seem a little extreme), the duration and cd's need to be looked at more than anything. Right now, 30 seconds is plenty time to drop multiple tanks, and mitigate most all damage.

Like I said, I think hardeners are a problem, but I think some of these issues can be fixed with a longer CD period, and changes to turrets.

Tanks - Balancing turrets Check my other thread out. I hate focusing on just a single thing like hardeners and saying those are the problem. They are part of the problem, but there are a lot of issues with tanks. And I think when you consider one (ie hardeners) you need to consider the other factors involved.

Is it that hardeners are too strong, or are turrets not strong enough, or are damage mods too strong.

No offense meant earlier fella, I just think we need to work with the idea that hardeners provide some serious resistance, and balance things more or less around them.

Btw, What's your fit. Double hardeners and a booster, you can nearly outlast a whole railgun clip, or at least for an overheat.

Ahh, a maddie, well those don't need to be double hardened either I think.

My suggestion with damage mods, is that they reduce your resistances in addition to giving you extra damage. In this way, even if they chose the double hardener route, using a damage mod helps negate the benefit of using 2.

Read that post I linked and check out my ideas for the turrets. Then scroll down and check out harpyj's suggestion about doing the same thing, just with ammo.

Basically, if a rail guns wants range, they lose out on damage.

If a rail gun wants damage, they lose out on range.

I've posted on the forums yesterday about that and to be honest drop railgun range to around 400-450m and remove dmg mods for them and the railgun wouldn't be so big a threat like it is and maybe make it over heat faster possibly a reduction to clip size but this is how I feel it would balance it out with the dmg it has but the idear you said is good too

Ahh, a maddie, well those don't need to be double hardened either I think.

My suggestion with damage mods, is that they reduce your resistances in addition to giving you extra damage. In this way, even if they chose the double hardener route, using a damage mod helps negate the benefit of using 2.

Read that post I linked and check out my ideas for the turrets. Then scroll down and check out harpyj's suggestion about doing the same thing, just with ammo.

Basically, if a rail guns wants range, they lose out on damage.

If a rail gun wants damage, they lose out on range.

Remember that at one time, tanks had variety in turrets and their fit. We are stipped bare atm, and no doubt we won't always just have the ONE turret type.

Turret types, or some form of it will be incoming. The current railgun is more or less filling in for the moment so CCP can get some good data to balance around.

Also if you were to look at it lore wise besides missles railguns had the 2nd best range if not the best range with high power so taking its range would change how the gun was designed for the world of eve and dust so like I said up top lower it's clip size and make it over heat faster and it would solve the issue with it's high power

Ahh, a maddie, well those don't need to be double hardened either I think.

My suggestion with damage mods, is that they reduce your resistances in addition to giving you extra damage. In this way, even if they chose the double hardener route, using a damage mod helps negate the benefit of using 2.

Read that post I linked and check out my ideas for the turrets. Then scroll down and check out harpyj's suggestion about doing the same thing, just with ammo.

Basically, if a rail guns wants range, they lose out on damage.

If a rail gun wants damage, they lose out on range.

UGh, lore. No, I'm not a fan of EVE lore when it comes to balancing. What works in space WILL NOT work on the ground. These are 2 completely different games with opposite goals and gameplay.

And beside, Dust 514 need's it's own lore. What works in the vacuum of space doesn't work on the ground. Planets are a whole different ballgame.

by the way I don't think a gunnlogi should need to be double hardned I think they have 60% resistance because they have the chance of getting hit before turning hardner on and because they have nothing to help mitigrate dmg

but the guns have nothing to do with space for one and it isn't about lore it's about the gun itself it's like saying a blaster in eve has the lowest range out of all guns and then in dust it has the highest range which defiys the entire understanding and logic behind both games being in the same world thats what I mean't when I said lore

Ever get hit with a rail, without your hardeners up? For a shield tank, it means death. I almost HAVE to run 2 hardeners to ensure I don't get 2 shot everywhere I go. With armor tanks, you get a nice rep. On a shield tank, often times it seems like FOREVER waiting on shield recharge.

Add me in game and I'll let you drive my proto gunnlogis sometime to get a feel for them. Those armor reps make the use of a second hardener less attractive, not to mention the CPU limitations, I know. But if you think about this too, a gunnlogi has NOTHING useful to put in their low slots (free slots) where as a maddie can fit 2 types of equipment.

I'm pretty sure that in eve, that while rail turrets do have the LONGEST range, they have varietys of said turrets, with one being the shortest range, a mid range, and then the longest range turret. And in EVE tracking plays a HUGE part, where on dust, it is very minimal.

thats because CCP was scared and worried about giving the shield tnaks to much shield HP because in teh passed that made them op as hell the issue is shields lack the shield hp and also it's style is mroe for players who are aware of their surroundings

Don't get caught with your pants down, very true with shield tanks. Hard to get the jump on a good armor tank. That shield buffer makes a big difference as well.