|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sir Dukey
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
789
   |
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
Shield vehicles die to railguns faster.
Shield vehicles die to swarms easier. (while armor vehicles reps right through damage at extreme speeds) the shield vehicle can't rep crap. (very noticeable on dropahips)
Shields also have less HP and less top speed. (they can't also fit nitros)
Shield vehicles are also bad at fitting damage mods. (they take away from its tank)
Shield boosters don't work properly. They don't give back 1900 promised shields and once you get that passive regen back it almost everytime gets stopped 2 seconds later.
Why must we go through this cycle every time CCP. Shield has always been worse than armor and for once in 1.7 shields were superior and then again they are back to sh*t. The only thing at this moment that the shield can actually do better than an armor tank on is fighting a missile tank. But still, 90% of people don't even have missiles. |
Sir Dukey
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
789
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Patrick57 wrote:I could understand infantry Shield / Armor imbalances, but this is working as intended. As far as Shields v Armor, Vehicles are pretty balanced. The only problems are AV, Damage Mods, and Railguns.
^ Completely IMO.
Are you kidding me? So, a madrugar repping 450 armor a second is = to a gunnlogi? I can bet my wallet that if I was trying to kill a tank, it would be a lot easier to kill shield than armor. Shield tank hardeners go down in 30 seconds and most likely hes gonna die without them (especailly cuz they suck now he might even die through them) while an armor tank can just sit there tanking through all the damage ever thrown at him or run away at the speed of light using nitros. |
Sir Dukey
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
795
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
Nevyn Tazinas wrote:Shield tanks however are balanced by not giving AV'ers WP for damage.
As an AV'er, all be it a lower skilled (in SP terms) one who also doesn't have PC income to afford perma proto suits, nothing is more annoying now than dealing thousands upon thousands of damage driving shield vehicles off and getting 0WP for it, while those armour tanks are treated as WP on legs for AV since even driving them off is rewarding.
No tanker gives a crap if AV get WP. We give a crap about surviving. |
Sir Dukey
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
798
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 23:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I think a big issue is that a shield booster is really the only way to 'increase' the rate at which shields rep. I think if they brought back modules which increased the base shield recharge rate by a % and possibly a vehicle version of the Shield Regulator, we would see shield tanks being more effective.
I understand that they needed to bring vehicles back to basics to get a proper baseline, but I think some essential modules were removed that should have remained/been added.
High Slot:
Shield Recharger (+Base Shield Recharge Rate)
Low Slot:
Shield Regulator (-Shield Recharge Delay)
Passive Damage Modifier (Less Bonus than Active)
Nanofiber (+ Speed -Armor)
Passive Speed Booster (+Speed -Ammo Capacity) CCP also needs to give us our slots back. Either through adv/proto vehicles or simply increase our slots on the current vehicles. 5 slots with more module variety = more fit variety as opposed to only 3 slots. In 1.6, I was able to afford to have a fusion accelerator in one of my highs, and I'm sure nobody expected a Falchion with a fusion accelerator to speed across the ground. Dropsuit progression sees massive buffs to slot count, so should vehicles. A Cal-logi gets 5-4 while my Gunnlogi gets 3-2? A medium vehicle (dropship) gets one more high slot than my heavy vehicle?
Python is like flying a one way ticket to bankrupsty. It literally takes 1000 damage to shields when landing softly, hitting anything lightly probably takes 2000. Also, most armor dropships can rep right through the swarm damage. The python no longer can therefore Incubus > Python when dealing with swarms. Python is suppose to be hit and run but it's so defenseless that a militia forgegunner can keep python pilot away the whole match since the hardeners nerf.
Also, my tank in 1.6 had 42.5% passive resistance and 5535 shields, now I have 0% resistance passive and 40% that lasts for like 30 seconds with 3945 shields. Only thing that is different is that passive shield recharge is much higher now and shield tanks have good acceleration like they should and also booster are a bit better.
To be honest, I want my chromosome sagaris back. I want it to have missile damage bonuses, reload and ammo per clip bonuses. 5/3 slots and more CPU and PG. Along with passive resistances.
Forge guns now destroy my shield tanks and swarms whiel they barley scratch my tripple repped maddy. |
Sir Dukey
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
798
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 00:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Harpyja wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I think a big issue is that a shield booster is really the only way to 'increase' the rate at which shields rep. I think if they brought back modules which increased the base shield recharge rate by a % and possibly a vehicle version of the Shield Regulator, we would see shield tanks being more effective.
I understand that they needed to bring vehicles back to basics to get a proper baseline, but I think some essential modules were removed that should have remained/been added.
High Slot:
Shield Recharger (+Base Shield Recharge Rate)
Low Slot:
Shield Regulator (-Shield Recharge Delay)
Passive Damage Modifier (Less Bonus than Active)
Nanofiber (+ Speed -Armor)
Passive Speed Booster (+Speed -Ammo Capacity) CCP also needs to give us our slots back. Either through adv/proto vehicles or simply increase our slots on the current vehicles. 5 slots with more module variety = more fit variety as opposed to only 3 slots. In 1.6, I was able to afford to have a fusion accelerator in one of my highs, and I'm sure nobody expected a Falchion with a fusion accelerator to speed across the ground. Dropsuit progression sees massive buffs to slot count, so should vehicles. A Cal-logi gets 5-4 while my Gunnlogi gets 3-2? A medium vehicle (dropship) gets one more high slot than my heavy vehicle? Python is like flying a one way ticket to bankrupsty. It literally takes 1000 damage to shields when landing softly, hitting anything lightly probably takes 2000. Also, most armor dropships can rep right through the swarm damage. The python no longer can therefore Incubus > Python when dealing with swarms. Python is suppose to be hit and run but it's so defenseless that a militia forgegunner can keep python pilot away the whole match since the hardeners nerf. Also, my tank in 1.6 had 42.5% passive resistance and 5535 shields, now I have 0% resistance passive and 40% that lasts for like 30 seconds with 3945 shields. Only thing that is different is that passive shield recharge is much higher now and shield tanks have good acceleration like they should and also booster are a bit better. To be honest, I want my chromosome sagaris back. I want it to have missile damage bonuses, reload and ammo per clip bonuses. 5/3 slots and more CPU and PG. Along with passive resistances. Forge guns now destroy my shield tanks and swarms whiel they barley scratch my tripple repped maddy. My 1.6 fit had a little over 6100 shield and 38% passive resists while now I only got 5300 shield with 40% resists that's not even active for half of the time. I think that the missile and shield booster mechanics should have been changed in 1.6 anyways, and shield tanks needed some increased recharge and acceleration as well. 1.7 basically only did what was supposed to be done in 1.6 for shield tanks. I don't think anyone will disagree that shield tanks were UP in 1.6. I also both love and hate the current recharge mechanics. I love them because of how I can recharge back up to full so fast as compared to 1.6, but also hate them due to the delay and the damage threshold. I don't know if I'd want a reduction to recharge in exchange for constant recharge at all times. It will also only further worsen the gap between passive armor repair and passive shield recharge. I think it would be better if shield recharge was based on % and had a base time to recharge to full, that way adding extenders boosts your recharge. Enforcers would have been much better if they didn't have the stupid movement penalty. I think the marauders should focus more on defense while the enforcers receive a focus on offense. So the Sagaris could come back with some shield resistance and extender efficacy while the Falchion can come back with missile damage and possibly reload and/or clip size bonus as you mentioned. These are just my thoughts without much organization 
completely agree.
I want them to change the boosters now. They don't really work well often failing me when I need them most. I wish when booster is turned on it makes passive repair constant for 30 seconds no matter the damage with a 200% boost to recharge rate at STD, 250% enhanced, 300% at complex. |
Sir Dukey
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
800
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 00:38:00 -
[6] - Quote
Harpyja wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Harpyja wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I think a big issue is that a shield booster is really the only way to 'increase' the rate at which shields rep. I think if they brought back modules which increased the base shield recharge rate by a % and possibly a vehicle version of the Shield Regulator, we would see shield tanks being more effective.
I understand that they needed to bring vehicles back to basics to get a proper baseline, but I think some essential modules were removed that should have remained/been added.
High Slot:
Shield Recharger (+Base Shield Recharge Rate)
Low Slot:
Shield Regulator (-Shield Recharge Delay)
Passive Damage Modifier (Less Bonus than Active)
Nanofiber (+ Speed -Armor)
Passive Speed Booster (+Speed -Ammo Capacity) CCP also needs to give us our slots back. Either through adv/proto vehicles or simply increase our slots on the current vehicles. 5 slots with more module variety = more fit variety as opposed to only 3 slots. In 1.6, I was able to afford to have a fusion accelerator in one of my highs, and I'm sure nobody expected a Falchion with a fusion accelerator to speed across the ground. Dropsuit progression sees massive buffs to slot count, so should vehicles. A Cal-logi gets 5-4 while my Gunnlogi gets 3-2? A medium vehicle (dropship) gets one more high slot than my heavy vehicle? Python is like flying a one way ticket to bankrupsty. It literally takes 1000 damage to shields when landing softly, hitting anything lightly probably takes 2000. Also, most armor dropships can rep right through the swarm damage. The python no longer can therefore Incubus > Python when dealing with swarms. Python is suppose to be hit and run but it's so defenseless that a militia forgegunner can keep python pilot away the whole match since the hardeners nerf. Also, my tank in 1.6 had 42.5% passive resistance and 5535 shields, now I have 0% resistance passive and 40% that lasts for like 30 seconds with 3945 shields. Only thing that is different is that passive shield recharge is much higher now and shield tanks have good acceleration like they should and also booster are a bit better. To be honest, I want my chromosome sagaris back. I want it to have missile damage bonuses, reload and ammo per clip bonuses. 5/3 slots and more CPU and PG. Along with passive resistances. Forge guns now destroy my shield tanks and swarms whiel they barley scratch my tripple repped maddy. My 1.6 fit had a little over 6100 shield and 38% passive resists while now I only got 5300 shield with 40% resists that's not even active for half of the time. I think that the missile and shield booster mechanics should have been changed in 1.6 anyways, and shield tanks needed some increased recharge and acceleration as well. 1.7 basically only did what was supposed to be done in 1.6 for shield tanks. I don't think anyone will disagree that shield tanks were UP in 1.6. I also both love and hate the current recharge mechanics. I love them because of how I can recharge back up to full so fast as compared to 1.6, but also hate them due to the delay and the damage threshold. I don't know if I'd want a reduction to recharge in exchange for constant recharge at all times. It will also only further worsen the gap between passive armor repair and passive shield recharge. I think it would be better if shield recharge was based on % and had a base time to recharge to full, that way adding extenders boosts your recharge. Enforcers would have been much better if they didn't have the stupid movement penalty. I think the marauders should focus more on defense while the enforcers receive a focus on offense. So the Sagaris could come back with some shield resistance and extender efficacy while the Falchion can come back with missile damage and possibly reload and/or clip size bonus as you mentioned. These are just my thoughts without much organization Edit: although the range bonus at higher levels was nice on the Falchion, I don't find myself even at half of max range now, mainly due to ammo and reloading purposes. In 1.6 I could actually bombard a certain objective from 280 meters and get random kills due to luck, but 1.8 missiles are impossible to spam accurately at range and it's just wasting ammo when bombarding for suppression. Also that zoom bonus wasn't noticeable at all.
the reload times are kind of over kill, I have mine at level 4 right now and it still takes for ever. Also, its annoying how it takes to reload the whole clip and one missile. I often am scared to use my missiles of infantry because I don't want to be ambushed especially now since blasters continue to do damage through resistance because they stop the passive recharge. |
|
|
| |
|