Moving to percent-based bonuses only would limit fitting choices, and as such, is a bad idea. Fitting in Dust is extremely important, as it allows you to shape your character as you see fit. Limiting fitting (because modules effects' are better/worse for various suits) is a step backward. If someone wants to fit an Amarr heavy with shield extenders in the highs and regulators/kincats in the lows, then that player ought to be able to. Yes, you'd have a poorly-fit armor suit, but at least you have the choice to. Flat hp-based shield extenders and armor plates open the door for creative fitting.

Moving to percent-based bonuses only would limit fitting choices, and as such, is a bad idea. Fitting in Dust is extremely important, as it allows you to shape your character as you see fit. Limiting fitting (because modules effects' are better/worse for various suits) is a step backward. If someone wants to fit an Amarr heavy with shield extenders in the highs and regulators/kincats in the lows, then that player ought to be able to. Yes, you'd have a poorly-fit armor suit, but at least you have the choice to. Flat hp-based shield extenders and armor plates open the door for creative fitting.

Banjo, your approach does have certain appeal and lots of work went into it, which is why I will give it a detailed response, however I see a few flaws with it, that I will list below. But first the good: This would prevent brick tanked scouts, which currently exist. This is the main benefit I see derived from this method. Would this be the goal of your intended changes? (To prevent brick scouts)

Banjo, also what percentages did you use as your stacking penalties?

Flaw 1: As someone has already stated, heavies would have WAY too much health. With 3 complex shield extenders you could probably sneak up on a sentinel, fire at them, not miss at all, and still have to reload before killing them.

This is a very big flaw, but

Solution: could be curbed by reducing the % given by each shield extender. (Rather than 16, 31, 46%, perhaps something along the lines of 15, 20, 25%- I'm not advocating these numbers, I am just throwing them out as a lower example). While this could help mitigate the utter power of sentinels, I haven't yet done the math to see how this would affect smaller suits (and if it would otherwise keep smaller suits balanced, or if the modules would be too lackluster to be useful on non-heavy suits).


Flaw 2: Whenever you make something percentage based, each additional module, adds more than the previous module due to compounding (Ie: the third shield extender would give you much more additional shield than the first shield extender). Because of this, CCP uses stacking penalties to somewhat offset the benefit of compounding. This is why I asked above what stacking penalty percentages you were using.

to be continued later.......

Banjo, your approach does have certain appeal and lots of work went into it, which is why I will give it a detailed response, however I see a few flaws with it, that I will list below. But first the good: This would prevent brick tanked scouts, which currently exist. This is the main benefit I see derived from this method. Would this be the goal of your intended changes? (To prevent brick scouts)

Banjo, also what percentages did you use as your stacking penalties?

Flaw 1: As someone has already stated, heavies would have WAY too much health. With 3 complex shield extenders you could probably sneak up on a sentinel, fire at them, not miss at all, and still have to reload before killing them.

This is a very big flaw, but

Solution: could be curbed by reducing the % given by each shield extender. (Rather than 16, 31, 46%, perhaps something along the lines of 15, 20, 25%- I'm not advocating these numbers, I am just throwing them out as a lower example). While this could help mitigate the utter power of sentinels, I haven't yet done the math to see how this would affect smaller suits (and if it would otherwise keep smaller suits balanced, or if the modules would be too lackluster to be useful on non-heavy suits).


Flaw 2: Whenever you make something percentage based, each additional module, adds more than the previous module due to compounding (Ie: the third shield extender would give you much more additional shield than the first shield extender). Because of this, CCP uses stacking penalties to somewhat offset the benefit of compounding. This is why I asked above what stacking penalty percentages you were using.

to be continued later.......

could you put this data in a spread sheet, preferably google sheets, im interested in your idea but that clutter is just too much