DUST Search - Shield extenders

Ryme Intrinseca wrote:

Driftward wrote:

Ryme Intrinseca wrote:

@driftward

So because ferroscale is already terrible we should make it even less competitive (relative to shield)? You must work for ccp with 'balancing' ideas like that.

What makes you think ferroscales are just going to sit as they are?

Rattati directly talked about how they (and reactives) needed help badly. All of my thought experiments were based on the assumption that ferroscale plates would get a buff (either by direct hp or indirect lowering of fitting). Your responses make it clear that rather than coming up with ideas for balancing you are heavily tied to one piece of equipment and balancing around it rather than globally. It's how we got the current armor situation which is by no means balanced. The only buffer mods we see used consistently are basic/enhanced plates and complex shield extenders. I want to see a more diversified field that includes rechargers, energizers, armor reppers, ferroscales and everything else as a viable option.

No need to get all butthurt and make it personal.

I don't disagree with the idea of more diversity. But if that's your goal, why buff complex shield extenders when, as you admit, they're already extremely widely used?

I suspect plain ol' shield tanker butthurt, show me otherwise.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 962	Posted - 2014.05.19 18:16:00 - [1] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: Joseph Ridgeson wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Yes, we want to look at comparative scaling of ehp/tank modules, whether armor or shield. It is fairly obvious that plate hp/pg is high and we need to make shield extenders competitive ...Stuff... An Extender costs 80% more CPU than a Plate at the same tier without saving any noticeable amount of PG. In fact, the Average PG cost of a Plate is 6.33 while the Average PG cost of an Extender is 6.67. Average CPU cost is 20 for Plate and 36 for Extender. If the HP is balanced because Shields Recharge themselves and the movement speed is balanced by the recharge delay, why are Shield Extender flat out harder to fit? He meant HP per PG is highGÇª meaning you get a lot of HP for a low amount of PG ^Exactly. Complex plate = 135 HP/ 12 PG -> 11.25 HP / PG Complex Extender = 66 HP / 11 PG -> 6 HP / PG Huge difference there. Not only that but the fitting costs for the extenders are even higher due to the CPU costs. Complex plate is 30 CPU while a complex extender is at 54 CPU. So higher fitting costs for half the HP. Shield extenders shouldn't have more or even equal hp to the armor plates due to the difference in recharge characteristics (armor vs shield repping) but I think we're seeing that the native bonuses to shield tanking don't balance or make up for a tank module with half the potential of the other.
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 965	Posted - 2014.05.20 15:24:00 - [2] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: CLONE117 wrote: 33 55 77. could this make good new shield extender values?.im not so sure.. No because enhanced and complex ferroscale would then be worse than shields in every respect. As arkena said, the problem is that armour clearly outperforms shield on low tiers. So either buff basic shields or nerf basic armour. Maybe change enhanced values slightly as well (though not as much as you suggest as that makes enhanced ferroscale redundant). Complex is fine as it is. 75 (ferroscale) vs 66 (shield) is reasonable given the shield regen; maybe ferroscale even a bit on the low side. While theres a big difference in regular complex armour hp and complex shield hp, 5% movement penalty is massive. If there was a 5% speed (not just run) mod it would be pretty popular. Plus the armour tanker needs a repper. So the shield user is really getting three modules of fuctionality in a slot where the armour tanker is only getting one. Given all the advantages shield has to have some sort of drawback, ie relatively low hp. You're drawing the wrong comparisons here. Ferroscale plates are specialized plates that remove some of the drawbacks inherent in normal plates and are therefore not a good base of comparison against regular shield extenders. I think that the HP/fitting costs for ferroscale are off (as are the HP values perhaps) but that's a completely different topic. Shield tanking by itself is not nearly as viable as armor tanking and I think a lot of that has to do with significantly lower tank potential. Extenders probably should have HP values at least similar to ferroscale plates to partly reduce the tank imbalance that we're seeing. I can already hear your counter argument about how shields recharge quickly and without extra modules. I get it. Seriously. What I'm saying is that we need to balance the regular modules against regular modules and not against specialized variants. The specialized variants need attention (and the devs have said as much) and as such they make especially poor comparisons. Ok now that that's out of the way, shields not only underperform at the lower tiers (significantly so) but also at complex level as well. Look at the HP/PG ratios that Rattati pointed out. Even at the complex level we see Armor outperforming shields by more than half. The lack of shield tanking (observation of primarily dual tanking with an emphasis on armor tanking) is, in my opinion, a direct result. If we don't modify the top end extenders and just raise the lower tier levels what do you envision as the result? Basic at 44 and advanced at 55? Why would complex extenders ever be used again? By compressing the differences within such a narrow range you marginalize the advantages of using higher level gear, exactly what's has happended (to an extent) with armor plates. Why spend exponentially more fitting to get 50 or 30 more hp when you can get 80 or 100 for far cheaper? I think that increasing shield extenders HP such that they maintain about 0.7 HP/PG ratio would be the change required. Any more and armor plates would be marginalized and any less and we maintain status quo.
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 968	Posted - 2014.05.20 20:44:00 - [3] - Quote Ryme wrote: TL;DR Armour tank and shield tank are balanced at complex levels. Armour tank is for frontal assaults, shield tank for sneakier attacks. If you increase complex shield HP values then shield will be for sneaking AND frontal assaults and armour will have no use. So they are balanced....that's why we see equal number of people using fittings based on shield tanking as we do for armor tanking? The only shield tankers (at light or medium frames) are those people who dual tank. They provide a buffer to their shields so that they can regen. Instead of the shield providing their own buffer. The only straight shield tanker that is at all viable right now is the caldari sentinel (who have a built in armor buffer). Even in that case, you're hard pressed to compete against armor based sentinels. The movement "bonus" as you call it (the lack of a negative movement penalty is NOT a "+5% movement bonus" but rather neutral. Lack of a negative doesn't mean bonus) is negligible especially on a sentinel who move slow as, well, just really slow. Unfortunately for the caldari sentinel, it regens shields at a something like 15 hp/sec (after a delay) which would take you how long to then full refill shields? Let's just say a long ass time. Maybe three or four times faster than an armor tanked sentinel using passive repping mods (which if you're a sentinel you're doing wrong in the current paradigm), but maybe half or much much less of an active repped/nanohive armor tanker. Regardless, the recharge mechanism of shields is great, but I suspect that you are overestimating the utility of that mechanism. Another comment you made that I take issue with is your pidgeon-holing of shields as "sneakier attacks". I don't dispute that shields shouldn't offer as large a buffer as armor but all tanking fits should be able to be "frontal assault" suits. The way you approach the frontal assault might be slightly different but that's not the point. You seem set on relegating shields as a secondary buffer to armor. The only way that shield tanking is currently viable (like I said previously) is to dual tank with armor as your backstop. So, how are we to make basic and adv shield extenders useful without relegating complex mods to the scrapheap if we don't have at least a moderate range between them? I don't think anyone argues that basic/enh shield extenders aren't useless, but if we increase the hp they give, how do we maintain the usefulness of complex mods (current armor situation). Oh and the reason I dismiss ferroscale plates...is because they are bad. Strap on a basic or enh plate instead (you accumulate b/w 1-3% movement penalty. With the saved fitting use a kin cat.) The data that ccp has shared seems to support that ferroscales are incredibly underused because the lower hp, massive cost of fitting, and the relative benefit to no movement penalty doesn't balance against the basic plates (Despite me saying that this was an entirely different issue that you completely ignored and used as the basis of your counterargument along with the differences between shield and armor regen which I also stated and then you ignored.....also, I play scouts almost exclusively, I tried SOOO hard to like ferroscales but they just don't compete well. As you say movement speed is a nice advantage but it's not as good as it was before uprising and certainly not as good as buffer) As an aside, there should be some reason why dual tanking is less good than it currently stands. My first thought is that this is due to the shield/armor modifying (not buffer mods) modules are primarily used in the same slot as the buffer module. Shield recharge modules are better spread than armor modules but are generally not useful. If we make regen/recharge modules more beneficial than the extra buffer (from armor) that would reduce some of the trend that we've seen towards stacking buffer in all slots rather than diversified slot fittings.
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 968	Posted - 2014.05.21 16:08:00 - [4] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: @driftward So because ferroscale is already terrible we should make it even less competitive (relative to shield)? You must work for ccp with 'balancing' ideas like that. What makes you think ferroscales are just going to sit as they are? Rattati directly talked about how they (and reactives) needed help badly. All of my thought experiments were based on the assumption that ferroscale plates would get a buff (either by direct hp or indirect lowering of fitting). Your responses make it clear that rather than coming up with ideas for balancing you are heavily tied to one piece of equipment and balancing around it rather than globally. It's how we got the current armor situation which is by no means balanced. The only buffer mods we see used consistently are basic/enhanced plates and complex shield extenders. I want to see a more diversified field that includes rechargers, energizers, armor reppers, ferroscales and everything else as a viable option. No need to get all butthurt and make personal attacks.....
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 969	Posted - 2014.05.21 19:33:00 - [5] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Driftward wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: @driftward So because ferroscale is already terrible we should make it even less competitive (relative to shield)? You must work for ccp with 'balancing' ideas like that. What makes you think ferroscales are just going to sit as they are? Rattati directly talked about how they (and reactives) needed help badly. All of my thought experiments were based on the assumption that ferroscale plates would get a buff (either by direct hp or indirect lowering of fitting). Your responses make it clear that rather than coming up with ideas for balancing you are heavily tied to one piece of equipment and balancing around it rather than globally. It's how we got the current armor situation which is by no means balanced. The only buffer mods we see used consistently are basic/enhanced plates and complex shield extenders. I want to see a more diversified field that includes rechargers, energizers, armor reppers, ferroscales and everything else as a viable option. No need to get all butthurt and make it personal. I don't disagree with the idea of more diversity. But if that's your goal, why buff complex shield extenders when, as you admit, they're already extremely widely used? I suspect plain ol' shield tanker butthurt, show me otherwise. I'll try and make it clear then, my point is that pure shield tanking is not viable (see Oswald Rehnquist's post). Complex shield extenders probably get used frequently because they are one of the only high slot modules that is worth a damn (now that damage mods are less useful) not necessarily that they are great individually. Complex shield extenders should be in the same category of use as complex plates (i actually think those are moderately well balanced between high buffer and high movement penalty) and as such if hp is increased then the shield depleted delay penalty could be considered for an increase too (15%+?). Regardless, the major point I want to make is this: We can't make a decent spread/range of shield extenders from basic to complex and have them all occupy a separate niche of use without expanding that range, at least a little. Would you consider using a basic shield extender if it gave 33 hp like you suggested? That is less than one bullet of just about any weapon. Stack three of them and you barely get more than a single basic plate. I think that a basic shield extender giving somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 hp would be more realistic. At least then you have ~half the functionality of a basic plate. Enhanced extender of maybe 55-60 and complex of max 80-85. That way there is a clear distinction between tiers of module and a reasonable lower limit. Stacking penalties should be extremely severe (as has been discussed in the armor rebalancing thread) such that modules of the same tier should have significantly reduced effectiveness. With a complex shield extender maxing out at 80-85 that keeps shields well below the buffer potential of armor. Ferroscale plates could max out around 100 hp at complex and enhanced level around 80-85 (approximately 1 tier above shield and 1 tier below regular plates) with fitting costs split between shield extender and reg plates (ie higher cpu than plates, lower than shields and ~ same pg 11-12) The changes I'm proposing would only work, and balance, IF and only IF something significant is done to reduce the benefits of stacking buffer modules to the exclusion of all else. (significant stacking penalties and increased bonuses to auxiliary buffer mods (energizer, repper, etc.) If stacking isn't modified then changing hp amounts will only exacerbate the current balance situation. I'm hopeful, based on the development discussion in the armor balance threads, that something will be done to rectify the situation somewhat in which case there might be some further things, such as what I'm suggesting, that could diversify the fitting meta.
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 971	Posted - 2014.05.21 20:45:00 - [6] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: 80-85 for complex extender and 100 for complex ferroscale doesn't sound unreasonable. That would fairly reflect the high fitting costs compared to regular armour plates, I think. Seems like we can get along after all ITS A MIRACLE!!!! Proof positive of higher powers.
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 974	Posted - 2014.05.22 16:03:00 - [7] - Quote CLONE117 wrote: i consider shields a first line of defense. and consider armor the last line of defense. wouldnt it always be better to have the strongest for last?. though its possible to reach passive tank/ rep levels of shield recharge rates for armor. the player doing so essentially sacrifices all slots and possibly several others just to obtain that rep rate for armor. wheres as shield gets it right off at the start but does start out with less hp in the beginning. but is also faster than armor in alot of cases. so shield tankers can reach locations first before armor tankers. retreat for a few seconds just for shields to recharge then head right back into attacking a position. i dont think they need the ability to out brawl armor in every slugging fest. as they have a faster overall regain during engagements unlike armor. which can really only stand up to hard hitting stuff. depending on the scenario. What you describe is essentially dual tanking. And is the number one killer for module and playstyle diversity. What some of the posts in this thread are describing is a plan to remove dual tanking as an option and be replaced by three distinct tanking style/strategies: Shield tank, Armor tank, dual tank (No significant weaknesses but also no significant bonuses, weaker in general than the other two). This is a preferable situation due to the increased meta that you then generate in fitting and in weapon choice. If your enemy team is primarily shield tanking then you switch to using a scrambler rifle, armor tank -> rail rifle, and so on. If the enemy team is using mainly combat rifles you switch to either a shield tanking dropsuit or dual tank if you don't have a "shield tank" specialized race (caldari and minmatar/amarr I forget which). Regardless, it allows for a strategic element that would be otherwise absent. In almost all situations, a more diverse field is a more balanced field. If we can institute changes to balance some of these situations.....I hope we can, so that we aren't stuck with one predominant style that is the only way to fit if you want to be competitive. What's the difference between that and not having a choice in the first place? We'd be wasting the fantastic variety that is currently provided (but not necessarily used)