DUST Search - this is so wrong

All Channels

General Discussions

this is so wrong

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jacques Cayton II Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1038	Posted - 2014.11.10 19:11:00 - [1] - Quote Let me just say this is ******** before i post this Cal assault proto 508 shield 66 rep 342 armor 20.25 rep So why is armor reping so fast again? We fight for the future of the State not our personal goals
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 14379	Posted - 2014.11.10 19:14:00 - [2] - Quote Because the argument was made to CCP Rattati that shield tankers were at a disadvantage because they have to make use of repper modules to rep their low armour levels once their shields go down. To my understanding the passive reps were supposed to be a means to discourage the use of armour modules in the low slots on shield tanked suits. Instead as you have identified it it simply possible now to make better use of low slot repper modules...... Basically the result is. All suits now have passive reps, shields simply have more reason to stack reppers in their lows. "HeGÇÖs sorry. ThatGÇÖs his sorry faceGÇª. Just keep quiet for now and maybe you'll get through this." -Kador Ouryon
Thumb Green Raymond James Corp 1694	Posted - 2014.11.10 19:21:00 - [3] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: Let me just say this is ******** before i post this Cal assault proto 508 shield 66 rep 342 armor 20.25 rep So why is armor reping so fast again? Max armor rep skill and ~3 (iirc) armor rep modules. I'm surprised Maynard hasn't been assassinated yet. Join us in our Pumpkin Crushing
Jacques Cayton II Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1038	Posted - 2014.11.10 19:26:00 - [4] - Quote Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? We fight for the future of the State not our personal goals
CUSE WarLord KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 75	Posted - 2014.11.10 19:28:00 - [5] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? nope
Jacques Cayton II Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1038	Posted - 2014.11.10 19:34:00 - [6] - Quote CUSE WarLord wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? nope Wtf? And we shield users get delay and hp subtracted all they get is speed wtf this is fcked up We fight for the future of the State not our personal goals
Xocoyol Zaraoul Superior Genetics 2707	Posted - 2014.11.10 20:38:00 - [7] - Quote To be fair, a shield user with proper high regen, mobility and cover will trash an armor suit 90% of the time. Armor is still a buffer, and shields are still a quick bounce-back as long as you don't brick-fit it with extenders. As for as stacking reps in the lows, you can really do better if you use other modules if using a CalAss or CalScout. "You see those red dots over there? Go and shoot them until you see a +50 on the screen" - Arkena Wyrnspire
Joel II X Bacon with a bottle of Quafe 4503	Posted - 2014.11.10 20:42:00 - [8] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: CUSE WarLord wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? nope Wtf? And we shield users get delay and hp subtracted all they get is speed wtf this is fcked up Um, shield extenders don't have a stacking penalty on the hp part? Only thing that takes away shields are the energizers, but they add a good boost to shield recharge rates.
castba Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 636	Posted - 2014.11.10 20:57:00 - [9] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? no, because reppers are a fixed value, not percentage based like rechargers and energizers. "When everything is OP, nothing is" - CCP Ratatti
Jack McReady DUST University Ivy League 1614	Posted - 2014.11.10 21:07:00 - [10] - Quote castba wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? no, because reppers are a fixed value, not percentage based like rechargers and energizers. beside that, the repair value is alot lower and the fitting requirements for armor repairers are harsh

Soldner VonKuechle SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance 931	Posted - 2014.11.10 21:13:00 - [11] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Because the argument was made to CCP Rattati that shield tankers were at a disadvantage because they have to make use of repper modules to rep their low armour levels once their shields go down. To my understanding the passive reps were supposed to be a means to discourage the use of armour modules in the low slots on shield tanked suits. Instead as you have identified it it simply possible now to make better use of low slot repper modules...... Basically the result is. All suits now have passive reps, shields simply have more reason to stack reppers in their lows. I think I called stuff like this dual-tank dual-regen happening in the discussion thread. yup, I did. #balance tanks better Give me ammo types or give me burst RRs! Death is irrelevant.
Jacques Cayton II Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1038	Posted - 2014.11.10 21:17:00 - [12] - Quote Joel II X wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: CUSE WarLord wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? nope Wtf? And we shield users get delay and hp subtracted all they get is speed wtf this is fcked up Um, shield extenders don't have a stacking penalty on the hp part? Only thing that takes away shields are the energizers, but they add a good boost to shield recharge rates. Delay bdog extenders make delay longer We fight for the future of the State not our personal goals
Jacques Cayton II Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1038	Posted - 2014.11.10 21:18:00 - [13] - Quote castba wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? no, because reppers are a fixed value, not percentage based like rechargers and energizers. Almost every module has stacking penaltys. Look at extenders and plates one is speed other delay We fight for the future of the State not our personal goals
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 135	Posted - 2014.11.10 21:20:00 - [14] - Quote I think at the moment The Shield vs Armor battle is balanced Good : Shield tankers have a really good regen Armor tankers have a lot of armor and a good regen & never wait for repair Bad : Shield has a delay penality & normaly less HP Armor has a speed penality & normaly less repair than shield So for me, the balancing is really good. Ho, I hope I'm not the only one who is scaried about a caldassault fit like that ?! For shield it can be good (but I think you can put more than 1 enhanced shield energizer and 1 enhanced shield recharger) BUT ! 342 HP armor with 29,.. HP/s armor regen ?? How do you do ? And as a Caldasault (for more than 1 year) I can tell you now : A caldari shield tanked and with shield energizer & regulator is more more better than a caldari double tanking, really. Welcome to CAMPER 514 The game where you never touch the ground.
Jacques Cayton II Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1038	Posted - 2014.11.10 21:23:00 - [15] - Quote Killer's Coys wrote: I think at the moment The Shield vs Armor battle is balanced Good : Shield tankers have a really good regen Armor tankers have a lot of armor and a good regen & never wait for repair Bad : Shield has a delay penality & normaly less HP Armor has a speed penality & normaly less repair than shield So for me, the balancing is really good. Ho, I hope I'm not the only one who is scaried about a caldassault fit like that ?! For shield it can be good (but I think you can put more than 1 enhanced shield energizer and 1 enhanced shield recharger) BUT ! 342 HP armor with 29,.. HP/s armor regen ?? How do you do ? And as a Caldasault (for more than 1 year) I can tell you now : A caldari shield tanked and with shield energizer & regulator is more more better than a caldari double tanking, really. Dude im running a suit that has 868 ehp with 86.25 rep rate that is ridiculous We fight for the future of the State not our personal goals
zzZaXxx Vengeance Unbound 648	Posted - 2014.11.10 21:23:00 - [16] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: CUSE WarLord wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? nope Wtf? And we shield users get delay and hp subtracted all they get is speed wtf this is fcked up You 're getting both. What's your complaint?
Midas Fool Prophets of the Velocirapture 526	Posted - 2014.11.11 00:59:00 - [17] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Because the argument was made to CCP Rattati that shield tankers were at a disadvantage because they have to make use of repper modules to rep their low armour levels once their shields go down. To my understanding the passive reps were supposed to be a means to discourage the use of armour modules in the low slots on shield tanked suits. Instead as you have identified it it simply possible now to make better use of low slot repper modules...... Basically the result is. All suits now have passive reps, shields simply have more reason to stack reppers in their lows. This is all I've wanted from the start. I knew it would work well. [Ironically generic forum signature here]
Lynn Beck Delta Vanguard 6 2202	Posted - 2014.11.11 01:11:00 - [18] - Quote As a minassault(part-time, maining mincommando/scout) Having 40% of my tank in armor and NOT repairing was horrendous, especially for those times i wanted to TRULY shield tank, or even speed tank. Pretty much constantly requiring a Prototype repairer on even a Basic commando was extremely limiting, as i had 50% of my health be unreparable wasnt an option. With this new change, im free to fit my assault how i want it, rather than ALWAYS having an Armor module installed(which was also half my lows on mincom/sault and olderMinja. General John Ripper -BAM! I'm Emeril Lagasse. This message was approved by the 'Nobody Loved You' Foundation
Eruditus 920 Nemo Malus Felix 773	Posted - 2014.11.11 01:31:00 - [19] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: Let me just say this is ******** before i post this Cal assault proto 508 shield 66 rep 342 armor 20.25 rep So why is armor reping so fast again? Au revoir Jacques! "Stay gold, Ponyboy..."
maluble Art.of.Death VP Gaming Alliance 152	Posted - 2014.11.11 02:29:00 - [20] - Quote Soldner VonKuechle wrote: True Adamance wrote: Because the argument was made to CCP Rattati that shield tankers were at a disadvantage because they have to make use of repper modules to rep their low armour levels once their shields go down. To my understanding the passive reps were supposed to be a means to discourage the use of armour modules in the low slots on shield tanked suits. Instead as you have identified it it simply possible now to make better use of low slot repper modules...... Basically the result is. All suits now have passive reps, shields simply have more reason to stack reppers in their lows. I think I called stuff like this dual-tank dual-regen happening in the discussion thread. yup, I did. #balance tanks better #tanks need nothing its a fps not world of tanks.

Joel II X Bacon with a bottle of Quafe 4512	Posted - 2014.11.11 04:15:00 - [21] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: Joel II X wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: CUSE WarLord wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Hmm well now my rep is 29.62 is their not a stacking penalty? nope Wtf? And we shield users get delay and hp subtracted all they get is speed wtf this is fcked up Um, shield extenders don't have a stacking penalty on the hp part? Only thing that takes away shields are the energizers, but they add a good boost to shield recharge rates. Delay bdog extenders make delay longer And regular plates slow you down. Also, bdog? Really?
Blueprint For Murder Immortal Guides 247	Posted - 2014.11.11 04:19:00 - [22] - Quote Did you say only speed... (Slowly turns and walks away) The Impossible Dream and Wizard Talk
Killer's Coys Prima Gallicus 139	Posted - 2014.11.11 18:09:00 - [23] - Quote Jacques Cayton II wrote: Dude im running a suit that has 868 ehp with 86.25 rep rate that is ridiculous Yeah on Heavy I guess ? But I really wanna know what you put in others slots/weapons Because I've never seen a Caldheavy with thoses HP + HP regen and with a boundless and complex shield regulator (If I good remember) Ho and yes, humm... I don't play heavies, so I can't tell about that. I was talking about Assault Because I think that is balanced Welcome to CAMPER 514 The game where you never touch the ground.
Jacques Cayton II Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1042	Posted - 2014.11.11 19:34:00 - [24] - Quote Killer's Coys wrote: Jacques Cayton II wrote: Dude im running a suit that has 868 ehp with 86.25 rep rate that is ridiculous Yeah on Heavy I guess ? But I really wanna know what you put in others slots/weapons Because I've never seen a Caldheavy with thoses HP + HP regen and with a boundless and complex shield regulator (If I good remember) Ho and yes, humm... I don't play heavies, so I can't tell about that. I was talking about Assault Because I think that is balanced No actually its assault dumb dumb thats total regen and hp. We fight for the future of the State not our personal goals


Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.