DUST Search - Armor Hardener vs. Shield Hardener.

True Adamance wrote:

Doc DDD wrote:

Pokey Dravon wrote:

DUST Fiend wrote:

Pokey Dravon wrote:

Back on topic...

While I actually am more of a fan of making hardeners similar if not identical, I also understand that people appreciate them being different which is also fine by me. If they're going to be the same, the ratios you presented need to be the same and the cooldown/duration needs to be the same.

If they're going to be different, I'd probably vote for a difference in resistance (though I'm reluctant to push the shield higher than its current 40%) in exchange for the Armor hardener's longer duration.

But again I honestly feel trying to make them different is more of a hassle than its worth. Making them equal is probably the simplest route in my opinion.

The problem with making them equal is that shields and armor aren't equal, therefor you will have differing performance despite having identical modules.

Well at that point it comes down to secondary attributes the define the differences between the two which gives shields advantages over armor's higher eHP. This is admittedly more difficult to balance, so it may be simply more viable to make the resistances different. I was honestly shocked at the choice to move armor from 25% to 40%. I expected something more along the lines of 30-35%

At this point the only thing that makes sense is to give shields the original 60% damage reduction to hardeners. Unless Ratatti is looking to slash armor hardener duration to 24 seconds base from 41 or whatever they are.. his shield nerfs so far make no sense unless hardener efficiency increases dramatically.

The logical thing to me would be to avoid giving Shield HAV back their 60% resistance modules that would be shamelessly abused and simply look into reductions to the modules themselves placing partial efficiency within a skill.

E.g- for arguments sake

Armour Adaption gives 5% efficiency per level and starts at 28% resistance. This adds up to 35% when the skill is maxed.

Shield Adaption gives 5% efficiency per level and starts at 32% resistance. This adds up to 40% when the skill is maxed.

Honestly the fact that we can even fit two active hardeners on tanks is beyond ridiculous if we had capacitor it would cap us our so quickly, inclusive of the Cap cost of firing and using other modules like Prop Modules, Shield Boosters, Armour Repairers that you simply wouldn't be able to use them effectively.

Hell EVE side frigates can't do this let alone bloody tanks.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 412	Posted - 2015.03.17 01:27:00 - [1] - Quote A hardened madrugar has the efficiency of the instant reps increased by 40%. Ie.. if you have 5000 armor, one hardener ups that to 7000 effectively. The same tank with 200 instant reps per second, with the same hardener activated effectively reps for 280 reps per second while hardened. The gunlogi comes no where near this, will not rep while taking damage, can not increase its reps, can only decrease it's 4 to 10 second recharge delay at the cost of ehp and a rediculous amount of cpu and pg. The most effective turret vs tanks is the blaster which does more damage vs shields. Yes there is 10 other forms of AV of which only plasma and fluxes hurt shields more than armor, BUT WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHEN ARMOR TANKS ARE TWICE AS EEFFECTIVE AS SHIELD TANKS. Yes please tell us again how shields are perfectly viable if you have cover within spitting distance, people are quickly learning that Shield tanks belong in the redline as armor tanks have EVERY advantage short of cornering. Rails are garbage on a gunlogi unless you trade in 3 of its 5 main tanking slots for damage mods and heat sinks. Madrugar does it better. Missiles are garbage as blasters outclass them in every way. Missiles and Rails are stuck in the redline. Want to beat a shield tank with an armor tank? -activate your hardeners when you see the shield tank activate his, you will not lose unless you drop your controller. If the shield tank isn't 100 meters back in thier redline before his hardeners wear off the armor tank will still have 15 seconds of damage reduction plus all the immediate reps it has been getting since the start of the battle. Trying to convince people that an average of 10% more damage on 75% of av weapons is a fair trade off for a broken tank that has to sit in the redline to be effective is typical for someone doesn't know what they are talking about.
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 412	Posted - 2015.03.17 01:34:00 - [2] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Back on topic... While I actually am more of a fan of making hardeners similar if not identical, I also understand that people appreciate them being different which is also fine by me. If they're going to be the same, the ratios you presented need to be the same and the cooldown/duration needs to be the same. If they're going to be different, I'd probably vote for a difference in resistance (though I'm reluctant to push the shield higher than its current 40%) in exchange for the Armor hardener's longer duration. But again I honestly feel trying to make them different is more of a hassle than its worth. Making them equal is probably the simplest route in my opinion. The problem with making them equal is that shields and armor aren't equal, therefor you will have differing performance despite having identical modules. Well at that point it comes down to secondary attributes the define the differences between the two which gives shields advantages over armor's higher eHP. This is admittedly more difficult to balance, so it may be simply more viable to make the resistances different. I was honestly shocked at the choice to move armor from 25% to 40%. I expected something more along the lines of 30-35% At this point the only thing that makes sense is to give shields the original 60% damage reduction to hardeners. Unless Ratatti is looking to slash armor hardener duration to 24 seconds base from 41 or whatever they are.. his shield nerfs so far make no sense unless hardener efficiency increases dramatically.
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 412	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:49:00 - [3] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Doc DDD wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DUST Fiend wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Back on topic... While I actually am more of a fan of making hardeners similar if not identical, I also understand that people appreciate them being different which is also fine by me. If they're going to be the same, the ratios you presented need to be the same and the cooldown/duration needs to be the same. If they're going to be different, I'd probably vote for a difference in resistance (though I'm reluctant to push the shield higher than its current 40%) in exchange for the Armor hardener's longer duration. But again I honestly feel trying to make them different is more of a hassle than its worth. Making them equal is probably the simplest route in my opinion. The problem with making them equal is that shields and armor aren't equal, therefor you will have differing performance despite having identical modules. Well at that point it comes down to secondary attributes the define the differences between the two which gives shields advantages over armor's higher eHP. This is admittedly more difficult to balance, so it may be simply more viable to make the resistances different. I was honestly shocked at the choice to move armor from 25% to 40%. I expected something more along the lines of 30-35% At this point the only thing that makes sense is to give shields the original 60% damage reduction to hardeners. Unless Ratatti is looking to slash armor hardener duration to 24 seconds base from 41 or whatever they are.. his shield nerfs so far make no sense unless hardener efficiency increases dramatically. The logical thing to me would be to avoid giving Shield HAV back their 60% resistance modules that would be shamelessly abused and simply look into reductions to the modules themselves placing partial efficiency within a skill. E.g- for arguments sake Armour Adaption gives 5% efficiency per level and starts at 28% resistance. This adds up to 35% when the skill is maxed. Shield Adaption gives 5% efficiency per level and starts at 32% resistance. This adds up to 40% when the skill is maxed. Honestly the fact that we can even fit two active hardeners on tanks is beyond ridiculous if we had capacitor it would cap us our so quickly, inclusive of the Cap cost of firing and using other modules like Prop Modules, Shield Boosters, Armour Repairers that you simply wouldn't be able to use them effectively. Hell EVE side frigates can't do this let alone bloody tanks. Yeah, again, this isn't Eve. Maybe go play Eve? We are trying to bring somesort iof balance to shield and armor tanks rather than just have shield tanks living in the redline, where armor tanks would still do a better job. Shield hardener increase to 60% is a good start given the shorter duration.
Doc DDD TeamPlayers Negative-Feedback 432	Posted - 2015.04.13 16:59:00 - [4] - Quote One of the reasons the double hardener double rep Maddies are so prevalent is the fact large rails have been nerfed at least 5 times in a row instead of fixing core issues. Damage Nerf Range Nerf Heat Build up Nerf Giving 90% more resist to armor hardener Nerf Basic and Advanced damage mod Nerf On top of these nerfs, shield tanks have also been nerfed ( because sitting in the redline hiding is supposed to be a 'pkaystyle' according to armor users). These nerfs include: Hardener Nerf Shield fitting Nerf Shield staking penalty Nerf Breaking Shield Booster Nerf Shield regen rate Nerf Shield starting armor value Nerf Missile splash damage nerf Missile clip size nerf Missile reload time nerf Fix Shields Fix Rails Fix Missiles Fix the core problems or do as per usual and pander to the masses that QQ on the forums for nerfs, as it is easier to cry on the forums than realize what the actual problem is in-game.