DUST Search - CCP Rattati, Resistance Modules for Infantry

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

CCP Rattati, Resistance Modules for Infantry

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9908	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:22:00 - [1] - Quote Reactive playing could work on vehicle modules and I'd love to have that. It could work for infantry too but it would be too difficult to work with it. Energized and basic resistance playing could work for both infantry and vehicles. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9909	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:40:00 - [2] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: Reactive playing could work on vehicle modules and I'd love to have that. It could work for infantry too but it would be too difficult to work with it. Care to explain why it would be to difficult? It's a similar reason to why reactive plates aren't often used on Frigates. The current TTK doesn't allow much absorption of damage for the reactive plate to finally settle its resistances. So in a firefight, it's over before the fight could even finish a cycle. Another reason why reactives wouldn't perform ideally with infantry is that you have multiple people using all different kinds of damage types. So lets say you're a heavy suit which would be about the only suit that could make use of it. There's a group of enemies and you're down into your armor so your reactive plate kicks in. You're surviving a long time against the onslaught of enemies but your reactive plate resistances are all pretty much staying the same. Why? Because the enemy you're facing are diverse. One enemy is dealing projectile damage, one using plasma damage, explosive damage with one laser damage . Your resistances are now all over the place with not a lot to spread around at all. Even though you survive this engagement two guys with Rail rifles and bolt pistols come in and take your ass out in a second. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9909	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:48:00 - [3] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: True Adamance wrote: Nocturnal Soul wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: Reactive playing could work on vehicle modules and I'd love to have that. It could work for infantry too but it would be too difficult to work with it. Care to explain why it would be to difficult? Reactive Plating works under the premise that over time the values shift from being universal across all damage types into one single damage type. Aka its a resistance plate the gets better the longer the same damage type is used against it. Infantry combat has too low a TTK for this to be a useful module on anything but a sentinel in most respects so finding a place for it that isnt solely the doman of the Sentinel is tricky. That's even before programming something like this into the game.... Ooh I didn't know that, I thought it was just a low flat bonus to all damage types... So I guess that's what energized plates are right? Yep. Energized plates offer more resistance than regular resistance plate but at the cost of more CPU. Regular resistance plates dont offer much resistance but dont really take much CPU. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9942	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:17:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Well, actually, if there is some OP meta, like let's say Scrambler Rifles, being able to say "I want to be properly defended against that and sacrffice HP" is pretty cool. Why not throw some ideas out, types, names, fitting cost, and values plus slot (high/low)? Me and True Adamance will be more than happy to give you some good in-depth numbers. People may not realize that something like this can't be a flat set bonus for all defenses and damage types, that would cause imbalance. Me and True will take theses things into consideration and will be back with good results. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9943	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:52:00 - [5] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Well, actually, if there is some OP meta, like let's say Scrambler Rifles, being able to say "I want to be properly defended against that and sacrffice HP" is pretty cool. Why not throw some ideas out, types, names, fitting cost, and values plus slot (high/low)? I'm not good with explaining things so I'll let my numbers do the talking. Here's what I'm envisioning when it comes to Resistance modules: Shield Resistance modules I wish I could complete it and flesh it out some more but it's 3am here and I work tomorrow so I should really get some sleep. If what's here is well accepted then I will continue to flesh it out and make one for armor and a separate thread for it maybe. Until then. o7 guys. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9946	Posted - 2015.03.16 16:40:00 - [6] - Quote duster 35000 wrote: Avallo Kantor wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Well, actually, if there is some OP meta, like let's say Scrambler Rifles, being able to say "I want to be properly defended against that and sacrffice HP" is pretty cool. Why not throw some ideas out, types, names, fitting cost, and values plus slot (high/low)? Hardeners based on each damage type, that reduce incoming damage by 10%, 20%, 25% per level. One for Shield, and Armor, with Shields being Highs, and Armor being lows. (They should not be able to be used without sacrificing the same spaces you use for buffer mods) And similar to how extender vs hardener mods work on vehicles: About 120% CPU than same level extender / plate, and 53% PG compared to same level extender / plate. That seems good, no longer will ScR instantly desttoy shields. You have to be careful with that though. You know shields already have 20% resistance to explosives, while I'm all for making it even beefier we still have to think about balance so we really shouldn't add on another 25% to that 20% with infantry weapons. Vehicle resist and infantry resist should not be implemented the same way. Vehicles have the luxury of being a bit easier to design while infantry will require a fine scapula to make things right with it. I'll finish the rest of that document later tonight after work. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9946	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:35:00 - [7] - Quote You've a point. At least for now a flat bonus amount may be the way to go just to test the waters. So all Shield Amplifiers and Resistance plates will grant the same amount. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9948	Posted - 2015.03.16 18:22:00 - [8] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: Sgt Kirk wrote: You've a point. At least for now a flat bonus amount may be the way to go just to test the waters. So all Shield Amplifiers and Resistance plates will grant the same amount. That is an interesting idea, but the counterpoint to that would be what is the benefit of skilling up? There would be no benefit to skilling up from basic -> proto. No I meant a flat bonus as in flat bonus for all modules of the same tier. The 15% 20% 25% idea proposed earlier in the thread. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9950	Posted - 2015.03.16 18:46:00 - [9] - Quote dzizur wrote: we're inventing new ways of tanking and modules based around living longer... yeah, because there's so much diversity in infantry modules. EWAR - we got damps and precisions (dont get me started on range amps..) BIOTICS - running, stamina , melee and jump (funny how people got pissed about introducing a new and refreshing mechanic) DAMAGE - well.. nothing to see here, just GIMME MOAR DAMAGE mods (yeaaah, 4 types..) KING HP - 3 types of plates, armor reps, shield extenders, shield rechargers, shield regulators (and one more which I don't remember name) I like the idea of having resistance modules, as it adds diversity, but don't you guys think there are other modules that would enrich gameplay than just "oh, lemme live longer" mods? I think we could still do more with damage in the game. What about add in modules that affect profiles slightly but for all weapons of the same type. I.e. Minor Flux Explosive upgrade changes Explosives -20% 20% to -10% 20% Focused Crystal upgrade changes Laser profile from 20% -10% Electromagnetic Rounds for projectile weapons changes its profile from -15% 15% to -10% 15% Plasma expansion increase for Hybrid Plasma changes its profile from 10% -10% to 10% -5% Or just have a damage mod that weapons of the same profile instead of weapon class. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*

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.