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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5942	Posted - 2015.03.15 19:56:00 - [1] - Quote I'm going to skip my usual post of honey dipped words and just flat out ask why this isn't a thing or hasn't been publicly considered since I know you can create modules as evident with vehicle shield regulators and dispersion mods. Its such a huge part of EVE that entire ship bonuses revolve around them. To have these in Dust would add a whole new level of intense fittings not plagued with HP mods but instead support functions. Plus its kinda what the Amarr do. (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17666	Posted - 2015.03.15 20:17:00 - [2] - Quote Are you referring to any of the following Reactive Plating - Plating that has comparatively low resistances across the board but adjusts its primary resistance types based on incoming damage. Energized Plating- Static across the board resistances. Damage Type Specific Plating - Higher Resistance values vs a single damage type. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5944	Posted - 2015.03.15 20:19:00 - [3] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Are you referring to any of the following Reactive Plating - Plating that has comparatively low resistances across the board but adjusts its primary resistance types based on incoming damage. Energized Plating- Static across the board resistances. Damage Type Specific Plating - Higher Resistance values vs a single damage type. The 1st & 3rd (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17667	Posted - 2015.03.15 20:44:00 - [4] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: True Adamance wrote: Are you referring to any of the following Reactive Plating - Plating that has comparatively low resistances across the board but adjusts its primary resistance types based on incoming damage. Energized Plating- Static across the board resistances. Damage Type Specific Plating - Higher Resistance values vs a single damage type. The 1st & 3rd Reactive would be damn difficult to do and most certainly only useful on Sentinels given TTK is longer on them. Damage Type Specific could work wonders, especially for Shield Suits to plug the EM resistance against Laser Weapons. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5945	Posted - 2015.03.15 20:54:00 - [5] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Nocturnal Soul wrote: True Adamance wrote: Are you referring to any of the following Reactive Plating - Plating that has comparatively low resistances across the board but adjusts its primary resistance types based on incoming damage. Energized Plating- Static across the board resistances. Damage Type Specific Plating - Higher Resistance values vs a single damage type. The 1st & 3rd Reactive would be damn difficult to do and most certainly only useful on Sentinels given TTK is longer on them. Damage Type Specific could work wonders, especially for Shield Suits to plug the EM resistance against Laser Weapons. Change sentinel bonus to module efficiency, that way it only applies when you fit one. Maybe start low with 3%,5%, and 7% just like light damage mods. Shields would naturally get a higher % due to lower HP module which should ease some pain for the Caldari. (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9908	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:22:00 - [6] - 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*
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5947	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:26:00 - [7] - Quote 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? (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17669	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:31:00 - [8] - 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? 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.... Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9909	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:40:00 - [9] - 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*
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5947	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:42:00 - [10] - Quote 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? (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!

Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9909	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:48:00 - [11] - 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*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17670	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:55:00 - [12] - Quote Sgt Kirk 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? 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. Tell that to the corp Tormentor Kirk. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5947	Posted - 2015.03.15 22:58:00 - [13] - Quote Well then, Type specific & Regular/Energized plating it is. Now we just need a response from Rattati...which could take forever. (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
DRT 99 Commando Perkone Caldari State 271	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:47:00 - [14] - Quote reactive plating that shifts resists like in eve would be really usefull in FW. have a teamate shoot you with an SMG a bit and walk into the heavy infested building have a teamate shoot you with an AR for a bit and facetank the blaster tank, or get shotgunned and laugh.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17673	Posted - 2015.03.16 00:56:00 - [15] - Quote DRT 99 wrote: reactive plating that shifts resists like in eve would be really usefull in FW. have a teamate shoot you with an SMG a bit and walk into the heavy infested building have a teamate shoot you with an AR for a bit and facetank the blaster tank, or get shotgunned and laugh. This is precisely the reason I'd rather not see Reactive in the game. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 219	Posted - 2015.03.16 01:03:00 - [16] - Quote True Adamance wrote: DRT 99 wrote: reactive plating that shifts resists like in eve would be really usefull in FW. have a teamate shoot you with an SMG a bit and walk into the heavy infested building have a teamate shoot you with an AR for a bit and facetank the blaster tank, or get shotgunned and laugh. This is precisely the reason I'd rather not see Reactive in the game. You shoot yourself with smaller bullets to build up an immunity to larger and larger bullets Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17675	Posted - 2015.03.16 02:28:00 - [17] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: True Adamance wrote: DRT 99 wrote: reactive plating that shifts resists like in eve would be really usefull in FW. have a teamate shoot you with an SMG a bit and walk into the heavy infested building have a teamate shoot you with an AR for a bit and facetank the blaster tank, or get shotgunned and laugh. This is precisely the reason I'd rather not see Reactive in the game. You shoot yourself with smaller bullets to build up an immunity to larger and larger bullets Indeed. Artifically build up resistances is not the intended function of the resistance plate nor with our low TTK and variety of damage types would this be worth having. On vehicles perhaps this could function reasonably well as the longer a tank duel goes on the better your resistances get against the primary damage type. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5959	Posted - 2015.03.16 02:46:00 - [18] - Quote I'd rather keep it simple on all accounts, reactive plates seem like a feature for "legion" (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 18891	Posted - 2015.03.16 04:41:00 - [19] - Quote 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)? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Avallo Kantor 514	Posted - 2015.03.16 04:57:00 - [20] - 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)? 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.

Apocalyptic Destroyer Killers 4 Hire 327	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:16:00 - [21] - Quote Maaaan I remember resistance plates on tanks .... Good OP times.. True Amarr In Disguise Pain is weakness leaving the body Proto : ADS Pilot, Tanker Ak.0 : Mando, Scout, Assault
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars RISE of LEGION 281	Posted - 2015.03.16 05:47:00 - [22] - Quote 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. I would suggest laser, projectile, hybrid blaster, hybrid rail, and explosive resistance hardeners, and perhaps a special flux resistance hardener unless the flux has a damage profile of a laser or hybrid blaster, then you wouldn't need a hardener against fluxes. The explosive hardener could be used in the grenade slot so that you could map the activation button to the grenade button. (this would help heavies and other suits survive 1 RE at the last second) these hardeners might accidentally be used to reduce orbital strike damage if you get hit by 1 strike but the rest hit behind a wall etc. those orbital strikes do have damage profiles don't they? I would suggest the hardeners do not increase in hardener % but increase in duration as they advance in tier. There activation could be manual by simply selecting them in the 4th equipment slot for the quick select weapon wheel (but create a condition where they can only be usable if the 4th equipment slot is not used and create invalid fittings if a 4th equipment slot and hardener are used, for logistics suits). I would suggest the laser and hybrid blaster hardeners have a CPU dominance cost and the projectile and explosive and hybrid rail hardeners have a PG dominance cost. The suggested hardener costs: laser hardener(std/adv/pro)(high slot): 20% extra CPU cost and 1 extra PG unit compared to shield extenders of same tier. 50% hardening 10/14/17.5 second duration 55 second cooldown hybrid blaster hardener(std/adv/pro)(high slot): 16% extra CPU cost and 3 extra PG unit compared to shield extenders of same tier 50% hardening 10/14/17.5 second duration 55 second cooldown hybrid rail hardener(std/adv/pro)(low slot): 14% extra PG cost and 25 extra CPU units in cost compared to armor plates of same tier 50% hardening 10/14/17.5 second duration 55 second cooldown projectile hardener(std/adv/pro)(low slot): 14% extra PG cost and 25 extra CPU units in cost compared to armor plates of same tier 50% hardening 10/14/17.5 55 second cooldown explosive splash resistance hardener(std/adv/pro)(grenade slot): 85% hardening 6/9/11.5 second duration 40second cooldown CPU/PG std: 20/3 adv: 30/4 pro: 45/5 you cant stack them with my design
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9942	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:17:00 - [23] - 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*
LOOKMOM NOHANDS Warpoint Sharx 245	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:34:00 - [24] - Quote I thought about these before and I am not sure they are a good fit. Yes we have them in Eve but we are also able to select an ammunition type to counter those resists. Damage profiles are already bad enough as they stand without this.
THUNDERGROOVE Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 1642	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:35:00 - [25] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: Care to explain why it would be to difficult? It's a similar reason to why reactive plates aren't often used on Frigates. [/quote] They're not used on frigates because of capacitor needs. Mace yourself, blame someone else itGÇÖs okay, no one will believe you AIV member.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17680	Posted - 2015.03.16 06:59:00 - [26] - 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)? Well the Damage Type Specific Modules are usually simply named after the damage types they resist EM Resistance Plating Thermic Resistance Plating Blah Blah Resistance Plating If you felt specific names were required you could name them based on minerals that exist that have a fair propensity or resisting great temperatures, forces, or explosions. E.G You could use Thermic Energized Armour Plating/ Layering EM Energized Armour Plating/ Layering Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17680	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:01:00 - [27] - Quote LOOKMOM NOHANDS wrote: I thought about these before and I am not sure they are a good fit. Yes we have them in Eve but we are also able to select an ammunition type to counter those resists. Damage profiles are already bad enough as they stand without this. How so. A player gives up a specific slot to plug a resistance that could be of the meta or that they are weakest against. Their eHP is technically lesser but they are not necessarily subject to that weapons potent damage profile. E.G- Laser Weapons. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2720	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:43:00 - [28] - Quote WeapondigitX V7 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. -snip- If they are only going to work against a single damage type, they should be passives. If they reduce all damage, they should be active. Reason being that you can't really anticipate what weapon you will come across next, the majority of the time. By the time you know what weapon you are fighting next, it is usually to late to worry about activating a module, as you are likely fighting the weapon already. Also, like Ratatti said "anti-FotM"... I would set modules like these at 15/20/25% passive resistances at all times against each damage type. Make them a little easier to fit than standard HP mods (since they won't be nearly as effective overall for 80% of the weapons you'll face)... Probably about the fitting read of Ferroscales/Reactives. Resistance mods that just reduce all incoming damage by a set percentage however, should definitely be actives. With mods like they you don't have to worry about what you'll be fighting only when you'll be fighting. I'm actually not sure how these should be balanced, really. At what HP level should they become more effective than HP mods? Should they stack? If so, should they have stacking penalties? How long should they last? A single 1v1 or a full firefight? Home at Last <3
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9943	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:52:00 - [29] - 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*
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5964	Posted - 2015.03.16 07:56:00 - [30] - Quote Whoa whoa whoa now Fizz, I'm definitely a firm believer in having passive resist on infantry due to the fact the game is too chaotic to simple use to great effectiveness which is balanced by its high CPU cost and low % as True said. P.s. thanks for starting the party while I slept :( (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!

LOOKMOM NOHANDS Warpoint Sharx 246	Posted - 2015.03.16 08:38:00 - [31] - Quote True Adamance wrote: LOOKMOM NOHANDS wrote: I thought about these before and I am not sure they are a good fit. Yes we have them in Eve but we are also able to select an ammunition type to counter those resists. Damage profiles are already bad enough as they stand without this. How so. A player gives up a specific slot to plug a resistance that could be of the meta or that they are weakest against. Their eHP is technically lesser but they are not necessarily subject to that weapons potent damage profile. E.G- Laser Weapons. How is this really different from stacking the appropriate HP? If you have a problem with the CR on an armor suit a shield extender not only gives you resists to the CR thanks to its damage profile but also increases your total HP. When used in combination with the current damage profiles you end up with suits that are unable to be killed. If you account for the occasional hit detection issues then you really have a problem. It is very bad for NPE. New players are already very unfamiliar with damage profiles and end up raging out of the game. This only counts as a little bit of an argument but an argument none the less. They would have no counter at all other than totally specializing into a new weapon. There are no damage mods that increase specific damage or any way to change ammo for a different profile on your weapon. It crosses paths with certain suits that already have resistances applied. Again this type of stacking causes serious balance issues. Basically I would love to see this implemented in the appropriate environment but I do not feel like there is anything appropriate about the current state of the game for it. We already have a more narrow version of these which weapons have been balanced around. If we had interchangeable ammo and set resists on each suit that these would supplement (just like in Eve) then I would be all about those changes but we have moved past that point. In the long term I would love to see us move to more of a model like Eve where weapons deal a specific damage(s) and the suit has the resists. I really do not think this is a viable option as it would involve throwing out a great bit of the last year of work.
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven Back and Forth 901	Posted - 2015.03.16 10:24:00 - [32] - 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'll do up a spread sheet XD I hear you like those :) "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven Moody come back SWBF3!!
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7639	Posted - 2015.03.16 10:28:00 - [33] - Quote 501st Headstrong 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)? I'll do up a spread sheet XD I hear you like those :) oddly enough, he does! AV
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 4166	Posted - 2015.03.16 10:43:00 - [34] - Quote Well, considering that i was running around with my min sentinel with 570 shield and suddenly a charged shot of SCR rifle took me to zero shield, i think that resistance modules can be quite useless, at least for shields. They will bring more problems than benefits imo. Pimp my Barge
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17684	Posted - 2015.03.16 10:49:00 - [35] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Well, considering that i was running around with my min sentinel with 570 shield and suddenly a charged shot of SCR rifle took me to zero shield, i think that resistance modules can be quite useless, at least for shields. They will bring more problems than benefits imo. Charged shot will serve to prevent a significant portion of your armour being annihilated by such a situation by nullifying that 20% damage profile. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Thaddeus Reynolds Facepunch Security 219	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:01:00 - [36] - 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)? Is it technically possible to have active modules on Dropsuits (Non-Equipment/weapon/grenade I mean)? Knowing this would help us propose some better modules in general? Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper. Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 661	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:27:00 - [37] - 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)? It would be important to consider how resistances would interact with damage profiles and how they apply to armor/shields. Imagine finding out that your 20/20 profile makes you useless, because the enemy's resistance applies to their shields and armor at the same time and you are pure Amarr Assault. With brick tanking, you at least know that your weapon is doing the amount of damage that it is supposed to do. Then again, what, exactly, is the difference between added HP and a percentage-based resistance? In the end, both do exactly the same thing. You just have to calculate more, to know which combination of resistance and HP modules grants the best eHP. Especially if resistance gets stacking penalties. If those modules were implemented, I'd expect the stat sheet of my dropsuit loadout to show me my eHP for all damage profiles. Because I sure as **** won't get a calculator and calculate the most effective ratio manually. Being able to be resistant against certain damage types is nice, but the infantry TTK will cause all kinds of frustration if it's implemented. We already have the silly situation where you select a Caldari, and then randomly run into someone with a Laser Rifle and see your shields evaporate in a flash. I generally feel that combat is too hectic to really make use of damage profiles. The other characteristics of weapons, like range and reload speed, are generally far more important due to not being dependant on the enemy. What if stacked laser resistance made explosive weapons better against that player? Wouldn't that be very counter-intuitive on, say, a Caldari? How would you even know that your laser weapon is being blocked by resistance and not stacked shield armor modules, with the former meaning that you'd better take out your sidearm and the latter meaning that you just need to keep firing? Do you intend to add some kind of visual or acoustic cue?
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5966	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:33:00 - [38] - Quote Nice post Sole but adding a resistance mod of type specific only makes you weaker in a way because it takes up a slot that could be used for a HP,biotics, ewar, and other shield supportive modules. These resistance mods are suppose to be good enough to make you think twice about choosing it or more hp (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Avallo Kantor 517	Posted - 2015.03.16 13:28:00 - [39] - Quote Sole Fenychs 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)? It would be important to consider how resistances would interact with damage profiles and how they apply to armor/shields. Imagine finding out that your 20/20 profile makes you useless, because the enemy's resistance applies to their shields and armor at the same time and you are pure Amarr Assault. With brick tanking, you at least know that your weapon is doing the amount of damage that it is supposed to do. Then again, what, exactly, is the difference between added HP and a percentage-based resistance? In the end, both do exactly the same thing. You just have to calculate more, to know which combination of resistance and HP modules grants the best eHP. Especially if resistance gets stacking penalties. If those modules were implemented, I'd expect the stat sheet of my dropsuit loadout to show me my eHP for all damage profiles. Because I sure as **** won't get a calculator and calculate the most effective ratio manually. Being able to be resistant against certain damage types is nice, but the infantry TTK will cause all kinds of frustration if it's implemented. We already have the silly situation where you select a Caldari, and then randomly run into someone with a Laser Rifle and see your shields evaporate in a flash. I generally feel that combat is too hectic to really make use of damage profiles. The other characteristics of weapons, like range and reload speed, are generally far more important due to not being dependant on the enemy. What if stacked laser resistance made explosive weapons better against that player? Wouldn't that be very counter-intuitive on, say, a Caldari? How would you even know that your laser weapon is being blocked by resistance and not stacked shield armor modules, with the former meaning that you'd better take out your sidearm and the latter meaning that you just need to keep firing? Do you intend to add some kind of visual or acoustic cue? A few points in response: The difference between resist and HP-mods is that HP mods are general purpose. Having more HP is applicable to everything. Resist mods only provide eHP against one narrow band of damage, taking up a slot that could have been used for other tanking modules (or utility). This is because of the current design goal of having them be placed in the respective mod for their tank type. (highs for shields, low for armor) Furthermore the general idea is to have 1 resist module provide more eHP against that specific damage type than a buffer mod, especially since that eHP increases as you add more buffer. Effectively these resistance modules give you more HP against weapon A, but 0 more HP against every other weapon. This allows more specialized fittings that are designed around a certain weapon, at the cost of being as effective against others. Also I would comment that it's not a "silly situation" to have shields be vulnerable to laser weapons. Weapon profiles add a depth to this game that many other FPS games lack, in my opinion. It allows the meta to shift as no matter what weapon is dominant, there is a tanking type that nullifies a good degree of it's damage, and no fitting can realistically be a perfect tank against every damage type, there will always be vulnerabilities. (In the case of trying to stack resistance modules against everything, then the low total raw hp values is your downfall, to high alpha) As to your last comment about needing some visual: We already have a % based indicator as to how much damage you will do with a weapon. No need to add anything, as that could easily take into account resistances. The other problems of confusion can be fixed with a bit more detailed tool tips, and perhaps a general guide on damage types somewhere IN GAME.
dzizur Nos Nothi 201	Posted - 2015.03.16 14:53:00 - [40] - Quote 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?

Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5969	Posted - 2015.03.16 14:56:00 - [41] - 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? Gotta start somewhere, why not here :D (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Vyuru Algintal Core Gallente Federation 96	Posted - 2015.03.16 14:57:00 - [42] - Quote Just tossing this out there, will let other's deal with the math and stuff. You ought to consider two types of damage reduction modules, shield and armor. I would suggest for shield damage reduction modules to be in the highs. Armor damage reduction modules in the lows. This lets both shield and armor tankers be able to participate in this, and this way people have to sacrifice ehp in order to balance out the -damage modules. Otherwise you will have an imbalance.
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5969	Posted - 2015.03.16 15:02:00 - [43] - Quote Vyuru wrote: Just tossing this out there, will let other's deal with the math and stuff. You ought to consider two types of damage reduction modules, shield and armor. I would suggest for shield damage reduction modules to be in the highs. Armor damage reduction modules in the lows. This lets both shield and armor tankers be able to participate in this, and this way people have to sacrifice ehp in order to balance out the -damage modules. Otherwise you will have an imbalance. Not trying to be a D but did you even read anything past the OP? (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Avallo Kantor 519	Posted - 2015.03.16 15:04:00 - [44] - 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'd argue we've spent too many iterations on decreasing TTK via various means, such as the Warbarge, damage buffs, making buffer mods less appealing, and even with more minor things like the 5MCC reward being a DAMAGE mod. It's fine to have damage increases, but they need to be balanced with increases to survivability, which would lead to a longer TTK. A component of this game I am all for. Also I would argue it's a false argument to say that there are other mods that could be added to enrich experience, as it does not impact the ability to add this module.
Logi Bro Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 3492	Posted - 2015.03.16 16:13:00 - [45] - 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)? To, "throw out some ideas," I would start by saying that they shouldn't be damage specific. I know EvE does the whole explosive damage resist, laser damage resist, so on and so forth, having one specific resist mod for each damage type, but Dust has a far different meta, with no ammunition swaps or anything of the sort, so I don't think that would work out. There should just be the two categories: shield and armor. I also don't think they should be passive. If you go passive, it is just essentially the same thing a plate/extender, just giving a flat increase to your eHP, and if you do that, then why not just equip the plates/extenders? In the end, I would just say have them function exactly as the vehicle hardeners do. Armor gets longer duration, smaller effect, shields get shorter duration, greater effect. Increase in tiers just reduces cooldown/increases duration and doesn't affect the actual percentage reduced. Just some numbers off the top of my head: Basic Active Armor Hardener(AAH): Low slot 75% damage multiplier (-25% damage) 10s duration 30s cooldown 6 CPU 5 PG Enh AAH Low 75% 12s Dur 28s CD 10 CPU 8 PG Cmplx AAH Low 75% 15s Dur 25s CD 16 CPU 13 PG Basic Active Shield Hardener(ASH): High slot 60% damage multiplier 5s duration 35s cooldown 25 CPU 2 PG Enh ASH: high 60% 7s Dur 32s CD 40 CPU 5 PG Cmplx ASH: high 60% 9s duration 30s CD 58 CPU 8 PG Shields get short burst high power, armor gets decent duration and moderate power. Both have high fitting costs (for AAH, more PG than plates, but less CPU, for ASH, more CPU than extenders, but less PG) SP Sinks? Fixed.
duster 35000 Algintal Core Gallente Federation 410	Posted - 2015.03.16 16:14:00 - [46] - Quote 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. Molestia approved
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9946	Posted - 2015.03.16 16:40:00 - [47] - 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*
Avallo Kantor 520	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:02:00 - [48] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: 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. That is a fair point. I would argue though that it is still sacrificing slots to further increase that advantage, instead of increasing other things such as resistance vs shields, or general hp. Much like EVE, having a incredibly high resistance to one damage type is possible, but it leaves you vulnerable to other damage types. Going further, increasing the resistance to a damage type your tank type is already strong against may sound good on paper, but I would argue out in the field explosive users are already trying not to target shield tanks over armor tanks, as they already have the disadvantage. Although to be fair, I do not think having a high resistance against only one damage type will be overly sought after mostly due to you'd be spending too much of your tank and resources on one specific damage type. I understand your concerns, but I think the inherent opportunity costs will resolve your issue, in addition to the fact that DUST (thanks to Rattati's balance efforts) sees a large variety of weapons fielded.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9946	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:35:00 - [49] - 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*
Avallo Kantor 520	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:40:00 - [50] - Quote 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.

Avallo Kantor 520	Posted - 2015.03.16 17:46:00 - [51] - Quote Logi Bro 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)? To, "throw out some ideas," I would start by saying that they shouldn't be damage specific. I know EvE does the whole explosive damage resist, laser damage resist, so on and so forth, having one specific resist mod for each damage type, but Dust has a far different meta, with no ammunition swaps or anything of the sort, so I don't think that would work out. There should just be the two categories: shield and armor. I also don't think they should be passive. If you go passive, it is just essentially the same thing a plate/extender, just giving a flat increase to your eHP, and if you do that, then why not just equip the plates/extenders? -SNIP- I don't mean to try to shoot you down, but currently there is no model for "active infantry modules", and we are trying to argue within the constraints of the current game, without trying to add a totally new system. Arguing for equipment also doesn't work, as the idea / spirit of these modules it that they would be an active choice between fitting resistance to a certain weapon vs buffer hp. Your idea works well (and already exists) for vehicles, but I would argue that it has to be passive for infantry. (Due to lack of support / structure for active infantry mods) If we accept that it has to be passive, we then also have to accept that they have to be damage-type specific. Why? Because if they were "omni-resists" then it would create a false choice. The issue becomes a math problem over an actual choice, because either the resistances or the pure hp would always trump in fitting X. In effect: one module gives a calculable EHP of X while the other gives a EHP of Y, and you need consider the mods no further past which one gives more.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9948	Posted - 2015.03.16 18:22:00 - [52] - 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 - [53] - 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*
Ghost Kaisar Negative-Feedback 10649	Posted - 2015.03.16 19:23:00 - [54] - Quote Sgt Kirk 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)? Me and True Adamance(if he even shows up) 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. I hope these come with Suit Capacitors (Or at least cooldowns) Oh, and make sure to give me a biotic active mod too. Imagine burst sprinting in a Min Scout at 30 m/s GOTTA GO FAST Currently listening to: Max Anarchy OST Old School Scout, watch out for the knives
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17690	Posted - 2015.03.16 20:11:00 - [55] - Quote Ghost Kaisar wrote: Sgt Kirk 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)? Me and True Adamance(if he even shows up) 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. I hope these come with Suit Capacitors (Or at least cooldowns) Also: I would love to see active module tanking on suit side as well. We have lots of passive mods for infantry, but it would be really cool to see active mods on infantry. For example: A shield booster would go a long way on a Cal Heavy, and the same for a heavy rep booster for a Gal Sent. Active Resist for an Amarr Heavy to tank HMG fire. Scouts could then have equipment or grenades that could sap suits "Capacitors" deactivating and draining all active mods. Logis could get a tool reduces cooldowns (Remote Capacitor). Even Cooler? Active Damage mods for when you gotta breach a room, or to put massive DPS on a vehicle. You would sacrifice overall HP or constant benefits for short, powerful bursts of HP or Damage (or Rep). Benefit of this tanking is the extra power gained in bursts would make you difficult to fight in cycle, but susceptible to flanking when off cycle (or even being forced to attack/defend in cycles.) I also want my Biotic Booster mods. Sprint at 30 m/s in a Min Scout GOTTA GO FAST Active modules would be tough to do....perhaps just let us try for the passives. I'll need Kirk to run me through his thinking in the spread sheet and we can go from there. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Ghost Kaisar Negative-Feedback 10651	Posted - 2015.03.16 20:30:00 - [56] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Ghost Kaisar wrote: Sgt Kirk 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)? Me and True Adamance(if he even shows up) 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. I hope these come with Suit Capacitors (Or at least cooldowns) Also: I would love to see active module tanking on suit side as well. We have lots of passive mods for infantry, but it would be really cool to see active mods on infantry. For example: A shield booster would go a long way on a Cal Heavy, and the same for a heavy rep booster for a Gal Sent. Active Resist for an Amarr Heavy to tank HMG fire. Scouts could then have equipment or grenades that could sap suits "Capacitors" deactivating and draining all active mods. Logis could get a tool reduces cooldowns (Remote Capacitor). Even Cooler? Active Damage mods for when you gotta breach a room, or to put massive DPS on a vehicle. You would sacrifice overall HP or constant benefits for short, powerful bursts of HP or Damage (or Rep). Benefit of this tanking is the extra power gained in bursts would make you difficult to fight in cycle, but susceptible to flanking when off cycle (or even being forced to attack/defend in cycles.) I also want my Biotic Booster mods. Sprint at 30 m/s in a Min Scout GOTTA GO FAST Active modules would be tough to do....perhaps just let us try for the passives. I'll need Kirk to run me through his thinking in the spread sheet and we can go from there. I like to dream big. Passive resist modules will open the door for more module tomfoolery. If you ever want a third opinion, hit me up on skype. Currently listening to: Max Anarchy OST Old School Scout, watch out for the knives
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars 282	Posted - 2015.03.16 21:34:00 - [57] - Quote Fizzer XCIV wrote: WeapondigitX V7 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. -snip- If they are only going to work against a single damage type, they should be passives. If they reduce all damage, they should be active. Reason being that you can't really anticipate what weapon you will come across next, the majority of the time. By the time you know what weapon you are fighting next, it is usually to late to worry about activating a module, as you are likely fighting the weapon already. Also, like Ratatti said "anti-FotM"... I would set modules like these at 15/20/25% passive resistances at all times against each damage type. Make them a little easier to fit than standard HP mods (since they won't be nearly as effective overall for 80% of the weapons you'll face)... Probably about the fitting read of Ferroscales/Reactives. Resistance mods that just reduce all incoming damage by a set percentage however, should definitely be actives. With mods like they you don't have to worry about what you'll be fighting only when you'll be fighting. I'm actually not sure how these should be balanced, really. At what HP level should they become more effective than HP mods? Should they stack? If so, should they have stacking penalties? How long should they last? A single 1v1 or a full firefight? If they are active and reduce all damage by a %, and can or can not be stacked, they would also be able to reliably be used as defensive modules to counter a ambush, assassination from behind if the assassin uses weapons like rifles or massdrivers. It is already possible to be hit/ambushed from behind and turn around and kill your opponent if the gear difference is large enough, and the assassin is only moderately good at aiming. With active hardening mods it would be much easier to do that if your hardener reduced all damage. If active hardeners only affected 1 damage type, this would be less of an issue, because you sometimes cant tell what weapon your assassin is using when he is firing from behind you at a large distance. You could however create active hardener modules that reduced all damage by a % but with a large activation delay, such as 3 seconds, this would limit those modules to being used during well planned attacks, when entering hotspots before the anticipated assassin comes, or when you burst out of cover to attack an enemy in a firefight that is also close to you behind cover.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17696	Posted - 2015.03.16 21:49:00 - [58] - Quote WeapondigitX V7 wrote: Fizzer XCIV wrote: WeapondigitX V7 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. -snip- If they are only going to work against a single damage type, they should be passives. If they reduce all damage, they should be active. Reason being that you can't really anticipate what weapon you will come across next, the majority of the time. By the time you know what weapon you are fighting next, it is usually to late to worry about activating a module, as you are likely fighting the weapon already. Also, like Ratatti said "anti-FotM"... I would set modules like these at 15/20/25% passive resistances at all times against each damage type. Make them a little easier to fit than standard HP mods (since they won't be nearly as effective overall for 80% of the weapons you'll face)... Probably about the fitting read of Ferroscales/Reactives. Resistance mods that just reduce all incoming damage by a set percentage however, should definitely be actives. With mods like they you don't have to worry about what you'll be fighting only when you'll be fighting. I'm actually not sure how these should be balanced, really. At what HP level should they become more effective than HP mods? Should they stack? If so, should they have stacking penalties? How long should they last? A single 1v1 or a full firefight? If they are active and reduce all damage by a %, and can or can not be stacked, they would also be able to reliably be used as defensive modules to counter a ambush, assassination from behind if the assassin uses weapons like rifles or massdrivers. It is already possible to be hit/ambushed from behind and turn around and kill your opponent if the gear difference is large enough, and the assassin is only moderately good at aiming. With active hardening mods it would be much easier to do that if your hardener reduced all damage. If active hardeners only affected 1 damage type, this would be less of an issue, because you sometimes cant tell what weapon your assassin is using when he is firing from behind you at a large distance. You could however create active hardener modules that reduced all damage by a % but with a large activation delay, such as 3 seconds, this would limit those modules to being used during well planned attacks, when entering hotspots before the anticipated assassin comes, or when you burst out of cover to attack an enemy in a firefight that is also close to you behind cover. They will not be active by all accounts Kirk is not looking into presenting active modules and at this point nor should he. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5971	Posted - 2015.03.16 22:03:00 - [59] - Quote Agreed (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 8591	Posted - 2015.03.16 22:12:00 - [60] - Quote I say if you want to make mods resistant to Shield destroying weaponry, they should be HS items. If you want to do the same with Armor, they should be LS items. This way choices and sacrifices have to be made. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.

Fizzer XCIV Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire 2723	Posted - 2015.03.16 22:26:00 - [61] - Quote One Eyed King wrote: I say if you want to make mods resistant to Shield destroying weaponry, they should be HS items. If you want to do the same with Armor, they should be LS items. This way choices and sacrifices have to be made. Said modules should be more effective than just plates/extenders against whatever they are designed for. Or else they will only be used on heavy framed suits. Home at Last <3
Avallo Kantor 520	Posted - 2015.03.16 23:27:00 - [62] - Quote I'll add a google doc when I get out of work, but I decided to do a bit of numbers on my idea (basing CPU / PG on the % difference between tank extenders / hardeners) Proposal is based on ~120% CPU and ~53% PG of same level Extender / Plate: Name Resist CPU PG Basic Shield 10% 22 2 Enh Shield 20% 44 3 Proto Shield 25% 66 6 Basic Armor 10% 11 2 Enh Armor 20% 22 4 Proto Armor 25% 44 7
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5971	Posted - 2015.03.16 23:45:00 - [63] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: I'll add a google doc when I get out of work, but I decided to do a bit of numbers on my idea (basing CPU / PG on the % difference between tank extenders / hardeners) Proposal is based on ~120% CPU and ~53% PG of same level Extender / Plate: Name Resist CPU PG Basic Shield 10% 22 2 Enh Shield 20% 44 3 Proto Shield 25% 66 6 Basic Armor 10% 11 2 Enh Armor 20% 22 4 Proto Armor 25% 44 7 Vehicle tanks? (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Avallo Kantor 522	Posted - 2015.03.17 00:29:00 - [64] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: Avallo Kantor wrote: I'll add a google doc when I get out of work, but I decided to do a bit of numbers on my idea (basing CPU / PG on the % difference between tank extenders / hardeners) Proposal is based on ~120% CPU and ~53% PG of same level Extender / Plate: Name Resist CPU PG Basic Shield 10% 22 2 Enh Shield 20% 44 3 Proto Shield 25% 66 6 Basic Armor 10% 11 2 Enh Armor 20% 22 4 Proto Armor 25% 44 7 Vehicle tanks? Yes. Also Link to google doc https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17STup5awUUTV-6A35QCS3dGtZxJRqXAlPeZNYq_lMMM/edit?usp=sharing
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9166	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:13:00 - [65] - Quote Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5975	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:22:00 - [66] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing I absolutely have to commend you on your work Aeon, but the efficiency bonus to the skill seems a bit much. Care to explain why you chose such numbers? (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17707	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:24:00 - [67] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing I like your proposal but why is EM resistance increased by 1.5% across both damage specific plate types. My main concern is not the Shield Resistance Values but those on the Energized Plating. With the negative efficiency vs Armour that would be an equivalent 47% damage resistance vs Armour its a little bit higher than I expected proposals would suggest. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Avallo Kantor 523	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:25:00 - [68] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing I am not sure how I like the idea of having different % resists for each damage type, as it simply makes some modules more effective than others, for example Laser based weapon is weakened most here while others are not, which would weaken the weapon considerably when compared to other weapons fighting against their opponent's 1x resist mod. If you want to have different % resists for each damage type, then they should follow a logic based on Shield and Armor. For example: The lowest progression on Shields is Laser, while the lowest progression on Armor is explosives. Basically making it hardest to fit against a tank type's weakness. [EDIT:] Or perhaps Vice Versa would be better, based on True's Concerns. Another concern which I voiced earlier is that I don't think general passive resist mods will work as well in DUST, as it becomes a rather straight forward math equation as to when a plate is flat out better than the adaptive, or vice versa. It is, in essence, a false choice as you would (on math) either be choosing the better or the worst one for -all- circumstances. Another idea is to have these modules increase a tank type's blast weakness (Flux for Shields, and Explosive Splash for Armor) by a moderate amount, with the trade off of even lower resistances so that they are always a 'worse' eHP choice than buffer, but potentially made better by the Flux / Explosive splash resistance. Basically making the desire to take the mod for those unique benefits. I do like the idea of adding skills for each type though, as I feel DUST could always do with more skills that provide some benefit to skilling into them (Other than just unlocks)
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9167	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:31:00 - [69] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing I absolutely have to commend you on your work Aeon, but the efficiency bonus to the skill seems a bit much. Care to explain why you chose such numbers? The general gist is that at level 5 the Complex modules will negate the bonuses brought on by the weapon's damage profile and the proficiency of the weapon while also balancing around a standard module still being useful at level 5 so that it negates the damage profile, but not proficiency. Originally the design was flat percentage reduction with no bonus from the skill but then I remembered someone saying 'all skills should have a bonus' and designed around that instead. True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing I like your proposal but why is EM resistance increased by 1.5% across both damage specific plate types. My main concern is not the Shield Resistance Values but those on the Energized Plating. With the negative efficiency vs Armour that would be an equivalent 47% damage resistance vs Armour. It's because Laser weaponry receives a 20% increase to shield damage and a 15% increase to damage proficiency, which totaled, gives a much higher damage percentage bonus than any other rifle type. The modules were designed around the rifles as a whole (note that the Explosive plate/amplifer doesn't provide a reduction to Splash damage, which is the Adaptive's thing). It's not because EM is being singled out, every (specific damage) resistance module is designed to counter the bonuses that weapon type provides or the inverse. So, if EM provides a 20% increase to Shield Damage, than the Shield Module would counter that while the Armor module would provide an -additional- resistance toward that damage profile. Yes, the negative efficiency vs Armor would bring it up to 47% damage resistance, but the player is sacrificing a lot to be able to get that. The PG/CPU is designed to be costly but not punishing and it's taking up a slot that they would otherwise fill with buffer/regeneration which applies to all areas. It's a 47% damage resistance but they're not gaining anything against the other damage types; essentially wasting the slot. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17707	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:36:00 - [70] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: It's because Laser weaponry receives a 20% increase to shield damage and a 15% increase to damage proficiency, which totaled, gives a much higher damage percentage bonus than any other rifle type. The modules were designed around the rifles as a whole (note that the Explosive plate/amplifer doesn't provide a reduction to Splash damage, which is the Adaptive's thing). It's not because EM is being singled out, every (specific damage) resistance module is designed to counter the bonuses that weapon type provides or the inverse. So, if EM provides a 20% increase to Shield Damage, than the Shield Module would counter that while the Armor module would provide an -additional- resistance toward that damage profile. Yes, the negative efficiency vs Armor would bring it up to 47% damage resistance, but the player is sacrificing a lot to be able to get that. The PG/CPU is designed to be costly but not punishing and it's taking up a slot that they would otherwise fill with buffer/regeneration which applies to all areas. It's a 47% damage resistance but they're not gaining anything against the other damage types; essentially wasting the slot. Pardon me for asking but is that not the same for explosive damage weapons like the Mass Driver. I only ask since the resistance for Explosives vs Shielding amounts to a 45.5% resistance. To some degree I was expecting an inverse profile. I suspected you might opted for the addition 1.5% as a result of EM weapons DPS compared to Explosive weapons DPS. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch

Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9167	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:38:00 - [71] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing I am not sure how I like the idea of having different % resists for each damage type, as it simply makes some modules more effective than others, for example Laser based weapon is weakened most here while others are not, which would weaken the weapon considerably when compared to other weapons fighting against their opponent's 1x resist mod. If you want to have different % resists for each damage type, then they should follow a logic based on Shield and Armor. For example: The lowest progression on Shields is Laser, while the lowest progression on Armor is explosives. Basically making it hardest to fit against a tank type's weakness. [EDIT:] Or perhaps Vice Versa would be better, based on True's Concerns. Another concern which I voiced earlier is that I don't think general passive resist mods will work as well in DUST, as it becomes a rather straight forward math equation as to when a plate is flat out better than the adaptive, or vice versa. It is, in essence, a false choice as you would (on math) either be choosing the better or the worst one for -all- circumstances. Another idea is to have these modules increase a tank type's blast weakness (Flux for Shields, and Explosive Splash for Armor) by a moderate amount, with the trade off of even lower resistances so that they are always a 'worse' eHP choice than buffer, but potentially made better by the Flux / Explosive splash resistance. Basically making the desire to take the mod for those unique benefits. I do like the idea of adding skills for each type though, as I feel DUST could always do with more skills that provide some benefit to skilling into them (Other than just unlocks) Not necessarily. The only reason there is a difference in the percentages is because each of those weapon types do different damage profile bonuses. Blaster/Railguns do +10/-10, Projectile does +15/-15, Laser does +20/-20. The modules are designed to counter those bonuses and level the playing field with just one and if you're adding more than that you're -REALLY- sacrificing in order to reduce the damage. Essentially the idea is that, if I'm an Armor Tanker... and I fit, say, an Explosive resistance plate. That levels the playing field against Projectile weapons, but I'm still weak against Rail weaponry. On the other hand, if I'm armor tanking and I fit an Electromagnetic resistance plate, I'm power-housing my resistance to Laser weaponry. I'm still weak against Projectile and Rail but someone using a Scrambler rifle is going to have a -REALLY- hard time trying to kill me. This design wouldn't work with active modules (like Equipment) because the amount of time you'd be spending trying to turn them on/off would just make infantry combat a hassle and I don't think anyone would use them. In an emergency, they'd be useless because the time it'd take to bring up the equipment wheel and turn them on is time that you'd be getting shot at. The idea of active resistance modules is cool for premeditated fights (like you know they're there and you're going to turn it on before you start fighting) but it's essentially useless for on-the-spot fights, which is what the majority of Dust 514 combat is. Another benefit of passive modules is it provides more opportunities to fit more than one as you're not limited by low equipment slots. Resistance Equipment would just be a buff to slayer Logi's and it'd maybe bring back Assault Scouts as they'd use the two equipment slots for resistance modules and the rest for plates/extenders. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9167	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:40:00 - [72] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: It's because Laser weaponry receives a 20% increase to shield damage and a 15% increase to damage proficiency, which totaled, gives a much higher damage percentage bonus than any other rifle type. The modules were designed around the rifles as a whole (note that the Explosive plate/amplifer doesn't provide a reduction to Splash damage, which is the Adaptive's thing). It's not because EM is being singled out, every (specific damage) resistance module is designed to counter the bonuses that weapon type provides or the inverse. So, if EM provides a 20% increase to Shield Damage, than the Shield Module would counter that while the Armor module would provide an -additional- resistance toward that damage profile. Yes, the negative efficiency vs Armor would bring it up to 47% damage resistance, but the player is sacrificing a lot to be able to get that. The PG/CPU is designed to be costly but not punishing and it's taking up a slot that they would otherwise fill with buffer/regeneration which applies to all areas. It's a 47% damage resistance but they're not gaining anything against the other damage types; essentially wasting the slot. Pardon me for asking but is that not the same for explosive damage weapons like the Mass Driver. I only ask since the resistance for Explosives vs Shielding amounts to a 45.5% resistance. To some degree I was expecting an inverse profile. I suspected you might opted for the addition 1.5% as a result of EM weapons DPS compared to Explosive weapons DPS. Right. Explosive weapons do +20/-20 but the Energized Armor Plate (Explosive) doesn't provide a resistance for that. The (Adaptive) one is the only one that provides a resistance to Splash damage so that the modules loosely mimic the design of the Sentinel resistances where Splash damage is considered separate of the other Damage Types. I explained this in the Design Philosophy section of the spreadsheet but maybe I should rename the module so that it is more clear. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Avallo Kantor 523	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:46:00 - [73] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Avallo Kantor wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Here's my proposal. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p754JSaoUrvON5pV65fJAfyIcZPAccNMJDgFCO5tXqg/edit?usp=sharing I am not sure how I like the idea of having different % resists for each damage type, as it simply makes some modules more effective than others, for example Laser based weapon is weakened most here while others are not, which would weaken the weapon considerably when compared to other weapons fighting against their opponent's 1x resist mod. If you want to have different % resists for each damage type, then they should follow a logic based on Shield and Armor. For example: The lowest progression on Shields is Laser, while the lowest progression on Armor is explosives. Basically making it hardest to fit against a tank type's weakness. [EDIT:] Or perhaps Vice Versa would be better, based on True's Concerns. Another concern which I voiced earlier is that I don't think general passive resist mods will work as well in DUST, as it becomes a rather straight forward math equation as to when a plate is flat out better than the adaptive, or vice versa. It is, in essence, a false choice as you would (on math) either be choosing the better or the worst one for -all- circumstances. Another idea is to have these modules increase a tank type's blast weakness (Flux for Shields, and Explosive Splash for Armor) by a moderate amount, with the trade off of even lower resistances so that they are always a 'worse' eHP choice than buffer, but potentially made better by the Flux / Explosive splash resistance. Basically making the desire to take the mod for those unique benefits. I do like the idea of adding skills for each type though, as I feel DUST could always do with more skills that provide some benefit to skilling into them (Other than just unlocks) Not necessarily. The only reason there is a difference in the percentages is because each of those weapon types do different damage profile bonuses. Blaster/Railguns do +10/-10, Projectile does +15/-15, Laser does +20/-20. The modules are designed to counter those bonuses and level the playing field with just one and if you're adding more than that you're -REALLY- sacrificing in order to reduce the damage. Essentially the idea is that, if I'm an Armor Tanker... and I fit, say, an Explosive resistance plate. That levels the playing field against Projectile weapons, but I'm still weak against Rail weaponry. On the other hand, if I'm armor tanking and I fit an Electromagnetic resistance plate, I'm power-housing my resistance to Laser weaponry. I'm still weak against Projectile and Rail but someone using a Scrambler rifle is going to have a -REALLY- hard time trying to kill me. This design wouldn't work with active modules (like Equipment) because the amount of time you'd be spending trying to turn them on/off would just make infantry combat a hassle and I don't think anyone would use them. In an emergency, they'd be useless because the time it'd take to bring up the equipment wheel and turn them on is time that you'd be getting shot at. The idea of active resistance modules is cool for premeditated fights (like you know they're there and you're going to turn it on before you start fighting) but it's essentially useless for on-the-spot fights, which is what the majority of Dust 514 combat is. Another benefit of passive modules is it provides more opportunities to fit more than one as you're not limited by low equipment slots. Resistance Equipment would just be a buff to slayer Logi's and it'd maybe bring back Assault Scouts as they'd use the two equipment slots for resistance modules and the rest for plates/extenders. Sorry if I caused a misunderstanding. I am not in any way supporting "active" mods, as I myself said earlier that I thought they wouldn't work as well. What I meant was the "omni-resist" mods you were proposing. The concern being with the "omni-resist" mods that it's just a math calculation as to which is better at a given stage: Buffer or Omni-resist. Again, not proposing active mods. As to giving laser more resists, you neglect to consider that lasers get that "extra damage" from sacrificing on the other side of things (Armor). With the higher resist given to shield you effectively counter Shields fully with the same effort as any other damage type... but that doesn't "undo" the negative cost laser weapons have already suffered for that bonus, i.e their terrible damage vs Armor. Effectively, this creates a situation where Lasers are unfairly punished for their damage profile, as resist mods equally destroy their bonus same as any other damage profile, leaving lasers with a worse weakness than any other damage type (except explosive which is reversed)
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9167	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:56:00 - [74] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: Sorry if I caused a misunderstanding. I am not in any way supporting "active" mods, as I myself said earlier that I thought they wouldn't work as well. What I meant was the "omni-resist" mods you were proposing. The concern being with the "omni-resist" mods that it's just a math calculation as to which is better at a given stage: Buffer or Omni-resist. Again, not proposing active mods. As to giving laser more resists, you neglect to consider that lasers get that "extra damage" from sacrificing on the other side of things (Armor). With the higher resist given to shield you effectively counter Shields fully with the same effort as any other damage type... but that doesn't "undo" the negative cost laser weapons have already suffered for that bonus, i.e their terrible damage vs Armor. Effectively, this creates a situation where Lasers are unfairly punished for their damage profile, as resist mods equally destroy their bonus same as any other damage profile, leaving lasers with a worse weakness than any other damage type (except explosive which is reversed) The damage reduction is countering those bonuses across the board on specific modules though. It'd be no more punishing to Laser weaponry than it would be to Projectile weaponry. Let's say you have an ASCR and are going against someone who's shield tanking with one of the Complex Modules - you'd lose your bonus to Shield damage; sure, but you'd still be doing your base DPS. It's the same case if you were running an ACR against an Armor Tanker with one of the Complex Modules. And if they fit two? Well, they're going to be sacrificing a lot. Caldari Assaults would have to sacrifice two of their five high slots to negate the damage, which they could have used to get 145 more Shield HP. That's not much of a gain to have such an advantage against Laser weaponry when everything else is going to kill them just as easy. Even still, they'd have to consider stacking penalties. It is a bit unfair toward Laser Weaponry in the larger scheme of things, yes, but without it, Laser Weaponry would be providing more damage than the modules negate and it would be unfair to everything else if it were a flat reduction. So it's really a choice of "Do I make Laser Weaponry inherently more powerful than everything else because of it's unique +20/-20" or "Do I make Laser Weaponry inherently less powerful than everything else because of it's unique +20/-20" The decision was to go with the latter as it'd be easier to balance those weapons to the changes (increasing their overall damage or RoF) than to balance -all the other weapons- to the changes. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17708	Posted - 2015.03.17 02:59:00 - [75] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: It's because Laser weaponry receives a 20% increase to shield damage and a 15% increase to damage proficiency, which totaled, gives a much higher damage percentage bonus than any other rifle type. The modules were designed around the rifles as a whole (note that the Explosive plate/amplifer doesn't provide a reduction to Splash damage, which is the Adaptive's thing). It's not because EM is being singled out, every (specific damage) resistance module is designed to counter the bonuses that weapon type provides or the inverse. So, if EM provides a 20% increase to Shield Damage, than the Shield Module would counter that while the Armor module would provide an -additional- resistance toward that damage profile. Yes, the negative efficiency vs Armor would bring it up to 47% damage resistance, but the player is sacrificing a lot to be able to get that. The PG/CPU is designed to be costly but not punishing and it's taking up a slot that they would otherwise fill with buffer/regeneration which applies to all areas. It's a 47% damage resistance but they're not gaining anything against the other damage types; essentially wasting the slot. Pardon me for asking but is that not the same for explosive damage weapons like the Mass Driver. I only ask since the resistance for Explosives vs Shielding amounts to a 45.5% resistance. To some degree I was expecting an inverse profile. I suspected you might opted for the addition 1.5% as a result of EM weapons DPS compared to Explosive weapons DPS. Right. Explosive weapons do +20/-20 but the Energized Armor Plate (Explosive) doesn't provide a resistance for that. The (Adaptive) one is the only one that provides a resistance to Splash damage so that the modules loosely mimic the design of the Sentinel resistances where Splash damage is considered separate of the other Damage Types. I explained this in the Design Philosophy section of the spreadsheet but maybe I should rename the module so that it is more clear. Again wasn't criticising just wondering about your thought process which I see now is outlined. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9167	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:00:00 - [76] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: It's because Laser weaponry receives a 20% increase to shield damage and a 15% increase to damage proficiency, which totaled, gives a much higher damage percentage bonus than any other rifle type. The modules were designed around the rifles as a whole (note that the Explosive plate/amplifer doesn't provide a reduction to Splash damage, which is the Adaptive's thing). It's not because EM is being singled out, every (specific damage) resistance module is designed to counter the bonuses that weapon type provides or the inverse. So, if EM provides a 20% increase to Shield Damage, than the Shield Module would counter that while the Armor module would provide an -additional- resistance toward that damage profile. Yes, the negative efficiency vs Armor would bring it up to 47% damage resistance, but the player is sacrificing a lot to be able to get that. The PG/CPU is designed to be costly but not punishing and it's taking up a slot that they would otherwise fill with buffer/regeneration which applies to all areas. It's a 47% damage resistance but they're not gaining anything against the other damage types; essentially wasting the slot. Pardon me for asking but is that not the same for explosive damage weapons like the Mass Driver. I only ask since the resistance for Explosives vs Shielding amounts to a 45.5% resistance. To some degree I was expecting an inverse profile. I suspected you might opted for the addition 1.5% as a result of EM weapons DPS compared to Explosive weapons DPS. Right. Explosive weapons do +20/-20 but the Energized Armor Plate (Explosive) doesn't provide a resistance for that. The (Adaptive) one is the only one that provides a resistance to Splash damage so that the modules loosely mimic the design of the Sentinel resistances where Splash damage is considered separate of the other Damage Types. I explained this in the Design Philosophy section of the spreadsheet but maybe I should rename the module so that it is more clear. Again wasn't criticising just wondering about your thought process which I see now is outlined. I know you're not criticising =P I'm just trying to explain what I was thinking. I'm open to suggestions if you have any. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17709	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:06:00 - [77] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: True Adamance wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: It's because Laser weaponry receives a 20% increase to shield damage and a 15% increase to damage proficiency, which totaled, gives a much higher damage percentage bonus than any other rifle type. The modules were designed around the rifles as a whole (note that the Explosive plate/amplifer doesn't provide a reduction to Splash damage, which is the Adaptive's thing). It's not because EM is being singled out, every (specific damage) resistance module is designed to counter the bonuses that weapon type provides or the inverse. So, if EM provides a 20% increase to Shield Damage, than the Shield Module would counter that while the Armor module would provide an -additional- resistance toward that damage profile. Yes, the negative efficiency vs Armor would bring it up to 47% damage resistance, but the player is sacrificing a lot to be able to get that. The PG/CPU is designed to be costly but not punishing and it's taking up a slot that they would otherwise fill with buffer/regeneration which applies to all areas. It's a 47% damage resistance but they're not gaining anything against the other damage types; essentially wasting the slot. Pardon me for asking but is that not the same for explosive damage weapons like the Mass Driver. I only ask since the resistance for Explosives vs Shielding amounts to a 45.5% resistance. To some degree I was expecting an inverse profile. I suspected you might opted for the addition 1.5% as a result of EM weapons DPS compared to Explosive weapons DPS. Right. Explosive weapons do +20/-20 but the Energized Armor Plate (Explosive) doesn't provide a resistance for that. The (Adaptive) one is the only one that provides a resistance to Splash damage so that the modules loosely mimic the design of the Sentinel resistances where Splash damage is considered separate of the other Damage Types. I explained this in the Design Philosophy section of the spreadsheet but maybe I should rename the module so that it is more clear. Again wasn't criticising just wondering about your thought process which I see now is outlined. I know you're not criticising =P I'm just trying to explain what I was thinking. I'm open to suggestions if you have any. I haz need think....... too many thunks need a thinking in mah brainz. Raphael: I'm warning you. Do not leave me here. I will find you. Castiel: Maybe one day. Today you're my little bitch
Avallo Kantor 523	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:10:00 - [78] - Quote You should take into account the values for explosive and laser damage with their opposite tank. In short: Adaptive Armor Plating (electromagnetic) and Shield Resistance Modules (Explosive) should be greatly reduced, i.e smaller than normal resist mods. In short, they shouldn't be "double punished" for having a +20 / -20.
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9168	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:15:00 - [79] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: You should take into account the values for explosive and laser damage with their opposite tank. In short: Adaptive Armor Plating (electromagnetic) and Shield Resistance Modules (Explosive) should be greatly reduced, i.e smaller than normal resist mods. In short, they shouldn't be "double punished" for having a +20 / -20. I don't see how they're "double punished"... If someone is Armor Tanking and they spend an entire slot to have -more- resistance to Laser Weaponry at the expense of everything else, they kinda deserve that niche bonus. Further more, another factor that has to be considered with Laser Weaponry is that Shields can't get as high of HP values as Armor; so reducing the damage further just makes sense when you're not seeing Caldari Assaults with 1000+ shields. Note: Explosive "Splash" weapons like Mass Drivers aren't covered by the Projectile module (even if it is named 'Explosive') so equipping that to receive a benefit against them would be pointless and do nothing to help you. The only module is the 'omni' Adaptive. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5977	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:20:00 - [80] - Quote @Rattati & All else, I strongly believe if this is to happen the sentinel bonus needs to be changed...perhaps to module efficiency of equipped resistance mods (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!

Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9169	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:25:00 - [81] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: @Rattati & All else, I strongly believe if this is to happen the sentinel bonus needs to be changed...perhaps to module efficiency of equipped resistance mods That'd be pretty cash. Would also limit how many Sentinels fit straight up buffer (plates/extenders) and give them legitimate weaknesses if they fit with their racial bonus and only lessen the weaknesses if they fit to cover the resistance holes. Something like: Amarr Sentinel - 3% efficacy to (Explosive) Resistance Modules, 2% efficacy to (Kinetic) Resistance Modules per level. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Avallo Kantor 523	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:27:00 - [82] - Quote As to my statements about the Adaptive mods being a calculateable best choice: I am comparing them to buffer mods (Such as shield extenders) As a rough example: 36.3 - HP from basic Shield Extender with max skills 7.5% - Resists to all via the Adaptive Shield Resistance amplifiers. So, by math, you can arrive at the Shield HP value at which an Adaptive mod provides more EHP than a same level Extender. With the added benefit of being the only mod able to resist explosive splash. Do you see what I mean by the "always best choice" at a certain point?
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5977	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:29:00 - [83] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Nocturnal Soul wrote: @Rattati & All else, I strongly believe if this is to happen the sentinel bonus needs to be changed...perhaps to module efficiency of equipped resistance mods That'd be pretty cash. Would also limit how many Sentinels fit straight up buffer (plates/extenders) and give them legitimate weaknesses if they fit with their racial bonus and only lessen the weaknesses if they fit to cover the resistance holes. Something like: Amarr Sentinel - 3% efficacy to (Explosive) Resistance Modules, 2% efficacy to (Kinetic) Resistance Modules per level. That's real nice (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5978	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:31:00 - [84] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: As to my statements about the Adaptive mods being a calculateable best choice: I am comparing them to buffer mods (Such as shield extenders) As a rough example: 36.3 - HP from basic Shield Extender with max skills 7.5% - Resists to all via the Adaptive Shield Resistance amplifiers. So, by math, you can arrive at the Shield HP value at which an Adaptive mod provides more EHP than a same level Extender. With the added benefit of being the only mod able to resist explosive splash. Do you see what I mean by the "always best choice" at a certain point? To be fair even though its not said I think most respectable armor tankers would fully accepts a increase to shield extender HP. Maybe up to Ferro levels (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Avallo Kantor 523	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:32:00 - [85] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: Avallo Kantor wrote: As to my statements about the Adaptive mods being a calculateable best choice: I am comparing them to buffer mods (Such as shield extenders) As a rough example: 36.3 - HP from basic Shield Extender with max skills 7.5% - Resists to all via the Adaptive Shield Resistance amplifiers. So, by math, you can arrive at the Shield HP value at which an Adaptive mod provides more EHP than a same level Extender. With the added benefit of being the only mod able to resist explosive splash. Do you see what I mean by the "always best choice" at a certain point? To be fair even though its not said I think most respectable armor tankers would fully accepts a increase to shield extender HP. Maybe up to Ferro levels Sorry, I used Shields as an example, but it applies to both tanking types. If anything, it benefits armor more, as they can more easily get more buffer.
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9170	Posted - 2015.03.17 03:42:00 - [86] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: Nocturnal Soul wrote: Avallo Kantor wrote: As to my statements about the Adaptive mods being a calculateable best choice: I am comparing them to buffer mods (Such as shield extenders) As a rough example: 36.3 - HP from basic Shield Extender with max skills 7.5% - Resists to all via the Adaptive Shield Resistance amplifiers. So, by math, you can arrive at the Shield HP value at which an Adaptive mod provides more EHP than a same level Extender. With the added benefit of being the only mod able to resist explosive splash. Do you see what I mean by the "always best choice" at a certain point? To be fair even though its not said I think most respectable armor tankers would fully accepts a increase to shield extender HP. Maybe up to Ferro levels Sorry, I used Shields as an example, but it applies to both tanking types. If anything, it benefits armor more, as they can more easily get more buffer. Not really. A basic Armor Plate is 93.5 additional armor. I'd be hard pressed to put on a Basic (Adaptive) when that'd only shave off 35 DPS off of a Prototype ACR. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Avallo Kantor 523	Posted - 2015.03.17 04:13:00 - [87] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Not really. A basic Armor Plate is 93.5 additional armor. I'd be hard pressed to put on a Basic (Adaptive) when that'd only shave off 35 DPS off of a Prototype ACR. You are correct, with plates you would roughly need over 1100 - 1300 (depending on comparing at basic vs proto levels) for a resist to provide more EHP than a plate. With Ferroscale however, you would need roughly 461 (basic) - 703 (proto) base HP for a resist to outstrip a ferroscale. Considering Shields perform even worse than ferroscale, this means that the Adaptive modules replace ferroscale and extenders for most respectable armor / shield tankers after a very short point. (In the case of some Amarrian / Caldari suits, this is reached very quickly) After this point, one adaptive always outshines one extender / ferroscale of equal level, although more expensive in fitting cost. While I am not against the idea of adaptive (resist all) items, I feel they have to provide bonuses that do not make them required for any eHP fitting, as the idea with resist plates / shield resistance should be that you trade overall eHP for specific weapon damage eHP.
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9171	Posted - 2015.03.17 04:31:00 - [88] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Not really. A basic Armor Plate is 93.5 additional armor. I'd be hard pressed to put on a Basic (Adaptive) when that'd only shave off 35 DPS off of a Prototype ACR. You are correct, with plates you would roughly need over 1100 - 1300 (depending on comparing at basic vs proto levels) for a resist to provide more EHP than a plate. With Ferroscale however, you would need roughly 461 (basic) - 703 (proto) base HP for a resist to outstrip a ferroscale. Considering Shields perform even worse than ferroscale, this means that the Adaptive modules replace ferroscale and extenders for most respectable armor / shield tankers after a very short point. (In the case of some Amarrian / Caldari suits, this is reached very quickly) After this point, one adaptive always outshines one extender / ferroscale of equal level, although more expensive in fitting cost. EDIT: [Up until stacking penalties, so after 2 (in most cases)] While I am not against the idea of adaptive (resist all) items, I feel they have to provide bonuses that do not make them required for any eHP fitting, as the idea with resist plates / shield resistance should be that you trade overall eHP for specific weapon damage eHP. I'm totally cool with Shield Tanking having that kind of bonus though. Everyone always whines and complains that armor is more powerful and talks about "the armor meta" so this would be a great way to give them something interesting. Armor has Higher Buffer and Constant Regen while Shields have Higher Regen and better Resistances. Even still, they're exhausting a lot to be able to do that and it doesn't really help them much against high Alpha weaponry (17 damage negated from an Ishukone Sniper Rifle) and Extenders would be the better choice there. If anything it just adds more choices and more consequences for the wrong choices. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Avallo Kantor 523	Posted - 2015.03.17 04:39:00 - [89] - Quote Fair enough, if that is the idea you want to go with then I can support that. I'd like to emphasize that I do like your idea, and generally support the majority of it. Most of these things are more nitpicks than a fundamental disagreement. My only remaining nitpick is that I feel there should be a specific module that reduces explosive (direct) damage, as I feel there shouldn't be any weapon type that is exempt from being fit to counter. As it stands the Reactive modules do not sufficiently allow armor tanks a way to resist their greatest weakness in the same way Shield is able to do with Laser weaponry.
Vicious Minotaur 2196	Posted - 2015.03.17 04:44:00 - [90] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Nocturnal Soul wrote: @Rattati & All else, I strongly believe if this is to happen the sentinel bonus needs to be changed...perhaps to module efficiency of equipped resistance mods That'd be pretty cash. Would also limit how many Sentinels fit straight up buffer (plates/extenders) and give them legitimate weaknesses if they fit with their racial bonus and only lessen the weaknesses if they fit to cover the resistance holes. Something like: Amarr Sentinel - 3% efficacy to (Explosive) Resistance Modules, 2% efficacy to (Kinetic) Resistance Modules per level. What is with people and Sentinel resistances.... Yeah, sentinels may be for 'point defence' or whatever... But one can achieve that 'role' via other methods that don't involve JUST resistances, JUST damage mitigation and bullet spongy-ness. Sure, make the role bonus resistance [mod?]-based... but racial bonuses could stand to be much more creative and augment the each of the four sentinels differently to allow for more interesting inter-sentinel combat (and combat in general). That'd be a different thread entirely, and I'm sure it would be ignored just like my various posts on the generic Sentinel resistance bonuses. Anyway, blah blah, I support resistance mods being implemented, blah blah. I am a minotaur. a+üa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa+üa¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça¦ça+üa+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+¦a+üa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa+üa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ëa¦ë

Night 5talker 514 Dead Man's Game RUST415 364	Posted - 2015.03.17 07:07:00 - [91] - 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)? In eve you have a number of different kinds of hardners. I think implementing something similar for suits and vehicles could be interesting. For example, in eve the passive hardners give far less hardening ability, but don't require ou to activate them. However, the active modules give a huge boost, but use capacitor (in Dust it would just have a cool down). It could be interesting to have such modules in for both suits and vehicles. It would require decent playing skill to utilise active mods on a dropsuit mid fire fight and reward those who are decent with it. I think for passive resists it could be: 10%, 15% & 20% Active's could be: 25%, 30% & 40% Or Actives could remain (like they are currently) at 40% across the board but the cool down could be larger at STD and lower at PRO. I would suggest that resists to specific damages may be a bit much with the limited module space, in eve ships have considerably more module slots etc which allows multple resist modules to be fitted. Dust is different in that regard so I feel it should be a blanket resist to damage types. Gaming Freek DUST 514 YouTube Channel
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 9172	Posted - 2015.03.17 08:30:00 - [92] - Quote Vicious Minotaur wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Nocturnal Soul wrote: @Rattati & All else, I strongly believe if this is to happen the sentinel bonus needs to be changed...perhaps to module efficiency of equipped resistance mods That'd be pretty cash. Would also limit how many Sentinels fit straight up buffer (plates/extenders) and give them legitimate weaknesses if they fit with their racial bonus and only lessen the weaknesses if they fit to cover the resistance holes. Something like: Amarr Sentinel - 3% efficacy to (Explosive) Resistance Modules, 2% efficacy to (Kinetic) Resistance Modules per level. What is with people and Sentinel resistances.... Yeah, sentinels may be for 'point defence' or whatever... But one can achieve that 'role' via other methods that don't involve JUST resistances, JUST damage mitigation and bullet spongy-ness. Sure, make the role bonus resistance [mod?]-based... but racial bonuses could stand to be much more creative and augment the each of the four sentinels differently to allow for more interesting inter-sentinel combat (and combat in general). That'd be a different thread entirely, and I'm sure it would be ignored just like my various posts on the generic Sentinel resistance bonuses. Anyway, blah blah, I support resistance mods being implemented, blah blah. I think it's just such a broad-spectrum bonus, honestly. It'd be like if all Commandos got a bonus to Light Weapon Damage instead of (racial damage type) damage. The resistances applying the way they do make it so that the obvious choice is to just fit a bunch of plates/extenders and call it a day, with Amarr Sentinel and Gallente Sentinel being the obvious best choice because they can fit damage mods without sacrificing on the tank. I think, generally speaking, there's a strong drive from the community for bonuses to apply to modules instead of being just passive buffs because then it encourages a certain fitting instead of just giving free reign to fit what you want while still having the power projection from the skill bonuses themselves. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5471	Posted - 2015.03.17 09:06:00 - [93] - Quote Alright I'll run some numbers later. I have some core concerns with the potential disparity between usefulness on lighter frames vs heavier frames. It's late so I may be fudging the math in my head, so I'll confirm and get back to you. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7643	Posted - 2015.03.17 09:52:00 - [94] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Alright I'll run some numbers later. I have some core concerns with the potential disparity between usefulness on lighter frames vs heavier frames. It's late so I may be fudging the math in my head, so I'll confirm and get back to you. Resistance mods are inherently. More useful on high- HP/ rapid rep suits. Resist mods will be nominally useful at best on scouts. AV
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5981	Posted - 2015.03.17 11:38:00 - [95] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Alright I'll run some numbers later. I have some core concerns with the potential disparity between usefulness on lighter frames vs heavier frames. It's late so I may be fudging the math in my head, so I'll confirm and get back to you. Resistance mods are inherently. More useful on high- HP/ rapid rep suits. Resist mods will be nominally useful at best on scouts. Yeah, as BS(ha) said more hp... descends back into troll cave (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7645	Posted - 2015.03.17 11:52:00 - [96] - Quote Nocturnal Soul wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Alright I'll run some numbers later. I have some core concerns with the potential disparity between usefulness on lighter frames vs heavier frames. It's late so I may be fudging the math in my head, so I'll confirm and get back to you. Resistance mods are inherently. More useful on high- HP/ rapid rep suits. Resist mods will be nominally useful at best on scouts. Yeah, as BS(ha) said more hp... descends back into troll cave Holy crap it took two years, but finally someone gets the joke without me having to explain it. AV
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5347	Posted - 2015.03.17 12:45:00 - [97] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Nocturnal Soul wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Alright I'll run some numbers later. I have some core concerns with the potential disparity between usefulness on lighter frames vs heavier frames. It's late so I may be fudging the math in my head, so I'll confirm and get back to you. Resistance mods are inherently. More useful on high- HP/ rapid rep suits. Resist mods will be nominally useful at best on scouts. Yeah, as BS(ha) said more hp... descends back into troll cave Holy crap it took two years, but finally someone gets the joke without me having to explain it. Your joke is a pun? This isn't Japan. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Avallo Kantor 524	Posted - 2015.03.17 14:56:00 - [98] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Alright I'll run some numbers later. I have some core concerns with the potential disparity between usefulness on lighter frames vs heavier frames. It's late so I may be fudging the math in my head, so I'll confirm and get back to you. Resistance mods are inherently. More useful on high- HP/ rapid rep suits. Resist mods will be nominally useful at best on scouts. Yes, that is rather the nature of the beast with % resistances. Calculating it out, you would need in the 400 - 600 area for a reactive (resist all to lesser degree) to provide more EHP than a ferroscale / extender of the same level. This would be reached by most Med Suits , and effectively all sentinel suits. Suits would need 1100 - 1300 hp before a plate (not ferroscale) became more useful for them. As Aeon correctly pointed out, resists don't help out as much against alpha though, but more against low DPS weapons. Looking At Aeon's sheet, the resist values given practically make ferroscale an "almost always" wrong choice on heavy frames, while they will still be needed on light frame armor tanks (as not to incur speed penalties) Although the high fitting costs of Adaptive should help to keep it as a more fitting expensive option for more hp.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 18924	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:24:00 - [99] - Quote 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. Agreed no passive omni hardening. passively it should provide more eHP against the damage type specified than any HP plate can offer by itself. However against other types its useless. Fitting wise you would be very very very hard pressed to get 3 on a suit. 2 or 1 should be reasonable. Omni hardening should be an active module probably in the form of a side arm. (so that sentinels can use it without leading to lol fat logis) CPM 1, Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior \\= ADV HAVs =// Unlocked
danie sous DUST BRASIL S.A 38	Posted - 2015.03.17 20:54:00 - [100] - 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)? Low slot/hmg RoF modifier Lower RoF/DPS/heat buildup (higher effective range maybe). Would make for area enforcer/supressor. Middle ground between controlled burst and full auto.

Avallo Kantor 525	Posted - 2015.03.17 21:55:00 - [101] - Quote danie sous 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)? Low slot/hmg RoF modifier Lower RoF/DPS/heat buildup (higher effective range maybe). Would make for area enforcer/supressor. Middle ground between controlled burst and full auto. Wrong thread. This thread is for Infantry Resistance modules, not weapons upgrades. There's a thread on weapon mods at: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=196564 I suggest posting those ideas over there.
Greiv Rabbah M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command 266	Posted - 2015.03.18 05:50:00 - [102] - Quote Been suggesting this over and over. Since rattati likes it when you say it, have fun. I thought leaving the names (and loosely the effects) the same as eve style would be best. So em resistance plating, thermic resistance plating, explosive resistance plating etc Sebiestor scout, MTAC pilot, Merc w/ a face
Nocturnal Soul Primordial Threat 5985	Posted - 2015.03.18 23:25:00 - [103] - Quote Looks up at the sky I think we've come to a central idea Rattati! (Gê¬n+Ç-´)GèâGöüGÿån+ƒ.pâ+n+ín+ƒ. LASERS BTCH!!!!!! The Incursions are back... and they're golden baby!
DR DEESE NUTS Algintal Core Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2015.03.21 19:42:00 - [104] - Quote Bump. Mmm candy
Most Sneakiest F0RSAKEN EMPIRE. 46	Posted - 2015.03.21 23:35:00 - [105] - 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)? Are you quietly admitting scrambler rifles are OP? Noob [Kaalakiota Sniper Rifle] Most Sneakiest A few kills later... Most Sneakiest [Militia Sniper Rifle] Noob


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [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.

Moody come back

I am a minotaur.