DUST Search - Discussion: Shield vs Armor

All Channels

General Discussions

Discussion: Shield vs Armor

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Boot Booter Titans of Phoenix 1198	Posted - 2015.03.17 17:15:00 - [1] - Quote What is the current state of shield vs armor tanking? What can we do to balance the two? Does it make sense to balance weapons before balancing shield and armor? Rattati has spent a lot of time balancing weapons. We are now in a much better place than we were previously (six months ago), however now we are getting into small tweaks and it made me wonder what the point was if there is imbalance between shields and armor. I'd like if we could discuss this and come up with some solutions. Mandatory "Keep it civil" statement. My opinion. The trend from what I have been seeing is repeating buffs to shield based weaponry (AR and AScr) as these weapons underperform in the current armor meta. This makes shield tanking even more difficult. I see no point in further balancing weapons until we fix shield and armor. My Ideas. Shield damage threshold - any damage below the threshold does not stop recharge or reset delay (value idk) Passive shield and armor hardeners - this would be a new module which goes in highs for shields and lows for armor. We could use this module directly to balance the two.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3198	Posted - 2015.03.17 17:26:00 - [2] - Quote Shield tanking will always be worse than armor, mainly because flux grenades wipe out any shield tank, and to a lesser extent Scrambler weapons (highest burst DPS light weapons, highest damage profile, against the weaker tank (in terms of straight numbers)). Other factors include: minimal speed difference per hp lost (due to ferroscales being about as good as extenders and fitting difficulties between kin cats and shield extenders), repair tools/hives for armor competing shield's higher native reps, and the lack of a damage threshold for breaking shield regen (people stopping you shield regen by plinking you from 80m doing <5 damage or falling down a small drop). Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
LUGMOS Corrosive Synergy 2830	Posted - 2015.03.17 17:32:00 - [3] - Quote Damage threshold NEEDS to be a thing. Plasma Cannon :3 Anti-FoTM Prof. V Forum Scavenger Prof. V
Boot Booter Titans of Phoenix 1199	Posted - 2015.03.17 17:36:00 - [4] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Shield tanking will always be worse than armor, mainly because flux grenades wipe out any shield tank, and to a lesser extent Scrambler weapons (highest burst DPS light weapons, highest damage profile, against the weaker tank (in terms of straight numbers)). Other factors include: minimal speed difference per hp lost (due to ferroscales being about as good as extenders and fitting difficulties between kin cats and shield extenders), repair tools/hives for armor competing shield's higher native reps, and the lack of a damage threshold for breaking shield regen (people stopping you shield regen by plinking you from 80m doing <5 damage or falling down a small drop). What exactly would you change to balance them?
7 Djin The Hundred Acre Hood 61	Posted - 2015.03.17 17:46:00 - [5] - Quote Nerf the **** outta ferroscale fitting requirements and nerf strafe speed and buff shield extenders 10hp. I'm 100% against this, I just wanna throw out a viable idea.
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3199	Posted - 2015.03.17 17:47:00 - [6] - Quote Boot Booter wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Shield tanking will always be worse than armor, mainly because flux grenades wipe out any shield tank, and to a lesser extent Scrambler weapons (highest burst DPS light weapons, highest damage profile, against the weaker tank (in terms of straight numbers)). Other factors include: minimal speed difference per hp lost (due to ferroscales being about as good as extenders and fitting difficulties between kin cats and shield extenders), repair tools/hives for armor competing shield's higher native reps, and the lack of a damage threshold for breaking shield regen (people stopping you shield regen by plinking you from 80m doing <5 damage or falling down a small drop). What exactly would you change to balance them? I don't know exactly, I have a few ideas but haven't given a whole lot of thought to it: Change SCR profile to 15/-15 Nerf fluxes (keep range (for clearing equipment) but nerf damage, perhaps add an AV variant with much higher damage but lower radius and only affects vehicles, something like that) Some sort of shield repair tool/hive. I'd like them to be somewhat unique from repair tools functionally, but that's for a different thread. Lower fitting for extenders slightly Damage mods to low slots (highs can have alternate weapons mods if they're introduced: range, dispersion, cool down, etc.) Just to name a few things. Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9961	Posted - 2015.03.17 17:52:00 - [7] - Quote I agree with Damage threshold and Hardeners but as far as meta goes these are the weapons that are good against armor: Projectile - combat rifles, smgs, HMGs Explosive - Grenades (which if you're into your armor and a grenade hits you you're dead 97% of the time) mass drivers, REs, Flaylock pistols and large missiles. Hybrid Rail aka Kinetic - sniper rifles, rail rifles, bolt pistols, magsecs Weapons against armor infantry: Hybrid plasma aka Thermal - Plasma Rifle, shotgun, plasma cannon ion pistol Lasers aka EM - scrambler rifles, scrambler pistols, lasers and a flux which is actually an electromagnetic grenade. Take that as you will. I believe shields just need a threshold of damage and we need hardeners in general, people need to learn that you can't play and fit a shield fit and an armor fit the same way. If they wanted that Call of Duty is over there. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
pegasis prime BIG BAD W0LVES 2043	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:04:00 - [8] - Quote Iv been shield tanking since i started playing Dust specificly caldari suits and teck. There is a few things about shield tanking iv learned 1. If your engaging your enimy head on your doing it wrong. (Allways attack frohpthe flank unless your wepon outranges thiers) 2. It's not about stacking extenders , regulators are key here on my Cko suits i stack complex regulators and get my delay down to1.6 seconds on my assaults and 1.2 on my logies (all caldari) also enegisers do wonders 90+ hp per second 3. cover is your friend (especially when you get that recharge dely down to less than 2 seconds and that regen up to 90+ on a 400+ shielded assault suit. Most folks who claim shield tanking is garbage are doing it wrong, any one who puts armour on a Caldari suit is doing it wrong. Proud Caldari purist . Rank 10 colonel omiwarrior. I fought and bled for the State on Caldari prime.
Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 9962	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:39:00 - [9] - Quote PegasIs Prime is one of those rare breads of people that know how to shield tank. We have a Gallente Guide which includes tactics and fitting for everything aspect of Gallente Mannerism. The Caldari need a guide as well and you, Mexx and four others are the ONLY people I have seen in game that actually know how to fit and play as shields. Everybody else just armor stacks and make no use out of regulators. Argh, its so frustrating. *As long as 5/6 (83%) of infantry AV weapons are Anti Armor based you're never going to achieve vehicle balance CCP*
Arkena Wyrnspire Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 22856	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:45:00 - [10] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Shield tanking will always be worse than armor, mainly because flux grenades wipe out any shield tank Considering a core locus grenade will do the same in most cases and actually kill you, I don't see the problem. Gallente Guide

Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3540	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:46:00 - [11] - Quote Kirk, You guys are hardly the only ones that have figured out to run shields. Most people simply prefer the better performance of armor. Look around. How many people do you think are using armor versus shields? How do you explain that without unnecessarily insulting their intelligence or playstyles?
Vulpes Dolosus Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3200	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:49:00 - [12] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Shield tanking will always be worse than armor, mainly because flux grenades wipe out any shield tank Considering a core locus grenade will do the same in most cases and actually kill you, I don't see the problem. Not with a shield buffer or poorly thrown. The kill radius is much smaller than an equivalent flux grenade (even a STD flux). Throw a core at a ak0 Sentinel and attack then do the same with a flux to a Ck0. Which is easier to kill? Dust is there! I was real! Dear diary, Rattati senpai noticed me today~
Joseph Ridgeson WarRavens 3394	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:51:00 - [13] - Quote The problems I see with Shield Tanking: 1. The fitting requirements for Shield Extenders are insane. 2. Shields require more slots in order to make full use. Regulators fill up the low slots while Armor has full access to their high slots. This may seem as a benefit ("you can use Highs and Lows for your defense strategy") however Regulators are said to have Shields "catch up with Armor" rather than surpass. 3. More SP. Regulation, Recharging, and Extenders while Armor only has two skills to worry about. It is nearly 934k saved SP from not being Shield based. 4. This one is a perception argument but not really a specific problem with shields. Most people who state that shields are in a strong place or are better than Armor will state "You are Caldari; of course you are going to lose at CQC. Fight at range." This, however, is based entirely on the weapon the person uses rather than the defense strategy they used. Sure, if you are using a Rail Rifle and are fighting from 50 meters away, you could argue that HP is not as useful. However, what is to say that an Armor Dropsuit could not utilize the same tactic and still be better at CQC? Same goes for "If you are not Flanking, you are doing it wrong." The problem is that Shields do not give a benefit towards that play style beyond moving slightly faster, which can be avoided by utilizing Ferroscale anyway. I see Shields as being fundamentally weaker than Armor. It is not completely doom and gloom but there is a very good reason why Armor suits are more ubiquitous than Shields and it isn't because those people can't get on the forums and find the many, many posts about "how to actually run a ck.0." "This is B.S! This is B.S! I paid money! Cash money, dollars money, cash money!"
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3540	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:52:00 - [14] - Quote pegasis prime wrote: Iv been shield tanking since i started playing Dust specificly caldari suits and teck. There is a few things about shield tanking iv learned 1. If your engaging your enimy head on your doing it wrong. (Allways attack frohpthe flank unless your wepon outranges thiers) 2. It's not about stacking extenders , regulators are key here on my Cko suits i stack complex regulators and get my delay down to1.6 seconds on my assaults and 1.2 on my logies (all caldari) also enegisers do wonders 90+ hp per second 3. cover is your friend (especially when you get that recharge dely down to less than 2 seconds and that regen up to 90+ on a 400+ shielded assault suit. Most folks who claim shield tanking is garbage are doing it wrong, any one who puts armour on a Caldari suit is doing it wrong. 1. Any suit will be dominant if you only engage against targets that don't see you. 2. Regulators/rechargers don't work if you're taking damage or dead before the modules start to work 3. Any suit will die if you don't use cover effectively. I know how to shield tank. The problem is it sucks in comparison to plates, and shields some type of balance adjustment, IMO. It's this fundamental imbalance that cascades to the weapons and why we find a preponderance of anti-armor weapons, as well. I would fix it with increasing HP of shields, or reducing their fitting cost, or both. Because, as it is, armor is dominant, and it only takes a quick glance at your team and opponent to figure it out. All of the above IMO, of course.
Reign Omega T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 1314	Posted - 2015.03.17 18:58:00 - [15] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Kirk, You guys are hardly the only ones that have figured out to run shields. Most people simply prefer the better performance of armor. Look around. How many people do you think are using armor versus shields? How do you explain that without unnecessarily insulting their intelligence or playstyles? Most players tend to favor armor playstyle because it is skewed toward the average non thinking player, and favors better players with more forgiveness. Armor is the run in chin down swing hard until they fall and that's what most people want (generalization). Not many people want the pick apart mid to long range hit and run coupled with using cover, because it isn't optimal for general purpose combat. Dust players as I have seen tend to try and fit the square peg in the round hole, then rather than choose the proper peg they shave the peg so it fits the whole. True shield players are pleasantly annoying to fight, and I consider them niche artists in a crudely painted landscape. Mark a$$ tricks, and bags of dicks....
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3541	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:01:00 - [16] - Quote Please stop insulting people. The reason people "swing hard until they fall" is because skirm/dom are games where you have to do that to win. If I wanted to sit back and pick people off -- and lose -- I'd be a sniper. You are no more intelligent or a thinking man's player than me, so please stop with the banter suggesting otherwise. This game is about taking and holding points. Sitting back and picking people off at distance, but jumping behind cover everytime you take enemy fire is a marginal role at best -- and that's precisely how you see them used. Shield tanks simply don't have enough HP to do take/hold points effectively. Damage mods in highs also add to this challenge. It's just that simple, IMO.
Cody Sietz Random Gunz 4440	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:01:00 - [17] - Quote Pretty equal, but shield tankers will always say it's worst(I'm sort shield tankers, but slot of your guys complain about regain 500 shields within a short amount of time) "I do agree with you there though. shudders" -Arkena Wyrnspire
Reign Omega T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 1314	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:16:00 - [18] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Please stop insulting people. The reason people "swing hard until they fall" is because skirm/dom are games where you have to do that to win. If I wanted to sit back and pick people off -- and lose -- I'd be a sniper. You are no more intelligent or a thinking man's player than me, so please stop with the banter suggesting otherwise. This game is about taking and holding points. Sitting back and picking people off at distance, but jumping behind cover everytime you take enemy fire, is a marginal role at best -- and that's precisely how you see them used. Shield tanks simply don't have enough HP to do take/hold points effectively. Damage mods in highs also add to this challenge. It's just that simple, IMO. I was no more suggesting that I am better than anyone, nor was I labeling you or anyone else as unintelligent. Please try not to misread. What I was suggesting however, was that players tend to group towards playstyles that are more general purpose and forgiving rather than ones that take time to understand and that aren't necessarily more rewarding upon understanding. Armor tanked suits are brawlers suits, and Dust tends to favor brawlers over thinkers in most cases. It's in no way meant as an insult, it's a simple truth gained from 3 years of observation. Mark a$$ tricks, and bags of dicks....
Reign Omega T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 1314	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:22:00 - [19] - Quote Also by comparison, the few cases in which shield combat and long range warfare are actually effective at holding ground, they're highly effective. Cal assault with RR can essentially lock down wide open spaces between objectives with minimal manpower. It's just unfortunate that there aren't more situations like this available for those types of players. Mark a$$ tricks, and bags of dicks....
Tiny Pineapple Corrosive Synergy 73	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:22:00 - [20] - Quote As Leadfoot has repeated over and over, it's not the lack of intelligence in shield users but simply armor>shield. There's nothing more to it. Do you really believe that the average armor user is smarter than the average shield user? That the reason why shield isn't used as often is because people don't know how to? And if that were true, why does 99% of everyone worth a damn in PC, who arguably know this game the best, never use a pure shield/regen fit? Surely the pros would see the advantages of shield to armor in an objective based game, right? But they don't because shield has no advantage over armor in winning the match. Half of what I say is sarcasm. Don't take me too seriously.

Reign Omega T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 1314	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:26:00 - [21] - Quote Tiny Pineapple wrote: As Leadfoot has repeated over and over, it's not the lack of intelligence in shield users but simply armor>shield. There's nothing more to it. Do you really believe that the average armor user is smarter than the average shield user? That the reason why shield isn't used as often is because people don't know how to? And if that were true, why does 99% of everyone worth a damn in PC, who arguably know this game the best, never use a pure shield/regen fit? Surely the pros would see the advantages of shield to armor in an objective based game, right? But they don't because shield has no advantage over armor in winning the match. Well that's definitely not what I'm talking about. I personally think shield suits require more finesse and tactical awareness to run competitively and properly and don't necessarily give exponential returns for the extra work. Mark a$$ tricks, and bags of dicks....
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3543	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:35:00 - [22] - Quote Reign Omega wrote: Leadfoot10 wrote: Please stop insulting people. The reason people "swing hard until they fall" is because skirm/dom are games where you have to do that to win. If I wanted to sit back and pick people off -- and lose -- I'd be a sniper. You are no more intelligent or a thinking man's player than me, so please stop with the banter suggesting otherwise. This game is about taking and holding points. Sitting back and picking people off at distance, but jumping behind cover everytime you take enemy fire, is a marginal role at best -- and that's precisely how you see them used. Shield tanks simply don't have enough HP to do take/hold points effectively. Damage mods in highs also add to this challenge. It's just that simple, IMO. I was no more suggesting that I am better than anyone, nor was I labeling you or anyone else as unintelligent. Please try not to misread. What I was suggesting however, was that players tend to group towards playstyles that are more general purpose and forgiving rather than ones that take time to understand and that aren't necessarily more rewarding upon understanding. Armor tanked suits are brawlers suits, and Dust tends to favor brawlers over thinkers in most cases. It's in no way meant as an insult, it's a simple truth gained from 3 years of observation. You should consider substituting "attacks at distance" for "thinkers", lest others get the same idea. It takes no more thinking to run or fit one suit than it does the other.
Tiny Pineapple Corrosive Synergy 73	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:35:00 - [23] - Quote Reign Omega wrote: Tiny Pineapple wrote: As Leadfoot has repeated over and over, it's not the lack of intelligence in shield users but simply armor>shield. There's nothing more to it. Do you really believe that the average armor user is smarter than the average shield user? That the reason why shield isn't used as often is because people don't know how to? And if that were true, why does 99% of everyone worth a damn in PC, who arguably know this game the best, never use a pure shield/regen fit? Surely the pros would see the advantages of shield to armor in an objective based game, right? But they don't because shield has no advantage over armor in winning the match. Well that's definitely not what I'm talking about. I personally think shield suits require more finesse and tactical awareness to run competitively and properly and don't necessarily give exponential returns for the extra work. My post wasn't specifically replying to yours just the people who think shield users are total idiots. I understood your argument in your first reply and half of me agrees with you. I just think that we need more maps with open areas and objectives that favor the shield playstyle. Half of what I say is sarcasm. Don't take me too seriously.
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3544	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:43:00 - [24] - Quote Reign Omega wrote: I personally think shield suits require more finesse and tactical awareness to run competitively and properly and don't necessarily give appropriate returns for the extra work. That is the very definition of UP.... ...although I substituted "appropriate" for "exponential" from your quote.
Reign Omega T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K 1314	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:44:00 - [25] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Reign Omega wrote: Leadfoot10 wrote: Please stop insulting people. The reason people "swing hard until they fall" is because skirm/dom are games where you have to do that to win. If I wanted to sit back and pick people off -- and lose -- I'd be a sniper. You are no more intelligent or a thinking man's player than me, so please stop with the banter suggesting otherwise. This game is about taking and holding points. Sitting back and picking people off at distance, but jumping behind cover everytime you take enemy fire, is a marginal role at best -- and that's precisely how you see them used. Shield tanks simply don't have enough HP to do take/hold points effectively. Damage mods in highs also add to this challenge. It's just that simple, IMO. I was no more suggesting that I am better than anyone, nor was I labeling you or anyone else as unintelligent. Please try not to misread. What I was suggesting however, was that players tend to group towards playstyles that are more general purpose and forgiving rather than ones that take time to understand and that aren't necessarily more rewarding upon understanding. Armor tanked suits are brawlers suits, and Dust tends to favor brawlers over thinkers in most cases. It's in no way meant as an insult, it's a simple truth gained from 3 years of observation. You should consider substituting "attacks at distance" for "thinkers", lest others get the same idea. It takes no more thinking to run or fit one suit than it does the other. I get it, you run shields. You think it takes more intelligence/skill/dedication, and with your last post you've also added that the returns are minimal. But there's no reason to look down your nose at other play styles with pejoratives such as you have used -- it weakens your message and leads towards non-productive conversations like this. Regardless, I appreciate your response & thank you for it. Actually all my suits are gallente... I have all Gallente suits and weapons proto. My alt was a Cal scout and logi, and I specced out of it into Amarr. I'm not championing shield players over armor, nor am I downplaying armor players in light of shields. I was merely stating that you can't tank a shield suit and forget it like you can armor, that's where the thinker comment comes in. So no... you didn't get it. Mark a$$ tricks, and bags of dicks....
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3544	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:45:00 - [26] - Quote I do now. I was dead on except for what you're running now -- after, apparently, you drew the same conclusion as me and the other 3/4 of the vets around here. Armor>Shields. Thanks.
duster 35000 Algintal Core Gallente Federation 414	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:46:00 - [27] - Quote Sgt Kirk wrote: I agree with Damage threshold and Hardeners but as far as meta goes these are the weapons that are good against armor: Projectile - combat rifles, smgs, HMGs Explosive - Grenades (which if you're into your armor and a grenade hits you you're dead 97% of the time) mass drivers, REs, Flaylock pistols and large missiles. Hybrid Rail aka Kinetic - sniper rifles, rail rifles, bolt pistols, magsecs Weapons against armor infantry: Hybrid plasma aka Thermal - Plasma Rifle, shotgun, plasma cannon ion pistol Lasers aka EM - scrambler rifles, scrambler pistols, lasers and a flux which is actually an electromagnetic grenade. Take that as you will. I believe shields just need a threshold of damage and we need hardeners in general, people need to learn that you can't play and fit a shield fit and an armor fit the same way. If they wanted that Call of Duty is over there. Shields are screwed by grenades too, because lower hp Molestia approved
Cypher Nil Fireteam Tempest 78	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:49:00 - [28] - Quote Leadfoot10 wrote: Reign Omega wrote: Leadfoot10 wrote: Please stop insulting people. The reason people "swing hard until they fall" is because skirm/dom are games where you have to do that to win. If I wanted to sit back and pick people off -- and lose -- I'd be a sniper. You are no more intelligent or a thinking man's player than me, so please stop with the banter suggesting otherwise. This game is about taking and holding points. Sitting back and picking people off at distance, but jumping behind cover everytime you take enemy fire, is a marginal role at best -- and that's precisely how you see them used. Shield tanks simply don't have enough HP to do take/hold points effectively. Damage mods in highs also add to this challenge. It's just that simple, IMO. I was no more suggesting that I am better than anyone, nor was I labeling you or anyone else as unintelligent. Please try not to misread. What I was suggesting however, was that players tend to group towards playstyles that are more general purpose and forgiving rather than ones that take time to understand and that aren't necessarily more rewarding upon understanding. Armor tanked suits are brawlers suits, and Dust tends to favor brawlers over thinkers in most cases. It's in no way meant as an insult, it's a simple truth gained from 3 years of observation. You should consider substituting "attacks at distance" for "thinkers", lest others get the same idea. It takes no more thinking to run or fit one suit than it does the other. I get it, you run shields. You think it takes more intelligence/skill/dedication, and with your last post you've also added that the returns are minimal. But there's no reason to look down your nose at other play styles with pejoratives such as you have used -- it weakens your message and leads towards non-productive conversations like this. Listen, if you think shield tanking is fine, awesome. However, given you just said it is not "necessarily more rewarding upon understanding" it does suggest there's something amiss that could be addressed as the OP suggested with this thread. And, FWIW, I agree with him....and I suspect you do to. Regardless, I appreciate your response & thank you for it. Saying that it takes more intelligence/skill/dedication to run shields is a reflection of compensating for shields being WORSE then armour. This statement has nothing to do with looking down at other players. If I say that being a doctor takes intelligence/skill/dedication that doesn't mean everyone who's not a doctor is stupid. your reading into something that isn't there. honestly given the stat's of armour compared to shields the clever thing is to go armour. shields require tactict's to compensate for lower HP and only offer a benefit of taking less damage from long ranged designed weapons. Its ok, I'm a ninja
Leadfoot10 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 3545	Posted - 2015.03.17 19:56:00 - [29] - Quote Cypher Nil wrote: Saying that it takes more intelligence/skill/dedication to run shields is a reflection of compensating for shields being WORSE then armour. This statement has nothing to do with looking down at other players. If I say that being a doctor takes intelligence/skill/dedication that doesn't mean everyone who's not a doctor is stupid. your reading into something that isn't there. honestly given the stat's of armour compared to shields the clever thing is to go armour. shields require tactict's to compensate for lower HP and only offer a benefit of taking less damage from long ranged designed weapons. You're right. These were terms of endearment: "Most folks who claim shield tanking is garbage are doing it wrong" "The Caldari need a guide as well and you, Mexx and four others are the ONLY people I have seen in game that actually know how to fit and play as shields. " "Dust players as I have seen tend to try and fit the square peg in the round hole" As if regulators/rechargers and using cover are some secret only revealed after 4 years of graduate school and residency....
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 865	Posted - 2015.03.17 20:02:00 - [30] - Quote TL:DR: Armor and Shield Tanking are balanced on a micro level. They are not balanced on a macro level I have made this point before, but it think that it bears repeating: I do not think that shield and armor values are extremely imbalanced. Rather, shield tanking is harder than armor tanking because of the many small benefits that armor tanking receives on a scale larger than raw numbers. If someone asked me: "Piercing, Who do you think would win in a 1v1 - Ghost Kaiser or True Adamance?", I would not answer "True would win, because he is an armor tanker". The victor would not be chosen by the tank, but by: How well each of them used cover How well each of them understood the map that they were fighting on How well each of them understood the damage profiles and optimal ranges of their weapons etc This type of example is more clearly illustrated by combat between lone heavies and assaults. Lone heavies can be considered "armor tankers" if you compare them to assault suits. Yet it is very often to see an "armor tanker" lose to a "shield tanker" in a mid to long range battle. In like manner, the "shield tanker" would lose in a mid to short range battle. This is why I argue that armor and shield tanking are balanced on a micro level - the type of tank is not the deciding factor in these battles, but the environment that the battle takes place in. The environment that most DUST battles take place in are in favor of armor tanking. This leads to armor tanking being imbalanced on a macro level. If we pit a caldari team of 4 Heavies, 4 Assaults, 4 Scouts, and 4 Logis against an Amarr team with the same composition, the Amarr team would win. This would be due, in large part, to the following factors: Repair Tools increase the survivability of the Amarr team much more than they do of the Caldari team Nanite Injectors (100% HP) afford a high chance of a revived revived Amarr merc moving out of fire than a caladri one. Triage Nanohives increase the survivability of the Amarr team much more than they do of the Caldari team Many maps have a majority of null cannons that highly favor CQC The final point deserves more explanation. Many maps are designed in a way such that access to null cannons consists of many narrow passage ways that favor CQC (Armor) over range (Shield). Next, due to complaints of snipers killing mercs at null cannons, most null cannons are designed to hamper ranged attacks - the types of attacks that shield oriented dropsuits are built for - and promote CQC and armor tanking as a result. Additionally, some null cannons are housed in a "box", where you can place a merc in front of the terminal to guard it. Such a design also favors armor tankers (and high alpha weapons to an extent), because of the lack of mobility required to defend those points. As an example, consider Boulder Rim. In Skirmish, with respect to the Null cannon, there is no way to flank mercs holding Objective A. The only two entrances to the null cannon are forward of the null cannon. Additionally, Objective A has many large containers for cover, which are more highly concentrated around the objective (CQC oriented). Finally, Objective A is housed in a "box", such that a merc can stand directly in front of the terminal to defend it. This also largely favors CQC armor tanking (Generally heavies), because this type of objective nullifies all of the advantages of shield tanking. There is no room for mobility, and armor tanking allows you the most time to deal and receive damage. Objective B is in a space that does not truly allow for flanking any more than one person. There are exactly two ways to enter the building, and both are in tight corridors that do not allow for mobility. This is the objective that is most commonly filled with heavies and Logis. Objective C is housed in a cylindrical building, again made of solely thin corridors. This further promotes CQC due to decreased mobility around the objective. To me, it is clear that - as far as the objectives are concerned - Bolder Rim is entirely CQC/Armor focused. Because the only victory condition of DUST is "Capture and Hold the Null Cannons", the aforementioned caldari team would be at a huge disadvantage compared to the Amarr team. Similar descriptions can be made for: Bolder Rim Domination Fracture Rode Skirmish (Objectives A, B, and C Ashland Skirmish (Objective B) Border Gulch Skirmish (Objectives B, C, D, and E) Impact Ridge Skirmish (Objective A, C, and D) Iron Delta Skirmish (Objectives A and B) Spine Crescent Skirmish (Objectives B and C) Skim Junction Skirmish (Objectives A, B, and C) From my look at these maps, only the only map that seems balanced in favor of Armor and Shield tanking at every objective is Line Harvest. These are my thoughts on why Armo... I got enemies, got a lot of enemies , got a lot of people tryna drain me of this energy



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.

Plasma Cannon :3