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.

CCP is incapable of balance and their love of armor is undeniable.

Therefore the following will always remain true in Dust: Armor > Shields.

1. "Getting the most out of Shields is not about stacking EHP but about regenerating quickly."
-Problem: This also requires more modules and more SP than Armor. The argument is about making Shields work as effectively as Armor, though not the same way. To make Shields work as well as armor, it requires more SP and module slots. This is not a benefit of Shields but a detriment.

2. "You should be fighting at range and thereby minimize your damage taken."
- Problem: This is entirely based on the weapon. An Amarr Assault with a Scrambler Rifle has about the same range as a Caldari Assault with a Rail Rifle. The Amarr is capable of operating at range as well as also having more EHP for the close range fight. Equating Shields with Range is inaccurate as it is based solely on the weapon and not the suit. Stating "we just need more maps that favor Shields" is, again, favoring only the weapon that the Caldari use and not the Shields themselves.

3. "Shields are great if you can flank the enemy."
- Problem: This is a level of play style that is not necessary for the Armor user. Instead of thinking it as "The Armor user charges while the Shield user flanks", it comes off as "The Armor user can charge or flank while the Shield user must flank." Adding an additional requirement in order for something to be on par with another option is a passable definition of underpowered. Would be like saying "A knife is more powerful than a gun if the knife is already in your throat"; it is true but it doesn't mean anything in regards to the actual power difference of a gun or a knife when the situation is already assumed to happen.

Damage threshold NEEDS to be a thing.

Counterpoints:
1. SP requirements are moot in general, it is not a good point in any balancing argument because the whole "I put x amount of sp into y thing therefore I'm entitled to z is always struck down. Dedication to a certain playstyle is the choice of the user, therefore there so no good reason to give them anything.

2. Shield users aren't supposed to play at range they're supposed to play less aggressively than armor tanks, that's why the hp given from extenders is less then plates. Not to mention this is the manner of playstyle gives shield users the optimal benefits of their suits. (high regen+low reg+avoiding fire=crazy regen)

3. It's a bad point to begin with so I can't make an argument for it.

4. Shield users get the option to armor tank effectively this should not be overlooked when talking about balance.

This sounds pretty spectacularly dumb considering we just went through patch Charlie where the Gunnlogi was functionally invincible. I keep seeing **** like this ascribing all kinds of blanket opinions and favoritism to CCP, but the fact is CCP couldnt find its own butt if it wasnt attached to their backsides, so this kind of conspiracy theory talk as if they have some kind of unified vision, or any vision at all, is ludicrous and doesn't help anything.

1. It is a slippery slope to state that it isn't a negative that it requires more SP because "I put X amount of SP into Y thing therefore I'm entitled to Z." I was merely showing that, yes, it does require more SP. This is a negative of Shields. It would be like Ferroscale being a third skill called "Plate Adjustment." I was also not stating that Shields must be better because it requires more skills. I am, however, saying that it requiring more Skills to be on par with Armor is a negative to Shields. Stating "dedication to a certain playstyle is the choice of the user, therefore there so no good reason to give them anything" is no different than saying "(Underpowered thing) doesn't need to get buffed because it is the choice of the user to go down that route." Again, the primary reason was just "why does it take more SP to do the same thing?" rather than "it should do more because it takes more SP."

2. An Armor user playing "less aggressively" does not get a negative to not playing "aggressively" in the same way that a Shield user does. This is very similar to Argument 3; "just don't play Aggressive." An Armor user is more than capable as doing just as well as a Shield user by "playing less aggressively" as a Shield user.

3. Just here as a placeholder to keep in line with your 1-4 for ease of reading.

4. "Armor users get the option to Shield tank effectively. This should not be overlooked when talking about balance." This is similar to stating "X weapon is not overpowered because anyone can use X weapon." Even if that is a bit of an oversimplification, the fact is that the street goes both ways so it isn't a specific bonus to Shields.

The purpose was to show flaws that I have seen come up over and over in arguments against the basis of "Armor is superior to Shields." No disrespect was meant and, hopefully, none taken.

P.P.S. Energizers and Rechargers take way too much CPU.

CCP is incapable of balance and their love of armor is undeniable.

Therefore the following will always remain true in Dust: Armor > Shields.

A small window of time when gunlogi was good does not change the fact that the vast majority of Dust's history armor had been the preferred meta especially for infantry.

I'd also like to point out the ONLY reason why gunlogi had it's 15mins of fame is because swarms were way too strong against armor vehicles.

A small window of time when gunlogi was good does not change the fact that the vast majority of Dust's history armor had been the preferred meta especially for infantry.

I'd also like to point out the ONLY reason why gunlogi had it's 15mins of fame is because swarms were way too strong against armor vehicles.

1. Good point, however because of precedent in discussing balance that point is always made so I thought I should make it, not to mention a small amount of things are put under this scrutiny.

2. Playing less aggressively as an armor user is not optimal because one can say that it is a waste of consistent rep and tank. The same can be said about shield users playing aggressively in that it is a waste of regen timers and regen itself, thought you're right it is more of a detriment to shield users.

3. (deleted)

3. Technically speaking armor suits cannot "shield tank properly" because of the base stats given their suits, shield suits are not pressed under this because armor give an exponential amount of hp and reps. The versatility of a suit should not be overlooked when discussing tanks because tank is under the scrutiny of how well the suits that use their main tank.

[quote=Vulpes Dolosus]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).[/quote/]

Flux nades usually do 500 shield damage to all suits cause they only have roughly 500 shields except caldari sentinels.

M1 grenades do roughly 500 armor damage anyway and can kill you. The grenades are pretty balanced except that std locus and sleek grenades do very little damage compared to other rifle weapons 'damage over 1 second' values. That creates a disincentive to use std locus grenades.

The real annoyance is that shields have a playstyle that is less obvious to see when use for CQC. You need dampeners and damage mods and maybe 1 shield mod for CQC shield styles.

The armor CQC style is stack armor and damage, you will be fighting head on and dying anyway, that is a obvious thing for new players, it is the easiest playstyle to understand and there are less things to worry about that could go wrong. The lack of tutorials in DUST 514 is contributing to the new players understanding the obvious armor style first (there are other armor play styles as though) before understanding how to use shield suits in different ways.

Additionally the map design favours the easy to understand 'in your face' player style of armor that I highlighted.

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.

Let's talk about your #1. Gal and Ammar can do both and Minass speed equates to anything they want. If your enemy assaults you head on what do you do? run away and flank..lol

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.

Enemy assaults you head on from what?

Be more specific.


Does he charge you head on from 70 meters?
Blap his ass before he can get in close.

Is he already close?

Try to control the range.

Whoever controls the range controls the tide of battle.