DUST Search - Issues with infantry shield tanking

Boot Booter wrote:

After making a post in GD and listening to people's opinion on the state of infantry shield tanking, I've come up with a list of reasons why armor > shield, with possible solutions. This is of course if you believe that armor > shield, as the general consensus seemed to be in the previous thread I made.

Shield damage threshold - everyone seemed to agree that shields should have a threshold in which any damage below the threshold would not stop recharge or reset delay. I believe this number should be in the 5 - 10 hp range. All shield tankers know how annoying it is to jump from a ledge that's a bit too high or to take a stray SMG bullet from 80 meters and have your delays reset.

Ferroscales - ferroscale plates offer more HP and are cheaper to fit the shield extenders with zero drawback. This is a huge balance issue. Sure shields recharge on their own and Ferroscales do not, but in order to fit a proper shield tank you have to sacrifice slots for regulators and rechargers as necessary for an, on average, lower hp pool. Point being is a shield tanker must sacrifice just as many, If not more, slots for non hp mods as armor tankers do, therefore having a natural regen is a rather mute point. Ferroscales > extenders, simple as that. Perhaps consider a small speed reduction or increased capacity cost for ferros.

Damage mods vs Kincats - armor tankers have damage mods which can be stacked to great effect. Shield tankers could in theory use speed as a weapon. Certainly speed is a valuable attribute for shield tanking unless you plan on sitting at range an entire match which, as highlighted in my previous thread, does not typically help to win matches. (as a side point it has been stated that maps and objectives are just more suited for armor tanking). However back on topic, damage mods are much easier to fit than Kincats when considering the capacity cost of shield extenders in PG and the PG limitations of shield based suits. I suggest several solutions. Reduce kincat or extenders PG requirements, and/ or add a new low slot module which increases weapons effective range.

Tl;dr
Shield damage threshold = a must
Ferroscales are OP
Kincats and extenders use too much PG / armor tankers have a monopoly on the damage vs range curve of weapons.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars 299	Posted - 2015.03.21 04:09:00 - [1] - Quote Boot Booter wrote: After making a post in GD and listening to people's opinion on the state of infantry shield tanking, I've come up with a list of reasons why armor > shield, with possible solutions. This is of course if you believe that armor > shield, as the general consensus seemed to be in the previous thread I made. Shield damage threshold - everyone seemed to agree that shields should have a threshold in which any damage below the threshold would not stop recharge or reset delay. I believe this number should be in the 5 - 10 hp range. All shield tankers know how annoying it is to jump from a ledge that's a bit too high or to take a stray SMG bullet from 80 meters and have your delays reset. Ferroscales - ferroscale plates offer more HP and are cheaper to fit the shield extenders with zero drawback. This is a huge balance issue. Sure shields recharge on their own and Ferroscales do not, but in order to fit a proper shield tank you have to sacrifice slots for regulators and rechargers as necessary for an, on average, lower hp pool. Point being is a shield tanker must sacrifice just as many, If not more, slots for non hp mods as armor tankers do, therefore having a natural regen is a rather mute point. Ferroscales > extenders, simple as that. Perhaps consider a small speed reduction or increased capacity cost for ferros. Damage mods vs Kincats - armor tankers have damage mods which can be stacked to great effect. Shield tankers could in theory use speed as a weapon. Certainly speed is a valuable attribute for shield tanking unless you plan on sitting at range an entire match which, as highlighted in my previous thread, does not typically help to win matches. (as a side point it has been stated that maps and objectives are just more suited for armor tanking). However back on topic, damage mods are much easier to fit than Kincats when considering the capacity cost of shield extenders in PG and the PG limitations of shield based suits. I suggest several solutions. Reduce kincat or extenders PG requirements, and/ or add a new low slot module which increases weapons effective range. Tl;dr Shield damage threshold = a must Ferroscales are OP Kincats and extenders use too much PG / armor tankers have a monopoly on the damage vs range curve of weapons. I agree with the damage threshold ( I would suggest roughly 8-16hp threshold) I dont see ferroscales as OP. Shield recharging on there own in combination with a shield mod is just as powerful as a low CPU/PG cost ferroscale plate combined with low 3hp constant reps. The shields would be able to out regen that easily at ranged fights. (assuming ewar is not considered) Shield tanking combined with stealth ewar tanking is far easier, compared to armor tanking combined with stealth ewar tanking. Armor tanking with precision enhancers is another option, but shield tankers also have the additional option of shield tanking and using range enhancers (which would be considered viable if range enhancers were better or if the outer ewar scan range of dropsuits was increased from 110% base range to 150% range compared to the middle scan range level of dropsuits.) (I refer to the 3 scan ranges of dropsuits located at roughly 40% of scan range, 100% range, 110% range.) moderate shield tanking combined with stealth ewar and some dmg mods make shield suits able to enter close ranges but with a different style. It is not user friendly. I agree that basic and adv kinkats need a PG cost decrease, otherwise they are not worth using compared to the proto kinkat module.
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars 299	Posted - 2015.03.21 04:23:00 - [2] - Quote DRT 99 wrote: I agree with everything stated in the OP, but have one addition. Flux grenades need to be changed, they are simply unfair to shield users. flux grenades are not OP for caldari sentinels because of there splash resistance, which also affects locus grenades. flux grenades wipe out your shields but they don't kill you, M1 and M8 and Core grenades might wipe out your shields and kill you if you focus your suit on regen shield tanking or moderate regen and hp. flux grenades are less effective against high shield regen built suits, (less total shields, less overall damage, and you recover quicker, if you position yourself right, you can retreat easily, recover in 4 seconds using adv suits, and then attack again.) Then use your locus grenades against the armored enemy, then finish them off, because they are slower and regen slower, they usually cant retreat easily. (you must have very good aim otherwise the mechanics of the game will usually not compensate enough for you to use your suit and win.) basic caldari suits are hard to use, the adv suits give you much more flexibility and allow regen built shield suits and high hp shield suits to shine. The shield damage threshold idea can make high hp shield suits interesting at range, because even if you start using long range weaponry such as rail rifles, the shield suits will have enough time and hp in most circumstances to be able to run away further and start regening shields in open fields while being shot (such as 100 ranges with rail rifle and SCR enemy bullets). Adding the shield threshold idea only to shield suits such as minmatar and caldari suits, but not gallente and amarr suits, would be my suggestion.