|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18062
   |
Posted - 2015.04.08 20:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:Gunnlogis and getting absolutely destroyed by armor tanks in pretty much every situation. It doesn't matter if you flank an Armor tank with Proto XT-201 Missiles and et half a clip into him, as soon as he hits hardeners everything is in his favor. Blasters wreck hardened 6000 shields with boosters in under 10 seconds while I might be sitting there all day trying to kill an armor tank with missiles. Rail Gunnlogi < Rail Madrugar Balster Gunnlogi < Blaster Madrugar Missile Gunnlogi < Missile Madrugar Armor hardeners need a reduction to 35-30% Also= when armor hardeners are active, repair rates need to go down by the same amount that the hardener resists. Literally, forget gunnlogis, I can be shooting an armor tank with my proto Min Commando with Wiki swarms with 2-3 clips and the armor tank will be at full armor due to the fact that, long lasting high resistance hardeners+high base eHP+Passive Armor reps= indestructable. Armor hardener> shield hardener 1.) Armor Hardener lasts much longer. 6 whole seconds longer without skills (gap increases with skill) 2.) The fitting: The PG of Shield hardener and CPU of Armor hardener is proportionate. BUT... Complex Shield Hardener CPU cost vs Armor Hardener PG cost. The CPU cost of a Complex Shield extender is 341 which is 1/4 or 26.6% of my CPU on a Gunnlogi The PG cost of a Complex Armor hardener is 400 PG which is like is approx 13% of the Madrugars PG Gåæ That does not seem fair at all. Why does it take twice the fitting space to fit a shield hardener on a shield tank than a Armor Hardener on a Armor tank? Fitting a Complex shield extender on Gunnlogi takes up 26.6% of CPU and 9% of the PG ON the other hand, a Armor Hardener on a Madrugar takes up 13% CPU and 13% PG. So why is it so uneven for the Gunnlogi/why is it so advantageous to use Armor Hardener on Armor tank than a Shield Hardener on Shield tank? Also- armor hardeners are super easy to double stack. And two of them are super OP. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNLT2Qk2KxM
Firstly I don't think anyone will deny that Shield HAV are lacking at the moment for a number of reasons though I don't believe they are necessarily what you believe them to be nor are you being particularly unbiased in this case.
I'm still convinced that the primary reason the Madrugar is more powerful than it's shield counterpart is due to its repairs being both prolific and uninterruptedly passive as a result when coupled with our competitive hardeners they produce incredibly powerful effective repair values that the Gunnlogi simply cannot match.
Beyond that if Shield Boosters could be more reliable and offer players the opportunity to completely regenerate the value stated on the module then I simply do not believe there will be such a gap between the HAV.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18067
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 22:48:00 -
[2] - Quote
sir RAVEN WING wrote:It was the Caldari's only good thing, why are you surprised?
Because Three of Five primary AV weapons aren't Caldari and aren't effective, because the ARR and RR weren't the go to weapons of top tier corporations for a good few months, because the previous Gunnlogi was not to the Madrugar what the Madrugar is to it now, and because you don't continually have the most content available to your race.....
Seriously harden up........  ......... ........ ..........
PUNS!
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18069
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 23:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:
Listen, where do all tanks go when hardeners are down? How long does it take them to go there?
Here are the answers.
1. Redline
2. maybe 20 seconds.
That's very debatable. Some pilots do chose to return to the redline as their fits are completely based around hardeners and have low eHP without them active other's don't have to and are more durable but I think the universal choice is to seek cover which is the correct course of action.
Pretending like you can sit out in the open without your hardeners and have a good time is going to lose you that HAV.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18069
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 23:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sir Dukey wrote:True Adamance wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:
Listen, where do all tanks go when hardeners are down? How long does it take them to go there?
Here are the answers.
1. Redline
2. maybe 20 seconds.
That's very debatable. Some pilots do chose to return to the redline as their fits are completely based around hardeners and have low eHP without them active other's don't have to and are more durable but I think the universal choice is to seek cover which is the correct course of action. Pretending like you can sit out in the open without your hardeners and have a good time is going to lose you that HAV. Tell you the truth, I don't always go to redline when I'm dominating the match but I do when I know there is AV and there is possibility of other tanks.
There are times when you simply have knocked out all resistance against you and therefore don't need to pull back. However most of the time I would suggest this is common sense, sticking around a single area with your hardeners on will draw pissed of AV to you, if you stay longer than your should you lose a big chunk of ISK simple as that.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18087
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 09:00:00 -
[5] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Thaddeus Reynolds wrote:
It wouldn't put an end to it...
but it would make the mechanical arguments against it irrelevant
the consistency within the setting argument could then be made...but never really need to be implemented besides making people (such as myself) who like the way Eve's shield regen work happy...but I imagine we're a small portion of the community, and CCP doesn't need to pander to us as long as they balance things in the system they have
Well I've said this before but here is what I envision with Armor Repairers becoming active modules and shield boosters having a slightly higher HP/minute. Natural Armor Rep (~30 HP/s) (Constant, very slow, Supplementary HP regeneration) Natural Shield Recharge (~120 HP/s) (Delayed, slow, Supplementary HP regeneration) Active Armor Repairer (Moderate Duration, Moderate Rate, Primary HP regeneration) Active Shield Booster (Short Duration, High Rate, Primary HP regeneration) The recharge delay is of course a factor, but is the tradeoff for a much higher natural rate. Even so in both cases that is simply supplementary regen. Currently Shield Boosters are so terribad that shield pretty much has to rely on natural recharge....which I think will remain nearly impossible properly balance against armor repairers, ESPECIALLY Heavy Passive ones. Most of this **** started when CCP Blam moved us to the "Passive Regeneration is Primary Regeneration" model and it has been a mess ever since. Passive regeneration is fine if it is limited to supplementary regen, but the primary regen moves back to the Active model. NOTE: I think that currently, the issue with armor repairers lies in the HEAVY ones. I don't think the Light ones are problematic so those can probably be left as is, as not to totally mess up Dropships and LAVs for the sake of HAV balance. As for balancing within the system we already have....I think Rattati is willing to be aggressive in change if it is absolutely necessary. However if he can reach a balanced state by making few changes, he's going to be more likely to go that direction with it. Manpower is very limited on the Dust Dev side so he has to make very tough choices on how things are done, and if he can get the desired result (of balance) with less work, he's going to take that direction with it.
And as I have mentioned before in keeping with the above ideals since I too feel the same way. I think the current repair rates for the armour modules are fine, sans the passive repair rate.
From previous builds the highest possible tier repairer was the old Efficient Heavy Armour Repairer which repaired a total of 414 armour every three seconds. On a per second basis this amounts to 138 repairs per second which I feel is fine and keeps the vehicle competitive and durable. However as it is not constant and gives time between pulses I feel like it would be distinctly more balanced while keeping the modules functionality relatively fair and balanced.
Considering we have a skill for the betterment of repair values I think if you set the Repair Rate on the Prototype Module to 330 armour repaired per pulse unmodified (every 3 seconds for a fifteen second duration) you would woukd amount to the current Prototype module we have now.
With skills that is 412.5 repairs every 3 seconds for the exactly 137.5 we have now just active and over a maximum time of between 15 and 18.75 seconds (which means Level V in core skills only adds one additional pulse meaning that under this model the total armour repaired changes from 2062.5 every 15 seconds to to 2475 over 18 seconds).
Those values I think are fair but not overly powerful. An indvidual repairer under this model functions with the exact same efficiency however its window of operation is now much lower. Couple that with an appropriate cool down time that allows shield to regenerate their HP at a faster rate per minute and I think you will see some changes to the vehicles themselves.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18155
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 00:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
Cypher Nil wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? I can destroy a shield tank by myself in 4 seconds using the free anti-armor fit, thats not balanced at all
Yeah......No.
No you can't.
Just no.
Bosh'tet Plz.
A Shield HAV would ******* decimate you.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18192
|
Posted - 2015.04.12 22:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
Mobius Wyvern wrote:Sir Dukey wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:How many times do I have to say that the answer is not to nerf vehicles, but buff them to whatever level the superior hull is at. You get parity in that fashion, not nerfing so AV has an easier time of destroying it. I don't care what you have to say because no way in hell should armor tanks be invincible to AV. Shield tanks and AV are balanced in my opinion. Armor tanks are definitely not balanced. How is it fair that an armor tank can take 2-3 clips (Clips not swarms) from my Proto Min Commando with proficiency level 4 in swarms and still have full armor? It's not. Passive Armor Repair remains one of the dumber things we've received in this game. Changing stats isn't going to address this. Armor Repair modules need to go back to being active modules like they used to be. Being able to constantly gain up to 200+ hp per SECOND without any cost doesn't make much sense from a balance standpoint, and that fact has just been becoming more and more obvious over time.
The actually rep rates aren't the problem it's that they are constant rather than active over a set duration. Without those repair values armour HAV would struggle against AV.
Think of it this way. The only Heavy Efficient Repairer repped 414 armour every 3 seconds for a total of 15 seconds and 2070 armour total. On a per second value this is 138 armour repaired per second on the top tier repper. Nothing wrong the with rep values themselves. Just the nature of the module.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18192
|
Posted - 2015.04.12 22:30:00 -
[8] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Instapop, no, but I think combined with how accurate some of the large turrets are regarding AI, its an OP double whammy. The "waves of opportunity" are too long, and the vulnerability too narrow. I think we should at least be able to do enough damage to require some maneuverability skill, hiding behind cover, escaping etc. As it is, they can just sit there and take as many shots as they please with no fear of being damaged, while still being fast enough to chase anyone trying to hide. A single Tanker shouldn't take 4 or 5 dedicated AV out of the game just in order to be chased off. Particularly when AV itself makes one vulnerable to infantry.
Except when I am good enough at my role I can manage to survive against 5 AVers but using speed, terrain, modules, and firepower.
Some players in Dust can go out of their way and manage to kill insane numbers of players, more so than I've seen any tank recently able to achieve, and still score good KDR's and all players do it salute them on "mad playz". It is wrong that I am better/ more able to deal with a forger with his proto Ishukone Assault Forge and Packed Lai Dai's and the hopping dicklord PLC scout he's running with?
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18192
|
Posted - 2015.04.12 23:05:00 -
[9] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:True Adamance wrote:One Eyed King wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I'm not a tanker, but I'm confused as to why people believe 1 Aver should be able to pop a 1.3 mil Isk tank with hardeners on...Is that vehicle suppose to be a battle tank or a firecracker?
I mean Dukey, I understand what you are saying about Shield Tankers. Gunlogis do need a buff...but your Heavy analogy makes little sense to me because a Sentinel suit does not cost 1.3 million isk. My isk invested should equal increase slaying capacity. This is why proto costs more than advanced. By that logic, fielding a 1 million isk asset should be able to at least clear out one proto Aver when hardened.
You Shield Tankers work out how to Buff Gunnlogis, but do not Nerf the Madrugar. Make it to where both kick some serious arse, not give free 150 WPs.
07 Instapop, no, but I think combined with how accurate some of the large turrets are regarding AI, its an OP double whammy. The "waves of opportunity" are too long, and the vulnerability too narrow. I think we should at least be able to do enough damage to require some maneuverability skill, hiding behind cover, escaping etc. As it is, they can just sit there and take as many shots as they please with no fear of being damaged, while still being fast enough to chase anyone trying to hide. A single Tanker shouldn't take 4 or 5 dedicated AV out of the game just in order to be chased off. Particularly when AV itself makes one vulnerable to infantry. Except when I am good enough at my role I can manage to survive against 5 AVers but using speed, terrain, modules, and firepower. Some players in Dust can go out of their way and manage to kill insane numbers of players, more so than I've seen any tank recently able to achieve, and still score good KDR's and all players do it salute them on "mad playz". It is wrong that I am better/ more able to deal with a forger with his proto Ishukone Assault Forge and Packed Lai Dai's and the hopping dicklord PLC scout he's running with? If it were a matter of skill, I would be fine with it. I do not believe that is the case however. If it was skill, it wouldn't just be any tanker doing it, but even mediocre tankers have no problem taking down AV. We shouldn't get to a point where the only solution to a tank is another tank, or 1/4 of the other team, just for one player. I don't even care if they have to decrease the costs of tanks to bring them more in line if need be, I just don't think they are balanced right now.
It's never been hard to drop AV though. They stand out in the open like it a god given right to be there and not die.
Just watch those AV sentinels walk out onto flat ground and try to forge, getting cut down as instead of running I rush them and drop them at close range, or as scouts attempt to play eHP peekabo and I pre-fire the corners they are popping around.
Reactive players who are smart enough to use positioning and their tools to not necessarily destroy that tank, though that happens, but blue balls it are the ones who are doing the job right. That leads to tankers becoming unfocused and therefore susceptible to smart players.
However I'd agree with you Tanks are unbalanced right now for what I see as two core reasons. One is that they have modules (armour repairers) that are passive yet have the prolific per second rep rate of Active Modules. And hardeners being stackable and static at 40%. I don't think dual hardeners are an issue but when you are hitting 60% resistance AND have something like 300 repairs per second something is wrong.
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
True Adamance
Praetoriani Classiarii Templares
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
18200
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 02:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:JARREL THOMAS wrote:
No, go away.
I've already been threatened because I call people out for their lack of experience, along with not compromising on my position. Why should I compromise when things were taken away from the deployment of Uprising through 1.8?
You mean 1.7?
GÇ£That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.GÇ¥
-The Nameless City
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|