I feel like good numbers to start with would be 50% for specific active resists and 30% for omni active resists (going off of EVE).

Though one big concern I have with this idea is that we only have a limited number of module slots whereas in EVE ships can get up to eight modules on a rack. Having a smaller number of module slots necessitates the use of more powerful individual modules whereas having more module slots allows for more flexibility between more specific modules (you don't give up as much fitting space per module).

What would you guys think of that? I believe that the strong hardeners that makes something damn near invulnerable should be in the game, just not in the form of an omni module.

I fully agree with this assessment. Many conclusions can be drawn from this, but it's perfectly clear that armor hardeners were overbuffed (my conclusion).

I'm not sure whether damage type resistance modules would work very well - in our typical battles all available damage types are being thrown around at the same time, so these modules are unlikely to be used for general purpose. You may get into a situation where you're casually rolling a HAV with a certain turret until someone drops a MLT HAV that's dual hardened against your specific turret and kills you easily before immediately recalling the vehicle. There really is no counter to that.

Do you see a solution to that problem?

By the way, I like how you suggested 23% resistance for 'omni' hardeners - which is almost exactly what we had before the armor hardener buff.
I'm going to continue to beat that dead horse for a while. Don't mind me.

I'd like to add that Dust side we can always tweak activation and cooldown times. I can live with strong modules that have a short active duration but a long cooldown.

I dislike the idea of specific resists. I don't mind low value Omni resists though.

You have to deal with that in EVE but at the same time EVE pilots don't get the luxury of coming in the battle again within seconds after they get killed. Alright, scratch that off then.

Omi Passives are still something I feel we really need. Especially with things Like LAVs.

Were you here back when we had damage control units?

In addition to Passive Omni- Hardeners (Energized plating and Shield Amplifiers) we also had those which gave a slight passive resist to shields and a decent resist stat for armor. The Damage control unit also, or wasn't supposed to, get a stacking penalty compared to the other resist module. Making it a pretty powerful thing.

Seeing as switching damage types for AV can be done on the fly, very quickly, I'd rather not.

Weird how people forget this has been suggested before........

Not forgotten, just supporting the renewal of the suggestion.

I think this is a good idea. They have their strengths and weaknesses.

The specific resist will work really well for FW (or any other missions they might implement where you're up against a specific faction) or if you plan on taking down a particular tank. Whereas the omni's would still give you reasonable resists for general tanking.