DUST Search - Minimum Damage Threshold to Break Shield Regen

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Minimum Damage Threshold to Break Shield Regen

» 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)
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9834	Posted - 2015.04.29 08:29:00 - [1] - Quote Brought up and loosely discussed in this thread. Wanted to expand on it a little bit with it's own thread. What would the minimum damage threshold be that it wouldn't be entirely broken? My thoughts are that a Caldari Assault with a Rail Rifle should have an obvious advantage against, say, a Gallente Assault with an Assault Rifle. Using that as a baseline, with the Rail Rifle's optimal range being 75m and the Assault Rifle's optimal being 40m, maybe that should be a good base? Say that a Caldari Assault has a Shield Damage Threshold of 225 DPS (50% max efficiency). That puts a Basic Assault Rifle at not being able to break the damage threshold at anything past 63m or so and thereby the Cal Assault's shields would continue to regen even while being shot at that range, giving them a notable advantage at longer ranges. This also gives a higher incentive to use high-alpha damage weaponry against them at long range such as the Sniper Rifle or Scrambler Rifle. Flat rate or role-based? Caldari Sentinels obviously have a much different mechanic than Caldari Assaults what with their low depleted shield delay. Should we also assume that'd they'd have different damage thresholds? I could see Commandos and Assaults having much higher tolerances, given their offense-oriented nature, than Sentinels, Scouts, or Logis. Commandos, especially, would benefit from a higher damage tolerance given their penchant for the Sniper Rifle/Rail Rifle combo. A Minmatar Assault, focusing more on speed and less so ranged combat, would have less tolerance toward damage than either the Cal Commando or Cal Assault, in that case. But maybe that's not the optimal solution and shields should have a flat rate of damage threshold for balance purposes? Module interaction? Should we also assume that a new or existing module would impact the damage threshold? Regulators, focusing more on recovery after-the-fact, could have a negative effect on the damage threshold whereas shield extenders (which increase the shield delay) could consequently increase the damage threshold. A sort of Tanking / Recovery metric between the modules. What about a new module that exists solely to increase the damage threshold required to break regeneration? Would it be a high slot or a low slot? How would it be balanced? Or maybe either of those are not good for balance? Maybe we should not have modules interact with the threshold at all? Discuss You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6103	Posted - 2015.04.29 08:35:00 - [2] - Quote Actually I think making it be a function of the shield regen rate would likely be the best choice. It discourages brick tanking and also makes sense that the regen threshold be tied to the regen rate. It would also make the threshold far more prevalent on Caldari and Minmatar suits due to higher shield regen rates, and less prevalent on Gallente and Amarr. As for actual numbers, well its too late for that. I'll have to sleep on it and think about it when I'm more awake. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
Cat Merc Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 16259	Posted - 2015.04.29 08:35:00 - [3] - Quote First, current coding has only a damage per shot thershold available, not DPS. Second, if you are basing it off of DPS, you have to account for people missing. It's a strafe shooter, missing happens, and shield regen is quite strong. Caution is advised. I would imagine a thershold of 250DPS would be absurd. Ripley: "I sexually identify as a cappuccino machine." Cat: "That's my fetish" Ripley: Steams milk seductively
Cat Merc Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 16259	Posted - 2015.04.29 08:36:00 - [4] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Actually I think making it be a function of the shield regen rate would likely be the best choice. It discourages brick tanking and also makes sense that the regen threshold be tied to the regen rate. It would also make the threshold far more prevalent on Caldari and Minmatar suits due to higher shield regen rates, and less prevalent on Gallente and Amarr. As for actual numbers, well its too late for that. I'll have to sleep on it and think about it when I'm more awake. I like that. Ripley: "I sexually identify as a cappuccino machine." Cat: "That's my fetish" Ripley: Steams milk seductively
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 4532	Posted - 2015.04.29 08:41:00 - [5] - Quote 12 Shifted in time, your tomorrow, my today.
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood Rise Of Legion. 389	Posted - 2015.04.29 10:30:00 - [6] - Quote I always say simply 15-25% sHP/s. Like the most you can cancel at 25% is if you go to 100+ sHP/s. That cancels smgs sadly... But lol that eHP will be super low. Also, the DPS will cut the shields pretty quickly anyways. Or.... You could just energize everything... But that's some seriously low eHP, and most likely you'll have shields exhausted before recharge. Made a high recharge ck.0 455 sHP (two complex extend) 105 sHP/s (two complex energizer, one enhanced) 26.25 sDamage threshold. (25%) Could be lower than 25% but, it's just a starting point for my idea The ADS tourney! Join today!
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9838	Posted - 2015.04.29 10:32:00 - [7] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: First, current coding has only a damage per shot thershold available, not DPS. Second, if you are basing it off of DPS, you have to account for people missing. It's a strafe shooter, missing happens, and shield regen is quite strong. Caution is advised. I would imagine a thershold of 250DPS would be absurd. Not so literal as straight DPS - just a round-abouts area of that damage range. Problem with basing it off damage alone though is that certain weapons get exempted because of RoF. 200 DPS on a basic assault rifle is like 15 damage per round, which is fine when you consider the Assault Rifle, doing that damage, would have to be 65m away.... but then you look over at the Assault Combat Rifle which does 16.87 damage (to shields) at it's optimal and suddenly it looks a lot less appealing. ACR would be completely ineffective at breaking the damage threshold at 65m which, I suppose is sort of the 'butter zone' by sheer coincidence. Albeit, that's a problem unique to projectile weapons because of their low shield damage so I suppose it works out. The main outlier I see here is that even at a 12 damage threshold the SMG gets gimped against shields pretty hardcore. 35m out (66% efficiency) and the SMG can't break the shield damage threshold, which pales in comparison to the Magsec SMG which extends out to 61m before it can't break the threshold. So I guess that's a -really- good buff for the Magsec SMG by consequence? You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
Cat Merc Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 16259	Posted - 2015.04.29 12:53:00 - [8] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Cat Merc wrote: First, current coding has only a damage per shot thershold available, not DPS. Second, if you are basing it off of DPS, you have to account for people missing. It's a strafe shooter, missing happens, and shield regen is quite strong. Caution is advised. I would imagine a thershold of 250DPS would be absurd. Not so literal as straight DPS - just a round-abouts area of that damage range. Problem with basing it off damage alone though is that certain weapons get exempted because of RoF. 200 DPS on a basic assault rifle is like 15 damage per round, which is fine when you consider the Assault Rifle, doing that damage, would have to be 65m away.... but then you look over at the Assault Combat Rifle which does 16.87 damage (to shields) at it's optimal and suddenly it looks a lot less appealing. ACR would be completely ineffective at breaking the damage threshold at 65m which, I suppose is sort of the 'butter zone' by sheer coincidence. Albeit, that's a problem unique to projectile weapons because of their low shield damage so I suppose it works out. The main outlier I see here is that even at a 12 damage threshold the SMG gets gimped against shields pretty hardcore. 35m out (66% efficiency) and the SMG can't break the shield damage threshold, which pales in comparison to the Magsec SMG which extends out to 61m before it can't break the threshold. So I guess that's a -really- good buff for the Magsec SMG by consequence? It would certainly create a dynamic where projectile weaponry struggles in. On another note, Mass Driver can't even deal splash DPS, so that would make it completely ineffective against shields. Ripley: "I sexually identify as a cappuccino machine." Cat: "That's my fetish" Ripley: Steams milk seductively
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9846	Posted - 2015.04.29 13:11:00 - [9] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Cat Merc wrote: First, current coding has only a damage per shot thershold available, not DPS. Second, if you are basing it off of DPS, you have to account for people missing. It's a strafe shooter, missing happens, and shield regen is quite strong. Caution is advised. I would imagine a thershold of 250DPS would be absurd. Not so literal as straight DPS - just a round-abouts area of that damage range. Problem with basing it off damage alone though is that certain weapons get exempted because of RoF. 200 DPS on a basic assault rifle is like 15 damage per round, which is fine when you consider the Assault Rifle, doing that damage, would have to be 65m away.... but then you look over at the Assault Combat Rifle which does 16.87 damage (to shields) at it's optimal and suddenly it looks a lot less appealing. ACR would be completely ineffective at breaking the damage threshold at 65m which, I suppose is sort of the 'butter zone' by sheer coincidence. Albeit, that's a problem unique to projectile weapons because of their low shield damage so I suppose it works out. The main outlier I see here is that even at a 12 damage threshold the SMG gets gimped against shields pretty hardcore. 35m out (66% efficiency) and the SMG can't break the shield damage threshold, which pales in comparison to the Magsec SMG which extends out to 61m before it can't break the threshold. So I guess that's a -really- good buff for the Magsec SMG by consequence? It would certainly create a dynamic where projectile weaponry struggles in. On another note, Mass Driver can't even deal splash DPS, so that would make it completely ineffective against shields. I just threw out DPS for an example of the bullet point which was 'what the minimum damage threshold' should be. I didn't mean to insinuate that DPS was the only option. You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1012	Posted - 2015.04.29 13:12:00 - [10] - Quote shield damage threshhold is in the game already. its value is set to zero currently. all it does is determine how much damage is rquired to stop your shields from regenerating. setting the value equal to the lowest damage per shot by a weapon (ei. smg or hmg) at its OPTIMAL range would be a good start. what it means is that for most weapons, firing outside of your optimal range will mean you wont be able to break shield regen. of course raising the threshold would give you shield regen aginst some weapons even while in optimal range. a value equal to an AR would mean combat rifles would not be able to stop your shield regen even while at their optimal ranges. is that desired? idk another question is can the threshhold be set for each race differently? so caldari would have the best threshold, abd the other races would would iether have lower thresholds, or none at all.

Cat Merc Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 16260	Posted - 2015.04.29 13:17:00 - [11] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Cat Merc wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Cat Merc wrote: First, current coding has only a damage per shot thershold available, not DPS. Second, if you are basing it off of DPS, you have to account for people missing. It's a strafe shooter, missing happens, and shield regen is quite strong. Caution is advised. I would imagine a thershold of 250DPS would be absurd. Not so literal as straight DPS - just a round-abouts area of that damage range. Problem with basing it off damage alone though is that certain weapons get exempted because of RoF. 200 DPS on a basic assault rifle is like 15 damage per round, which is fine when you consider the Assault Rifle, doing that damage, would have to be 65m away.... but then you look over at the Assault Combat Rifle which does 16.87 damage (to shields) at it's optimal and suddenly it looks a lot less appealing. ACR would be completely ineffective at breaking the damage threshold at 65m which, I suppose is sort of the 'butter zone' by sheer coincidence. Albeit, that's a problem unique to projectile weapons because of their low shield damage so I suppose it works out. The main outlier I see here is that even at a 12 damage threshold the SMG gets gimped against shields pretty hardcore. 35m out (66% efficiency) and the SMG can't break the shield damage threshold, which pales in comparison to the Magsec SMG which extends out to 61m before it can't break the threshold. So I guess that's a -really- good buff for the Magsec SMG by consequence? It would certainly create a dynamic where projectile weaponry struggles in. On another note, Mass Driver can't even deal splash DPS, so that would make it completely ineffective against shields. I just threw out DPS for an example of the bullet point which was 'what the minimum damage threshold' should be. I didn't mean to insinuate that DPS was the only option. Ah, I see. Ripley: "I sexually identify as a cappuccino machine." Cat: "That's my fetish" Ripley: Steams milk seductively
Cat Merc Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 16260	Posted - 2015.04.29 13:18:00 - [12] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: shield damage threshhold is in the game already. its value is set to zero currently. all it does is determine how much damage is rquired to stop your shields from regenerating. setting the value equal to the lowest damage per shot by a weapon (ei. smg or hmg) at its OPTIMAL range would be a good start. what it means is that for most weapons, firing outside of your optimal range will mean you wont be able to break shield regen. of course raising the threshold would give you shield regen aginst some weapons even while in optimal range. a value equal to an AR would mean combat rifles would not be able to stop your shield regen even while at their optimal ranges. is that desired? idk another question is can the threshhold be set for each race differently? so caldari would have the best threshold, abd the other races would would iether have lower thresholds, or none at all. All weapons should be able to stop shield regen up to their effective range. If a weapon can't stop shield regen, it's not effective. And yes, it can be set per race. It's a setting just like any other setting on a suit. Same as HP or speed. Ripley: "I sexually identify as a cappuccino machine." Cat: "That's my fetish" Ripley: Steams milk seductively
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6104	Posted - 2015.04.29 18:29:00 - [13] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: shield damage threshhold is in the game already. its value is set to zero currently. all it does is determine how much damage is rquired to stop your shields from regenerating. setting the value equal to the lowest damage per shot by a weapon (ei. smg or hmg) at its OPTIMAL range would be a good start. what it means is that for most weapons, firing outside of your optimal range will mean you wont be able to break shield regen. of course raising the threshold would give you shield regen aginst some weapons even while in optimal range. a value equal to an AR would mean combat rifles would not be able to stop your shield regen even while at their optimal ranges. is that desired? idk another question is can the threshhold be set for each race differently? so caldari would have the best threshold, abd the other races would would iether have lower thresholds, or none at all. Well you also run into an issue where lower damage per shot weapons would have a more difficult time stopping regen if threshold is on a per bullet. And it should never be "Oh well, the system should be only really effective against this race of weapon". The reason it works with vehicles is because damage from smallarms is greatly reduced so the difference in damage per bullet is effectively less pronounced. Additionally DPS is a dangerous approach to, because as Cat pointed out, that assumes optimal conditions. A quick wiggle wiggle shield suit could effectively be regenerating constantly because the incoming DPS is never sustainable high enough to break regen. Additionally some lower DPS weapons like Mass Driver would likely be unable to break shield regen, even with perfect accuracy. You might have the approach it more from a "the suit can take an amount of damage equal to f(shield_regen_rate) with a period of time equal to f(shield_recharge_delay) to break shield regen" which is more work and more core-gameplay, so likely not going to happen. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 358	Posted - 2015.04.29 20:44:00 - [14] - Quote Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1012	Posted - 2015.04.29 20:50:00 - [15] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: shield damage threshhold is in the game already. its value is set to zero currently. all it does is determine how much damage is rquired to stop your shields from regenerating. setting the value equal to the lowest damage per shot by a weapon (ei. smg or hmg) at its OPTIMAL range would be a good start. what it means is that for most weapons, firing outside of your optimal range will mean you wont be able to break shield regen. of course raising the threshold would give you shield regen aginst some weapons even while in optimal range. a value equal to an AR would mean combat rifles would not be able to stop your shield regen even while at their optimal ranges. is that desired? idk another question is can the threshhold be set for each race differently? so caldari would have the best threshold, abd the other races would would iether have lower thresholds, or none at all. Well you also run into an issue where lower damage per shot weapons would have a more difficult time stopping regen if threshold is on a per bullet. And it should never be "Oh well, the system should be only really effective against this race of weapon". The reason it works with vehicles is because damage from smallarms is greatly reduced so the difference in damage per bullet is effectively less pronounced. Additionally DPS is a dangerous approach to, because as Cat pointed out, that assumes optimal conditions. A quick wiggle wiggle shield suit could effectively be regenerating constantly because the incoming DPS is never sustainable high enough to break regen. Additionally some lower DPS weapons like Mass Driver would likely be unable to break shield regen, even with perfect accuracy. You might have the approach it more from a "the suit can take an amount of damage equal to f(shield_regen_rate) with a period of time equal to f(shield_recharge_delay) to break shield regen" which is more work and more core-code, so likely not going to happen. What I meant is that if a smg is 20 damage per shot for example, then you set the threshold to 20 or 19 depending on how it actually works. So the only way to break shield regen is to: Not ******* snipe with a smg from 100m away. Sorry lol. But yea, really I'm looking to give caldari they place on the fields as the long range fighters. Between weapon falloff and a damage threshold, caldari wouldn't have to hug crates so much. It helps caldari more since their weapons have long optimal ranges and higher shield regen. But it doesn't give them any advantages in cqc, which is where they should be weaker Breaking shield regen should be simple: get closer.
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1012	Posted - 2015.04.29 20:51:00 - [16] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. The shield damage threshold come from following eve. Armor doesn't have one
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6104	Posted - 2015.04.29 21:20:00 - [17] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: What I meant is that if a smg is 20 damage per shot for example, then you set the threshold to 20 or 19 depending on how it actually works. So the only way to break shield regen is to: Not ***** snipe with a smg from 100m away. Sorry lol. But yea, really I'm looking to give caldari they place on the fields as the long range fighters. Between weapon falloff and a damage threshold, caldari wouldn't have to hug crates so much. It helps caldari more since their weapons have long optimal ranges and higher shield regen. But it doesn't give them any advantages in cqc, which is where they should be weaker Breaking shield regen should be simple: get closer. Well the point I'm making is that as an example, say damage per shot to break regen is 20. Assault Combat Rifle does 22 per shot Assault Rail Rifle does 42 per shot The combat rifle can barely go over its Optimal range before it stops being able to break regen. However the ARR can go well beyond its optimal to skill meet the minimum 20 damage per shot. So you end up with the ACR losing its ability to break shield regen just 2 meters past its optimal range (~64m) whereas the ARR loses its ability to break shield regen at 20 meters past its optimal (~92). These are of course the more extreme cases, but because bullet damage varies so much, the higher the damage per bullet the more forgiving the system is, because high bullet damage allows for more falloff before it falls below the minimum threshold to break regen. If all weapons had the same bullet damage this would totally work, but sadly they do not. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6104	Posted - 2015.04.29 21:23:00 - [18] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. Armor already has a damage threshold of infinity, since it repairs while taking damage already, regardless of incoming DPS. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
Kaeru Nayiri Ready to Play 1056	Posted - 2015.04.29 21:35:00 - [19] - Quote Here's an outside-the-box idea for you guys: Efficiency rating. If the efficiency rating is below a certain predetermined amount, regardless of what damage is dealt, it will not stop shields from regening. I'm thinking the 10% area is perfect. Know what cannot be known.
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9858	Posted - 2015.04.29 21:59:00 - [20] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. Not really. The entire point here is that Armor Regens passively but cannot attain the same level of regen quantity that shields have - whereas shields are basically screwed if even 1 damage is inflicted on them because they have to wait the full duration for their shield recharge delay. We could say that the -amount- of damage inflicted, based on a percentage of total HP, dynamically changes the shield recharge delay with smaller damage amounts having shorter down-times between recharging but optimally the best thing to do is to have uninterrupted shield recharge from small amounts of damage to prevent 'whittling' effects; or some dummy with a short range weapon doing miniscule amounts of damage and still causing shields to go down.. DeathwindRising wrote: What I meant is that if a smg is 20 damage per shot for example, then you set the threshold to 20 or 19 depending on how it actually works. So the only way to break shield regen is to: Not ***** snipe with a smg from 100m away. Sorry lol. But yea, really I'm looking to give caldari they place on the fields as the long range fighters. Between weapon falloff and a damage threshold, caldari wouldn't have to hug crates so much. It helps caldari more since their weapons have long optimal ranges and higher shield regen. But it doesn't give them any advantages in cqc, which is where they should be weaker Breaking shield regen should be simple: get closer. The problem with this logic is that you need to take a look at Protofits.com before making assumptions, lol. With a damage threshold of 20, the SMG is gimped even at it's optimal range of 25m because a standard SMG only does 17.85 damage to shields. That's a hell of a lot different than shooting an SMG at 100m. Even with a damage threshold of 12 though (proposed earlier) the SMG gets boned at 35m, which is 70% efficiency. No matter how you look at it, unless the damage threshold is dynamic to the weapon, the SMG is going to get screwed over. At 50% efficiency (40m) the SMG is doing just 8.7 damage per shot - which means if we bring the damage threshold that low that it effectively is meaningless to every other weapon in the game just because of how high their damage per shot is (look at the TAR, for instance). Kaeru Nayiri wrote:** Here's an outside-the-box idea for you guys: Efficiency rating. If the efficiency rating is below a certain predetermined amount, regardless of what damage is dealt, it will not stop shields from regening. I'm thinking the 10% area is perfect. It sounds good on paper but then you have to remember that the system would have to make checks between the offending player and the defending player to assume what the efficiency rating is between the two, based on what weapon it is, which will undoubtedly add to hit detection issues if it's too complex an algorithm. And this isn't even touching on the Laser Rifle which we also need to consider because of it's unique range mechanics. You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go

Kaeru Nayiri Ready to Play 1058	Posted - 2015.04.29 22:06:00 - [21] - Quote I certainly cannot claim to know how the game is coded, however I would like to point out that the check of efficiency rating between attacker and defender is already done after collision, and used for damage application. It would be a matter of using that % value to determine whether the hit deserves to shut off shield regen or not. What I mean is that there is a very good chance that it won't add extra load, only ccp can answer for certain. Know what cannot be known.
Thokk Nightshade Montana Militia 808	Posted - 2015.04.30 01:01:00 - [22] - Quote Nice and simple. Yes. I am a Cal player so I'll use the Calmando as the example. The Calmando has an 8 SECOND regen delay. 1 bullet = 8 seconds? No thank you. I should need to take more damage if I am losing my primary lifegiver for that extended time. It can literally become death by 1000 cuts. Every single shot resets, just keep on plinking and it will eventually whittle to nothing. Thokk Kill. Thokk Crush. Thokk Smash.
Shamarskii Simon The Hundred Acre Hood Rise Of Legion. 390	Posted - 2015.04.30 02:35:00 - [23] - Quote Think about it guys... If it SMG doesn't break recharge in 1 shot, look at it's dps... It's definitely going to cut into sHP considerably. And i still believe it should be a percentage of sHP/s. The ADS tourney! Join today!
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1013	Posted - 2015.04.30 03:15:00 - [24] - Quote Addressing the point of low damage per shot weapons not breaking shield regen: A threshold of 20 was simply a number I pulled out of my head. It's more involved than I made it seem. Two thing that effect damage I didn't mention before are damage profiles, and damage mods. If the lowest damage per shot is a smg at 17 damage per shot then I'd say make the threshold about that. But then you factor in projectile damage profile reducing the damage to shields by 15%. So it still wouldn't break shield regen. But then we must also consider that a smg a cqc weapon, and also anti armor. Is it really unacceptable for it to struggle with breaking shield regen? What about using damage mods to help break shield regen?
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1013	Posted - 2015.04.30 03:29:00 - [25] - Quote Another idea would be to allow zero shield delay while shields are above a certain percent of total shields. For example, if you have 100 hp of shields, then as long as your shields don't fall below 50 hp you would have zero shield delay. But once your shields fall under that you start getting shield delays. I kinda don't like this way as much though. Or we can combine both ideas into one... If shield hp is 50% or higher of total shield hp, then shields regen constantly. If shields hp is below 50%, then shield regen stops. We would still use shield delays like we do currently but they would only apply when shields fall below 50%. This means high alpha weapons could be used to break regen quickly. An smg would struggle but would eventually break shield regen as it can use it's dps to out damage the shield regen, get shields below 50% and then finish off the target.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6114	Posted - 2015.04.30 03:53:00 - [26] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Addressing the point of low damage per shot weapons not breaking shield regen: A threshold of 20 was simply a number I pulled out of my head. It's more involved than I made it seem. Two thing that effect damage I didn't mention before are damage profiles, and damage mods. If the lowest damage per shot is a smg at 17 damage per shot then I'd say make the threshold about that. But then you factor in projectile damage profile reducing the damage to shields by 15%. So it still wouldn't break shield regen. But then we must also consider that a smg a cqc weapon, and also anti armor. Is it really unacceptable for it to struggle with breaking shield regen? What about using damage mods to help break shield regen? You're still going to run into issues where weapons with more damage per bullet effectively have a much larger range when it comes to breaking shield regen because they can afford more falloff and subsiquently more damage lost per shot, than a smaller damage round. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
Imp Smash Molon Labe. RUST415 822	Posted - 2015.04.30 04:02:00 - [27] - Quote Is this technically possible though? As far as I know, you can only base shield regen on a per bullet basis. Some guns do damage by volume of fire and not damage per shot. Those weapons wouldn't be able to break shield regen at all...So you would have to be able to make it calculate DPS. Assuming CCP could even do that (and I would assume that would be a HARD thing to code) wouldn't that tax system resources significantly? I would assume it is nigh impossible to code given the code they already have... Although the issue about what weapons have the range to break shield regen (outside of optimal) will have to be factored. As well as proficiencies to shield breaking weapons. It sounds like a nightmare. Seems to me if you want to balance shields and armor without changing the roles and and strengths/weaknesses you would just need to remove the regen delay penalty from Extenders and put in support tools like armor has. Then shields will still be better at what they were designed and not as good at what armor was designed for while not being inferior to armor.
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 363	Posted - 2015.04.30 05:11:00 - [28] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. The shield damage threshold come from following eve. Armor doesn't have one Please cite the source, I am pretty sure I would have noticed this sometime over the last 4-5 years. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 363	Posted - 2015.04.30 05:19:00 - [29] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. Armor already has a damage threshold of infinity, since it repairs while taking damage already, regardless of incoming DPS. I think everyone who responded missed the point I was trying to make. Shields also repair whether repaired or not, given built in shield recharge. Given how quickly shields regen in comparison to armor this seems kind of unfair, favoring even one race over another for damage thresholds, not to mention the fact that even shield tankers have armor, you all (for damage threshold changes) seem to think that there is something broken. I do not believe this is the case for the above stated reasons. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
Imp Smash Molon Labe. RUST415 822	Posted - 2015.04.30 07:14:00 - [30] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. Armor already has a damage threshold of infinity, since it repairs while taking damage already, regardless of incoming DPS. I think everyone who responded missed the point I was trying to make. Shields also repair whether repaired or not, given built in shield recharge. Given how quickly shields regen in comparison to armor this seems kind of unfair, favoring even one race over another for damage thresholds, not to mention the fact that even shield tankers have armor, you all (for damage threshold changes) seem to think that there is something broken. I do not believe this is the case for the above stated reasons. I see what point you are trying to make. It's just completely wrong. *I've highlighted the point that completely refutes the point you were trying to make* but you are seeming to ignore. Jecture, do you think that shields are the equal of armor? What is your opinion on the balance currently?

DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1013	Posted - 2015.04.30 09:16:00 - [31] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: Addressing the point of low damage per shot weapons not breaking shield regen: A threshold of 20 was simply a number I pulled out of my head. It's more involved than I made it seem. Two thing that effect damage I didn't mention before are damage profiles, and damage mods. If the lowest damage per shot is a smg at 17 damage per shot then I'd say make the threshold about that. But then you factor in projectile damage profile reducing the damage to shields by 15%. So it still wouldn't break shield regen. But then we must also consider that a smg a cqc weapon, and also anti armor. Is it really unacceptable for it to struggle with breaking shield regen? What about using damage mods to help break shield regen? You're still going to run into issues where weapons with more damage per bullet effectively have a much larger range when it comes to breaking shield regen because they can afford more falloff and subsiquently more damage lost per shot, than a smaller damage round. Std weapons vs proto? Yes.
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 364	Posted - 2015.04.30 12:45:00 - [32] - Quote Imp Smash wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. Armor already has a damage threshold of infinity, since it repairs while taking damage already, regardless of incoming DPS. I think everyone who responded missed the point I was trying to make. Shields also repair whether repaired or not, given built in shield recharge. Given how quickly shields regen in comparison to armor this seems kind of unfair, favoring even one race over another for damage thresholds, not to mention the fact that even shield tankers have armor, you all (for damage threshold changes) seem to think that there is something broken. I do not believe this is the case for the above stated reasons. I see what point you are trying to make. It's just completely wrong. *I've highlighted the point that completely refutes the point you were trying to make* but you are seeming to ignore. Jecture, do you think that shields are the equal of armor? What is your opinion on the balance currently? Well considering I have been running my Cal Assault a great deal lately, I would have to say they are still UP from armor. This leaves me with the feeling that you guys are pushing for something not really needed. The problem with that point is highlighted above as well. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 364	Posted - 2015.04.30 13:02:00 - [33] - Quote My favorite shield tanking fit is slightly different: Dragonfly Assault Krins Damage Application Stick x3 Toxin AR Toxin SMG Militia Locus Grenade [BPO] Militia Uplink [BPO] Militia Armor Repairer [BPO] This suit actually has survived longer on some maps than my All Pro Fat Suit just because it (the fitting described) has a shield tank. My pro fat suit is a Turbo Turtle in case anyone is interested. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9868	Posted - 2015.04.30 14:11:00 - [34] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Imp Smash wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. Armor already has a damage threshold of infinity, since it repairs while taking damage already, regardless of incoming DPS. I think everyone who responded missed the point I was trying to make. Shields also repair whether repaired or not, given built in shield recharge. Given how quickly shields regen in comparison to armor this seems kind of unfair, favoring even one race over another for damage thresholds, not to mention the fact that even shield tankers have armor, you all (for damage threshold changes) seem to think that there is something broken. I do not believe this is the case for the above stated reasons. I see what point you are trying to make. It's just completely wrong. *I've highlighted the point that completely refutes the point you were trying to make* but you are seeming to ignore. Jecture, do you think that shields are the equal of armor? What is your opinion on the balance currently? Well considering I have been running my Cal Assault a great deal lately, I would have to say they are still UP from armor. This leaves me with the feeling that you guys are pushing for something not really needed. The problem with that point is highlighted above as well. For a loadout that works very well. Std Cal Assault: Energizer, Recharger, Damage mod, Any Pea shooter, Nades for spam, Uplink, Armor repairer. Basic rules of engagement state that finding cover from enemy bullets is preferable to standing in front of them. Finding cover allows shields to regenerate. Play to cover and exploit the armor tanker's weakness by regenerating all your health before he can find you and continue nibbling off his giblets until they are all gone. Bearing in mind that there is a problem with this logic in that shield extenders increase shield recharge delay, which means that unless you fit a hefty amount of shield regulators the time you'll need to be in cover isn't practical. Consider this situation: A Cal Assault using a Rail Rifle against a Gallente Assault with an Assault Rifle. They start firing at one another and at 70m or so the Rail Rifle is doing it's job at doing damage - but the problem is that the entire time the Gallente Assault is recovering from at least some of the damage. Whereas, the Caldari Assault is incapable of recovering from the damage, so as long as the Gallente Assault stays mobile, diving in and out of cover to abuse the Rail Rifle's charge-up time, and fires he can at least drop the Cal Assault's shields enough that he'll be vulnerable at close range where his playstyle excels. The Cal Assault dives into cover to regain some shields, but because he has an 8-10 second shield recharge delay, the Gallente Assault can use this opportunity to rush him. Sprinting at 7m/s or so, he can cover anywhere from 56-70 meters, putting him -WELL- within optimal range of his Assault Rifle. That whole time he's been regenerating armor and has a substantial advantage in this fight. Whereas, if we had damage threshold, perhaps the Caldari Assault wouldn't have had to choose between dying and diving into cover. Perhaps, at that range, the Gallente Assault can't break his damage threshold and can't advance because he'll lose too much HP in the process. Just a theory. You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 365	Posted - 2015.04.30 14:30:00 - [35] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Bearing in mind that there is a problem with this logic in that shield extenders increase shield recharge delay, which means that unless you fit a hefty amount of shield regulators the time you'll need to be in cover isn't practical. Consider this situation: A Cal Assault using a Rail Rifle against a Gallente Assault with an Assault Rifle. They start firing at one another and at 70m or so the Rail Rifle is doing it's job at doing damage - but the problem is that the entire time the Gallente Assault is recovering from at least some of the damage. Whereas, the Caldari Assault is incapable of recovering from the damage, so as long as the Gallente Assault stays mobile, diving in and out of cover to abuse the Rail Rifle's charge-up time, and fires he can at least drop the Cal Assault's shields enough that he'll be vulnerable at close range where his playstyle excels. The Cal Assault dives into cover to regain some shields, but because he has an 8-10 second shield recharge delay, the Gallente Assault can use this opportunity to rush him. Sprinting at 7m/s or so, he can cover anywhere from 56-70 meters, putting him -WELL- within optimal range of his Assault Rifle. That whole time he's been regenerating armor and has a substantial advantage in this fight. Whereas, if we had damage threshold, perhaps the Caldari Assault wouldn't have had to choose between dying and diving into cover. Perhaps, at that range, the Gallente Assault can't break his damage threshold and can't advance because he'll lose too much HP in the process. Just a theory. Terrible example, mostly due to your use of a terribad AR. Secondly RR are still op vs armor/shield so..,.dive for cover and git gud. Here's a good example: Dragonfly Assault Tactical Sniper walks up to Pro Gal Logi Sniper and point blank shoots him 2x for a kill...Tru story. The point is that we're all diving for cover, no one is immune to the damage or better able to tank, its damaged or not damaged thats all. I understand your point but fail to accept that it is indeed an issue due to running both shield tanked as well as armor tanked suits. My example happened in a match I fought not 5 minutes ago. I was literally clubbing the other sniper with my tip of my rifle. No I did not have an armor plate fit. The reality of the game is that there are few one v one engagements, most are tank v infantry or ASCRs (multiple) vs one target. This is blobby warfare Aeon, not the lone gunman vs the lone gunman. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6118	Posted - 2015.04.30 15:00:00 - [36] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Std weapons vs proto? Yes. EDIT: im not sure which weapons you have issue with. smg vs breach smg for example? std smg vs proto smg? smg vs rail rifle? except for weapon tiers, all weapons and their variants have their own weapon optimal ranges anyways. an AR wouldnt break the shields of some using an RR +70m away because that outside the AR's range, but maybe not for the TAC AR. im not sure which weapons you think would have superior range for breaking shield regen compared to other weapon of similar type besides std vs adv vs proto weapons of the same type. I wrote a pretty lengthy explanation earlier in the thread outlining my concerns. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9869	Posted - 2015.04.30 15:50:00 - [37] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Bearing in mind that there is a problem with this logic in that shield extenders increase shield recharge delay, which means that unless you fit a hefty amount of shield regulators the time you'll need to be in cover isn't practical. Consider this situation: A Cal Assault using a Rail Rifle against a Gallente Assault with an Assault Rifle. They start firing at one another and at 70m or so the Rail Rifle is doing it's job at doing damage - but the problem is that the entire time the Gallente Assault is recovering from at least some of the damage. Whereas, the Caldari Assault is incapable of recovering from the damage, so as long as the Gallente Assault stays mobile, diving in and out of cover to abuse the Rail Rifle's charge-up time, and fires he can at least drop the Cal Assault's shields enough that he'll be vulnerable at close range where his playstyle excels. The Cal Assault dives into cover to regain some shields, but because he has an 8-10 second shield recharge delay, the Gallente Assault can use this opportunity to rush him. Sprinting at 7m/s or so, he can cover anywhere from 56-70 meters, putting him -WELL- within optimal range of his Assault Rifle. That whole time he's been regenerating armor and has a substantial advantage in this fight. Whereas, if we had damage threshold, perhaps the Caldari Assault wouldn't have had to choose between dying and diving into cover. Perhaps, at that range, the Gallente Assault can't break his damage threshold and can't advance because he'll lose too much HP in the process. Just a theory. Terrible example, mostly due to your use of a terribad AR. Secondly RR are still op vs armor/shield so..,.dive for cover and git gud. Here's a good example: Dragonfly Assault Tactical Sniper walks up to Pro Gal Logi Sniper and point blank shoots him 2x for a kill...Tru story. The point is that we're all diving for cover, no one is immune to the damage or better able to tank, its damaged or not damaged thats all. I understand your point but fail to accept that it is indeed an issue due to running both shield tanked as well as armor tanked suits. My example happened in a match I fought not 5 minutes ago. I was literally clubbing the other sniper with my tip of my rifle. No I did not have an armor plate fit. The reality of the game is that there are few one v one engagements, most are tank v infantry or ASCRs (multiple) vs one target. This is blobby warfare Aeon, not the lone gunman vs the lone gunman. It's all good, that was a terrible enough rebuttal. You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 365	Posted - 2015.04.30 16:45:00 - [38] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Bearing in mind that there is a problem with this logic in that shield extenders increase shield recharge delay, which means that unless you fit a hefty amount of shield regulators the time you'll need to be in cover isn't practical. Consider this situation: A Cal Assault using a Rail Rifle against a Gallente Assault with an Assault Rifle. They start firing at one another and at 70m or so the Rail Rifle is doing it's job at doing damage - but the problem is that the entire time the Gallente Assault is recovering from at least some of the damage. Whereas, the Caldari Assault is incapable of recovering from the damage, so as long as the Gallente Assault stays mobile, diving in and out of cover to abuse the Rail Rifle's charge-up time, and fires he can at least drop the Cal Assault's shields enough that he'll be vulnerable at close range where his playstyle excels. The Cal Assault dives into cover to regain some shields, but because he has an 8-10 second shield recharge delay, the Gallente Assault can use this opportunity to rush him. Sprinting at 7m/s or so, he can cover anywhere from 56-70 meters, putting him -WELL- within optimal range of his Assault Rifle. That whole time he's been regenerating armor and has a substantial advantage in this fight. Whereas, if we had damage threshold, perhaps the Caldari Assault wouldn't have had to choose between dying and diving into cover. Perhaps, at that range, the Gallente Assault can't break his damage threshold and can't advance because he'll lose too much HP in the process. Just a theory. Terrible example, mostly due to your use of a terribad AR. Secondly RR are still op vs armor/shield so..,.dive for cover and git gud. Here's a good example: Dragonfly Assault Tactical Sniper walks up to Pro Gal Logi Sniper and point blank shoots him 2x for a kill...Tru story. The point is that we're all diving for cover, no one is immune to the damage or better able to tank, its damaged or not damaged thats all. I understand your point but fail to accept that it is indeed an issue due to running both shield tanked as well as armor tanked suits. My example happened in a match I fought not 5 minutes ago. I was literally clubbing the other sniper with my tip of my rifle. No I did not have an armor plate fit. The reality of the game is that there are few one v one engagements, most are tank v infantry or ASCRs (multiple) vs one target. This is blobby warfare Aeon, not the lone gunman vs the lone gunman. It's all good, that was a terrible enough rebuttal. You're right, armor regenerates (if repped) and shields already do so if not taking fire. All in all though I think if we had more cover on maps in random places so people don't need to dive for cover but could rather step into it, you would see a marked difference in the game. To use something from GRP, cover stops bullets, shooting from cover stops some bullets and shooting at the targets instead of beside them works better. The reason I bring this up is that a while back (CB) someone suggested being able to shoot from cover, others have suggested being able to go prone, all of these things seem like good parts of gunplay but are absent from DUST, and would make marked improvements in how players move and can avoid getting OHKed as regularly (maybe) as they do now. It also may improve tactics on maps with a good deal of open space. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1014	Posted - 2015.05.01 02:43:00 - [39] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. The shield damage threshold come from following eve. Armor doesn't have one Please cite the source, I am pretty sure I would have noticed this sometime over the last 4-5 years. https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Passive_shield_tanking when i said damage threshold i was loosely referring to shield peak regen rate. which of course is the amount of incoming dps you can take. every ship in eve has a native peak regen value. armor does not
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1014	Posted - 2015.05.01 02:46:00 - [40] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: Std weapons vs proto? Yes. EDIT: im not sure which weapons you have issue with. smg vs breach smg for example? std smg vs proto smg? smg vs rail rifle? except for weapon tiers, all weapons and their variants have their own weapon optimal ranges anyways. an AR wouldnt break the shields of some using an RR +70m away because that outside the AR's range, but maybe not for the TAC AR. im not sure which weapons you think would have superior range for breaking shield regen compared to other weapon of similar type besides std vs adv vs proto weapons of the same type. I wrote a pretty lengthy explanation earlier in the thread outlining my concerns. i read it again and its worse than you think because you didnt factor in damage profile vs shields. youre range would be even less. but im still asking why youre trying to fight a ARR at long range with a short range weapon? you compared a shorter range weapon to a long range weapon and then complained when the ACR had less effective range for breaking shield regen. if it were a real siuation id be using the ACR on mim assault where i could simply run up to you if i could and kill you. even with no damage threshold i would sit at range and pepper you to death. there are other mechanics too that work here. you can not look at a damage threshold out of context. the point of a damage threshold it to provide shield tankers with the ability to hold their own on open ground against remote rep armor tankers. that the only use i'd have for it besides blocking idiots 200m away pinging you with smg. so perhaps theres something better than an absolute avalue for damage threshhold

DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 365	Posted - 2015.05.01 03:29:00 - [41] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. The shield damage threshold come from following eve. Armor doesn't have one Please cite the source, I am pretty sure I would have noticed this sometime over the last 4-5 years. https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Passive_shield_tanking when i said damage threshold i was loosely referring to shield peak regen rate. which of course is the amount of incoming dps you can take. every ship in eve has a native peak regen value. armor does not Why not remove the ping to stop shield regen then and modify shield recharge rates to a much much lower value. This would also make sense because this would not make shields OP, unfortunately what has been proposed in here would. It would mean there would need to be more DPS incoming than X amount to affect shields when in actuality, what you describe as being from Eve, is Passive Regen mitigating a portion of incoming DPS. The DPS still affects the shield level, but is regenerated passively over the time needed to regenerate it rather than being ignored. There is absolutely no reason a player should be able to stand in a storm of bullets on open ground and survive. Logi Reps being the exception, and they work on shield tankers too btw, so long as the rep rate is high enough to mitigate incoming DPS. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 6130	Posted - 2015.05.01 07:42:00 - [42] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: i read it again and its worse than you think because you didnt factor in damage profile vs shields. youre range would be even less. but im still asking why youre trying to fight a ARR at long range with a short range weapon? you compared a shorter range weapon to a long range weapon and then complained when the ACR had less effective range for breaking shield regen. if it were a real siuation id be using the ACR on mim assault where i could simply run up to you if i could and kill you. even with no damage threshold i would sit at range and pepper you to death. there are other mechanics too that work here. you can not look at a damage threshold out of context. the point of a damage threshold it to provide shield tankers with the ability to hold their own on open ground against remote rep armor tankers. that the only use i'd have for it besides blocking idiots 200m away pinging you with smg. so perhaps theres something better than an absolute avalue for damage threshhold No, you're misunderstanding. I'm not talking about the ABSOLUTE range, I'm saying that the Rail Rifle breaks regen at 127% its optimal range, Combat Rifle breaks regen at only 103% of its optimal range. Im not contesting the natural range difference, I'm saying that the Rail Rifle is effective at breaking shields at a far greater percentage past its optimal range than the Combat Rifle is. I mean am I making any sense? Anyone else understand what I'm getting at? Honestly while not perfect, Ru's idea for efficiency is a cleaner solution since that's based more off of range rather than absolute bullet damage. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast & Blog www.biomassed.net
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9873	Posted - 2015.05.01 08:40:00 - [43] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Ok so shield damage threshold gets implemented, we putting an armor damage threshold on too? It only seems fair. The shield damage threshold come from following eve. Armor doesn't have one Please cite the source, I am pretty sure I would have noticed this sometime over the last 4-5 years. https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Passive_shield_tanking when i said damage threshold i was loosely referring to shield peak regen rate. which of course is the amount of incoming dps you can take. every ship in eve has a native peak regen value. armor does not Why not remove the ping to stop shield regen then and modify shield recharge rates to a much much lower value. This would also make sense because this would not make shields OP, unfortunately what has been proposed in here would. It would mean there would need to be more DPS incoming than X amount to affect shields when in actuality, what you describe as being from Eve, is Passive Regen mitigating a portion of incoming DPS. The DPS still affects the shield level, but is regenerated passively over the time needed to regenerate it rather than being ignored. There is absolutely no reason a player should be able to stand in a storm of bullets on open ground and survive. Logi Reps being the exception, and they work on shield tankers too btw, so long as the rep rate is high enough to mitigate incoming DPS. Sooooo basically make it like exactly like armor? That seems redundant and boring. It also completely invalidates things like shield regulators and Caldari Sentinel low recharge delay. And I still fail to see how this proposal would make shields OP besides this hilarious logic: "Terrible example, mostly due to your use of a terribad AR. Secondly RR are still op vs armor/shield so..,.dive for cover and git gud." "The reality of the game is that there are few one v one engagements, most are tank v infantry or ASCRs (multiple) vs one target. This is blobby warfare Aeon, not the lone gunman vs the lone gunman." Which, in that case, we might as well balance for 1v10 and call it a day - but that's not how this works. We balance this game in a way that it's possible to do the 1v1 fight and the blob warfare is a circumstance of heavily encouraged squad/team-play. Which isn't necessarily bad but it's a ****** justification for not making something better as a result. Adding more cover isn't an option because we -already- have framerate issues without. Adding in stuff like going prone or some 'shoot from cover' mechanic also isn't practical because of how dev intensive it'd be. And please provide legitimate arguments other than 'you used an AR in your example' and 'we shouldn't balance for 1v1'. You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1015	Posted - 2015.05.01 09:25:00 - [44] - Quote well you could do this.... change the shield delays to kick in after shield hp drops to a certain level. say maybe 50%? so shields constantly regen until they fall below 50% of total shield hp.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 8323	Posted - 2015.05.01 10:06:00 - [45] - Quote The hilarious thing you all forget is that damage mods negate the disadvantage of regen not breaking outside optimal. Skills also would affect this. Shield regen should break when the shields hace lost more than 20-25% capacity. There's never enough sh**posting going on, so let's add a few more teaspoons of the guy posting after me to the recipie!
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1015	Posted - 2015.05.01 15:37:00 - [46] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: The hilarious thing you all forget is that damage mods negate the disadvantage of regen not breaking outside optimal. Skills also would affect this. Shield regen should break when the shields hace lost more than 20-25% capacity. no i mentioned it before but they mostly ignored it. skills would only help anit shield weapons. go figure lol. so those guys have to drop their shield extenders for damage mods.... oh no, how horrible lol on the 25%... that sounds reasonable. you can add extenders to get a better buffer if needed too. on 526 shield hp, you can take ~131.5 shield damage before shield regen stops on 634 shield hp, it'd be ~158.5 on 707 shield hp, it's 176.75 before shields break.
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 365	Posted - 2015.05.01 16:01:00 - [47] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: And please provide legitimate arguments other than 'you used an AR in your example' and 'we shouldn't balance for 1v1'. If the reason is to make it "like eve" and you want the regen to continue while being pinged then yeah. Obviously I am not suggesting changing anything on the shields my response was in merely an illustration of how passive regen works in Eve not a description of how I want things to be. I personally don't like sniffing glue either though. No we shouldn't balance for 1v1, there are rare 1v1s in this game unless you go hide somewhere away from the objectives, then someone will find you. Oh but how about 5v5 lets balance for that or better yet 5v1. This game is more blobby than Eve and it makes no sense why you would want 5 ppl each getting tagged by one stray bullet from an smg at mid range to regenerate their shields as if it were nothing. Incoming DPS on a lone gunman, would obliterate him rather quickly with any rifles. How about we look at a case where a sniper is keeping your squad pinned down and while separately the incoming dps at long range from your rifles will likely not be enough to take him down through his shields with your proposal, 6 people shooting, at range, at him likely wouldn't either. You ask for arguments with 1v1? Player A is using an SMG Player B has an AR and the engagement is mid range at the edge of the SMG's engagement range. I think you know where I'm going with this but, Player A bullet hoses Player B, all shots land on target. Player B's shields don't dip at all. Player B line's up his shots, looks around for snipers then pulls the trigger sending a short burst into Player A's head. We all know who the winner in that engagement is. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9877	Posted - 2015.05.01 17:48:00 - [48] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: And please provide legitimate arguments other than 'you used an AR in your example' and 'we shouldn't balance for 1v1'. If the reason is to make it "like eve" and you want the regen to continue while being pinged then yeah. Obviously I am not suggesting changing anything on the shields my response was in merely an illustration of how passive regen works in Eve not a description of how I want things to be. I personally don't like sniffing glue either though. No we shouldn't balance for 1v1, there are rare 1v1s in this game unless you go hide somewhere away from the objectives, then someone will find you. Oh but how about 5v5 lets balance for that or better yet 5v1. This game is more blobby than Eve and it makes no sense why you would want 5 ppl each getting tagged by one stray bullet from an smg at mid range to regenerate their shields as if it were nothing. Incoming DPS on a lone gunman, would obliterate him rather quickly with any rifles. How about we look at a case where a sniper is keeping your squad pinned down and while separately the incoming dps at long range from your rifles will likely not be enough to take him down through his shields with your proposal, 6 people shooting, at range, at him likely wouldn't either. You ask for arguments with 1v1? Player A is using an SMG Player B has an AR and the engagement is mid range at the edge of the SMG's engagement range. I think you know where I'm going with this but, Player A bullet hoses Player B, all shots land on target. Player B's shields don't dip at all. Player B line's up his shots, looks around for snipers then pulls the trigger sending a short burst into Player A's head. We all know who the winner in that engagement is. I see no reason to change this, and btw you are asking them to bring back a CB feature that was tested and proved to be OP even with tuning. It was difficult to kill anyone using any sort of damage threshold, battles were lasting "too long" and there were not enough tears on the forums. You must have forgotten that I was around during Closed Beta too and there was a hell of a lot more to it than damage threshold (which I don't remember ever being a thing) what with hit detection issues and lack of aim assist. I never once said that this should be "like Eve" although now that you bring it up I will say that there are a few things that we can borrow from a - brace for it - successful game that's had twelve years of experience with these sort of things. You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
Vyuru Algintal Core Gallente Federation 172	Posted - 2015.05.01 18:42:00 - [49] - Quote This might have been brought up already, but what if shield mechanics were changed to be like EVE? Example: In Eve, shields regen constantly, but at low amounts (EX 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) the speed of which can be varied by modules, and if the shield is under a certain threshold, I forget if it is 0% or 25%. I think this would be alot better than the current Dust mechanics.
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1015	Posted - 2015.05.02 07:55:00 - [50] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: And please provide legitimate arguments other than 'you used an AR in your example' and 'we shouldn't balance for 1v1'. If the reason is to make it "like eve" and you want the regen to continue while being pinged then yeah. Obviously I am not suggesting changing anything on the shields my response was in merely an illustration of how passive regen works in Eve not a description of how I want things to be. I personally don't like sniffing glue either though. No we shouldn't balance for 1v1, there are rare 1v1s in this game unless you go hide somewhere away from the objectives, then someone will find you. Oh but how about 5v5 lets balance for that or better yet 5v1. This game is more blobby than Eve and it makes no sense why you would want 5 ppl each getting tagged by one stray bullet from an smg at mid range to regenerate their shields as if it were nothing. Incoming DPS on a lone gunman, would obliterate him rather quickly with any rifles. How about we look at a case where a sniper is keeping your squad pinned down and while separately the incoming dps at long range from your rifles will likely not be enough to take him down through his shields with your proposal, 6 people shooting, at range, at him likely wouldn't either. You ask for arguments with 1v1? Player A is using an SMG Player B has an AR and the engagement is mid range at the edge of the SMG's engagement range. I think you know where I'm going with this but, Player A bullet hoses Player B, all shots land on target. Player B's shields don't dip at all. Player B line's up his shots, looks around for snipers then pulls the trigger sending a short burst into Player A's head. We all know who the winner in that engagement is. I see no reason to change this, and btw you are asking them to bring back a CB feature that was tested and proved to be OP even with tuning. It was difficult to kill anyone using any sort of damage threshold, battles were lasting "too long" and there were not enough tears on the forums. more blobby than eve +1000 man fleets? i think not

DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1015	Posted - 2015.05.02 08:03:00 - [51] - Quote Vyuru wrote: This might have been brought up already, but what if shield mechanics were changed to be like EVE? Example: In Eve, shields regen constantly, but at low amounts (EX 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) the speed of which can be varied by modules, and if the shield is under a certain threshold, I forget if it is 0% or 25%. I think this would be alot better than the current Dust mechanics. you can't do it like in eve for a few reasons. bad hit detection and lag would cause shots to not register, and your target wouldnt take any damage at all. even from multiple players. you also wouldnt wouldnt want to set a threshold like that either. it means you'd need to deal 75% shield damage before his shield stop regen. which is bad for the reason i gave above. a threshold of requiring only 2% damage might work since that's easier to accomplish and can also be done with high damage per shot weapons.
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 365	Posted - 2015.05.02 16:16:00 - [52] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: And please provide legitimate arguments other than 'you used an AR in your example' and 'we shouldn't balance for 1v1'. If the reason is to make it "like eve" and you want the regen to continue while being pinged then yeah. Obviously I am not suggesting changing anything on the shields my response was in merely an illustration of how passive regen works in Eve not a description of how I want things to be. I personally don't like sniffing glue either though. No we shouldn't balance for 1v1, there are rare 1v1s in this game unless you go hide somewhere away from the objectives, then someone will find you. Oh but how about 5v5 lets balance for that or better yet 5v1. This game is more blobby than Eve and it makes no sense why you would want 5 ppl each getting tagged by one stray bullet from an smg at mid range to regenerate their shields as if it were nothing. Incoming DPS on a lone gunman, would obliterate him rather quickly with any rifles. How about we look at a case where a sniper is keeping your squad pinned down and while separately the incoming dps at long range from your rifles will likely not be enough to take him down through his shields with your proposal, 6 people shooting, at range, at him likely wouldn't either. You ask for arguments with 1v1? Player A is using an SMG Player B has an AR and the engagement is mid range at the edge of the SMG's engagement range. I think you know where I'm going with this but, Player A bullet hoses Player B, all shots land on target. Player B's shields don't dip at all. Player B line's up his shots, looks around for snipers then pulls the trigger sending a short burst into Player A's head. We all know who the winner in that engagement is. I see no reason to change this, and btw you are asking them to bring back a CB feature that was tested and proved to be OP even with tuning. It was difficult to kill anyone using any sort of damage threshold, battles were lasting "too long" and there were not enough tears on the forums. more blobby than eve +1000 man fleets? i think not You are arguing just to argue at this point. Sorry that we can't put 1000+vs 1000+ on field, still the effect is the same, horde of bodies running after a few or all of whomever spawns in and doesn't leave battle. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
Aeon Amadi Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 9911	Posted - 2015.05.02 16:41:00 - [53] - Quote DJINN Jecture wrote: DeathwindRising wrote: DJINN Jecture wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: And please provide legitimate arguments other than 'you used an AR in your example' and 'we shouldn't balance for 1v1'. If the reason is to make it "like eve" and you want the regen to continue while being pinged then yeah. Obviously I am not suggesting changing anything on the shields my response was in merely an illustration of how passive regen works in Eve not a description of how I want things to be. I personally don't like sniffing glue either though. No we shouldn't balance for 1v1, there are rare 1v1s in this game unless you go hide somewhere away from the objectives, then someone will find you. Oh but how about 5v5 lets balance for that or better yet 5v1. This game is more blobby than Eve and it makes no sense why you would want 5 ppl each getting tagged by one stray bullet from an smg at mid range to regenerate their shields as if it were nothing. Incoming DPS on a lone gunman, would obliterate him rather quickly with any rifles. How about we look at a case where a sniper is keeping your squad pinned down and while separately the incoming dps at long range from your rifles will likely not be enough to take him down through his shields with your proposal, 6 people shooting, at range, at him likely wouldn't either. You ask for arguments with 1v1? Player A is using an SMG Player B has an AR and the engagement is mid range at the edge of the SMG's engagement range. I think you know where I'm going with this but, Player A bullet hoses Player B, all shots land on target. Player B's shields don't dip at all. Player B line's up his shots, looks around for snipers then pulls the trigger sending a short burst into Player A's head. We all know who the winner in that engagement is. I see no reason to change this, and btw you are asking them to bring back a CB feature that was tested and proved to be OP even with tuning. It was difficult to kill anyone using any sort of damage threshold, battles were lasting "too long" and there were not enough tears on the forums. more blobby than eve +1000 man fleets? i think not You are arguing just to argue at this point. Sorry that we can't put 1000+vs 1000+ on field, still the effect is the same, horde of bodies running after a few or all of whomever spawns in and doesn't leave battle. So, how on earth do you propose we balance anything at all..? You guys are like a broken record with this "CPM material" business xD Let it go
Kaeru Nayiri Ready to Play 1071	Posted - 2015.05.02 19:45:00 - [54] - Quote Solution was at the top of page 2. Know what cannot be known.
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 365	Posted - 2015.05.02 20:21:00 - [55] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: You must have forgotten that I was around during Closed Beta too and there was a hell of a lot more to it than damage threshold (which I don't remember ever being a thing) what with hit detection issues and lack of aim assist. I never once said that this should be "like Eve" although now that you bring it up I will say that there are a few things that we can borrow from a - brace for it - successful game that's had twelve years of experience with these sort of things. I haven't forgotten, but I don't think that this is the "fix" you are looking for, otherwise I would say sure why not. Others have said this is a fix from Eve, I just don't see this as anything like an Eve fix, and I have indicated why. Your fix, if you want it to be like Eve would need to be x amount of base regen per tick (however long a tick is) and remove the burst ticks of the percentage of shield (because this behaviour is a Dust specific system that would overlap on the changes). Then your shield recharge rate can be affected in a manner that actually reflects a shield recharger, and yes it would eliminate the usefulness of a regulator but this would provide your minimum threshold you are all talking about in here. It means you need x+ amount of base DPS to reduce a person's shields. This is how it would be an EVE based idea. As for the rest, base amount of damage applied to a person's shield to negate recharge is a different idea. I have issues with this because every bullet needs to have higher DPS to affect the shield if this were the case even if they are good solid hits in rapid succession. The Eve based fix is even more of an issue IMO for "fixing shields" which I don't believe have issues because there would need to be a significant reduction in the base shield recharge rate, mostly causing all shield tankers to have a bunch of issues. It would reduce the number of people straight up buffer tanking though so not altogether bad but its a question of which numbers are the right ones... *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
DJINN Jecture Templar of the Glowing Blade 365	Posted - 2015.05.02 20:31:00 - [56] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: So, how on earth do you propose we balance anything at all..? How about giving Logis another tool specifically for shield repair? This has been brought up in a number of threads and with borrowing from Eve to fix an issue I think this is the best option. It fills the missing role of shield logi and give caldari logis something useful specifically for the cal logi community as a whole that should help even things out as we see in Eve. This way there is a benefit to having a shield team or an armor team rather than just going armor because they have Logi. This is what I call balance, not fixing the shields that are actually breakable just like armor is. *-ç +æ+Ä ß+¦ß¦+Gé¦ß+¡ !!!* *ß¦äß¦â-à*
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 8352	Posted - 2015.05.02 20:34:00 - [57] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: The hilarious thing you all forget is that damage mods negate the disadvantage of regen not breaking outside optimal. Skills also would affect this. Shield regen should break when the shields hace lost more than 20-25% capacity. no i mentioned it before but they mostly ignored it. skills would only help anit shield weapons. go figure lol. so those guys have to drop their shield extenders for damage mods.... oh no, how horrible lol on the 25%... that sounds reasonable. you can add extenders to get a better buffer if needed too. on 526 shield hp, you can take ~131.5 shield damage before shield regen stops on 634 shield hp, it'd be ~158.5 on 707 shield hp, it's 176.75 before shields break. All ov which are possible with any rifle in less than one second, but a stray bullet isn't going to hose you. Which is the point. There's never enough sh**posting going on, so let's add a few more teaspoons of the guy posting after me to the recipie!
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 1018	Posted - 2015.05.03 01:35:00 - [58] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: I certainly cannot claim to know how the game is coded, however I would like to point out that the check of efficiency rating between attacker and defender is already done after collision, and used for damage application. It would be a matter of using that % value to determine whether the hit deserves to shut off shield regen or not. What I mean is that there is a very good chance that it won't add extra load, only ccp can answer for certain. you are saying that if the rating is, idk, 75% or below, then you wouldnt be able to stop shield regen? im sorry i clearly missed this
Kaeru Nayiri Ready to Play 1075	Posted - 2015.05.03 23:01:00 - [59] - Quote DeathwindRising wrote: Kaeru Nayiri wrote: I certainly cannot claim to know how the game is coded, however I would like to point out that the check of efficiency rating between attacker and defender is already done after collision, and used for damage application. It would be a matter of using that % value to determine whether the hit deserves to shut off shield regen or not. What I mean is that there is a very good chance that it won't add extra load, only ccp can answer for certain. you are saying that if the rating is, idk, 75% or below, then you wouldnt be able to stop shield regen? im sorry i clearly missed this I proposed 10%, but yea, you got the idea ! Know what cannot be known.


Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.