|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
13
   |
Posted - 2015.08.21 17:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Varoth Drac wrote:Just buff energisers and rechargers.
^
Probably wouldn't hurt to nerf armor a tad as well.
CPM Sgt Kirk - On Community
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 02:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sicerly Yaw wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Varoth Drac wrote:Just buff energisers and rechargers. ^ Probably wouldn't hurt to nerf armor a tad as well. actually it would, armor is actually not in the best sate ...
It's in a better state than shields, and it's in a better state than every other low-slot module.
If the goal is "a more dynamic battlefield", why not move away from HP > All Else?
CPM Sgt Kirk - On Community
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 15:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:I dislike the notion of simultaneous buffing and nerfing. Balance requires patience and even a simple fix can potentially lead to a positive outcome. Buffing and nerfing at the same time only exacerbates the issue and appeals to that pendulum balancing method offers the impression that it has been over-corrected and we're forced to backtrack. The scalpel is preferable to the sword.
What is certain is that everyone has a different idea on how to fix shields. However, an overall theme and idea is present in each argument and reading between the lines offers a unanimous opinion: Shield recharge capability is suboptimal.
I've tinkered with the concept of shields simply not having a recharge delay, only a depleted recharge delay, so that they can recharge through damage. On paper, it looks optimistic, although practice is different and this is quite an extreme concept. However, it offers merit to reducing shield delays and increasing recharge.
Simultaneous buffing and nerfing can work when done carefully; consider the recent changes to movement speed:
Assaults were Nerfed. Logis were Buffed. No pendulum swings were observed.
Assaults were Nerfed. Commandos were really Buffed. No pendulum swings were observed.
"CCP cannot simultaneously nerf and buff successfully" is an inaccurate assertion and a poor foundation upon which to build an argument (or attempt to dismiss another's).
What is certain is that Armor Modules are the best-in-class low-slot option. If we buff Shields sufficiently to rival Armor, we'll have an obvious, best-in-class high-slot option. Should we choose this HP > All Else path, we'll end up observing less battlefield diversity rather than more, and a further widening of the performance gap between units which tank or dual-tank and units which do not.
Further, an HP > All Else approach to module balance stands to benefit MedFrames by wider margin than other frames, thanks to their superior slot counts. MedFrames are already outselling all else. We should be looking for ways to bring the dropsuit sales trendlines closer together; not for ways to spread them further apart.
CPM Sgt Kirk - On Community
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 16:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Afterthought:
Assume Shields were going to be buffed to perform on par with Armor. Increasing fitting requirements of plates would be an excellent way to prevent dual tanking. And why not? Shouldn't best in-class modules cost the most?
CPM Sgt Kirk - On Community
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.22 17:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
Carmine Lotte wrote:What about a Shield Tool that repairs you by your recharge stats making it an equipment that works with Recharges and energizers. That should slow any shield Rep on armor Suits that don't rely on Recharges/energizers.
I'd run it by Cross and the Triage Ward in the Locker Room. Could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure consensus there is that a shield rep tool would create new imbalance.
CPM Sgt Kirk - On Community
|
|
|
| |
|