DUST Search - [Feedback] Hotfix FoxFour

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Feedback] Hotfix FoxFour

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 14 post(s)
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.24 14:47:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: HAV/AV Balance There is a logical thread through this that needs to be explained. We have talked about HAV vs AV balancing for an eternity it seems. The situation is simply 1.Gallente HAVs are very strong due to Hardener/Repair combo 2.Caldari HAVs are not strong enough comparatively 3.Dropships are ok, Caldari need a PG buff (not in this hotfix) but Swarms are too strong 4.Dedicated AV in the form of a Minmando with Swarms or otherwise, can definitely suppress HAVs and area deny Dropships, but rarely destroy vehicles. So instead of trying to tweak our way out of this, I propose a radical skill-based solution. Simply increasing the weak spot on HAVs considerably will allow dedicated AV and other vehicles to use positioning, speed and skill to heavily change the outcome of each encounter without having an effect on Dropships. Secondly, changing the Swarm Launcher profile to be a new Explosive GÇô Missile, and granting the damage bonus to the Caldari Commando, and leaving Minmatar Commandos with Explosive GÇô Explosives (both have a +20% Armor/-20% Shield damage profile. Thirdly, changing all Explosive Weapons to deal full damage to HAVs, making the Breach Mass Driver a potent AV weapon in the hands of a Minmatar Commando. Same thing for Assault HMGGÇÖs and Nova Knifes. All this extra damage potential towards HAVs is met with a strong buff for Caldari HAVs in the form of increased recharge rates and decreased recharge delays. The Gallente HAVs are strong enough to deal with it. Finally, reducing the Swarm Launcher lock-on range, hit impact and turning radius should improve the quality of life of Dropship users, and somewhat for HAVs. HAV to HAV, I'm afraid better recharge rates and recharge amount weren't exactly the root of the problem. Though they do help, Gal HAV will still be king against other HAVs. Why? Because of utility. Shields have to fit full D just to have a fighting chance 1vs1. Armor fits full D AND HS plus other utility like DMG mod and nitro. When considering rails of course. This is something you need to address in some way if you want to bring parity between the two. But wait, explosives of any kind do full damage. HAH. Wait, ahahahaha. No really I ahahahah. Still trying to catch my breath give me a minute....... Wheew, ok. I see what you are doing here, give the maddie more forms of damage to avoid and maybe in the process bring the gunnie up in the ranks. As it will take less damage to explosives yet still more than it did before by 20%. It sorta of makes sense. But then I think about all the lolz I'm going to have running infantry AV (If I can ever get off my destiny stint). Core nades, mass drivers and flaylocks, now apply full damage. Flux it, core nades for days, and never once will I have to break my infantry slaying abilities! Fortunate I had the foresight to respec into things more useful on the infantry side! Just missin a plasma cannon to deal with those gunnies that will be running around. Honestly though, how have tanks fared thus far. It's not often they rule the battlefield in any reasonable way like days of old. If anything, tanks roll up and make everything hide, if there are any possible objectives to roll up to that they can make a difference on. This will be most interesting. No doom and gloom really just yet, but it doesn't exactly looking bright for tanks. Need to get my cal mando back so I can stack the myos and go to town meleeing for my finishing move.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.24 15:01:00 - [2] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Gallente HAVs are strong enough to deal with it. Sorry, just need to point this out. I think you said something to this effect last time you made changes to tanks. How did that turn out? Are gal HAV's really strong enough to handle it, or are you just pulling this out of your butt again
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.24 19:08:00 - [3] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Forge gun: + Longest ranged AV option + Has multiple useful variants + Highest alpha damage of all AV + Strong against infantry - there's a reason it's been used as a sniper replacement in the past (and been nerfed for it) + Most accurate AV option - can reliably hit weakpoints + Fastest projectile of all AV - Charge time - Lowered mobility whilst charging - Has to be on a heavy suit (? Does this count as a real combat drawback?) Swarm launcher: + Tracking + Doesn't need to be used on a heavy suit - Short range - Travel time - Completely unable to defend against infantry, rendering a sidearm mandatory - Unreliable on ground targets (e.g. frequently running into walls) - Lock-on time (less than forge gun's charge up time though) - Cannot be pre-charged (unlike the forge gun) There're probably a couple of points you can scrounge elsewhere, but I don't really think that lineup favours the swarms. The one thing that has always bugged me about the FG is that range. It's a railgun on a heavy suit that has full up and down directional aiming and able to position itself in far more advantageous positions over a tank it's intended to fight. I would personally like to see the FG get knocked down a peg or two on range. Maybe trade out for more damage but less range. Breakin, where you at fool.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.24 20:22:00 - [4] - Quote Thaddeus Reynolds wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Forge gun: + Longest ranged AV option + Has multiple useful variants + Highest alpha damage of all AV + Strong against infantry - there's a reason it's been used as a sniper replacement in the past (and been nerfed for it) + Most accurate AV option - can reliably hit weakpoints + Fastest projectile of all AV - Charge time - Lowered mobility whilst charging - Has to be on a heavy suit (? Does this count as a real combat drawback?) Swarm launcher: + Tracking + Doesn't need to be used on a heavy suit - Short range - Travel time - Completely unable to defend against infantry, rendering a sidearm mandatory - Unreliable on ground targets (e.g. frequently running into walls) - Lock-on time (less than forge gun's charge up time though) - Cannot be pre-charged (unlike the forge gun) There're probably a couple of points you can scrounge elsewhere, but I don't really think that lineup favours the swarms. The one thing that has always bugged me about the FG is that range. It's a railgun on a heavy suit that has full up and down directional aiming and able to position itself in far more advantageous positions over a tank it's intended to fight. I would personally like to see the FG get knocked down a peg or two on range. Maybe trade out for more damage but less range. Breakin, where you at fool. At the same time though, the forge gun has lower magazine, ammo carried, and a slower refire rate than the big railgun turret. Additionally, the platforms the forge gun is deployed on are far more susceptible to small-arms fire than the HAVs/emplacements the Railgun turrets go on. My only problem with the forge gun is how effective it is at sniping...making it effectively a better sniper rifle than the sniper rifle, but this is more an issue with the sniper rifles than with the forge gun itself Positioning is everything. Being able to position yourself on a key tower limits your risk and maximizes gains. A FG on a tower can effectively deny a HUGE area around said tower. Like say the mushroom on the research lab or cargo hub tower or rings. On the cargo hub, they can nearly reach both home points, and can be incredibly difficult to dislodge. Would a shortened range of say 200M really destroy their role? If anything it gives the ADS or DS more breathing room to operate and dislodge them, and allows a tank to at least operate in areas around them without being insta ganked the moment they move any where near them. For all their "faults", the FG stands above tanks and any other form of AV as the ultimate AV weapon in my book. They are one of the most crucial parts to a PC battle. Tanks are just there to supplement the FG. A little less range won't have a damning affect on their operation.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.25 15:05:00 - [5] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: When hell freezes over unless the rate of fire goes up on the forge. Then we'll talk. You are just DRIPPING with bias. But like I said a decrease to range would call for a buff in some other area. And it doesn't even have to be all forge guns. Things like the breach or the regular forge gun can keep that range. But the assault variant needs to come down in range. It's already the most powerful of all forge guns with no drawbacks in comparison to the other variants (unable to hold a charge isn't really a draw back from my experience). A reduction to range would make the other variants more appealing (breach get more range for long charge times?). Your standard variant and breach are long range area denial weapons, while the assault would be your short range area denial/destruction variant. Honestly though, in your quest to destroy vehicles, I feel you are neglecting your own bias for the forge gun. My balancing rule of thumb is to gain you must lose. So a weapon should not have long range and high dps. As range increases, dps should go down. This is evident in the breach, but it lacks what it really needs, more range. The assault is like the converse, same range but MORE dps. Why?
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.25 15:59:00 - [6] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: XxBlazikenxX wrote: Dropships will not be OP from ONE av weapon being nerfed We'll see. Interesting tidbit, in PC, forge guns are an ADS's worst nightmare. Swarms are simply supplemental.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.25 16:17:00 - [7] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: XxBlazikenxX wrote: Dropships will not be OP from ONE av weapon being nerfed We'll see. Interesting tidbit, in PC, forge guns are an ADS's worst nightmare. Swarms are simply supplemental. No doubt. Still I've found that mixed AV worked very well it came to crashing birds and tanks. Forge + Swarms made for a deadly combination. I don't think that swarms will see much use following FoxFour; will be interesting to see what (if anything) replaces them, both in pubs and PC. I always use officer swarms anyhow. 200M range ftw.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.25 18:29:00 - [8] - Quote Duke Noobiam wrote: Just wanted to chime in on the Swarms vs ADS. As a player who was around in 1.6 and 1.7, I share Soraya's concern about OP vehicles that farm infantry at a rate of 25-50 KDR. Anyone who played infantry back then and who tried to fulfill the AV role knows how frustrating and futile it was. Maybe the pendulum went too far when swarms were buffed and vehicles were nerfed, but recent releases have (IMO) struck a pretty good balance where a single AV player can not necessarily kill a pilot but can at least drive them away for a minute or two. I'm not sure why this is not considered as being balanced. As for ADS specifically, it's important to keep in mind the following when trying to balance them. 1. Swarms are the only real viable option for ADS suppression. - A forge gun can be used with partial success at short range, (75 meters or less) but is useless at a distance. Add the fact that equiping a forge gun makes an AV player canon foder to infantry and the returns quickly become untenable. - The plasma canon is very difficult to use even at a close range against dropships. 2. Denying access to an area is not equivalent to killing. I actually think that the ability to deny access to specific area to a vehicle by one AV player is perfectly balanced. This protects pilots from a huge ISK loss and protects infantry from being farmed. It is much more balanced than requiring multiple players to deal with a single player using a vehicle. 3. The primary critetria to determine balance needs to be KDR. It cannot be ISK as ISK has no bearing on the outcome of a specific game. That said, I'm not necessarily against the proposed changes but I am concerned about the opinions of vehicles pilots who believe that their ISK investment entitles them to farm opponents. Your ISK investment allows you to affect the outcome of the battle by giving you access to parts of the map that no one else can use, by giving you greater mobility and by giving you invulnerability to small arms fire. It should not give you a disproportionately higher KDR by virtue of spending more isk. This guy gets it.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.25 20:32:00 - [9] - Quote Alena Ventrallis wrote: Off-topic, but I want to chime in on the idea of "area-denial" to AV players. Denying an area means stopping the enemy from operating in that area by posing a threat if they try. That does NOT only mean that you have killed him; killing him is certainly one way to deny him, but by no means the only way. So when we talk about forge guns denying an area in a 300m bubble, we do not mean that we are always killed if we enter that 300m bubble, only that we are denied doing what we do in that area. We cannot kill infantry or land to drop links if there is a forge gun present, because both of those require us to be relatively still, and that makes us the perfect target for a forge gun. We are denied the area not because of our destruction, but because doing anything other than dodginf forge gun shots will result in our death. Whether we successfully dodge the forge shots or not, the forger has denied us the area, because his team can move and act as though we are not even there. AV should not be a guaranteed kill against any vehicle. What it should be is something that makes the vehicle stop what it's doing (laying links, killing infantry) and be forced to deal with the threat (by retreating, engaging the AV directly, etc.) Rather than continue with its original mission. The threat of death does need to be there: that's why armor tanks were OP, because they could basically ignore AV and continue to do whatever they were doing. But death should not be a forgone conclusion just because you pulled out AV. Well put!
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.26 15:09:00 - [10] - Quote Press Attache wrote: Massive vehicle nerfs, no corresponding buff in lethality, and no creation of a distinct role for tankers. Kind of meh. Like the AV changes, forge should have been the best AV forever, but without a clear role for tanks(transport, scanning, or even as a functioning in PC/FW cru) it just means driving around outside large sockets. Going to have to record what will surely be ridiculous deaths when infantry come up on masse and beat a tank to death. Jumping plc's were already ridiculous, this next patch should finally kill off vehicles for any competitive use. Unfortunately, I do believe that will be the outcome. While I can't say for sure until the changes hit, I do suspect tanks will become a much lesser part of the field than even now. A tanks role and impact on the battlefield is rather limited even now. Why they must be easier to destroy is beyond me. Those boys on the ground are the ones making any measurable contributions. I could understand this if tanks were like the murder machines of old, but right now they are stale. While changes don't look HUGE, this will further affect their operational value and ability, which is rather low as is.

Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.26 15:15:00 - [11] - Quote Kallas Hallytyr wrote: Genral69 death wrote: I am worried about gunlogis with the Av changes happing, the only advantage the gunlogi has when close to infantry was that small arms would not break its shield regen and would require some actual Av weapons also people going round punching vehicles is completely a stupid idea. I get that you could do actual damage to one but how do you destroy a metal vehicle with your fists :/ and that it would most likely break your hands Bear in mind that Gunnies are getting a recharge and depleted delay buff,as well as recharge rate buff. With a single PRO Shield Regulator you get a 2.25s recharge delay, which is the same as a max operation AFG's charge time. It's not all bad for Gunnies! No, but def not enough. Recharge is just a small part of the issue. Like, have you ever tried fitting a reg to a gunnie? What happens when you do so? And is it worth it over what you lose. This buff will have nearly no noticeable affect on their performance.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.27 16:20:00 - [12] - Quote Demandred Moores wrote: The recharge is one of the BIGGEST issues. Regs cost a bit but they can be fit. This will be noticeable, not a complete fix but give them time. And havs are VERY valuable on the field. I don't get the hate a forge couldn't kill anything before. Not my tanks anyways. Jumpy plc is no problem stay aware. Would have like to see shield boaters reworked to multiple small pulses and active armour reps brought back with passives being nerfed. Too much for one hotfix though I would assume. I'll have to disagree there. Recharge is NOT the biggest issue, the biggest issue are the massive CPU/PG differences between armor and shields mods as well as the utility over defense. The new recharge rates are helpful but don't point to the root of the problem. At full health using extenders with hardeners, assuming lets say a value of 4400 on health, it will still take 20 - 24 seconds to fully recover shield damage. Where a maddie will be recovering at a constant rate as you struggle to break fire. In a straight fight, a maddie will still have the clear cut advantage. I mean just assume a maddie fit dual hards, plate, rep, heatsink, damage mod, nitro. That's fit for FULL tank AND damage augmentation / speed. Conversely, look at your shield fit. If you want to fit for a full defense, 2 hards, 2 extenders at the very least are required. That leaves just one slot in your highs for an offense related utility mod. But then you need to fit a PG/CPU mod to your lows to make it happen because hardeners are quite intensive on PG/CPU (not to mention extenders). To even say that right now recharge is the biggest issue right now just seems so ridiculous to me when you could just compare fits and see the obvious. Armor has no need to sacrifice any slots, yet a gunnie MUST to even compare to a poorly fit maddie. And as far as HAV's usefulness on the field, nope. Yes, I'll admit there are some situations where they could shine. 5 point bridge map for one. But maps like 2 in 2 out cargo, or 3 in 2 out research, tanks are just useless. Home point defense at best if you can even shoot the console, many sockets you can't. They are good at shooting dropships down, but generally a FG fills this niche better, as they can sit in the middle of the map, elevated. Even swarms work better with their tracking many times, as leading a dropship isn't exactly the easiest thing to do. Transport, that's what a dropships is for. Sure in pubs it does seem like the HAV is this unstoppable murder machine winning the match. But then I go run infantry and play to the points mostly ignoring the tank on the field because unless its a blaster, it won't be doing much. Even if it's a blaster, mobility around points can be extremely limited so it's not much an issue ducking behind cover or moving around another area. It's usually an issue of silly blue dots that think they need to kill this tank doing absolutely nothing for their team, leaving the points undefended in the process or running into the maws of the enemy. And if all else fails, AV grenades. Oh wait, all explosives do full damage to tanks (more to armor), cores it is! Maybe throw in some mass driver rounds and drive that tank off and never once worry about breaking my infantry slaying capabilities with AV nades that can't damage infantry or swarms that can't shoot at infantry. Be my guest though, I hope you enjoy those plasma cannon rounds to the fuel cell that basically strip all of your shields in a single round with both hardeners up! It should be quite interesting for those unprepared for the pain!
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.27 16:30:00 - [13] - Quote Devadander wrote: I run double reg gunnis .... I can smell the fanmail already. I feel sorry for all the drugar pilots that are going to have to learn to drive. Really, I mean come on really. Is the only competition you ever get sica's and soma's. Do me a favor, jump into a PC and find yourself some real competition. There is NO chance you would ever beat a dual hard, rep, plate maddie. Even getting him from behind it would still turn and just insta pop you. Fanmail, haha. Sounds like you need to move up in the MU bracket and quit playing academy scrubs. I don't even care about gunnies, I'll let you hit my maddie at 300M as I rush in with a blaster. Eating every single round and then basically insta popping you the moment you get in range. Then I could casually roll off with full health! And don't give me this crap about sneaking around or whatever. I'll be playing at the same level, the only encounter you get is face to face.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 15:26:00 - [14] - Quote Devadander wrote: Oh no, right in the feels.... Seriously? I run a gunni because they are more fun to drive than a maddy. We all know they can't compete ATM so goml with your "I'm so pro" crap. Currently, if I feel like tanking, I call a gunni. I zip around and have fun trying to stay alive mostly. Yes, its easily popped. However, if I actually tank a match and get popped in the gunni, out comes the windrugar... I'm nearing 800m in isk alone so losing 2m once in a while hurts me not. If I'm having a good time, your opinions can get rekt. Oh, and BTW sweetheart.. After foxfour, a dual reg gunni will tank an ion blaster with damage mods running. Math. Add a hardener, and I'm gonna need a bigger bucket. Terribly sorry, I'll admit I was being over critical. I started with a gunnlogi over 2 years ago tanking, it's still hands down my favorite. Thing is, I want to see them become competitive again. It doesn't help though when people downplay their very serious faults. But I'm going to have to burst your bubble here. A duel reg gunnie doesn't stand a chance now before first overheat of the blaster. What makes you think 94 extra shield regen, and a one second improvement to shield delay non depleted will change that? You are probably better off with one reg, as I assume stacking penalties apply to the regs. So now yr down to a 2 second non depleted. So lets just assume a 10 second span. (assuming duel regs) Gunnie Non depleted recharge - 1760 Depleted recharge - 1540 Maddie (single rep) Total repped - 1670 So if I ignore the fact that armor reps are constant, whoo gunnie wins! But armor reps constantly, so lets just look at that. So lets assume the maddie has a pro blaster with just base damage no modifiers. In this 10 seconds you get hit once 5 seconds in. Gunnie 1 sec - waiting on recharge 2 sec - waiting on recharge 3 sec - 220 4 sec -220 5 sec - Damaged, recharge aborted 6 sec - waiting on recharge 7 sec - waiting on recharge 8 sec - 220 9 sec -220 10 sec -220 So you get a total of 1100 reps minus the 195 from the single blaster shot. So total repped, 905. Back to our comparison: Gunnie - 905 Maddie - 1670 So I'm putting my money on the fact that this shield recharge change won't have any considerable impact on a gunnies life. But I wanna go a step further and check out a duel reg or maybe just a single reg fit (don't use 2 regs, I don't think you will get anything out of the second reg) Well, proto fits is painfully out of date. But it does seem a fit like this: Duel hards (adv) Duel hvy extenders ( 1 pro, 1 adv) Basic shield booster (pro) Single reg Particle cannon Is possible. This is how I fit mine for testing purposes a while back. I've tried it now when I had the advantage, and there was no way to beat those reps. Without a heatsink, you just won't win that fight. Even assuming you can break engagement for 10 seconds, the maddie will have nearly repped the same amount as yourself. So in reality, no, this change won't have any sizable impact on a gunnies performance tank to tank. They will however be good against AV, same as before. As most forms of AV, minus the plasma cannon, do less damage to shields. But with your lower HP totals, increased sweet spot damage, and now more forms of damage (ie all explosives) to watch out for, I'm afraid it will be worse for the gunnie, not better. The best you could hope for in a gunnie is that with the extra forms of AV will keep the maddies at bay. While the extra forms of AV will affect a gunnie to a lesser extent, in the end it will still have a further negative impact on their performance.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 16:54:00 - [15] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: So in reality, no, this change won't have any sizable impact on a gunnies performance tank to tank. They will however be good against AV, same as before. As most forms of AV, minus the plasma cannon, do less damage to shields. But with your lower HP totals, increased sweet spot damage, and now more forms of damage (ie all explosives) to watch out for, I'm afraid it will be worse for the gunnie, not better. The best you could hope for in a gunnie is that with the extra forms of AV will keep the maddies at bay. While the extra forms of AV will affect a gunnie to a lesser extent, in the end it will still have a further negative impact on their performance. What's the damage threshold for regen on gunnies? Not positive, but it's low enough that a pro blaster will still stop regen with 2 hards up. Meaning a freedom mass driver should be sufficient to stop regen as it does more damage per shot over the blaster. I suspect as well a flaylock pistol will have enough power to stop shield regen as well. But it would be nice to know the exact threshold number.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 17:38:00 - [16] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: Megaman Trigger wrote: Tebu Gan wrote: So in reality, no, this change won't have any sizable impact on a gunnies performance tank to tank. They will however be good against AV, same as before. As most forms of AV, minus the plasma cannon, do less damage to shields. But with your lower HP totals, increased sweet spot damage, and now more forms of damage (ie all explosives) to watch out for, I'm afraid it will be worse for the gunnie, not better. The best you could hope for in a gunnie is that with the extra forms of AV will keep the maddies at bay. While the extra forms of AV will affect a gunnie to a lesser extent, in the end it will still have a further negative impact on their performance. What's the damage threshold for regen on gunnies? Not positive, but it's low enough that a pro blaster will still stop regen with 2 hards up. Meaning a freedom mass driver should be sufficient to stop regen as it does more damage per shot over the blaster. I suspect as well a flaylock pistol will have enough power to stop shield regen as well. But it would be nice to know the exact threshold number. With explosives being -20 vs Shields, I'm not sure a MD will stop the regen unless it's a BMD. 264 damage to shields, It most certainly should, considering the large blaster does 195 per shot and still breaks regen with hards up.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 18:01:00 - [17] - Quote Megaman Trigger wrote: Is that the Breach or the Freedom? Freedom, according to proto fits. Mind you this is direct impact damage, something you don't often observe using against infantry but will most def see against tanks.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 18:58:00 - [18] - Quote Devadander wrote: Currently, with dual regs and no hardener running, I can drive past a blaster installation and not worry about it. Turn on a hardener and I can stand off on it balancing my heat until I destroy it. I can also tank anything but ions ATM, modded or not, with a hardener running. But even a full contact salvo from xt will not pop a dual hard maddy. I like that we got love, but it won't dethrone madrugars. My fit is: Ext Hard Dual boost (basic lights to kick in emergency regen) Dual reg (with these even a basic light boost will engage full regen cycle) Heat sink for gunners Effective vs anything but prodrugar ion. ( and other missile boats) I expect to be able to tank some serious blaster fire after ff hits given my addiction to dual regs. Killing the hull its on is another thread entirely.... I'm sorry, but it's not possible to simply tank blaster fire with just a single hardener. Unless you are some how repping DURING the blasters fire, you are not doing what you describe yourself as doing. The only thing that has any chance of taking blaster fire uses two hardeners. Duel regs are doing absolutely nothing, you simply won't have enough time to activate passive shield regen. Even if you do, a single bullet from the blaster will negate any regen done. If anything, your boosters are doing the work, negating the recharge delay and kick starting your passive regen. Though again the blaster will negate that regen. Without regs, boosters will still initiate your full regen cycle btw. So a blaster maddie will hands down drop you in less then 10 seconds, not to mention one running damage mod and heatsink. And don't even pretend like you can take a rail maddie with that fit. You won't, not anyone with any skills and experience in tanks. It will require you to land 7+ shots at the very least, and the maddie will have both a heatsink and damage mod with full tank. Even if you broke engagement to recharge, the maddie will still be full and no doubt cooled down ready to go at you full strength again. I've tanked for a very long time, and honestly I've never found a gunnie that even stood half a chance, even WITH 2 freakin gunners, in this new build. I've tried a fit similar to yours with duel regs. It doesn't work, it's half assed and weak in comparison to a whole slew of other fits. Competitively, I see so many holes in that fit it's not even funny. I'm sorry man, but I gotta call you out on this one. Boosters, not regs, are creating the things you see. That's the main strength of your build, NOT the regs. You could drop the regs, pop on cpu/pg boosters, and focus on better things for your high slots and probably see MORE improvement in your fit. Complex hvy ext, cplx hard, cplx small boosters ( for the faster CD times), and a cplx HS (maybe even better guns for your gunners). But dude, those regs are doing you absolutely no good with the weak recharge rate at current. Seriously, try what I said an you won't even notice the loss of those regs. Regs are not affecting your boosters.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 19:37:00 - [19] - Quote Devadander wrote: I have 17 HAV fits, 60m+ sp into HAV, and have been here since the beginning. So please just don't. I'm telling you what I have seen with my own eyes. The boosters do jack under fire except kickstart regen (with hardener up they do a full cycle but are basic lights sooo....) Without dual regs I do NOT experience same shield effect. Have stood my ground on turrets many a time. Killed many rail tanks. (I'm known to put neutrons on gunnis..) Have NEVER been a rail nor redline tanker... Out of those 17 fits ... 2 are madrugars... I run gunni in current build, often. Exactly ZERO other fits perform like the dual regger. I don't get you man.. We got a problem idk about? Sorry man, but technically regs should have no affect on booster performance. So forgive me if I have a hard time believing you on this. I've personally had booster work under blaster fire and other times not. Let me get this clear, are you say that regs seem to somehow augment your booster so that they work while under fire to full affect. Because that honestly makes absolutely no sense. If it some how is the case, then it may point to where boosters are failing. Though I would have to personally test this, I feel something else is going on here not related to the regs.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 19:57:00 - [20] - Quote Devadander wrote: With dual regs, activating a booster seems to make shield continue to regen under fire till regen rate gets defeated. Without I cannot duplicate. shrug Full regen happens after one second. You should instantly get full benefit from booster. Anything else after is your passive regen, not booster regen.

Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 21:29:00 - [21] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Oh wow. I just realized how much potential tegen can happen between forge shots on a gunnlogi. This could get ugly quickly. 440 right. Not to mention your -10 to shields. Eh maybe, but I'm betting you won't be the only one hitting it. And that fuel cell damage will be utterly insane. A gunnies fuel cell is SOO much easier to hit too. Thing sticks out like a sore thumb.
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1	Posted - 2015.09.28 22:02:00 - [22] - Quote Devadander wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Oh wow. I just realized how much potential tegen can happen between forge shots on a gunnlogi. This could get ugly quickly. My crappy math puts a dual reg gunni starting regen at around .4-.6. Then add new regen rate and a hardener... Considering they no doubt have stacking penalties, it would be roughly 1.6 - 1.8 seconds shaved off. So about 1.4 - 1.6 to start regen with 2.

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.