|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zero Harpuia
Maverick Conflict Solutions
422
   |
Posted - 2012.09.14 05:51:00 -
[1] - Quote
Which is better, armor tanking or tanking with shields? Oh let me count the ways...
ARMOR
Must have 0 shield remaining to damage it.
Takes self damage at about 50%. (Vehicles Only)
Seems to take more damage from all current AV weaponry.
Adding more slows down the wearer.
Huge powergrid requirements, medium to low CPU requirements.
Low slot modules only.
No natural regen.
Destruction upon depletion.
Analogous to EVE 'Structure' meter.
SHIELD
Does not require foregoing armor before seeing its effects.
No weaknesses imbued by losing a certain amount of it.
Seems to have higher natural resistances to all current AV weaponry.
Adding more has no drawbacks.
Medium CPU requirements, low to no Powergrid requirements.
High and low slot modules.
Naturally recurring regeneration.
Upon depletion, run away and/or DEPLOY THE BOOSTERS!
Analogous to EVE 'Shield' meter.
Any comments? Anything I'm missing? Let's see what else we can dredge up, shall we?
Oh yea, new nerfs to armor resistances, and a nerf to a shield module I have never seen used (and it doesn't have an armor equivalent)... great. |
Zero Harpuia
Maverick Conflict Solutions
422
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 06:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
Spooty Frog wrote:Increasing shield capacity should increase signature radius.
IMO - natural shield regen should be very slow - several minutes for full recovery like in EVE.
I believe sig radius here is 'how easily you show up on the map.' That said, I don't think it does even that (plus I have never heard anyone say 'I can't find that tank'), but I'll check the market tomorrow for confirmation. |
Zero Harpuia
Maverick Conflict Solutions
422
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 16:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
Bump due to edits. |
Zero Harpuia
Maverick Conflict Solutions
422
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 19:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
True, but most FPS use the shield as a regenerative buffer to reward careful play, and prevent people from just going from one engagement to the next without thought. In other words, shields were easier to penetrate in Halo, Perfect Dark, or were only a damage modifier, like Just Cause 2 or the 007 games. Not that anything is wrong with the strong DUST shields, but it may make more sense if there were dropsuits that specialized in shield over armor in a more obvious way, like the Caldari vehicles over the Gallente ones. |
Zero Harpuia
Maverick Conflict Solutions
422
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 20:01:00 -
[5] - Quote
Eskel Bondfree wrote:I think you should add two points to the 'armor' list:
- Armor plates give a much higher boost to overall hp
- armor tanking enables you to increase damage ouput via damage mods in the high slots.
I think armor tanking is still viable if used in the right situations. It requires you to go in hard and take out the enemy quickly. Armor has the advantage in this situation due to high hp and high damage. However, as soon as the enemy gets away or you're forced to retreat, shield regen kicks in and shifts the balance in favor of the shield tank (unless you have someone to remote rep you). So shield tank is the way to go for hit and run or engagements that are not decided in a single confrontation. However, since the majority of encounters in Dust tend to be one of the last two types, I agree that shield tank is overall the better choice and that armor tanking is reduced to some kind of a niche tactic.
Damage mods are low slots(on vehicles), not high slots. On the subject of vehicles, there are no high slot mods but shields.
Meanwhile, on ground troops, The same can be said of armor preventing you from equipping fitting boosters (CPU/PG upgrades). Dropsuits are far more balanced, module wise, than vehicles, while vehicles are more balanced, hull wise. |
|
|
| |
|