To summarize, it feels like shields are overall much better than armor in almost every way that matters, that shields are more deciding in combat than armor, and that ultimately armor is substantially inferior while running for an equivalent cost and providing no real general or specific advantage.

This strikes me as especially odd since the advent of space mining should provide for a considerable influx of materials that would be highly effective in dealing with radiation and kinetic damage, not to mention the inevitable and necessary advances in metallurgy that should have taken place relative to common space travel and general technological advancement. Further still that all sensible shield technology would be much more power intensive and fragile compared to solid armor.

Anyway, here is a comparative list of things I've noticed.

Shields:

• + Automatically recover - I wouldnt say automatically recover but they do recharge shield hp at about 24-30hp a second
• + Have modules to increase recovery, shield strength. You mean shield boosters, armor tanks also have armor reppers
• + Suffer no low health penalty (compared to armor's burning damage) Actually if they get into low armor they will also have the burning armor but its more of a threat for armor tanks because it uses armor
• + Can equip multiple Power Diagnostic Systems (low powered modules to specifically and significantly optimize shields)
• + Have a lower PG/CPU cost total
• + Have Buffer modules (shield extenders) armor tanks have armor plates
• + Do not affect movement
• + More CPU intensive, but CPU extenders have no CPU/PG cost (despite the logical wattage requirement for use and cooling), use the less necessary low powered slot, and is otherwise balanced.
• - May have a larger sensor signal
• - Have no means of recovery from infantry eh?
• -/+ Suffer from Flux weapons (however these also shut down low powered modules which are not as important in shield heavy fittings but can leave amour units bare)
• + Are otherwise equal or relative to armour in every way (same slot total, similar SP cost, market cost, damage absorption) with these advantages.

Armour:

• + Generally higher health
• + Can be repaired by infantry
• - Must be away from combat or the healer is often extremely vulnerable you use the armor repper on the tank
• - Requires exiting the craft [no it doesnt/b]
• - Requires having the pilot get out or to have someone else on board who can, meaning a higher organization requirement in a low communication environment. no it doesnt
• - Requires special equipment to recover no it doesnt
• - Manual what? armor tanks have armor reppers you can use, you dont need a man with a remote armor repper
• - Recovers more slowly, cool down penalty armor reppers heal more armor per pulse than shield boosters do, also both suffer the same cooldown period
• - Has no slot/PG advantage to compensate depends on setup
• - Suffers burn damage when low shield does suffer the same, all tanks are effected by this
• - No specific High powered modules to aid armor strength no because high slots are for shield and lows are for armor
• - Only HPM that helps armor (Damage control unit) can only be equipped once and does as much for shields
• - Shield equivalent is superior, helps more, no limit.
• - Slower
• - Has equivalent cost in ISK, SP for inferior quality
• - PG intensive, PG extenders have a CPU cost, use primary slot set for armor craft
• - Is not significantly more resistant to damage (as far as I can tell) despite physics.

This is mostly from a vehicular perspective, but a lot of this translates over to dropsuits as well and is partially why heavies often have a hard time of it.



Here are some requests to balance things out, any two or three would go a long way to that end.

• Increased slots on armor heavy vehicles/suits (more armor, bigger frame, more power, more space) what more slots? learn to fit it up right
• Lower SP/ISK cost given availability of materials/less tech heavy development wont happen
• Anti-grav high powered modules implementing technology similarly available in any standard drop suits to decrease movement penalties.
• Swap armor recovery and PG expansion modules to the high powered side, or create a high powered armour recover module with a higher CPU cost that is automatic and constant you already have an armor repper why do you want one that perma reps?
• Power Diagnostic System equivalent module for armor HPM
• Make armor more resistant to damage than shields to compensate for lower recovery and other disadvantages
• Armour resistance modules 2-5% more effective than shield counter-parts and/or suffer no stacking penalty (since shields by their nature are designed to be more resistant and the tech is more redundant or something) [b]you are giving the advantages to armor now
• Give advanced tier armor units some integrated armor recovery (automatic or manual), or at least on Logistics dropships and Special Ops tanks.
• Extend armor shielding to provide better cover players in LAVs/Dropships