DUST Search - [Feedback] Shield > Armour GÇô Detailed Explanation

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Feedback] Shield > Armour GÇô Detailed Explanation

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 932	Posted - 2013.06.05 21:25:00 - [1] - Quote the primary concern about heavies is that approaching 1300 HP requires at least 2 complex plates and a crippling speed penalty. Further, without completely maxing out both armor and the shield upgrade skill the base health of a heavy is less than a tanked caldari medium suit. Before anyone says defensive roles, that's a s**tty copout. sentinels are defensive. Heavies are heavy. Further, the speed penalty is crippling when the defender is so pathetically easily outflanked. until CCP does 64v64 or higher matches people do not have the manpower to park 4 or more fatties on a cap point. In ambush fatties are sitting ducks. to a lesser extent so are gallente and amarr medium/assault suits.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 934	Posted - 2013.06.05 22:21:00 - [2] - Quote I pretty much have maxed support skills and often a militia fit caldari medium frame (standard) lives longer than my heavy fit. It depends what I'm fighting though. As always some enemies are easier than others. Oh and the points you made apply to heavies as much if not more in your OP. There's really no functional difference in the downsides between the various classes. it's just more obvious in the heavy, but proportionally equally problematic. At the current rate the smart thing for heavies will be to jump ship to caldari/minmatar as soon as the suits are released.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 934	Posted - 2013.06.05 22:27:00 - [3] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: A sad example of how important mobility is. Ask any tactical coordinator in the USMC: Mobility kills.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 935	Posted - 2013.06.05 22:33:00 - [4] - Quote my thoughts are that CCP has always kinda had a bass-ackward view of shield Vs. tank. It's evident in EVE online especially. Shields are the tougher nut, you only need to wait for them to recharge, and there's ways to make that happen insanely fast. Armor is pretty much SOL without local reps. Shields tend to be standoff and long range. Armor tends to be wade-in-and-smash. Shields seem to be faster Armor is slower. Armor needs to be able to get in fast in order to deliver anything resembling damage properly.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 936	Posted - 2013.06.06 07:37:00 - [5] - Quote CCP Remnant wrote: BL4CKST4R wrote: what heavies really need is resistance to damage taken, supplemented with a limited increase in EHP. We've considered this, but the problem is that right now there is no good feedback for damage resistance in the game. Adding this without all the necessary UI improvements would likely just end up with the majority of players thinking their weapons suck instead of understanding they're just less effective against certain targets. The current target intel is a very barebones implementation. It needs to be a lot better. resistances are limited to certain tank drivers right now so there's not enough of a playerbase to gauge the efficiency of resistances except AV and Tank drivers, and even then only if the AV know they're hitting resistances. I'd bluntly start fatties at 3% resistance per level and cap it at 15%. that way they take less damage and they don't eat it so fast. but I think even the 4% per level that the rokh and the drake or the abaddon enjoy would be pushing it for DUST. but since there are no infantry resist modules it could provide a good baseline unique to heavies for now as your testbed.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 936	Posted - 2013.06.06 07:39:00 - [6] - Quote crazy space 1 wrote: so you guys aren't going to buff the repair modules? So like won't self repairing plates be better? Complex armor reps should heal 10hp/sec not 5 put a stacking thing on them so people don't put 4 on and get 40 hp/sec actually that would put them roughly on par with an untanked assault who runs regulators in the lows. But armor is only half a heavy base tank, half an amarr tank and pretty much the be-all end-all for gallente.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 941	Posted - 2013.06.06 08:54:00 - [7] - Quote damage mods aren't AS good as you think. Most good players use shield extenders and skip damage mods entirely. Defense in DUST is worth more than a few more DPS unless you're talking about some very specific weapons.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 941	Posted - 2013.06.06 09:27:00 - [8] - Quote D legendary hero wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: A sad example of how important mobility is. Ask any tactical coordinator in the USMC: Mobility kills. Off-topic stuff Keep it on-topic D. The HMG is a completely different topic and has little/no bearing here. We are discussing the disparity between armor and shield tank. I brought heavies up because they show in a more obnoxiously obvious fashion the disparity between shields and armor as they have more to lose in the drawbacks. This is purely a discussion of the armor modules and armor tanking, versus shields. We have the attention of the Devs, so let's not waste that by drifting off-topic. The HMG was fixed and is again playable. that is enough for now.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 941	Posted - 2013.06.06 09:40:00 - [9] - Quote nicely posted laurent. I agree with your point of armor vs. shield regen to a point. I think base regen on the rep modules needs to be higher, as there is nothing stopping shield users from dropping two regulators in the lows for faster recharging, and dropping one or two shield regen rate boosts in the highs while still maintaining a rather beefy tank. so we can afford some more wiggle room there, because shield extenders are not the be-all end-all of shield tanking. they are merely the most user-friendly.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 941	Posted - 2013.06.06 09:43:00 - [10] - Quote D legendary hero wrote: Stuff playing with resists is a dangerous thing. Giving say a base 6% per level of heavy suit skill to resists would effectively give an unmodded heavy the rough equivalent of 1300 HP without adding any sort of plates. More Vs. lasers. It's a very delicate balance point and native resists can absolutely goatfuck the equation if they are done wrong. I think having 1600 HP heavies is slightly unnecessary without cranking plates in all slots. with your idea they would only need 2. plus the HMG isn't a marshmallow gun anymore. it eats people alive.

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 941	Posted - 2013.06.06 09:48:00 - [11] - Quote D legendary hero wrote: ^^since the resistance mechanic is already in the game and all players are familiar with it, it won't be hard to implement. anyone who has used an smg against a fully shielded opponent or a scrambler rifle against armor knows that their weapon seems to 'burn through' either shields or armor, and then does noticeably less damage to its counter part. that is resistance. applying moodules that upgrade resistances could be the key to balancing shield verses armor. if armor mods gave some kind of resistance to damage to armor then it could offset the movement penalty. p.s. with regards your comment about flux nades not being lethal. i think flux inaddition to removing shield should do some kind of armor damage. shields recover way to fast, their must be a reward for using them. no. flux nades are intended to be useless against armor. just like locus are limited against shields. and inherent resistances should be suit-based not just "Oh armor gets a flat resistance bonus." CCP has found native resistance bonuses to often be overpowering, to the point where there's no reason to use other equipment in the class. If armor is made too good there will be no need for shields.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 941	Posted - 2013.06.06 09:56:00 - [12] - Quote D legendary hero wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: [quote=D legendary hero]Stuff right now these shield tankers make my heavy look like a clown that performs barmitzfa's and birthday parties and doesn't get tips. You're doing it wrong. what are your armor/shield skills and what's your normal fit? Edit: there's some ways around the current armor tanking limitations. It requires tactics and a serious "No F*cks Given" attitude.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 945	Posted - 2013.06.06 10:09:00 - [13] - Quote resistances are part of the answer. removing mobility penalty on armor tanking is a bad idea if you add downsides to shields down the line. 30% damage resistance is quite a bit of resistance. it would add 150 HP (taking my base EHP to 1162 with no mods) to my fatsuit equivalent before I ever thought about welding on the dumpster walls I found in the trash. And that's only if that resistance did not apply to shields. If it DID apply to my shields my no-module EHP would be a whopping 1312 EHP. Just a bit broken once I start adding defenses, because I can already out-firepower most heavy tanked assault/logi within my optimal. I use plates and am pretty spectacularly successful with them. However that's not the problem. We're looking at ways to balance armor without making it OP AND... without making Armor tanking the same as shield tanking. You're banging on a point that will push fatties into the OP zone sharply. But that does not address the overall balance issues of armor tanking. Now that we have armor-tanked amarr/gallente assault and logis as well as medium frames Armor tanking is no longer a "Heavy problem." It is now "everybody's problem."
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 945	Posted - 2013.06.06 10:48:00 - [14] - Quote more to the point, shield tankers will benefit equally from EWAR as the armor tankers will, so net gain of 0.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 948	Posted - 2013.06.06 11:48:00 - [15] - Quote I think keeping shields and armor distinct should be done. making one function like the other is undesirable
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 953	Posted - 2013.06.06 19:54:00 - [16] - Quote Kitten Empress wrote: They are planning on bringing back the true Heavy, however I think they will put some limits on its Anti infantry power. they already have. Range. Plus the forge gun bites ass killing infantry.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 953	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:22:00 - [17] - Quote range was not brought back up. assault HMGs don't count. we still have about a 30 meter optimal, 50 ish meter max.
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 953	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:25:00 - [18] - Quote Kitten Empress wrote: False. The range is lowered for everyone, and so far HMG still works nicely at its job - point defense. I doubt you will even get to have the HMG. 2500+ eHP AND a weapon that can deal 600+ DPS? Unless it had SMG range, this would make heavies the new TAC AR. and why do you say we will lose the HMG? I've never seen any indication that CCP intends to pump heavies to 2500 EHP. Pics or it didn't happen Jenza
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet 954	Posted - 2013.06.06 22:27:00 - [19] - Quote if armor is fixed so it is as good as shields... I must stress I do not want them to be identical... ever... then there is no reason to not have a handheld infantry shield transporter to boost caldari/minmatar dropsuits in the field.

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.