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)
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 48	Posted - 2013.06.01 19:17:00 - [1] - Quote Make passive shield regen slower, add shield transfer arrays. Fix modules accordingly, giving armor a pure HP advantage (still) unless shield extenders get a noteworthy penalty.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 66	Posted - 2013.06.06 11:25:00 - [2] - Quote Just gonna throw a random thought out there, but what if the downsides to shield extenders were that they actually reduced shield recharge rate as well? (can be done alongside other changes for balance) As is, in my armor tanked suits, my shields restore to full effortlessly. Adding a few hundred HP to shields and it's still not a huge time to wait for them to restore, unlike armor which can take quite a seriously long time. But if the more shield buffer you put onto a ship, the less HP/sec your shields would restore, and I think that may be a step in the right direction? At the very least, it gives shield tanking a noticeable drawback similar to how armor tanking noticeably reduces speed.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 68	Posted - 2013.06.06 11:30:00 - [3] - 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. Adding more information to weapons and dropsuits is not a bad idea either. Labeling weapons as "Hybrid", "Laser", "Projectile", and "Explosive" in game would go a long way. Adding damage and resistance indicators is also not a bad idea. It doesn't have to be exactly like EVE, but some way for people to learn "Okay, my Precision Rifle (Projectile) with the standard ammo will do well against armor tanks (gallente/amarr suits) but not so well against the shield tanks (caldari/matari)." They would be able to take this information with them into battle and notice the difference in performance as well.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 68	Posted - 2013.06.06 11:31:00 - [4] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote: Just gonna throw a random thought out there, but what if the downsides to shield extenders were that they actually reduced shield recharge rate as well? (can be done alongside other changes for balance) As is, in my armor tanked suits, my shields restore to full effortlessly. Adding a few hundred HP to shields and it's still not a huge time to wait for them to restore, unlike armor which can take quite a seriously long time. But if the more shield buffer you put onto a ship, the less HP/sec your shields would restore, and I think that may be a step in the right direction? At the very least, it gives shield tanking a noticeable drawback similar to how armor tanking noticeably reduces speed. Hrm. I don't think this would work, as it would probably be an even harsher penalty than armour. Proportionally, you do recharge slower if you stack shield extenders. I think the recharge rate of shields is fine as is - armour repairs aren't okay, though. You don't actually recharge any slower though. You just have a lot more HP to charge (and proportionally, it still takes shields pretty much no time at all to fill up to maximum compared to armor) You also have modules and skills that affect shield regenerative abilities, which creates a bit of diversity with playstyles and fittings and skillpoint allocation (depending on if pure buffer or regenerative abilities are more important to you) This also plays out better with Caldari/Matari differences, where Caldari would prefer shield buffers and Matari prefer shield regeneration.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 69	Posted - 2013.06.06 12:01:00 - [5] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Hrm. I don't think this would work, as it would probably be an even harsher penalty than armour. Proportionally, you do recharge slower if you stack shield extenders. I think the recharge rate of shields is fine as is - armour repairs aren't okay, though. You don't actually recharge any slower though. You just have a lot more HP to charge (and proportionally, it still takes shields pretty much no time at all to fill up to maximum compared to armor) You also have modules and skills that affect shield regenerative abilities, which creates a bit of diversity with playstyles and fittings and skillpoint allocation (depending on if pure buffer or regenerative abilities are more important to you) This also plays out better with Caldari/Matari differences, where Caldari would prefer shield buffers and Matari prefer shield regeneration. This is true. But combining it with a penalty means that shields take a ludicrously long time to recharge fully, similar to what we have with armour. I don't think that's a solution. Well then this is a point where we disagree! We're both after the same thing, balance, but it seems we are looking at different ways to accomplish the same thing. Allow me to continue my efforts: For starters, know that part of my basis for this argument does come from the EVE universe (in EVE, passive regeneration is very slow but can made very powerful by dedicating nearly every slot to it, and it never stops passively regenerating even if empty). That alone is probably enough to make a DEV skip over it without offering any consideration to it (Hey, can we get that EVE logo on top of the DUST 514 logo gone as well? We don't want EVE influencing our totally unrelated game, right?) /rant Okay for comparison's sake here I'm just going to compare Gallente and Caldari equipment at the prototype level. Proto Caldari Assault ck.0: 210 Shields @ 25hp/s 120 Armor Delay: 5.0s (8.0 depleted) Proto Gallente Assault gk.0: 120 Shields @ 20hp/s 210 Armor Delay: 7.0s (10.0 depleted) So we see here it will take a maximum of 16.4 seconds for the Caldari Assault to return to full shields before any modules or skills are factored in. It will take the Gallente suit a maximum of 16 seconds to return to full shields before any modules or skills are factored in. So at this level, the Caldari suit is less than half a second slower to full shields, but is getting a bonus of 90 extra hp in that time (that's not really small). But we know that the Gallente isn't shield tanking so if we move to armor modules we see the Complex repairs 5hp/s. Most fits that I know of tend to use 2 to mitigate the speed penalty and to allow for better field sustainability (in small scale firefights). So at 10hp/s with a maximum of 209 armor to fill (210 would result in death of course) means it takes the Gallente suit 20.9 (rounds to 21) seconds to take its "tank" from empty to full. Nearly 5 seconds longer than the Caldari suit takes, but it has to use two modules to do it and invest a heavy amount of SP. So let's throw some Complex Shield extenders on the Caldari suit. We'll go all out and throw 4 on for the sake of pure math goodness. That's (4*66) + 210 = 474 shield HP. Once shields start regenerating, that means it will take 18.96 seconds (round to 19) +8 delay (27s total) for the Caldari tank to go from empty to full. That's 6 seconds slower than the Gallente suit, but a total of 264 extra HP restored. And at no cost to the shield tank. It doesn't have to think twice about stacking shield extenders because there is no penalty. If we start adding armor plating to the Gallente suit, we not only have to consider how much longer it's now going to take us to get our tank back to full power, but also how much slower we'll be moving. So let's say that Complex shield extender reduces shield recharge rate by -1 per extender. That gives it a 21hp/s recharge rate with 4 extenders (still higher than Gallente shield recharge by 1 and over 2x as much as a Gallente using 2 complex armor reps). It extends the time required to go from 0 tank to full 474 hp only slightly. Originally the time was 27 seconds, now it would be 30.5. Not a huge margin in my opinion, but enough to make a shield tanker consider taking a shield recharge module instead of an extra extender. Is it a perfect idea? I wouldn't say so. But I do think it might be worth considering. And if I missed any important points here please feel free to present them, I deal more with vehicles than dropsuits!
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 69	Posted - 2013.06.06 12:18:00 - [6] - Quote It's worth noting that the Caldari shield tanker, if this change were to go through, could experience something like this: 3 Extenders + 1 Recharger He'd be sacrificing one extender so his sHP would drop from 474 to 408. In return, however, his Passive Regen would improve from 22sHP/s (25 - 3) to 31sHP/s (22 * 1.42 = 31.24). This would give him a zero-to-full recharge time of ~21 seconds (408/31) + 8 = 21.16. That's about the same timeframe it takes the Gallente suit with 2 complex armor repairers just to get to 210 HP, and he's getting 408 out of it. So again, I'm not going to say it's an end all perfect fix (or that it's even remotely close), but we have more armor modules coming out that could help narrow the gap, and the point is that this gives shield extenders an actual drawback where they currently have none. This also accomplishes the effect of varying shield tanks. Do you go for the extra buffer to give yourself the edge in small combat? Or do you go for the improved sustainability/reliability of quicker regeneration? Again, these ideas could be integrated into the Caldari/Minmatar dropsuits (respectively) to give them slightly increased racial flavor and is a throwback to EVE lore and mechanics as well, without being an exact copy.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 69	Posted - 2013.06.06 12:35:00 - [7] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote: It's worth noting that the Caldari shield tanker, if this change were to go through, could experience something like this: 3 Extenders + 1 Recharger He'd be sacrificing one extender so his sHP would drop from 474 to 408. In return, however, his Passive Regen would improve from 22sHP/s (25 - 3) to 31sHP/s (22 * 1.42 = 31.24). This would give him a zero-to-full recharge time of ~21 seconds (408/31) + 8 = 21.16. That's about the same timeframe it takes the Gallente suit with 2 complex armor repairers just to get to 210 HP, and he's getting 408 out of it. So again, I'm not going to say it's an end all perfect fix (or that it's even remotely close), but we have more armor modules coming out that could help narrow the gap, and the point is that this gives shield extenders an actual drawback where they currently have none. This also accomplishes the effect of varying shield tanks. Do you go for the extra buffer to give yourself the edge in small combat? Or do you go for the improved sustainability/reliability of quicker regeneration? Again, these ideas could be integrated into the Caldari/Minmatar dropsuits (respectively) to give them slightly increased racial flavor and is a throwback to EVE lore and mechanics as well, without being an exact copy. I don't know if your asking to buff shields or not You do realize that shields are currently capable of this without adding a passive regeneration penalty to extenders? I mean, I have no idea if 3 complex extenders and a complex recharger even fit on a Caldari Assault Suit (I'd guess they don't considering huge CPU requirements) but it's just for a mathematical example. To provide what the same situation would be WITHOUT my proposed change: Caldari Full Buff (Pre): Shields: 474 @ 25 hp/s = 27 seconds to full Caldari Full Buff (Post): Shields: 474 @ 21 hp/s = 30.57 seconds to full So with the added drawback it'd take an extra ~4 seconds for Caldari shields to regen. Caldari Buffergen (Pre): Shields 408 @ 35.5 hp/s = 19.49 seconds to full Caldari Buffergen (Post): Shields 408 @ 31 hp/s = 21.16 seconds to full So there is an extra ~2 seconds for the shields to regen. Not a huge nerf in the slightest, just something that sort of helps "bring it in line". Like I said we've got new armor modules incoming and CCP is aware that there is a slight discrepancy between the two so we may see a slight armor buff in the future. I am more trying to make it so shields aren't as much "free hp at no cost". In EVE shield extenders increase your signature radius making you a much easier target to track and hit. Armor plates increase your mass, which reduce your BOOSTED speed, making it more difficult for you to control the range of your engagement. Both have drawbacks to consider, and some may be less desirable in certain times than others. Sorry if I wasn't making it quite clear, but I am not trying to suggest a shield tank buff.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 69	Posted - 2013.06.06 12:40:00 - [8] - Quote Beren Hurin wrote: EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote: Adding more information to weapons and dropsuits is not a bad idea either. Labeling weapons as "Hybrid", "Laser", "Projectile", and "Explosive" in game would go a long way. Adding damage and resistance indicators is also not a bad idea. It doesn't have to be exactly like EVE, but some way for people to learn "Okay, my Precision Rifle (Projectile) with the standard ammo will do well against armor tanks (gallente/amarr suits) but not so well against the shield tanks (caldari/matari)." They would be able to take this information with them into battle and notice the difference in performance as well. Actually, if we already have the bars floating over enemy players' heads, it might make more sense to have resistance profiles on these bars rather than native to a weapon HUD, or in the quick-info text (current location). You could have a third bar above or below the current health bars that somehow mimics damage rates vs armor and shield. I'm thinking a bar with a line in the center with the shield rating corresponding to the length of the left side of the bar, and armor the length of the right. A 50% full shield side would mean that your weapon does 100% damage to shield and vice versa. So when a new player would see 2 really short bars hovering above a HAV when their AR is equipped, they would know not to give away their position and shoot at it. Ah! I was not exactly meaning to imply the information be relative to the HUD, but rather: 1) The Weapon information/stats details 2) The dropsuit information/stats details 3) The dropsuit fitting window Sorry about that. As for your idea, would you mind making a quick mockup in MSPaint or something? I am not sure I am getting the image you are trying to draw.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 71	Posted - 2013.06.06 13:19:00 - [9] - Quote BL4CKSTAR wrote: So your suggesting that 14% Shield reduction for a 10 decrease increase in regen, which makes them.... better? Also your leaving it to choice for the Caldari to sacrifice a Complex mod for a recharger, most people would rather get the HP increase. Honestly I am just really confused at what you're suggesting. No, you're completely misunderstanding my post. Adding a shield recharge penalty to all shield extenders can in no way make shield tanking any better than it currently is. It only makes it take longer for their shields to reach full power. It is NOT intended as "the fix" to make shield tanking and armor tanking equal. I have already stated that. The ENTIRE intention of the change would be to give shield tanking a drawback to consider. For armor tanking it is a speed drawback. In this case, it would reduce your shield regeneration amount. That means a Caldari suit with no shield modules would reach 210 shields faster than a Caldari suit with 474 shields from 4 complex extenders. With CURRENT mechanics they would reach 210 shield hp at the exact same time. It is something meant to slightly reduce the advantage that shield tanking currently has over armor. Alongside a slight armor buff, the two will balance out without any major changes to either side. Are Caldari tankers really going to notice it taking an extra 4 seconds for their shields to hit maximum? Perhaps! But it shouldn't be enough to cause any tears or complaints. And I don't know where you're getting 480 shields from with 3 complex extenders and a complex recharger. I am not using skills for my calculations and the number is clearly 408 (210 + [663]). If you are factoring skills into your equations then they don't stand alongside my calculations. And I already gave you the Gallente numbers. The reason I'm NOT INCLUDING them further from what I have already done is because Gallente are not good with shields in DUST and should not be shield tanked. Therefore a drawback to shield extenders does not directly affect them. It indirectly affects them through a direct effect on their competition (shield tanks) which is why the shield suit numbers are what matter here. My proposal is simple, I will state it again: In an effort to reduce the advantage of shield tanks over armor tanks, shield tanking should come with a noticeable drawback. I am proposing this drawback to be a reduction in shield recharge rate built into Shield Extender modules, in the same way that a speed penalty is built into armor plating modules. This applies the affects already listed: A Caldari Assault Suit with 4 complex extenders CURRENTLY has 474 shield HP with a 0-Maximum recharge time of 27 seconds (before skill bonuses are included). A Caldari Assault suit fit the SAME WAY (but with the drawback) would have 474 shield HP with a 0-Maximum recharge time of 30.57 seconds (before skill bonuses are included). This means that my change would DECREASE the rate at which shield tanks recharge when stacking extender modules ALONGSIDE having to restore the extra HP provided by the extender modules. This results in ~4 extra seconds for a Caldari shield suit to return to full HP over CURRENT game mechanics. It is in no way* a buff to shields. It is a very slight nerf, implemented by adding a drawback to their extender modules. The SIDE EFFECT of this is that shield tanks become more varied by making shield regenerator modules more attractive. At the cost of raw HP, they can improve the rate at which they return to full HP. This means they are at full HP for the next fight in a much smaller timeframe than a full extender fit would be. However, they are STILL impacted by the proposed drawback to the extender modules, as so: A Caldari Assault suit with 3 complex extenders and 1 complex recharger has 408 shield HP with a 0-maximum recharge time of 19.49 seconds (before skills are factored in). A Caldari Assault suit fit the SAME WAY (but with the drawback) would have 408 shield HP with a 0-maximum recharge time of 21.16 seconds (before skills are factored in). This shows that: Currently the recharger fit would recharge about 7 seconds faster than the buffer fit. The drawback included version would recharge about 6 seconds faster than the current buffer fit. The drawback included recharge version would recharge 9 seconds faster than the drawback included buffer fit. How you are getting this to be a buff to shields is completely beyond me, I am not sure I can make it any clearer than that. Hopefully this is explaining what I'm trying to get across, but here's another simplified version: Armor tanking has a discrepancy compared to shield tanking on dropsuits (shield tanking is arguably better as pointed out by OP). New armor modules are incoming that MAY reduce the discrepancy (confirmed by CCP). My proposal is to slightly nerf shield tanks ALONGSIDE a buff to armor to equalize the playing field. My reason for doing so is that at the moment, shield tanking comes with no penalty for shield tanking, whereas armor does (movement cost). Putting a slight penalty on shields helps smooth the difference between the two. However, shields are already in a good spot and we don't want to majorly nerf them with a big penalty that could throw off the game. So adding a shield recharge penalty to shield extender modules makes a slight difference to current setups that should not heavily impact anybody's playstyle or fittings, but reduces the discrepancy between the two tank types.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 72	Posted - 2013.06.06 13:44:00 - [10] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote: BL4CKSTAR wrote: So your suggesting that 14% Shield reduction for a 10 decrease increase in regen, which makes them.... better? Also your leaving it to choice for the Caldari to sacrifice a Complex mod for a recharger, most people would rather get the HP increase. Honestly I am just really confused at what you're suggesting. No, you're completely misunderstanding my post. Adding a shield recharge penalty to all shield extenders can in no way make shield tanking any better than it currently is. It only makes it take longer for their shields to reach full power. It is NOT intended as "the fix" to make shield tanking and armor tanking equal. I have already stated that.... This makes a lot more sense, and yes I did use skills. But many of us suggesting for an armor fix do not wish for shields to be touched. We aren't even asking for armor to be brought up to the EXACT same level as shields. All we want is armor to be competitive, we aren't even asking for armor to repair just as fast as shields we only asked for a small repair bonus to armor tanking suits so that the OVERALL recharge rate of all suits is equal. But aside from this, your post makes sense and I now understand what your suggesting and I do say it isn't a bad idea. Okay well I'm glad I managed to make that clear enough, sometimes I am not so good at conveying my ideas into words. On your point, I too am fairly satisfied with where shields are! I don't think they need any major nerfs to make armor tanking feel more viable. I just feel that shield tanking should come with a viable drawback that shield tankers would have to consider for themselves, in the same way armor tankers do (Do I really care enough about my movement speed to use the complex plate or do I go for a less HP oriented fit?), and adding this drawback indirectly helps the situations discussed about armor tanks. I am hoping that my proposed change (-1hp to recharge rate built into extender modules) would be enough. It would give them a slight drawback, but it wouldn't really CHANGE how shield fits currently operate. It only slightly increases the time it takes for them to hit full HP again. Another side effect I had mentioned earlier is that CCP can use the differences between shield extenders and rechargers to offer more racial variety between Caldari suits and Minmatar suits. In EVE Caldari favor buffer where Minmatar favor shield regeneration. This change would easily allow for a more distinct flavor between the two types of shield tanks, as well as offering more for shield tanks to consider, and it indirectly narrows the current gap between armor and shields without doing anything major. Keep in mind that even with my current proposal, a 4 extender Caldari suit would still recover HP over 2x faster than a Gallente suit would recharge armor with 2 Complex Armor Reppers. I am not pushing to make armor>shields or armor=shields either. I am a firm believer that each one should have upsides and downsides that change the playstyles of the fits and also their advantages in combat when used properly. I'd prefer unique flavors to outright equality, for sure. After all, shield tanking has been dominant in EVE online for years and I'm still a die hard armor tanker.

EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 72	Posted - 2013.06.06 13:57:00 - [11] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: Well the biggest drawback is almost double the cost in CPU but 1 PG cheaper than armor, and the low HP added. That's why I say that ferroplates NEED to be higher because yet again, shield tanking will have lesser drawbacks. Yes, the fitting requirements of shields in DUST are currently rather high. Although I'm sure I'll hear rage about this, let me make a comparison using like-EVE modules. Small Shield Extender II: 263 Shield HP +2m Sig Rad penalty' 23 CPU, 3 PG 100mm Reinforced Steel Plates II: 300 Armor HP +37,500kg mass addition 11 CPU, 6 PG First things we notice are that the armor plates take about half of the CPU, but double the powergrid, and that they give slightly more HP than the closest related shield module. The reason it gives a bit more HP than shields is because shields constantly regenerate in EVE so adding extra shield HP also increases not only how much your shields regen each second but also the length of time they have to naturally regen before depleting, so it evens out a bit. As for the drawbacks, the 2m sig penalty on the Extender makes your ship easier to track. The mass addition from the armor plate reduces your speed while boosted (3m/s under Afterburner and 9m/s under MicroWarp Drive before skills are factored in). Actually, it is because of this that I support armor modules not reducing your speed directly but having a more significant impact on your stamina. This feels like it fits more with EVE to me and a lot of people seem to support the idea as well. Just something to think about.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 73	Posted - 2013.06.06 14:08:00 - [12] - Quote Absolutely not. Armor and Structure only regenerate with an armor/structure repair module equipped (and unlike in DUST, the module requires capacitor management to utilize, it isn't free passive armor regen). Basically this offers you the choice of getting an extremely high armor buffer tank in the hopes that you can defeat your opponent before they can break down your wall (with no capacitor draw from a repper) or you can choose to go active armor tank which gives you less EHP but the ability to repair your damage both during and after battle (assuming you survive) but it takes a lot of capacitor to run.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 75	Posted - 2013.06.06 14:17:00 - [13] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: EXASTRA INVICTAS wrote: Absolutely not. Armor and Structure only regenerate with an armor/structure repair module equipped (and unlike in DUST, the module requires capacitor management to utilize, it isn't free passive armor regen). Basically this offers you the choice of getting an extremely high armor buffer tank in the hopes that you can defeat your opponent before they can break down your wall (with no capacitor draw from a repper) or you can choose to go active armor tank which gives you less EHP but the ability to repair your damage both during and after battle (assuming you survive) but it takes a lot of capacitor to run. Hmm this is interesting, this makes sense with the speed penalty, but I don't think EVE ships can dodge bullets so it kinda balances for them, but not for us. EVE ships can indeed "dodge" bullets though not quite through the same mechanism as in a FPS. A tracking formula is utilized that includes: 1) Ship Signature Radius 2) Weapon Signature Resolution 3) Distance to Target + Target speed (Transversal Velocity) 4) Weapon Tracking speed in radians per second It is referred to as "speed/sig" tanking when you attempt to "dodge" enemy fire by combining as high of a speed as you can with as low of a signature radius as you can. This works best for smaller ships, such as frigates, versus larger ships such as battleships. Think of this as a Light suit vs Heavy suit.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 81	Posted - 2013.06.06 20:16:00 - [14] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: EXASTRA INVICTAS, I think you're explaining this idea quite well. It's a nice idea, and I'd say go for it, but I worry that it'd be too harsh and also it wouldn't fit with shields. They're for burst tanking more than anything else. Feel free to just call me ExAstra, I don't know why my name is in all caps and also I can't use the same name in EVE as DUST. It's shorter and has a nicer ring to it. Anyway, I understand what you're saying about burst tanking for shields, trust me. In EVE they achieve a similar feel by tanking less per cycle than armor but cycling almost twice as fast. They also regenerate HP at the beginning of a cycle instead of at the end, like armor. And given that I want DUST to at least feel like it's part of the EVE universe, and not just a game that lets EVE players shoot at stuff they can't see (or see the impacts of), trust me in that I want to see the game balanced and with relation to EVE lore, at least where necessary or sensible! I will note again that, even with my proposed "nerf" to the shield extender modules, shields would be regenerating over 2x faster minimum than an armor suit with 2 complex reps. Given that shield tank suits also begin regenerating shields 2 seconds quicker than armor tanking suits, and that they'll regen a larger amount per "burst", the burst tanking feel remains intact and untrifled with. ~4HP/s for shields isn't a big deal. For armor, it obviously is. I don't think complex armor reps need a real buff to the speed with which they repair. If anything, only 1 or 2 hp/s is more than enough, anything higher than 2 is becoming too much. Actually, 2 is probably too much. My goal here isn't to nerf shield tanking or make it feel any different than it currently is. A shield tanker really won't notice that his shields are only bursting 21hp at a time instead of 25 (extender nerfed regen of 21 on Caldari is still 1hp/s faster than Gallente base recharge rate). The difference is also further mitigated by skills, where Assault suits get a regen bonus and there are skills that affect regen rate as well. My goal is only to give shields a drawback that WON'T change how shields work in the overall concept, or change the way they feel to the shield tanker, but still give the armor tank an advantage in certain scenarios (as you pointed out there aren't really any advantages to armor tanking right now). Keep in mind that armor tanking in DUST is also flirting with death, as we don't have the option to hit zero.
EXASTRA INVICTAS Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 117	Posted - 2013.06.13 12:21:00 - [15] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: BL4CKST4R wrote: bump I am currently writing up a larger thread, which will supercede this one. Don't worry about bumping this one anymore. Thanks though. Perhaps provide a link when the thread is made? Because with the newly "unveiled" equipment, we need a place to put numbers for CCP again.

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.