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 [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 584	Posted - 2013.06.01 12:16:00 - [1] - Quote This is a thread about the infantry balance, not the vehicle balance. Please restrain yourselves from complaining about vehicle balance in this thread. Similarly, please stay on topic. Posts like GÇÿlol dust suxGÇÖ and GÇÿforget armour, fix xGÇÖ are not welcome. I have been armour tanking since the start of Chromosome. I may be biased, but I have tried to avoid that as much as possible in this report. Despite that, it will likely come across that I am strongly supporting armour, and that is true. I truly believe that armour is inferior to shields, though. I have also specced into shields with an alternate character to try and gauge balance. I will start off with the negatives for armour. There are positives, and I will come to those, but they are outweighed by the negatives as opposed to shield. Armour is worse than shield for a number of reasons. Here is why: Armour is significantly slower than shield, and mobility is exceedingly important. At the same time, armour cannot attain the buffer tank of shield, nor the recharge. The recharge through fire is nice, but given the recharge delay on shields is so short and the recharge on shield is so much higher, shield wins out on recharge overall. In the time it takes to be killed, armour might repair 30 HP with some strong reps. Fully rep fit it might be more except buffer is so low at that point that you die much quicker. Shield doesnGÇÖt have to fit reppers, so it can devote its resources to buffer. This means that although armour inherently gives higher buffer HP, it actually gets similar or lower buffer HP. The balance between plates and extenders contributes to this GÇô shield extenders, as you go up the levels, give a much higher amount of HP proportionally that armour. In addition to this, the penalty for armour plates goes up much higher proportionally as you go through the tiers than the HP bonus, making the highest tier plates, the complex plates, simply not worth using. Here are the numbers: Basic Shield Extender GÇô 22 HP Enhanced Shield Extender GÇô 33 HP Complex Shield Extender GÇô 66 HP The complex is 3x as effective as the basic. Basic Armour Plate GÇô 65 HP Enhanced Armour Plate GÇô 87 HP Complex Armour Plate GÇô 115 HP The complex is approximately 1.76x as effective as the basic. This isnGÇÖt it, however GÇô armour plates have penalties associated with them as well. Basic Armour Plate GÇô 3% penalty Enhanced Armour Plate GÇô 5% penalty Complex Armour Plate GÇô 10% penalty The complex penalty is 3.3x as harsh as the basic GÇô this is even more than the shield benefit proportion! The penalty for the plates is disproportionate to the gain, and as a direct result of this complex plates are frequently replaced by enhanced plates. Shield tanks donGÇÖt have to make this sacrifice, and there is no penalty for shielding, so shield tankers can use complex shield modules without any problems. The next reason armour is inferior to shield is because of slot layout. Shield tankers can use their lowslots for whatever, whereas armour dedicates it to tank. Of course, shield tanks dedicate their midslots to tank, however, bar damage mods and tank, midslots are less useful than lowslots. Damage modifiers are the only notable non-shield tank midslot module, and shield tanks can still compromise to fit them and have more HP than armour. Armour tanks canGÇÖt compromise their tank to fit it without making significant sacrifices in their tank which shields donGÇÖt have to make. Low slots, on the other hand, can be used for fitting mods and biotic mods, both of which can be extremely effective and useful, and biotic mods widen the mobility gap even further, which is important. We start to get the failure of the Gallente design philosophy here GÇô they use short range, high damage weapons, but with armour they canGÇÖt get in range to use them. Shield tanks can actually improve their tank further with their low slots as well GÇô shield regulators are low slot modules, thus the open slots which they have can be used to back up their tank more. This widens the gap between shield tanks and armour tanks. Non-shield tank mods in midslots: Damage modifiers (Very effective, but can still be fitted on shields) Myofibril Stimulants (lol) Non-armour tank mods in lowslots: Shield Regulators (Can be used to improve shield tank with the free slots!) Kinetic Catalyzers (Mobility gap) Cardiac Regulators (Mobility gap) Precision/Scan Strength Enhancers Scan Range Amplifiers Profile Dampeners CPU Enhancers PG Upgrades Codebreakers There seems to be a bit of a disparity here, hrm?
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 584	Posted - 2013.06.01 12:16:00 - [2] - Quote Reserved
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 584	Posted - 2013.06.01 12:16:00 - [3] - Quote Reserved
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 584	Posted - 2013.06.01 12:16:00 - [4] - Quote Reserved
Treablo James Howard WarRavens 21	Posted - 2013.06.01 12:21:00 - [5] - Quote Remote Armor Repair. Find a logi. Hug your logi. Love your logi.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 588	Posted - 2013.06.01 12:39:00 - [6] - Quote Treablo James Howard wrote: Remote Armor Repair. Find a logi. Hug your logi. Love your logi. I covered this. It takes a gun off the field, and shield regen is similarly effective.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 89	Posted - 2013.06.01 12:54:00 - [7] - Quote Add the Armor Honeycombing skill from EVE. This gives a 5% reduction to the movement penalty per level of armor modules reduce the movement penalty proportionally to the armor increase. Basic -> Enhanced is a 25% armor increase, so the penalty should increase by 25%, which so the penalty should be roughly 3.75%, Enhanced -> Complex is roughly 25% so the penalty should be 4.69%. [*] GIVE SUITS THAT FOCUS ON ARMOR TANKING, BONUSES TO ARMOR USAGE!This is probably the most important thing that would need to be looked at before changing armor tanking, because if we change all the armor modules and skills etc, then what we will create is good armor tanks, but better shield tanks. Shield tanks can stack more complex modules than armor tanks and on top of that they would now have lower penalties for armor tanking so they can go fully defensive an out tank us even more, or use up armor modules and use their excessive High slots for weapon modifiers.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 588	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:00:00 - [8] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: Add the Armor Honeycombing skill from EVE. This gives a 5% reduction to the movement penalty per level of armor modules reduce the movement penalty proportionally to the armor increase. Basic -> Enhanced is a 25% armor increase, so the penalty should increase by 25%, which so the penalty should be roughly 3.75%, Enhanced -> Complex is roughly 25% so the penalty should be 4.69%. GÇó GIVE SUITS THAT FOCUS ON ARMOR TANKING, BONUSES TO ARMOR USAGE! This is probably the most important thing that would need to be looked at before changing armor tanking, because if we change all the armor modules and skills etc, then what we will create is good armor tanks, but better shield tanks. Shield tanks can stack more complex modules than armor tanks and on top of that they would now have lower penalties for armor tanking so they can go fully defensive an out tank us even more, or use up armor modules and use their excessive High slots for weapon modifiers. 1. We don't really need more SP sinks for armour right now. Also, a 5% per level reduction to the penalty translates to a 2.5% change at maximum, with nearly 1 mil SP spent. That's not really helpful, imo, and certainly not worth the SP. 2. I agree. I suggested that the ratios be adjusted so the complex is worth 3x the basic instead of under 2x - the penalties would then be 3%, 6%, and 9%, though I've suggested lower numbers. 3. Completely agree. That's absolutely needed. Armour needs adjustment across a number of issues, and suits is one important one.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 90	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:23:00 - [9] - Quote Every time I make a post suggesting to fix armor I can't ever suggest anything without thinking at how much shield tanks would benefit from it, so the only way to really fix it is to add passives for the Armor races for just being the race, or increase the speed of all suits that focus on using armor so when the penalty hits it would put us on par with a normal suit that focuses on shields while both having an equal EHP with equal investment in defense. Also I believe that armor should fragment and increase the damage we take from explosives progressively, so instead of a MD doing 130% damage initially it would start out at 100% and go up as our armor goes down. Flux grenades should also have the ability disrupt the recharge delay and have a EMP effect, so if I get fluxed my shields would take longer to recharge and my sensors would be disrupted pretty much a flash bang/grenade.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 593	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:28:00 - [10] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: Every time I make a post suggesting to fix armor I can't ever suggest anything without thinking at how much shield tanks would benefit from it, so the only way to really fix it is to add passives for the Armor races for just being the race, or increase the speed of all suits that focus on using armor so when the penalty hits it would put us on par with a normal suit that focuses on shields while both having an equal EHP with equal investment. Also I believe that armor should fragment and increase the damage we take from explosives progressively, so instead of a MD doing 130% damage initially it would start out at 100% and go up as our armor goes down; almost everything on the field is made to destroy armor so we should have a fighting chance at least. Flux grenades should also have the ability disrupt the recharge delay and have a EMP effect, so if I get fluxed my shields would take longer to recharge and my sensors would be disrupted pretty much a flash bang/grenade. A straight buff to armour probably wouldn't help shield tankers much, unless they're dual tanking, in which case it's not a problem. Increasing the base speed of armour suits would be nice - in EvE (I hate to use this as an example but it works) Gallente ships are faster than average, and this mitigates the penalties of armour plates. The same applies to minmatar armour ships. I like this idea - I'll add it to the OP. Whilst a progressive system would be cool, it would probably be needlessly complicated to implement. Perhaps the base resistances should simply be better? Flux disrupting shield recharge further would also be nice, but I think this should be less about nerfing shields and more about buffing armour. It's worth thinking about, though. Have a +1 for your feedback, thanks.

BL4CKST4R WarRavens 93	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:38:00 - [11] - Quote Yeah I strayed a bit off topic, I started thinking about other stuff. The biggest problem with armor is mitigating the penalty specially since it increases disproportionately to its bonus. The best course of action is making the penalty proportionate to the bonus, while giving classes that focus on armor for survival an edge when using it.
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 210	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:40:00 - [12] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: Every time I make a post suggesting to fix armor I can't ever suggest anything without thinking at how much shield tanks would benefit from it, so the only way to really fix it is to add passives for the Armor races for just being the race, or increase the speed of all suits that focus on using armor so when the penalty hits it would put us on par with a normal suit that focuses on shields while both having an equal EHP with equal investment. Also I believe that armor should fragment and increase the damage we take from explosives progressively, so instead of a MD doing 130% damage initially it would start out at 100% and go up as our armor goes down; almost everything on the field is made to destroy armor so we should have a fighting chance at least. Flux grenades should also have the ability disrupt the recharge delay and have a EMP effect, so if I get fluxed my shields would take longer to recharge and my sensors would be disrupted pretty much a flash bang/grenade. Hmm, the fragment effect is a cool one and should be added. Also, so what if they dual tank? We can dual tank too. We can also fit damage mods.
S Park Finner BetaMax. CRONOS. 125	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:41:00 - [13] - Quote For dropsuits, one thing to consider with a speed increase is that, in combination with lots of low slots on armour tanking suits, the modules that increase speed would now make speed tanking easier as well. Would a fast Gallente scout benefit out of proportion? A Gallente prototype scout has 4 low slots and 5.5 m/s move, 7.6 m/s sprint right now.
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 210	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:52:00 - [14] - Quote S Park Finner wrote: For dropsuits, one thing to consider with a speed increase is that, in combination with lots of low slots on armour tanking suits, the modules that increase speed would now make speed tanking easier as well. Would a fast Gallente scout benefit out of proportion? A Gallente prototype scout has 4 low slots and 5.5 m/s move, 7.6 m/s sprint right now. This is why we need to replace the speed penalty with stamina, scouts are heavily affected by it.
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 210	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:56:00 - [15] - Quote All of these fixes together WILL BE too much, however tweaking the numbers here and there would be good. With these numbers you can get 454 armor hp + 50hp/s regenration. Or 1030hp with 15hp/s regeneration. So yeah. (This is one a Gallente logi) Also, instead of increasing the armor hp to such a high place, put complex plate to 44 hp. So 22/33/44. And then put complex plates at 130. So 65/97/130. This would put shields and armor inline in terms of increase but won't put armor at super uber high hp.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 93	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:56:00 - [16] - Quote Kitten Empress wrote: BL4CKST4R wrote: Every time I make a post suggesting to fix armor I can't ever suggest anything without thinking at how much shield tanks would benefit from it, so the only way to really fix it is to add passives for the Armor races for just being the race, or increase the speed of all suits that focus on using armor so when the penalty hits it would put us on par with a normal suit that focuses on shields while both having an equal EHP with equal investment. Also I believe that armor should fragment and increase the damage we take from explosives progressively, so instead of a MD doing 130% damage initially it would start out at 100% and go up as our armor goes down; almost everything on the field is made to destroy armor so we should have a fighting chance at least. Flux grenades should also have the ability disrupt the recharge delay and have a EMP effect, so if I get fluxed my shields would take longer to recharge and my sensors would be disrupted pretty much a flash bang/grenade. Hmm, the fragment effect is a cool one and should be added. Also, so what if they dual tank? We can dual tank too. We can also fit damage mods. We can't dual tank as well as shield tanks can because of how easier it is for them to stack HP. On a Assault ck.0 I can get 758 EHP and 4.64 speed with a Complex damage modifer, using 3 Complex shield extenders and 1 basic 1 enhanced armor plate. On a Assault gk.0 I can get 686 EHP with and 4.64 speed with a Complex damage modifier, using 2 Complex shield extenders and 1 basic 1 enhanced armor plate. The only way for the gk.0 to get the same EHP as the Assault is to add a basic armor plate but that would mean I would be slower and I also would be more focused on armor than shields therefore worse at dual tanking. S Park Finner wrote: For dropsuits, one thing to consider with a speed increase is that, in combination with lots of low slots on armour tanking suits, the modules that increase speed would now make speed tanking easier as well. Would a fast Gallente scout benefit out of proportion? A Gallente prototype scout has 4 low slots and 5.5 m/s move, 7.6 m/s sprint right now. I meant a passive increase to the suits speed itself, a very small increase actually between like 3%-6% increase in suit speed, so when adding a armor module the speed drops to around current base speed, essentially negating the penalty of one armor module.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 595	Posted - 2013.06.01 13:59:00 - [17] - Quote Kitten Empress wrote: All of these fixes together WILL BE too much, however tweaking the numbers here and there would be good. With these numbers you can get 454 armor hp + 50hp/s regenration. Or 1030hp with 15hp/s regeneration. So yeah. (This is one a Gallente logi) Also, instead of increasing the armor hp to such a high place, put complex plate to 44 hp. So 22/33/44. And then put complex plates at 130. So 65/97/130. This would put shields and armor inline in terms of increase but won't put armor at super uber high hp. That would work, yeah. It would nerf shield tanking fairly significantly at the same time as buffing armour quite a bit, though, so that's perhaps not ideal.
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 210	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:01:00 - [18] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Kitten Empress wrote: All of these fixes together WILL BE too much, however tweaking the numbers here and there would be good. With these numbers you can get 454 armor hp + 50hp/s regenration. Or 1030hp with 15hp/s regeneration. So yeah. (This is one a Gallente logi) Also, instead of increasing the armor hp to such a high place, put complex plate to 44 hp. So 22/33/44. And then put complex plates at 130. So 65/97/130. This would put shields and armor inline in terms of increase but won't put armor at super uber high hp. That would work, yeah. It would nerf shield tanking fairly significantly at the same time as buffing armour quite a bit, though, so that's perhaps not ideal. Its uber buff vs nerf and buff.
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 210	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:10:00 - [19] - Quote Hey CCP FoxFour, its time for you to shine! We know you're a Gallente bro, push the people responsible to balance! Me and Arkena promise, if you manage to make them balance armor and shield, we will stop calling you SoxFour.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 93	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:15:00 - [20] - Quote Kitten Empress wrote: Hey CCP FoxFour, its time for you to shine! We know you're a Gallente bro, push the people responsible to balance! Me and Arkena promise, if you manage to make them balance armor and shield, we will stop calling you SoxFour. I don't think devs read these posts as much as they should :(

Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 211	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:17:00 - [21] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: Kitten Empress wrote: Hey CCP FoxFour, its time for you to shine! We know you're a Gallente bro, push the people responsible to balance! Me and Arkena promise, if you manage to make them balance armor and shield, we will stop calling you SoxFour. I don't think devs read these posts as much as they should :( We will push FoxFour on IRC to read it. This will hopefully make him push it to the people responsible for balance.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 595	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:33:00 - [22] - Quote Kitten Empress wrote: BL4CKST4R wrote: Kitten Empress wrote: Hey CCP FoxFour, its time for you to shine! We know you're a Gallente bro, push the people responsible to balance! Me and Arkena promise, if you manage to make them balance armor and shield, we will stop calling you SoxFour. I don't think devs read these posts as much as they should :( We will push FoxFour on IRC to read it. This will hopefully make him push it to the people responsible for balance. SoxFour will become FoxFour, and all will be well.
Martin0 Brancaleone Maphia Clan Corporation CRONOS. 314	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:38:00 - [23] - Quote IMO 1.Change the gallente and amarr assault suits skill bonus from 5% shield recharge to 5% reduction to armor plates speed penality. 2.Give shields a proper drawback. In eve armor plates slows you down BUT shields increase your sig. radius. Just give shield extender a sig radius penality like in eve so that armor is slower but shields make you more visible on the battlefield. -Basic shield extender +3% sig radius -Advanced shield extender +5% sig radius -Proto shield extender +10% sig radius
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 211	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:43:00 - [24] - Quote Martin0 Brancaleone wrote: IMO 1.Change the gallente and amarr assault suits skill bonus from 5% shield recharge to 5% reduction to armor plates speed penality. 2.Give shields a proper drawback. In eve armor plates slows you down BUT shields increase your sig. radius. Just give shield extender a sig radius penality like in eve so that armor is slower but shields make you more visible on the battlefield. -Basic shield extender +3% sig radius -Advanced shield extender +5% sig radius -Proto shield extender +10% sig radius So you compare speed penalty vs sig radius? In what world is it fair? You suggested fixes would keep shields superior.
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 93	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:50:00 - [25] - Quote Kitten Empress wrote: Martin0 Brancaleone wrote: IMO 1.Change the gallente and amarr assault suits skill bonus from 5% shield recharge to 5% reduction to armor plates speed penality. 2.Give shields a proper drawback. In eve armor plates slows you down BUT shields increase your sig. radius. Just give shield extender a sig radius penality like in eve so that armor is slower but shields make you more visible on the battlefield. -Basic shield extender +3% sig radius -Advanced shield extender +5% sig radius -Proto shield extender +10% sig radius So you compare speed penalty vs sig radius? In what world is it fair? You suggested fixes would keep shields superior. In the world of EVE were sig radius matters a bit more, in our world sig radius isn't as important as speed. Sig radius doesn't save my life as much as running away.
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 212	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:57:00 - [26] - Quote BL4CKST4R wrote: Kitten Empress wrote: Martin0 Brancaleone wrote: IMO 1.Change the gallente and amarr assault suits skill bonus from 5% shield recharge to 5% reduction to armor plates speed penality. 2.Give shields a proper drawback. In eve armor plates slows you down BUT shields increase your sig. radius. Just give shield extender a sig radius penality like in eve so that armor is slower but shields make you more visible on the battlefield. -Basic shield extender +3% sig radius -Advanced shield extender +5% sig radius -Proto shield extender +10% sig radius So you compare speed penalty vs sig radius? In what world is it fair? You suggested fixes would keep shields superior. In the world of EVE were sig radius matters a bit more, in our world sig radius isn't as important as speed. Sig radius doesn't save my life as much as running away. What he said. In EVE larger sig means you're easier to hit.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 597	Posted - 2013.06.01 14:59:00 - [27] - Quote Martin0 Brancaleone wrote: IMO 1.Change the gallente and amarr assault suits skill bonus from 5% shield recharge to 5% reduction to armor plates speed penality. 2.Give shields a proper drawback. In eve armor plates slows you down BUT shields increase your sig. radius. Just give shield extender a sig radius penality like in eve so that armor is slower but shields make you more visible on the battlefield. -Basic shield extender +3% sig radius -Advanced shield extender +5% sig radius -Proto shield extender +10% sig radius Signature radius in dust right now is a laughable penalty - it'd do very little.
Kitten Empress Ametat Security Amarr Empire 217	Posted - 2013.06.01 16:30:00 - [28] - Quote bump
BL4CKST4R WarRavens 93	Posted - 2013.06.01 16:35:00 - [29] - Quote Did FoxFour read it
Poplo Furuya Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2013.06.01 16:36:00 - [30] - Quote I'm in agreement with the plate penalty being too heavy handed. It's penalisation being speed also puts the Gallente scout in an awkward position, having it's two strengths potentially impinging on one another. Shifting the penalty to stamina would remedy this. Armour is in a very rough place compared to shields in almost all areas of capability. This does call for them to be evened out but this doesn't necessarily mean armour being brought up to the same kind of level as shields, bringing shields more in line with armour is also an option. Giving it trade-offs of another kind, reducing the hp granted by complex extenders, perhaps increasing the delay on shield recovery or a reduction to recharge speed. The extender is the main one I'd advocate, going overboard and reversing the situation between armour and shields I would not. The decision about which direction to take it, which one should be made to meet the other, is a gameplay one. Where do you want the TTK to be at? Do you want to trivialise non-lethal damage or make them bear their wounds longer? The bottom line is that by buffing one thing you are also, in essence, nerfing everything else and vice versa. As most of the tools in Dust revolve around either making someone's health hit zero or preventing your own from doing the same shields and armour tie into this particularly heavily.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.