|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Disturbingly Bored
Universal Allies Inc.
250
   |
Posted - 2013.06.08 17:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Kitten Empress wrote:
Why do all weapons (except the scrambler rifle, which does 120% to shields) do 110% to shields, when every explosive in the game does 130%+ to armor?
Weapon resistance modifiers (weapon/shield modifier/armor modifier):
Assault Rifle110%90%
Mass Driver70%130%
Laser Rifle120%80%
Sniper100%100%
Shotty110%135%
Forge Gun150%100%
Nova Knives100%100%
HMG95%110%
SMG94%109%
Scramblers120%80%
Looks like a pretty even spread to me. The most used weapons in the game (AR, SR) have a penalty against armor. No whining necessary, IMO. |
Disturbingly Bored
Universal Allies Inc.
250
|
Posted - 2013.06.08 17:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
Kitten Empress wrote:
Even spread and yet the armor specific weapons do much more damage.
How does that seem even to you?
The true explosive weapons have a matching huge penalty to shield damage. Otherwise, are you saying that the HMG and SMG need to be nerfed?
Honestly, the only one that really looks out of wack for armor is the shotgun. The bonuses for it are just...weird. You're going to be hard pressed to find people who agree that the Shotgun is overpowered and needs to be nerfed, however.
The biggest outlier honestly is the Forge Gun, which gets a tremendous shield damage bonus without the cost of an armor penalty. That doesn't fit in with your original argument, though.  |
Disturbingly Bored
Universal Allies Inc.
250
|
Posted - 2013.06.08 17:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kitten Empress wrote:
So?
Considering on my Gallente suit, 1/6th of my eHP is shield, I think it doesn't matter how huge a penalty is against shield.
It should be even spread, 90%/110% or 110%/90% except for some unusual weapons like the forge gun which I will explain.
If shield weapons had 140%/60%, against a Caldari, what do you think would happen?
The same time to kill as 100%/100%?
The forge gun is an AV weapon.
Its supposed to do extra damage to tank shields, not infantry.
Its just that people decided to use it for infantry sniping.
Fair enough. I suppose I'm coming at it from a Heavy standpoint, where even shield and armor amounts means it all evens out in the end for me.
Bear with me a bit though on two points:
1) You are talking about total HP, not eHP. Your eHP depends on what's shooting at you. If you have 100 shields and 200 armor, you have 300 total HP.
If an Assault Rifle is shooting at you, you have 100/1.1 + 200/.9 = 312 EHP.
If a Scrambler Rifle is shooting at you, you have 100/1.2 + 200/.8 = 333 EHP.
If a Mass Driver is shooting at you, you have 100/.7 + 200/1.3 = 295 EHP.
2) Some givens on the state of the game, and you can feel free to disagree:
GÇó A lot of people use Assault Rifles and Scrambler Rifles
GÇó A lot of people shield tank
GÇó Given the previous point, people fit to kill shield tanks
GÇó A fair amount of tossed (non-fused) grenades do no or minimal damage to people because people dodge
Given all those things, you're more likely to end up with higher EHP than total HP by playing Gallente, than you are to end up with less EHP than total HP.
Make sense? |
Disturbingly Bored
Universal Allies Inc.
251
|
Posted - 2013.06.08 18:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kitten Empress wrote:
Armor would have the advantage, since you first have to get through the layer of shields.
By the time you pierce through it to have your slice of damage at the armor, the dude already killed you.
Completely and totally not trying to be an asshat here:
But isn't your statement the best argument for leaving the explosive damage modifiers the way they currently are? That's kind of already the state of the game. |
|
|
| |
|