|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nightbird Aeon
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Omega Commission
196
   |
Posted - 2013.07.02 14:30:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hiya,
So, shield energizers, at the proto level, give you a -6% base shield a 60% recharge rate increase. Seems OP, but don't forget a couple of things.
1 - This module is a high-slot module, so it does more than remove 6% of base shield... it removes a slot. In other words, it will most likely replace a Complex Shield Mod... meaning it will remove 6% of the base shield, PLUS the 66hp from the module that isn't fitted.
2 - Shield recharge rate isn't instantaneous. There are a several seconds after receiving damage before the recharge kicks in. Yes, this module means that the shield will recharge faster once the the recharge starts... however, as most engagements (1v1) are 3-5 second affairs, this won't have a major impact on these.
3 - While I have not yet been in game to check them out, I agree with the following:
a) If the fitting requirements are too low, this is a problem. They should require as much CPU/PG as extenders.
b) They need to be skill-based... so you should need level 5 in a skill to use the Proto modules... much like the extenders.
As a dedicated shield guy, let me tell you that it is the BUFFER, not the RECHARGE, that saves me in fights. I've tried dropping a shield extender in favor of an extra damage mod, and I can tell you that I die WAY faster... well before my shield recharge kicks in.
On the surface, these stats seem OP. We already know that CCP has another release planned for early August, and that they aren't against mid-cycle stat changes (see the TAC assault rifle for an example).... so how about everyone take a Valium and we'll see how this plays out. |
Nightbird Aeon
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Omega Commission
198
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 14:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
GeneralButtNaked wrote:Part of the issue is that armor tankers get garbage modules while the shield guys at least get a viable one.
Well, in EVE, I am a dedicated armor tanker, so I am familiar with both sides of the divide.
But people mix both sides of the argument, and each should be reviewed based on their own merits.
Rather than provide armor buffer... why not give armor resists? If you could fit a damage control unit on a drop suit (i.e. 50% damage reduction), then that 250 armor becomes 500 *effective*... which is much better, no?
This will be a side-buff to armor repairers too... as each HP repped will actually be 1.5 points (in this example). Armor tankers also need a skill that not only increases armor repair rate (i.e. hp/second), but that increases raw hp repped (i.e. 1 point per level... much like the suit bonus).
... but don't QQ about shield because armor is *kitten*. QQ about armor being *kitten*, and make suggestions on how to fix armor. |
Nightbird Aeon
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Omega Commission
198
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 14:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:Okay that was well presented and allayed some of my fears.....however after looking at new armour plate stats I'm inclined to say that no BUFFER is given to us and we already have lower EHP than Shields......
Here's the solution then....
Step 1:
Like in EVE - Add Energized Adaptive Nano Membranes... 20% base, 27.5% Advanced, 35% Proto resist bonus, across the board.
Step 2: Add an armor skill that increases the base armor repaired... in addition to the repair rate ("ticks per second").
Poof... tank-ability improved, buffer improved.... no plates required.
Thoughts? |
Nightbird Aeon
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Omega Commission
201
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 15:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
MlDDLE MANGEMENT wrote:
No offense but you are doing it wrong. Use regulators to drop the delay, drop one SE for one of these Rechargers and move cover to cover. Shield tanking is really that simple.
Shhhhh.... don't give it away!
There are merits to both approaches, though. Going with a buffer or with the recharge... depends on your playstyle. Also depends on the map. Some maps have way more cover than others.... on the more open maps, I would prefer a buffer, as cover may be too far away. |
|
|
| |
|