| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kushmir Nadian
Valor Coalition
RISE of LEGION
293
   |
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
The gap between Shields/Armor is closer but still needs tweaking. Hopefully the movement penalties for armor are going to be lowered.
Hopefully values and CPU/PG will be tweaked for the new armor additions (Enhanced and Complex Reactive with the same repair rate? really?) but there's still more work to be done.
What about making Armor Hardeners passive while Shield Hardeners are an active module? They're not in the game yet but as they are in EVE they should be in Dust as well. I wont even suggest values as i'm not a game designer but a passive module that eats a % of all incoming armor damage would have serious value.
One more thing....please stop showing everyone where drop uplinks are placed. They should only be revealed with Active Scanners or if within your suits scan radius. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
569
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
Kushmir Nadian wrote:The gap between Shields/Armor is closer but still needs tweaking. Hopefully the movement penalties for armor are going to be lowered.
Hopefully values and CPU/PG will be tweaked for the new armor additions (Enhanced and Complex Reactive with the same repair rate? really?) but there's still more work to be done.
What about making Armor Hardeners passive while Shield Hardeners are an active module? They're not in the game yet but as they are in EVE they should be in Dust as well. I wont even suggest values as i'm not a game designer but a passive module that eats a % of all incoming armor damage would have serious value.
Make hardeners a highslot so you sacrifice shield for some weapon specific resistances. |
Oso Peresoso
RisingSuns
89
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
confused as armor is considered better for vehicles, shield for infantry, but you're both talking about active modules and making armor better. |
Kushmir Nadian
Valor Coalition
RISE of LEGION
293
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
Hmmm...was actually thinking a low slot (it is armor after all) but again i'm not a game designer. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
571
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kushmir Nadian wrote:Hmmm...was actually thinking a low slot (it is armor after all) but again i'm not a game designer.
There are shield modules for both low and highslots. Why do all armor modules have to be lowslots?
With the current vehicle meta, I could be wrong, but the active modules on armor tanks makes them easier to tank more damage and recover HP better than shield tanks. This doesn't necessarily mean they survive anti-armor AV always, or more often, but they can take significantly more damage.
I wonder, if dropsuits did eventually get active modules, could this be the thing that balances them?
I doubt active modules are core gameplay and aren't on the next quarter's game plan, but I really think this could be the long term plan.
Possible active tanking modules:
(lowslot) Adaptive Shield Hardeners: 10 second hardener, 30 second cooldown. 15%/25%/35% resists. Can be fluxed.
(highslot) Shield Boosters: 5 cycle repair boosts. Some racial bonuses apply. 45 sec cooldown. Also auto-cancels shield delay.
(highslot) Ancilliary Shield Booster: limited charges grant instant shield recharge and shield delay reset. STD: 3 charges and 100 HP, ADV: 4 charges and 150 HP, PRO: 5 charges and 200 HP. 3 second cooldown
(highslot) Adaptive Nano Membrane: 30 second hardener, 30 second cooldown. 20%/30%/40% resists. Can't be fluxed.
(lowslot) Ancilliary armor repairer: nanite charges repair armor HP instantaneously. STD 4 charges @ 100 HP, ADV: 5 charges @ 175 HP, PRO: 6 charges @ 250 HP. 6 second cooldown.
(sort of passive) (Highslot) Nanite Flux Circuit: Increases shield delay/ depletion delay, but increases armor repair by 100%/150%/200% DURING delay period only. |
Cody Sietz
Tritan's Onslaught
RISE of LEGION
349
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
I think its kind of nuts that the new shield module does more for less cpu but the new armour modules require more cpu and pg to do almost nothing. |
TheGoebel
Kite Co. Couriers
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:45:00 -
[7] - Quote
Suggestions welcomed
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=87752 |
Zeylon Rho
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1115
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 15:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
I'd be for adding a high-slot passive armor hardener, but leaving shield hardeners as a vehicle thing. |
Mobias Wyvern
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 01:02:00 -
[9] - Quote
Be your own Judge. What game looks like more fun to you? Dust.........Or this.........
Planetside 2
Coming to PS4 this year
|
TheAmazing FlyingPig
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
1430
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 01:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
As much as I'd like to see armor become on-par with shields, I'm not sure active modules on infantry would be a great idea. The combat is far too fast-paced to be able to select your module out of the wheel, unless you hide behind something, which I suppose could work.
... Iunno. I just talked myself into not disagreeing. I'm on the fence for this one. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |