DUST Search - Request - High power slot armor modules

Eldest Dragon wrote:

Lets just do that, and then, lets make a grenade that does 1500 damage to ds armor. Oh and then lets make shield extenders that give 120hp ea and then lets give those a movement penalty. And then lets make armor and shields rep at the same rate.

I get tired of hearing its not fair or armor needs this, w/e dude, spec into shields then. No1 wants to adrress the current issues with shields though.. like whats a regulator really good for anyway... unless ur losing tank or damage for recharge. Recharge and regulation go hand in hand.

The only thing armor should get to help balance it with shields is.. a decrease in the movement penalty on the complex plates.. or maybe a buff to the armor rep modules thats it. Otherwise they just need to make shields and armor the same or remove 1 of them.

Personally i'd like a grenade that took off all dropsuit armor, or an ar like the scrambler, thats fully auto aimed at shredding armor. Theres ups and downs to both..pick the ups and downs you can live with and go into that peeps. And please ffs quit complaining.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ankoku Daishogun Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 89	Posted - 2013.07.30 07:24:00 - [1] - Quote Shield tankers can benefit from both high power and low power slots, while armor tankers can only use low power slots for their tank. I am not counting armor repairing nano hives because basic heavies and sentinels can't carry any equipment, and when minmatar and caldari heavy frames get introduced, amarr and gallente will be at a great disadvantage, especially if infantry shield transporters get introduced. I suggest introducing a high power slot module that increases the armor repairer's repair rate, similar to the auxiliary nano pump in eve. Another idea is armor resistance modules that will passively buff armor ehp.
Zatara Rought TeamPlayers EoN. 585	Posted - 2013.07.30 07:27:00 - [2] - Quote Ankoku Daishogun wrote: Shield tankers can benefit from both high power and low power slots, while armor tankers can only use low power slots for their tank. I am not counting armor repairing nano hives because basic heavies and sentinels can't carry any equipment, and when minmatar and caldari heavy frames get introduced, amarr and gallente will be at a great disadvantage, especially if infantry shield transporters get introduced. I suggest introducing a high power slot module that increases the armor repairer's repair rate, similar to the auxiliary nano pump in eve. Another idea is armor resistance modules that will passively buff armor ehp. Virtually every experienced heavy would rather have a complex damage mod in a high slot over a shield extender...or any other module you com up with.
xSir Campsalotx D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 54	Posted - 2013.07.30 07:29:00 - [3] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Ankoku Daishogun wrote: Shield tankers can benefit from both high power and low power slots, while armor tankers can only use low power slots for their tank. I am not counting armor repairing nano hives because basic heavies and sentinels can't carry any equipment, and when minmatar and caldari heavy frames get introduced, amarr and gallente will be at a great disadvantage, especially if infantry shield transporters get introduced. I suggest introducing a high power slot module that increases the armor repairer's repair rate, similar to the auxiliary nano pump in eve. Another idea is armor resistance modules that will passively buff armor ehp. Virtually every experienced heavy would rather have a complex damage mod in a high slot over a shield extender...or any other module you invent. Agreed
Ankoku Daishogun Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 89	Posted - 2013.07.30 07:56:00 - [4] - Quote xSir Campsalotx wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Ankoku Daishogun wrote: Shield tankers can benefit from both high power and low power slots, while armor tankers can only use low power slots for their tank. I am not counting armor repairing nano hives because basic heavies and sentinels can't carry any equipment, and when minmatar and caldari heavy frames get introduced, amarr and gallente will be at a great disadvantage, especially if infantry shield transporters get introduced. I suggest introducing a high power slot module that increases the armor repairer's repair rate, similar to the auxiliary nano pump in eve. Another idea is armor resistance modules that will passively buff armor ehp. Virtually every experienced heavy would rather have a complex damage mod in a high slot over a shield extender...or any other module you invent. Agreed The subject isn't what should heavies use in high slots, it is the lack of armor tanking modules for the high slots while shield tankers get shield tanking modules for lows. I am an experienced heavy, and in some situations where I am not on point defense, taking an outside letter for example, I would use a damage mod and a shield module (either a recharger or extender) to add more defense since I will be out in the open (Enemy snipers defending the hacking panel) because I will need every hitpoint to get the hack off, that's one example. Another example is when am using a gastun, 2 damage mods on a gastun is just an overkill and not needed imho, so instead I use one damage mod and shield mod. Another example, I am on high grounds defending a hacking panel of an objective with a forge gun, I don't need damage mods because I will be shooting mainly infantry going for the hack, will be open to sniper fire, and an ishukone assault forge gun can take care of any drop ship in 2 or rarely 3 shots without using damage mods, smarter heavies use sleek av grenades to take care of the drop ships. I am not inventing any modules, I am naming tanking modules that exist on eve online. Again, since most on the forums have ADD, the subject is armor tankers can't benefit from high slots as much as shield tankers benefit from low slots.
Misses Trickster Industrial removal service 7	Posted - 2013.07.30 09:29:00 - [5] - Quote I want this idea My minamtar suit gets a base 2/hp plus 3 lows for 6hp each thats 14hp ps then use 5 highes to lets say doulbe that.. 28 armor per second And because of no plates i keep my speed. But yeh all in all i agree that armor should get 1 high mod to help out since shield gets that 1 mod that lowers shield recharge time But unlike eve its all buffer at this point. You can easly duel tank on most suits its only suits that get bonuses to a certain tank type that should be focused
RedRebelCork Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 240	Posted - 2013.07.30 09:33:00 - [6] - Quote Makes sense. Maybe armour hardeners or resistances would go in high slots?
True Adamance PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 917	Posted - 2013.07.30 09:45:00 - [7] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Ankoku Daishogun wrote: Shield tankers can benefit from both high power and low power slots, while armor tankers can only use low power slots for their tank. I am not counting armor repairing nano hives because basic heavies and sentinels can't carry any equipment, and when minmatar and caldari heavy frames get introduced, amarr and gallente will be at a great disadvantage, especially if infantry shield transporters get introduced. I suggest introducing a high power slot module that increases the armor repairer's repair rate, similar to the auxiliary nano pump in eve. Another idea is armor resistance modules that will passively buff armor ehp. Virtually every experienced heavy would rather have a complex damage mod in a high slot over a shield extender...or any other module you invent. I would love some energised armour plating to protect myself from those pesky plasma and explosive weapons.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 5203	Posted - 2013.07.30 09:49:00 - [8] - Quote I definitely agree, shield tankers shouldn't be the only ones with modules for both.
Eldest Dragon D3LTA FORC3 Inver Brass 59	Posted - 2013.07.30 11:57:00 - [9] - Quote Lets just do that, and then, lets make a grenade that does 1500 damage to ds armor. Oh and then lets make shield extenders that give 120hp ea and then lets give those a movement penalty. And then lets make armor and shields rep at the same rate. I get tired of hearing its not fair or armor needs this, w/e dude, spec into shields then. No1 wants to adrress the current issues with shields though.. like whats a regulator really good for anyway... unless ur losing tank or damage for recharge. Recharge and regulation go hand in hand. The only thing armor should get to help balance it with shields is.. a decrease in the movement penalty on the complex plates.. or maybe a buff to the armor rep modules thats it. Otherwise they just need to make shields and armor the same or remove 1 of them. Personally i'd like a grenade that took off all dropsuit armor, or an ar like the scrambler, thats fully auto aimed at shredding armor. Theres ups and downs to both..pick the ups and downs you can live with and go into that peeps. And please ffs quit complaining.
Ankoku Daishogun Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 92	Posted - 2013.07.30 12:10:00 - [10] - Quote Eldest Dragon wrote: Lets just do that, and then, lets make a grenade that does 1500 damage to ds armor. Oh and then lets make shield extenders that give 120hp ea and then lets give those a movement penalty. And then lets make armor and shields rep at the same rate. I get tired of hearing its not fair or armor needs this, w/e dude, spec into shields then. No1 wants to adrress the current issues with shields though.. like whats a regulator really good for anyway... unless ur losing tank or damage for recharge. Recharge and regulation go hand in hand. The only thing armor should get to help balance it with shields is.. a decrease in the movement penalty on the complex plates.. or maybe a buff to the armor rep modules thats it. Otherwise they just need to make shields and armor the same or remove 1 of them. Personally i'd like a grenade that took off all dropsuit armor, or an ar like the scrambler, thats fully auto aimed at shredding armor. Theres ups and downs to both..pick the ups and downs you can live with and go into that peeps. And please ffs quit complaining. You do realize that dust 514 is a work in progress. There is no permanent ups and downs, the game will always evolve, and the modules I requested will eventually be in the game in one form or another. You do realize I am not complaining here, this is the feedback/request section and I was giving my feedback and request. So FFS stop responding to complaining posts you read somewhere else on my thread. I'd prefer if you just leave just like your corp left PC.

Cosgar ParagonX 3380	Posted - 2013.07.30 12:23:00 - [11] - Quote RedRebelCork wrote: Makes sense. Maybe armour hardeners or resistances would go in high slots? I'd say keep hardeners in the low slots, but something that multiplies repair rate by a percentage in the high slot.
Oso Peresoso RisingSuns 393	Posted - 2013.07.30 14:31:00 - [12] - Quote Cosgar wrote: RedRebelCork wrote: Makes sense. Maybe armour hardeners or resistances would go in high slots? I'd say keep hardeners in the low slots, but something that multiplies repair rate by a percentage in the high slot. Of any armor mods that could go in a highslot, this makes the most sense.
Harpyja DUST University Ivy League 407	Posted - 2013.07.30 15:02:00 - [13] - Quote I don't want to be the mean guy here, but I say no to high power armor modules. Armor needs to get balanced in other ways rather than adding high power armor modules. There is not a single armor module in EVE that goes to a medium slot (equivalent to Dust's high slot), but there are shield modules that go into low slots. It works in EVE, now they just have to make it work in Dust. As for shield transporters for infantry to use, let them! But here's the catch: they work like vehicle shield transporters. This mean that they don't work on infantry, and only on vehicles. Shield vehicles are very disadvantaged right now, and I want to be able to hop out and help my shields a little between booster cycles. I could just recall and call in a new fully repped tank, but repairing it myself is more legit.
Meeko Fent Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 424	Posted - 2013.07.30 15:50:00 - [14] - Quote Put damage mods up there, that's one of the advantages to an armor tank. Or duel tank with extenders. Armor is gimped right now, but more useless modules aren't the answer.
Bettie Boop 2100190003 A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. League of Infamy 70	Posted - 2013.07.30 18:38:00 - [15] - Quote The only thing I would consider replacing damage mods with is a module that reduces damage taken by armor. I would only run the module is if I gained enough resistance to negate damage mods being used against me. A module like this would bring armor, as far as efficiency, in line with shields which is needed.
Cosgar ParagonX 3404	Posted - 2013.07.30 18:46:00 - [16] - Quote Oso Peresoso wrote: Cosgar wrote: RedRebelCork wrote: Makes sense. Maybe armour hardeners or resistances would go in high slots? I'd say keep hardeners in the low slots, but something that multiplies repair rate by a percentage in the high slot. Of any armor mods that could go in a highslot, this makes the most sense. I would agree with this, but it would take away from damage mod advantage armor has over shields. We still need armor tanking suits to have armor related bonuses so that shield tankers can't armor tank better. Everyone seems to be ind the mindset that armor should have similar regen speeds to shields, and it shouldn't be the case. But the option can be available for a high slot module for higher armor regen with a high PG cost or something as a trade off. Also, this idea just came to me- how about "hardener" module in the low slot that multiplies your armor EHP without a speed penalty.
Epicsting pro Planetary Response Organization 57	Posted - 2013.07.30 19:33:00 - [17] - Quote I like this, but what if the mod trade on high slot to give you an extra low slot, but more rep is cool I already on my ammar logi heal 36/s more is always good.
Aizen Intiki Ghost Wolf Industries Alpha Wolf Pack 296	Posted - 2013.07.30 19:39:00 - [18] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Ankoku Daishogun wrote: Shield tankers can benefit from both high power and low power slots, while armor tankers can only use low power slots for their tank. I am not counting armor repairing nano hives because basic heavies and sentinels can't carry any equipment, and when minmatar and caldari heavy frames get introduced, amarr and gallente will be at a great disadvantage, especially if infantry shield transporters get introduced. I suggest introducing a high power slot module that increases the armor repairer's repair rate, similar to the auxiliary nano pump in eve. Another idea is armor resistance modules that will passively buff armor ehp. Virtually every experienced heavy would rather have a complex damage mod in a high slot over a shield extender...or any other module you invent. I would love some energised armour plating to protect myself from those pesky plasma and explosive weapons. plasma based weapons do more to shields, so your point?
Ankoku Daishogun Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 95	Posted - 2013.07.31 09:59:00 - [19] - Quote Harpyja wrote: There is not a single armor module in EVE that goes to a medium slot (equivalent to Dust's high slot), but there are shield modules that go into low slots. If I use the same logic, then there is not a single damage mod in EVE that goes in a medium slot, yet dust have all damage mods in high slots (equivalent to EVE's medium slot). The idea here is to use concepts of eve ship's modules, regardless of whether they're high, medium, low, or even rigs. Harpyja wrote: As for shield transporters for infantry to use, let them! But here's the catch: they work like vehicle shield transporters. This mean that they don't work on infantry, and only on vehicles. Shield vehicles are very disadvantaged right now, and I want to be able to hop out and help my shields a little between booster cycles. I could just recall and call in a new fully repped tank, but repairing it myself is more legit. I always thought there will be a shield equivalent of infantry armor repairers, seems I was wrong.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]