open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Lower Resist Mod/Shiptype
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Riame
Posted - 2008.01.28 16:31:00 - [1]
 

After watching some command ships tank 15+ bs's and/or a carrier, I think there ought to be a way to reduce someone's armor or shield resists, and/or shield boosting/armor repping.

I'm not calling for a total shut down of repairing, or a 'bring resists to 0' mod, and I'm definitely ok with the idea of a stacking penalty on this, but with the addition of scripts, it seems like a high slot mod that lowers one resist on either armor or shield (say 15% base, improvable up to 20%? Ideas?) is completely reasonable. In the same vain, a high slot mod that increases boost/rep time also seems like an easy implement.

This would open a new door for support class ships.

You can also reverse the idea and make a high mod that BOOSTS one type of damage resist for armor or shields. OR, a high mod that reduces armor rep time.

Again, this ads some complexity to logistics ships, and makes them more then just glorified HP donors.

Thoughts?

Eclip
VersaTech Interstellar Ltd.
Posted - 2008.01.29 01:09:00 - [2]
 

15 BS's?? Unless its getting remote repped to hell and back that is the funniest think i ahve heard. 15BS's with averaged skilled pilots is still like 7500dps plus. thats assuming 500dps per BS. so so it can strip the shield off the think in under a second and even with officer gear no command ship cna tank that much. i think a claymore caps out at like 3.5k dps tanked with full officer/faction gear totaling in the multi billions.

It sounds as if your squad coulnt find the remote repper and primaried the command ship which is usually a big no no as they tank harder then BS's.

remote rep gangs are nasty if they have pricision and execution. Otherwise they fail misrubly. a BS can tank 2-3 carriers if remote repped etc. did ur opposition have logistics on the grid or carriers. since a 100man BS fleet cna shhot at anotehr BS all day with a carrier repping it.

hint jammers work well on remote reppers. shuts em down dead in their tracks

Riame
Posted - 2008.01.29 05:11:00 - [3]
 

Are you completely oblivious to the concept of hyperbole? Did you even read my post?

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2008.01.29 10:53:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Riame
Are you completely oblivious to the concept of hyperbole? Did you even read my post?


You mean, are we completely oblivious to the concept of "Look at the preety fake story I made up to use as justification for a bad mechanic." kind of posts? No, we just expose you for a noob and then flame you Laughing

adriaans
Amarr
Ankaa.
Nair Al-Zaurak
Posted - 2008.01.29 13:10:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Eclip
15 BS's?? Unless its getting remote repped to hell and back that is the funniest think i ahve heard. 15BS's with averaged skilled pilots is still like 7500dps plus. thats assuming 500dps per BS. so so it can strip the shield off the think in under a second and even with officer gear no command ship cna tank that much. i think a claymore caps out at like 3.5k dps tanked with full officer/faction gear totaling in the multi billions.

It sounds as if your squad coulnt find the remote repper and primaried the command ship which is usually a big no no as they tank harder then BS's.

remote rep gangs are nasty if they have pricision and execution. Otherwise they fail misrubly. a BS can tank 2-3 carriers if remote repped etc. did ur opposition have logistics on the grid or carriers. since a 100man BS fleet cna shhot at anotehr BS all day with a carrier repping it.

hint jammers work well on remote reppers. shuts em down dead in their tracks


ever seen a plate tanked damnation with slave implants?

Commoner
Caldari
The Tuskers
Posted - 2008.01.29 13:39:00 - [6]
 

This is actually a very good idea, but actually i think that "resistance negation" should be for T2 ammo.

Instead of doing "higher" damage, lower the damage on some of the t2 ammos, but make fx. 20% of the damage they do "unresistable".

This could be an idea for T3 ammo maybe?

Riame
Posted - 2008.01.29 14:59:00 - [7]
 

My thinking behind having a specialized ship/mod for resistance modification (either as a booster or a diminishes) is that it would open the door for new support classes. Right now theres what, tackler, ewar, and "toss HP at my allies".
This could diminish blob warfare reliance in bringing down larger ships, as smaller, more efficient groups who use them well can effectively add ~20% to their overall damage and break tanks.
Say one mod for resistance boosting/dropping, and one mod for armor rep/shield boost time reduction/increasing, and design the ship so it can only fit two of these mods.
So:
Shield Resistance Harmonizer- Provides a 5% improvement to the targets shield resists
Armor Nanofield- Provides a 5% improvement to the targets armor resists
Scripts- Therm/Kin/Explodo/EM Algorithms- Reduces bonus to other resists by 100%, boosts bonus to therm/kin/explodo/em resists by 200%

Thus you can either provide a general 5% boost, or a single resist 15%. This would be stacking penalized.

So then there'd be the same, but for reducing resists in the target.

Shield Resistance deharmonizer... Armor nanofield disruptor...

Eleana Tomelac
Gallente
Eclats de verre
Posted - 2008.01.29 16:10:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Riame

Shield Resistance Harmonizer- Provides a 5% improvement to the targets shield resists
Armor Nanofield- Provides a 5% improvement to the targets armor resists


See warfare links!
There are warfare link improving resists, repair speed, repair cost for shield and armor, others improve speed and signature tanking and the last type improves EW.

Originally by: Riame
So then there'd be the same, but for reducing resists in the target.

Shield Resistance deharmonizer... Armor nanofield disruptor...


Now back to your module idea.

If it sets a malus on a ship, it should be considered EW and supercaps are immuned which would be a good thing, because loosing them because some 200Mil worth ship opened a so huge breach that you bring down a supercap worth tenth of billions is wrong.

This kind of module is still very very efficient.
On a 80% tank, lowering 15% means more than 50% damage added. (80% => 68% so, 20% taken to 32% taken, this is a 60% increase)

Also, it means it is more efficient on ships with better and super expensive tank modules and ships with resistance bonus because they will get to higher resistances.

Look at the effect on a 90% resist :
lowering 15% : 76.5%, means 23.5% damage taken instead of 10%, this is a 135% increase!!

So, the idea was not bad, but it looks imbalanced from the start, if everyone uses this kind of module, everyone will fit extenders instead of hardeners and leave home any expensive tanking module home because it will simply be inefficient.

That's about it for my comments, I used 15%, but it is the same effect whatever the values are, it is better and better on super expensive tanks.

Riame
Posted - 2008.01.29 17:15:00 - [9]
 

Links are total gang bonuses, and are race specific for the full bonus. I'm proposing something smaller, that specifically works to lower resists or boost resists of single targets (or maybe two).

Your right that the values I put forth were unrealistic, I hadn't run the numbers, but obviously these can be tweaked. I just feel there should be additional roles to fleet tactics, and a buff/debuffer would be a good place to start.

Again, I agree this shouldn't work on capitals (if this shouldn't though, why shouldn't a heavy interdictor require a capital specific scram unit?), but it would still allow smaller gangs to take down larger opponents.

Or if this doesn't fly, maybe make offensive gang warfare links.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only