Features & Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
79 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

[Retribution 1.1] Armor Tanking 1.5

First post First post
Author
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2013-01-21 18:33:22 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
:Largeish reply to some questions and comments posted on Jan 22nd here:

Decided that the title was probably being less than helpful by raising expectations and suggesting that we wouldn't continue iterating after these changes. So I adjusted it.

We've got the resources all properly committed so I'm now ready to share with you all our initial plan to fix some of the biggest problems that face armor tanking in this game. Sorry for the extended period of teasing, hopefully the happy ending will make it all worthwhile.

I was going to go into this big spiel about all the problems with armor tanking in general and active armor tanking in particular, but you all know this so I'll jump straight to the interesting bits.

Here's what we're looking for feedback on:

    Armor Rigs

    UPDATE: Overheating Rig is pulled while I re-evaluate the method used to apply the bonus.

  • Change the penalty on all active armor rigs (Aux Nano Pump, Nanobot Accelerator, and the new Nanobot Overcharger) to increase the powergrid use of local armor reps by 10% instead of reducing ship velocity. Note this is increasing the PG use of the reps by 10% (or 5% at Armor Rigging V) not decreasing the total PG of the ship.

  • Plates
  • Add a new skill to the game called Armor Upgrades. This skill reduces the mass penalty of all armor plates by 5% per level. (Int/Mem, rank 3, requires Mechanics 3) This skill affects all plates (including 1600mm) and is separate from the stat change listed below.
  • Reduce the base mass penalty on all 800mm, 200mm and 50mm plates by 20%

  • Armor Reps:New:
  • Reduce the Powergrid requirements of all Medium Armor Repair units by 20%
  • Reduce the Powergrid requirements of all Large Armor Repair units by 10%

  • Ancillary Armor Repairer
  • Not the same mechanic as the ASB, please read to the end.
  • Always uses the same cap as a normal (T1/T2/Named) Armor Repper
  • When not loaded with Nanite Repair Paste, has 3/4 the rep amount as a T1 Armor Repairer
  • When loaded with Nanite Repair Paste triples rep amount (so reps 2.25x a T1 repairer when loaded)
  • Same cycle time and fittings as T1 reps
  • Smalls use 1 paste per cycle, mediums 4, larges 8. Can hold 8 cycles worth of paste at a time. Reload time is 1 minute just like an ASB, but the longer cycle time of armor reps means it goes longer between reloads
  • Limited to one per ship


:Edit:
Incursus
With these changes we're looking to reduce the Incursus rep bonus from 10% to 7.5% because otherwise it would be wtfbbqop. Forgot to mention that initially :mybad:

Quick Q&A about the AAR:
  • Why limited to one per ship?
  • The longer time between reloads is a big part of the playstyle we wanted to give the AAR, but that with multiple copies would completely negate the burst tanking ideal. In addition, there is more of a tradition of lowslot tanking modules restricted to one per ship so I made the call that in this case the restriction would be worthwhile. The ASB debate is a separate issue unconnected. Please note that nothing is preventing current dual or triple rep fits from swapping one of their reps into an AAR.
  • Why keep the cap use consistent?
  • The elimination of cap consumption when loaded is a huge advantage of ASBs, but we decided with the AAR to build the strengths in another direction, focusing on greater stability instead. In addition, one downside of the ASB's zero cap use is the inability of one player to influence the tank of another through neuts. This works ok for the ASB but I am not inclined to expand that mechanic further.
  • Why not just buff all armor reps?
  • One of the aspects I really like about the ASB is that it allowed CCP to decouple burst tanking from sustained tanking in a new and interesting way. Burst tanking is key for most PVP active tank scenarios while sustained tanking is more common for PVE. We wanted to carry that aspect over to armor tanking, allowing us to create new burst tanking gameplay without making current sustained tanking gameplay overpowered.

    So we are very interested in hearing your feedback on this proposal. Expect at least most of these changes to make it into the next Sisi build for playtesting (the AARs might not catch this upcoming build but they should at least be in the one after that).

    Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

    Eve Radio Alliance
    #2 - 2013-01-21 18:43:15 UTC  |  Edited by: DJWiggles
    NOICE!!!!!!!!!! also technical first :D

    Live on Eve Radio Thursdays 22:00 GMT with me & friends blabbering on about Eve and stuff. Twitter, Facebook TotalEve

    Pandemic Legion
    #3 - 2013-01-21 18:43:16 UTC
    Does the nanobot overcharger work on capital reps?
    K162
    #4 - 2013-01-21 18:44:28 UTC
    So much for catching up to you in likes....

    CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

    A Band Apart.
    #5 - 2013-01-21 18:44:41 UTC
    Hyperion pilots rejoice
    RvB - RED Federation
    #6 - 2013-01-21 18:44:49 UTC
    I look forward to experimenting with the potential uses of this.
    C C P Alliance
    #7 - 2013-01-21 18:45:19 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
    Destoya wrote:
    Does the nanobot overcharger work on capital reps?


    No, although I'm hoping to do a more focused pass on capital tanking at some future point with one of the goals being to make bonuses consistent between capital and non-capital reps (without breaking everything)

    Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

    Pandemic Legion
    #8 - 2013-01-21 18:46:42 UTC
    Upset about 2k8 nano nerf.

    Fix nanos, not my fault most of the eve player base is ********* as **** and ccant take a **** **** ****** up the *******. In short go **** ****** icelandic ***, fix nanos.

    danke

    inb4 suspension
    #9 - 2013-01-21 18:47:05 UTC
    Gallente love! I hope to see a drone UI rework soon(tm).
    #10 - 2013-01-21 18:48:08 UTC
    sounds all very interesting, two things which came in my mind while reading:
    - faction plates should be revisited. they have been forgotten as the T2 plates where balanced
    - wouldn't a "Ancillary Resistance Booster" be more interesting for armor as a ancillary reper?

    cool stuff! certainly looking forward to the changes

    how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

    C C P Alliance
    #11 - 2013-01-21 18:48:22 UTC
    TruthState wrote:
    Upset about 2k8 nano nerf.

    Fix nanos, not my fault most of the eve player base is ********* as **** and ccant take a **** **** ****** up the *******. In short go **** ****** icelandic ***, fix nanos.

    danke

    inb4 suspension


    This is the wrong thread friend.

    Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

    Minmatar Republic
    #12 - 2013-01-21 18:49:28 UTC
    When are you gonna give us hull tanking rigs?
    C C P Alliance
    #13 - 2013-01-21 18:49:44 UTC
    Bienator II wrote:
    sounds all very interesting, two things which came in my mind while reading:
    - faction plates should be revisited. they have been forgotten as the T2 plates where balanced
    - wouldn't a "Ancillary Resistance Booster" be more interesting for armor as a ancillary reper?

    cool stuff! certainly looking forward to the changes


    - All faction stuff is in need of a balance pass, however I cannot give a date for such.

    - ARB would be very powerful but I didn't want to buff armor resistance tanking in fleets further than it already is

    Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

    RvB - RED Federation
    #14 - 2013-01-21 18:49:49 UTC
    I have a question, what about 1600mm Plates? Why are they excluded from the bonus? I personally never use anything smaller than those for plates.
    #15 - 2013-01-21 18:51:43 UTC
    You had me at "Nanobot Overcharger"...

    Changing the active armor rig penalty from speed to PG is amazing... it's going to make those small active tank ships so much more nimble, myrm, thorax, brutix, proteus... can't wait to try out a deimos or vigilant with these!

    Not sure about the AAR just yet... triple the active rep amount of a t1 repper sounds quite a lot... guess it'll be balanced if deemed OP... are the AAR's affected by the Active armor tank rigs as well?
    DARKNESS.
    #16 - 2013-01-21 18:51:55 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:

    Plates
  • Add a new skill to the game called Armor Upgrades. This skill reduces the mass penalty of all armor plates by 5% per level. (Int/Mem, rank 3, requires Mechanics 3)
  • Reduce the mass penalty on all 800mm, 200mm and 50mm plates by 20%



  • If i'm reading this correctly, 1600 plates are unaffected by the new skill? That would definitely be a small step towards making other plates viable - though tbh 1600s will most likely still dominate.
    Goonswarm Federation
    #17 - 2013-01-21 18:51:56 UTC
    Hopefully the change in active rigs isnt some terrible slight of hand to get people to use the new rig by no longer allowing triple rep/dual rep setups

    i like the myrm as it is
    C C P Alliance
    #18 - 2013-01-21 18:52:30 UTC
    Xenuria wrote:
    I have a question, what about 1600mm Plates? Why are they excluded from the bonus? I personally never use anything smaller than those for plates.


    The fact that nobody uses anything other than 1600mm and 400mm plates is why they are excluded from the bonus Smile
    The 800mm and 200mm change is to help narrow that gap a bit (I know it doesn't narrow it all the way) and the 50mm change is there just to keep OCD people happy.

    1600s still get the benefit of the new skill.

    Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

    #19 - 2013-01-21 18:52:54 UTC  |  Edited by: IamBeastx
    So your screwing over active tanking armor ships by limiting there PG for weaponry: Or are you changing the PG requirements of repppers?

    I see no changes to buffer fits, are we gonna still be fat and slow when we fit trimarks/resists?

    This over complicated AAR does not entice me to active armor tank anything with a small cargohold., what calculations have you done in reference to increased cap booster cargo space needed?

    All my life i wanted to be someone, now i know i should have been more specific.

    SpaceMonkey's Alliance
    #20 - 2013-01-21 18:53:11 UTC  |  Edited by: MainDrain
    Question asked and answered before i could finish posting!
    Cheers
    79 Pages123Next pageLast page
    Forum Jump