Regeneration Modules And Passive Regeneration

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

Wanted to talk about passive shield tanking and builds, so here we are.

Purposed Changes

  • Remove Purger Rigs from the game
    Purger rigs are to significant of an impact on the passive build. removing them from the game will help significantly improve shield recharger value

  • Shield Rechargers

    • Increase Shield Recharger regeneration rate from 10-15% to 20-25% (T1-T2)
    • Shield Rechargers now increase movement speed by 10-15% (T1-T2)
      adding movement speed bonus to shield rechargers will improve their value for smaller ships, as well as medium sized ones. Since larger ships are naturally slower they will lose a small amount of value but still be a good option for some extra speed and regeneration.

  • Shield Power Relay

    • Shield Power Relay Regeneration increased from 20-25% to 35-40%
      _Shield Power Relays have long player its rule as the primary option for passive tanking and should continue to do so. a buff was merited to help balance the loss of regeneration from purger rigs _

  • Shield Flux Coil

    • Shield Flux Coil Regeneration increased from 28-30% to 40-45%
    • Shield Flux Coil Maximum Shield Reduction removed
    • Shield Flux Coils now reduce all shield resistance by 5.
      Shield flux coils reducing the maximum shield HP seemed almost counter-productive, especially at significant rates like 15%. By buffing the base regeneration module and reducing the resistance we can accomplish a similar, higher regeneration rate with weaker to break point/alpha strike

This should work out after testing so that

Flux coil build provides another 30% regeneration (Example from 250/s to 325/s) due to the loss of shield HP the flux build should opt for more regeneration in place of less buffer so there is a bigger chance of dying vs larger groups and alpha then 1v1.
Shield Power Relay provides around 235/s.
Shield Rechargers are an alternative to extenders and should provide -5% of the extender bonus but provide an option for more speed.

Potential from these changes

  • Potentially offer Passive tanking to smaller tackle craft which could help balance them out as a game play option (reduce their death rates)
  • More mobility for passive tanked ships
  • More validity for rechargers, especially on small and medium sized ships
  • The potential to have rigs slots for other things, such as more damage, capacitor etc.
  • These changes will slightly buffer passive tanks due to the fact that other rigs can be equipped to support it.
2

sure, the gila is too weak.

2 Likes
3

nerf it by a mid or low

4

It was irony.

Passive shield are good in pve. Passive is bad in eve otherwise.

3 Likes
5

i dont really like how it works. I was thinking it work like boosters some how but then it seemed to be to similar to active shields

6

wBdnNVK.jpg1920Ă—1080 56.1 KB

3 Likes
7

8

When your only rationale is “i dont really like how it works”.
No.

3 Likes
10

…

Considering that they are literally winning this game I’ll take that as a compliment.

11

You might try to demonstrate a NEED for a change (with factual or statistical evidence) before you bandy about your proposals. I see no reason for the changes you propose.

4 Likes
12

Don’t think of passive recharge as a primary defense but rather a supplement to your buffer. Removing purgers and buffing the existing shield recharge modules would just result in people fitting extender rigs combined with the buffed chargers resulting in obscene EHP and passive tank.

3 Likes
13

This is a good point, but it’s not really a cause for concern. If anything actually the resist rigs are a bigger issue. After you do game balance for a while you learn high resist, and high regeneration and high attack speed and high critical strike percentage tend to break the game.

I had considered an out-right change to the way that shield regeneration takes place in eve applying two types, passive rate(what we have now), and a flat regeneration(something like a boost that never turns off thats not based on the recharge timer itself of shield regeneration).

by having a flat rat we can have a valued item. For example if the current regeneration on a oa caps at 300 setting the regeneration rate as a base value on rechargers at 40 per would be totally in alignment with current passive regeneration rates. However, the biggest change to this would be that you can totally ditch the other rates freeing up low slots in place for other modules.

16

You seem to want to massively buff passive shield tanking, which is pretty much unwarranted.

-1

2 Likes
17

Read the math.

I do not want to buff it (Ie make it stronger then active). I want to make it more common place and less punishing on players (by forcing so many mid slots to be used to be viable.

18

I have, and it’s still a huge buff. Really, you’re giving up 15% 10% max HP/sec per module in your rig slots and replacing it with 10%-15% boosts to other modules for your mids and lows. Which seems okay at first, except that with the rigs you’re limited to 2-3 per ship, whereas the mid and low modules you’re buffing aren’t so constrained. Plus, you’re increasing the buffer of these builds and there’s that random speed boost added in.

Tell me again how that math works out to not be a huge buff? You’re right that it wouldn’t be stronger than active tanking, but it would be considerably stronger than it is now. And it would probably be fine for smaller ships with limited mids and lows, but on a battlecruiser? You’d end up with a potentially crazy tank, and a larger buffer than you already have.

(EDIT: Corrected a math error and associated text. Ironically.)

19

No, that is not how it works. The Shield module does not regenerate 30% of its hp a second. other wise with 1 shield regenerator i’d do 4200 shields a second, and no subcap in game can even think about touching that.

The suggestion includes “removing purger rigs”. That means they are gone, out of the game.
At this point you need to go back and read it all again, carefully, and slowly because its clear you do not understand.

20

I will give you some more specific math examples.

For a tier 2 fitten moa, you will regenerate around 300 shields a second. most of these 5-10% buffs(that means it will go from 300s to 310-320s) will only really serve to make these modules more competitive to the current module build options for passive tanks, however, it should not really significantly change anything.

For example, because Shield extenders are more desirable then for example shield rechargers however shield rechargers are competitive to shield extenders if enough extenders are present (Ie if there is more then 3). That means that rechargers need be fundamentally changed or buffed by regen value, and something else to be competitive to the loss of regeneration and HP buffer.

-Flux coils are actually a drop in regeneration which makes no sense because their actual purpose is to provide the highest regeneration rate.

  • Shield Relays are the primary form of regeneration in current passive builds, and should basically stay the same. I feel passive regen needs a very small buff to be a little more competitive on some other ships that do not gain “resistance” benefits (drake, Moa, etc) to make “passive tank” a more “common place” option, just as armor/shields/speed are.

  • by increasing rechargers regeneration you are only pushing it to maintain the same rates that the ship would have with out extenders, thus making the ship weaker to alpha but providing the same regeneration, some speed benefits, and normal signature ( as extenders increase signature).

21

The numbers I provided were referring to the benefits of each module granted (i.e. each module provides X% benefit to passive shield recharge), not regenerating 10%-15% of your maximum shield amount every second. You’re absolutely right, that would be bonkers.

(For reference, I was passive shield tanking ships before Drakes or rigs were even introduced. I’m intimately familiar with the math and mechanics behind them. :wink:)

You’re removing purger rigs, yes, but extender rigs also impact passive shield tanks. Remember that 15% shield regen I mentioned that you were giving up in your rig slots earlier? That was the drop in performance by using extenders instead of purgers. (And it’s actually only 10%, not 15%. Dammit Bronson, get with the program!) A 20% reduction in shield recharge time has roughly 10% more benefit to peak shield regen than a 15% increase in shield HP.

Here’s a little math for you:

Passive shield tanking ability is determined by, among other things, a ship’s peak shield HP/s passively regenerated. This occurs at roughly 30% shield capacity, and is a function of a ship’s maximum shield HP and its shield recharge time. (There’s also a fixed constant of about 3 multiplied in there, but I’m ignoring that for now.)

Imagine a fictional ship with 400 shield HP and a shield recharge time of 100s. It’s peak shield recharge (again, ignoring that constant) is 4HP/s at roughly 30% shields, and drops off as you go higher or lower in shield capacity.

Now, fit that ship with a core defense field purger I, which reduces the shield recharge time by 20%. Your peak shield HP/s would be 400HP/80s, or 5HP/s. Wahoo! You just increased your peak shield regen by 25%.

But if you had fitted that ship with a core defense field extender I instead, you’d still see some benefit. Your peak shield HP/s would be 460HP/100s, or 4.6HP/s. Not as big a boost as with the purger rig, but still a 15% increase.

So even if you gave up purger rigs entirely, you can still fit extender rigs and boost your passive shield regen by 10% less (per module), and have more buffer to boot.

So, yes, I did get my math wrong earlier. By giving up purger rigs you’re only losing 10% per module, not 15%, and you’re buffing other modules by 10%-15%, for a net gain overall. Plus, you can fit more of the other modules on larger ships because of the limited number of rig slots.

You can’t ignore the extender rigs.

2 Likes
22

This is correct, but they play to big of a role in other builds to merit removal, where purgers only benefit passive tanking. also the benefit is really not that significant. As i said, people will defer to resistance more as it has a more significant impact on the tanks survival then extenders. I can walk through the math if you’d like.

Correct, which generally takes place (starting) around 65-75

These numbers seem off. Please recheck your stats, are you factoring deminishing returns for module stacking?

At current moa caps at around 300/s. With the nature of passie tanking (requiring lots of moduls to aquire the tank) you will have significant DR which means even buffing 10% on modules that are on 5 lows, and another 10% on 6 mids will not exceed a total of another 5%-10 actual outputted regeneration.

That means you will jump from 300-310 or maybe 320-330 at most. That is not 25% (or 300> 375) and its no where near the 460/s your claiming (which btw a drake can do right now).

23

If your going to remove shield extender rigs then trimark armor pump rigs need to go too.

1 Like