Search

 
 Join the Community, Create an EVE-ONLINE account or log in.

open All Channels
sepopen Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Crystal-Slave, that way?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

New Topic   
 
Author Topic

Reatu Krentor
Minmatar
Void Spiders
Fate Weavers
Posted - 2006.10.20 22:51:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Reatu Krentor on 20/10/2006 22:58:31
Ever since LeMonde's post in the events forum, there has been much jubilation from the armor tankers and much despair from the shield tankers(the ones that tank actively anyway Smile). Although in the dev chat Tuxford debunked the rumour that Crystal set is definately changing he did mention there was flying chairs and stuff involved. I think some discussion of alternative options to change Crystal(and Slave) is in order(Tux is hereby invited to the discussion Cool).

Currently Slave improves total armor hp, a nice additional buffer that only delays destruction(if tank is insufficient). The Slave boost is also cap neutral, it doesn't require cap to benefit from it. And because of the way the bonus works it also indirectly improves additional armour plating. So apart from being a passive bonus there is no direct advantage or disadvantage that I have spotted. I must admit though I haven't personally used a Slave set, yet(doesn't mean I can't armor tank with the best of them though, being minnie specced afterall Razz)

Crystal on the other hand improves the actual tank by boosting shield boost amount. This can make for very tough tanks. Though Crystal would be mostly used in PvE as losing a crystal set is quite costly. Also shield tanking in PvP is generally not considered usefull, mainly because of the mid slot value, a mid slot has lots of module options that are very helpfull, especially in pvp. Such things as ecm, tracking disruptors, disruptors, webbers, injectors, etc. Low slots however have mainly a choice between armor tank, grid mods, some cap mods and damage mods. Unlike Slave set, Crystal provides a bonus that is very cap dependant. A good amount of energy vampires or neutralizers on the field and all you have is a very expensive head that would make a nice paperweight for your enemy.

It got me thinking in a different direction. Instead of changing one to be similar to the other, why not change both to match up and not be weaker nor stronger then eachother. So instead of armor/shield hp buff, or a repair/boost amount buff, give a damage reduction on the armor/shield layer. A damage reduction achieved by increasing all armor/shield resists. This would result in a buff that combines the best of both worlds, you'd get a total effective armor/shield hp increase and at the same time your effective repair/boost amount would increase.

But what about the lasers against armor or projectiles against shields? Well because every resist would be increased by the same amount the relative difference between the resists(and as such between weapons) doesn't change. So there would only be an imaginary problem from this. The EANM tank issue is an entirely different issue and is not part of this discussion.

** Continued in next post **

Reatu Krentor
Minmatar
Void Spiders
Fate Weavers
Posted - 2006.10.20 22:52:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Reatu Krentor on 20/10/2006 23:00:08
Using the original values as the current would clearly be quite overpowered. It would result in something like a 38.12%(resists would be negative modifiers similar to the Talisman set modifiers) increase to all resists resulting in an effective hp/boost increase of about 60%. Meaning you'd get 2 bigger bonuses where there originally was only one. My suggestion would be near the bonus from the Halo set, -20.7% (for high-grade, -14.3% for low-grade). Resulting in effective hp/boost increase of approximately 25%. Slave set would lose some of it's buffer but gain a repair boost while Crystal set would lose some of it's repair boost and gain some buffer. Stacking penalty shouldn't affect Crystal nor Slave set, they should give the same benefit to all regardless of modules fitted. It would otherwhise benefit pure hp tanks more and be penalized into oblivion for fitting resistance modules.

Personally I would be able to live with this change to my crystal set. I believe it would "nerf" the strength in specific scenarios but at the same time "boost" general use of both.

Read, think, discuss, comment, flame... In that order is preferable.

Example of new Crystal/Slave set:
Armor/Shield Resist bonus:
Alpha: -1%
Beta: -1.25%
Delta: -1.5%
Epsilon: -2%
Gamma: -1.75%
Set Bonus: 1.15x(1.1x LG) for Alpha-Gamma, 1.5x(1.25x) for Omega.

LeMoose
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2006.12.04 19:35:00 - [3]
 

i really like it Smile

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2006.12.04 19:42:00 - [4]
 

/me loves it

Although a -22.5% resists bonus for full LG set and -30% resists bonus for full HG sets (both crystal and slave) would still not be all that overpowered, especially if you consider just how pricey they are.

-22.5% equates to +29% boost amount and +29% buffer
-30% equates to +42.8% boost amount and +42.8% buffer

Reatu Krentor
Minmatar
Void Spiders
Fate Weavers
Posted - 2007.01.31 12:37:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Akita T
/me loves it

Although a -22.5% resists bonus for full LG set and -30% resists bonus for full HG sets (both crystal and slave) would still not be all that overpowered, especially if you consider just how pricey they are.

-22.5% equates to +29% boost amount and +29% buffer
-30% equates to +42.8% boost amount and +42.8% buffer

The price is irrelevant to balance of implants/modules and what not, price is determined by demand and supply. Just because it costs a lot on TQ to get these doesn't necessarily mean they should have higher or lower effects Wink.

Demora Anglis
Amarr
The Splinter Syndicate
Posted - 2007.01.31 15:00:00 - [6]
 

Or you could introduce a BPO that allowed people to combine implants of the two types together to get a hybrid that increased armor repping or something, but I'm blabbering at this point and would open up more worms than it would close.

KD.Fluffy
Caldari
Heavy Influence
Aggression.
Posted - 2007.07.15 02:37:00 - [7]
 

Signed, great idea m8

Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2007.07.15 06:37:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: KD.Fluffy
Signed, great idea m8


Forum necromancy is uncool.

LeMoose
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2007.07.21 20:32:00 - [9]
 

not when the idea is great and really should be looked at

Jaden Icer
Gallente
Icerian Technologies
Posted - 2007.07.22 04:11:00 - [10]
 

As a shield tanker I concur

N1fty
Amarr
Galactic Shipyards Inc
HUZZAH FEDERATION
Posted - 2007.07.23 14:16:00 - [11]
 

Hmm, I think you need to be careful when increasing resistances/rep amounts instead of HP/Cap to make combat last longer.

If you can tank say 150 dps, and your enemies are doing 180 DPS then that tank is going down, no matter how many HP you have, be it 1K or 50K. 50k will take longer than 1k, its still a broken tank.
But now if you increase your resistances by 20.7% your enemy will be doing 142 DPS against 150 rep and so you now have an unbreakable tank.

This is the fundamental problem with increasing resistances instead of armour amount to increase the length of combat. You will create immune players, and nobody should be immune. I suspect crystals will be changed to a shield amount bonus [maybe at the expense of recharge rate], or a cap reduction to shield-boosting.


 

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

New Topic