test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

shields or armor?

princedimwitprincedimwit Member Posts: 230 Arc User
edited December 2012 in Federation Discussion
I'm trying to decide if I can last longer in a fight if I have better armor (kinetic/all) or shielding boosts.

I have a pretty decent shield, it's the shield array mk xi [cap] (uncommon) with 7650.5 capacity/238.1 regen every 6 seconds.

I'm running with uncommon neutronuim armor mk. xi and uncommon diburnium hull plating mk. x.

Just thinking I could swap out one or both of those for something that boosts my shields.

Thoughts?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Post edited by princedimwit on

Comments

  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Use science consoles to make your shields better. Use engineering console to make your hull better.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • princedimwitprincedimwit Member Posts: 230 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Yes, I understand that. It's just that the field emitter is an engineering console where I've got my armor consoles and my isometric charge that I don't want to part with.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • collegepark2151collegepark2151 Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I use neutronium on everything, so I guess hull would be first. Probably because I don't fly cruisers due to turn rates (nothing wrong with them, just not my thing).

    I maxed out the neutronium on my Vesta to get rid of the tissue paper hull effect. Now up to solid construction paper. Maybe even a paper plate! ;)

    I've got two neutroniums and a plasma relay (or whichever one it is that increases your weapons power) on my Armitage because the hull was naturally higher and it's more escort than the Vesta, so it is better at dodging incoming fire.

    These are the only two ships I really play. Sometimes I take the Oddy out for a spin, but then put it back in the garage.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Porthos is not amused.
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Look. First off, what are you flying? Second off, what do you get smacked with the most? Lastly, why are you using diburnium?

    A standard setup for a 3 engi console is 2 neutroniums 1 monotanium. A standard cruiser setup is 4 neutronium. If you have only 2 engi consoles available, just run double neutronium. If you have 3 available, you can either run triple neutronium, or double with a mono. If you have 4, just use full neutronium.

    As for your shields? They block energy damage well enough as is. Your engi consoles are mostly to protect from bleedthrough. And if your shields drop, your passive hull resistances plus the neutronium will protect you well enough from energy weapons (provided it's not PvP), which only leaves you to worry about torps on unshielded hull (which hurt like a mother ****er), so run that monotanium.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • shimmerlessshimmerless Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Four neutronium is honestly overkill, if you're in PvE just run monotanium and if you're in PvP try to fit a few team consoles in there (like SIF gens).
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    vids and guides and stuff

    [9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
  • mandoknight89mandoknight89 Member Posts: 1,687 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Yes, I understand that. It's just that the field emitter is an engineering console where I've got my armor consoles and my isometric charge that I don't want to part with.

    As a shield-boosting console, the Field Emitter leaves much to be desired. The Science-slot Shield Emitter or Field Generator consoles would get you more bang for your buck, and the former are available in Romulan versions (so far as I've seen, [+Th] only, though, so probably best for an otherwise tough setup).
  • ariseaboveariseabove Member Posts: 186 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I have a pretty decent shield, it's the shield array mk xi [cap] (uncommon) with 7650.5 capacity/238.1 regen every 6 seconds.

    Not to sound mean but they are not "pretty decent" at all 7k for shields is quite low.
    I'm running with uncommon neutronuim armor mk. xi and uncommon diburnium hull plating mk. x.

    Drop the diburnium and add some shield power mkxi are 3.5 base bonus also it helps to know what your skills are as you get a better bonus from consoles depending what you have trained in (don't forget to check your passive skills as well).
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Look. First off, what are you flying? Second off, what do you get smacked with the most? Lastly, why are you using diburnium?

    A standard setup for a 3 engi console is 2 neutroniums 1 monotanium. A standard cruiser setup is 4 neutronium. If you have only 2 engi consoles available, just run double neutronium. If you have 3 available, you can either run triple neutronium, or double with a mono. If you have 4, just use full neutronium.

    As for your shields? They block energy damage well enough as is. Your engi consoles are mostly to protect from bleedthrough. And if your shields drop, your passive hull resistances plus the neutronium will protect you well enough from energy weapons (provided it's not PvP), which only leaves you to worry about torps on unshielded hull (which hurt like a mother ****er), so run that monotanium.

    What about diminishing returns on multiple armor consoles? Each one adds 50% less resistance than the one before it (100/50/25/12.5/6.25)
  • princedimwitprincedimwit Member Posts: 230 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    What about diminishing returns on multiple armor consoles? Each one adds 50% less resistance than the one before it (100/50/25/12.5/6.25)

    I thought that was if you stacked the same console.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    1.) Armor does not have diminishing returns.

    It just seems that way because what the armor is actually doing versus what you think it's doing, is not the same thing.

    Explained here.

    2.) Shields versus hull

    Shields can ignore a very high percentage of damage with a low equipment cost, since shield resistance is based primarily on your shield power level but also your bridge officer abilities. The same abilities that restore your shields also usually "harden" them so they take less damage. Hence the massive and enduring popularity of Emergency Power to Shields and Transfer Shield Strength. Gaining significant hull damage resistance requires that you have and spend a whole bunch of engineering consoles while gaining significant shield damage resistance is about jacking up your shield power level and knowing when to use shield hardening abilities.

    For non-resilient shields, 10% of the incoming damage is going to leak through your shields no matter what. It's very easy to have your hull melted to slag while your shields are still strong and all your shield-related abilities are working at maximum efficiency. That is why you should have at least some armor and some hull healing. Resilient shields only leak 5% of the incoming damage, which is basically the same as gaining 50% immunity to all damage through armor as far as the bleed damage is concerned. Though Resilient shields tend to have other drawbacks, like a lowered capacity or lowered recharge rate.

    I will second the notion that the engineering consoles that boost shield power level are a very very poor "value" and should generally be avoided. Pretty much all the power boost consoles are very inefficient use of slots.
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    I thought that was if you stacked the same console.

    Look at what Heriticknight had said in the post that I responded to:
    A standard setup for a 3 engi console is 2 neutroniums 1 monotanium. A standard cruiser setup is 4 neutronium. If you have only 2 engi consoles available, just run double neutronium. If you have 3 available, you can either run triple neutronium, or double with a mono. If you have 4, just use full neutronium.

    He is mentioning using up to four copys of the same console. This is what I was replying to with the "[100/50/25/12.5/6.25]" statement.
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    momaw wrote: »
    1.) Armor does not have diminishing returns.

    It just seems that way because what the armor is actually doing versus what you think it's doing, is not the same thing.

    Explained here.

    Actually, I checked it today on my Nebula after discussing it with a fleetie.

    Base (No Neutronium MK XI blues): Kinetic 2.0% energy types: 14.4%

    1 Neutronium : K=16.3 (+14.3) E=25.3 (+10.9)
    2 Neuts' : K=26.7 (+10.4) E=33.6 (+8.3)

    If Armor has no dimininshing returns, it would be +14.3 and +10.9 for each Neut Mk XI Blue I wouldve added.

    Also, when plugging in the information into an excel spreadsheet and then making a line graph with it, the 1-2 point has a weaker slope than the 0-1 does, it actually "kinks". There would be no "kinks" if it was a (reasonable) perfect liner progression.

    This is very parallel to the diminishing returns experienced with RCS Accelerators.
  • shimmerlessshimmerless Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Actually, I checked it today on my Nebula after discussing it with a fleetie.

    Base (No Neutronium MK XI blues): Kinetic 2.0% energy types: 14.4%

    1 Neutronium : K=16.3 (+14.3) E=25.3 (+10.9)
    2 Neuts' : K=26.7 (+10.4) E=33.6 (+8.3)

    If Armor has no dimininshing returns, it would be +14.3 and +10.9 for each Neut Mk XI Blue I wouldve added.

    Also, when plugging in the information into an excel spreadsheet and then making a line graph with it, the 1-2 point has a weaker slope than the 0-1 does, it actually "kinks". There would be no "kinks" if it was a (reasonable) perfect liner progression.

    This is very parallel to the diminishing returns experienced with RCS Accelerators.

    There is an extremely small amount of "diminishing returns" due to armor scaling off at 75%. However each console essentially adds the same as the last. There's a translation between the tooltip resistance and the effective in-game resistance which is too convoluted (and it's way too late at night here) for me to get into, but neutroniums (or any other armor) stack just fine.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    vids and guides and stuff

    [9:52] [Zone #11] Neal@trapper1532: im a omega force shadow oprative and a maoc elite camander and here i am taking water samples
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    There is an extremely small amount of "diminishing returns" due to armor scaling off at 75%. However each console essentially adds the same as the last. There's a translation between the tooltip resistance and the effective in-game resistance which is too convoluted (and it's way too late at night here) for me to get into, but neutroniums (or any other armor) stack just fine.

    Simpler version of what shimmerless said:

    Due to the cap at 75%, as you increase the amount of resistance you have, each added point of defense will add less to your total resistance.

    I.E. 10 resist will give you 10% defense, but 20 resist will only give you 18%.

    They do this so you have to have 200 armor (or 5 mk XII purple specialty consoles) to hit the 75% resist. It's basically to force you to have to work hard to tank, and have a build specifically for tanking and nothing else, but only if you want to hit the hard cap.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • lasoniolasonio Member Posts: 490 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    even if they are small there is dim-Re and in his game 2-3+% is not small it's actually pretty big. We're talking up to 15-20+% Dimre in a divice that gives 20% on the extremely high end on the spectrum so you could very well lose an entire item and around 34+M, that's nothing to baulk at as an elite level pvper. That is something to be very-very-very concerned about unless you have the money to throw away then it's fine but most players don't have that kind of money to kick around. It will still be higher of course then a player who only uses one in leaps and bounds but there is still a dim-re. They will not let us be 100% invunerable to damage since everyone would get the 20% to all damage and get like 5-6 of them.

    Now weapons tech does not give dimre so you can be as stack crazy as you want with that.

    In a way I am happy that polaron for some crazy reason is becoming the new standard for ships. Though I must admit seeing DHC's on a Fed ship just gives me pauses but atleast I won't be seeing that ugly violet all that often and that will be a good trade off. (I'm not really all that sure why a ship with any large amount of people 10+ would be fish tailing and firing cannons like a fighter jet anyway, i mean it just does not make sense, the people inside should be soup and going through crazy bouts of vertigo or something.)

    But seriously I think we should stop discussing many topics like this before they go back and nerf that as well.... I feel kind of bad for the guys that did not get the tier four early ad now have to get the 50.6 regen all because players couldn't stop running their flappers kinda messed up how that works out. When we figure out something the dev's and mods don't know then it should become a state secret or something lol so they don't nerf it for months to come. That was like the fastest nerf ever. I've never seen them move so fast to do anything, oh well.
    Even god rested. No work ethic.
  • momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    After spending all morning pressing way too many buttons on my calculator, I will amend my statement and say that yes, armor suffers from diminishing returns.

    After testing on my Fleet Negh'var with five identical layers of Neutronium Alloy, I can tell you that the efficiency of each layer of armor in adding its resistance to the previous amount came out to be: 98.3%, 94.9%, 92.0%, 86.1%, and 81.5%.

    The total loss of performance across five layers of armor was just under half of one of the consoles i.e. about 1/10th of the potential. It's up to the reader to decide if this is a significant loss of performance.

    Personally I'm not convinced that it's entirely deliberate given the erratic way the numbers jump around, and I strongly suspect rounding errors in the game's code.
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    momaw wrote: »
    After spending all morning pressing way too many buttons on my calculator, I will amend my statement and say that yes, armor suffers from diminishing returns.

    After testing on my Fleet Negh'var with five identical layers of Neutronium Alloy, I can tell you that the efficiency of each layer of armor in adding its resistance to the previous amount came out to be: 98.3%, 94.9%, 92.0%, 86.1%, and 81.5%.

    The total loss of performance across five layers of armor was just under half of one of the consoles i.e. about 1/10th of the potential. It's up to the reader to decide if this is a significant loss of performance.

    Personally I'm not convinced that it's entirely deliberate given the erratic way the numbers jump around, and I strongly suspect rounding errors in the game's code.

    I knew I wasn't crazy. :confused: It isn't as radical as I suggested (I was going with the dim-re habits of RCS as a hypothesis starting point) but still noticeable to the eye.

    I haven't tried it out yet, but the guys in my fleet are pretty sure that using different kinds of armor with each other (neutronium' +monanitum +etc...) does bypass the diminishing returns effect. I've just been okay with the diminishment of the second neut' on my ships, but when I get my Fleet Neb' I will be considering a third of a different type.
  • woodwhitywoodwhity Member Posts: 2,636 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    Well, to make it simple: Shields over Armor. Without shields you die. However, this is not important for consoles (since Engineering=Armor, Science=Shields). And healing shields is easier than healing hull.
  • whamhammer1whamhammer1 Member Posts: 2,290 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    woodwhity wrote: »
    Well, to make it simple: Shields over Armor. Without shields you die. However, this is not important for consoles (since Engineering=Armor, Science=Shields). And healing shields is easier than healing hull.

    I wouldn't go that far, there are times in PvP when my shields seem to never see the light of day for me, hull is just as important.
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    momaw wrote: »
    After spending all morning pressing way too many buttons on my calculator, I will amend my statement and say that yes, armor suffers from diminishing returns.

    After testing on my Fleet Negh'var with five identical layers of Neutronium Alloy, I can tell you that the efficiency of each layer of armor in adding its resistance to the previous amount came out to be: 98.3%, 94.9%, 92.0%, 86.1%, and 81.5%.

    The total loss of performance across five layers of armor was just under half of one of the consoles i.e. about 1/10th of the potential. It's up to the reader to decide if this is a significant loss of performance.

    Personally I'm not convinced that it's entirely deliberate given the erratic way the numbers jump around, and I strongly suspect rounding errors in the game's code.

    -.-

    Have you ever played League of Legends? If so, you will know that in a game like that, with a hard cap on defense, each added point to armor adds less to your defense... which is basically what I said in my most recent post...

    They did this system to make it very hard to reach the resistance cap. You literally need to have 200 resistance to hit the 75% hard cap. It makes sense if you've played games that do that.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    -.-

    Have you ever played League of Legends? If so, you will know that in a game like that, with a hard cap on defense, each added point to armor adds less to your defense... which is basically what I said in my most recent post...

    They did this system to make it very hard to reach the resistance cap. You literally need to have 200 resistance to hit the 75% hard cap. It makes sense if you've played games that do that.

    200? Keep going.

    Basic damage reduction = 12.7%
    + Diburnium Mk XII (35 * 5) armor = 60.4%
    + Aux2SIF3 (54) + Polarize Hull (62.8) + Subspace field modulator (34) = 68%

    Well over 300 in resist value.

    I don't understand their logic on this personally. The penalties for using basic armor isn't very significant. Most ships max out at 4 layers of armor, which would only be a penalty of about 8% if you're using all neutronium. Their diminishing returns system instead has vastly more impact on how much you benefit from temporary abilities if you're already using physical armor. As in makes them worth much less. For example there's almost no practical difference between high aux power and low aux power, or ability level, when using Aux2SIF and Polarize if your damage reduction is already pushing 50%. But how is obscenely high damage resistance a problem if it only lasts 10 seconds? Also, shield damage reduction doesn't seem to have this same problem.
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    momaw wrote: »
    200? Keep going.

    Basic damage reduction = 12.7%
    + Diburnium Mk XII (35 * 5) armor = 60.4%
    + Aux2SIF3 (54) + Polarize Hull (62.8) + Subspace field modulator (34) = 68%

    Well over 300 in resist value.

    I don't understand their logic on this personally. The penalties for using basic armor isn't very significant. Most ships max out at 4 layers of armor, which would only be a penalty of about 8% if you're using all neutronium. Their diminishing returns system instead has vastly more impact on how much you benefit from temporary abilities if you're already using physical armor. As in makes them worth much less. For example there's almost no practical difference between high aux power and low aux power, or ability level, when using Aux2SIF and Polarize if your damage reduction is already pushing 50%. But how is obscenely high damage resistance a problem if it only lasts 10 seconds? Also, shield damage reduction doesn't seem to have this same problem.

    I beg to differ. When using Aux2SIF3, at my usual 48-58 aux I will heal 4800 and increase the target's resistances by 45. At 125 Aux power, I will heal 8000 and increase the targets resistances by 65. I'd say that's a pretty significant difference. To say nothing of the lower level versions. They are by far, almost ludicrously weaker. Which is why BOffs with Aux2SIF3 are usually somewhat expensive on the exchange. And you are correct, it only lasts 10 seconds, but it's cd is only 15 seconds. That's 66% uptime. It's better than most other abilities.

    And of course the value you get per armor point will decrease. If that wasn't the case, I would hit my 75% resistance with ease. And they don't want that. They want your build to be specifically for tanking if you plan on doing super tanking. It makes sense if you step back and think about it.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
  • momawmomaw Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    When using Aux2SIF3, at my usual 48-58 aux I will heal...


    I meant as far as the damage resist goes. Aux2SIF3 is amazing and scales well with aux power level as far as the heal goes, of course.
  • hereticknight085hereticknight085 Member Posts: 3,783 Arc User
    edited December 2012
    momaw wrote: »
    I meant as far as the damage resist goes. Aux2SIF3 is amazing and scales well with aux power level as far as the heal goes, of course.

    Read the rest of the post and you will see I added in the effect it has on resists.
    It is said the best weapon is one that is never fired. I disagree. The best weapon is one you only have to fire... once. B)
Sign In or Register to comment.