EVE Search - When are you going to look at tanking again?

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

When are you going to look at tanking again?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.05.28 09:36:00 - [1] Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 28/05/2009 09:38:32 Now I've heard you say before CCP that balance is a matter of opinion and there will always be arguments etc..., but the following modules are not imbalanced, they are obsolete. Shield Flux Coils - Pointless modules nobody who know's anything uses, pve or pvp. Capacitor Flux Coils - Designed for shield tankers since no armor tanker in their right mind would use them over cap power relays, guess what? Capacitor Power Relays are so awesome they are worth the shield boost penalty on shield tanking ships anyway. Therefore I claim this is an utterly useless module, pvp or pve. Shield Rechargers - A module sometimes used on inferior passive tanked drakes for the purpose of freeing up extra grid, strange choice considering swapping out a shield power relay for a power diagnostic system achieves the same end in a preferable fashion. Therefore I claim this is an utterly useless module aswell, pve or pvp. There really does seem to be a problem when the one ship everyone is terrified of ever getting a tech 2 or faction version of is the drake. I don't want to try and suggest too much in how to balance shields against armor because my ideas always seem to end up homogenizing them. All I'll say is maybe there should be some kind of yin and yang, maybe trying to think how armor realisticly works might help. Active Shield Tanking Very short repping cycles, every second roughly, the lower the shields, the more capacitor required to boost. e.g Active Armor Tanking Long repping cycles, but large amount of hitpoints repaired to make up for it. Passive Shield Tanking High resistance levels, low hitpoints, the faster shields will recharge as the more of the shield is in a damaged state. Passive Armor Tanking High hitpoints, low resistance levels, the higher amount of armor hitpoints remaining, the more difficult it is for enemy munitions to penatrate and cause significant damage to the ship, as more armor hitpoints will equal thicker armor remaining protecting the ship. Maybe I'm wasting my time since on paper 70% of the ships armor tank and in reality more like 85% of people choose to. But I think I've put some good ideas there, particularly an answer in armor form to the overpowering passive shield tank.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.05.28 11:07:00 - [2] Passive shield tanks aren't overpowered.
Ulstan	Posted - 2009.05.28 16:37:00 - [3] While for a long time shield tanks have been disfavored in PvP because their slots occupy the needed tackling slots, we are starting to see more people using shield buffer tanks (almost nobody shield active tanks, but then, many armor tanks are buffer tanks as well) so that leaves us closer to parity than we have been in the past IMO. Only real standout problem is the huge prevalence of armor vs shields in RR. Even ships that nominally shield tank (raven) would switch to armor tanks for RR...one big issue is the incredible cost CPU wise of fitting shield transfers. Most ships simply can't do it.
Andrest Disch Amarr Letiferi Praedones	Posted - 2009.05.28 17:04:00 - [4] Can you clarify what you think is wrong with shield or armour tanking?
Liang Nuren The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.28 17:55:00 - [5] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Capacitor Flux Coils Used in certain permarun PVE setups. Quote: Shield Rechargers - A module sometimes used on inferior passive tanked drakes for the purpose of freeing up extra grid, strange choice considering swapping out a shield power relay for a power diagnostic system achieves the same end in a preferable fashion. Therefore I claim this is an utterly useless module aswell, pve or pvp. No, I wouldn't call them useless, but IMO they could certainly use a boost. Quote: There really does seem to be a problem when the one ship everyone is terrified of ever getting a tech 2 or faction version of is the drake. Funny, I'm far more concerned about a T2 Harbinger than Drake. That said, a T2 Harby with a pair of 10% optimal bonuses would be seexxxyyyy. :) /shrug. Quote: Maybe I'm wasting my time since on paper 70% of the ships armor tank and in reality more like 85% of people choose to. But I think I've put some good ideas there, particularly an answer in armor form to the overpowering passive shield tank. No, that's false. It's pretty easy to see that just over half of the ships flown these days are buffer shield tanked (this is a combination of an "unexpected" large caldari presence in PVP and ships that were previously armor tanked being shield buffered). It's also pretty easy to see that 80%+ of the ships flown in PVP are buffer tanked in some way. IMO, what we really need to see are some huge change to tanking modules. IMO, we need to increase the fitting cost of plates/extenders and decrease the fitting costs of reps/boosters. Even still, you have to consider that in PVP, a cap booster is mandatory on an active tank so that has to be considered too. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Rakshasa Taisab Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.05.28 18:55:00 - [6] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Shield Rechargers - A module sometimes used on inferior passive tanked drakes for the purpose of freeing up extra grid, strange choice considering swapping out a shield power relay for a power diagnostic system achieves the same end in a preferable fashion. Therefore I claim this is an utterly useless module aswell, pve or pvp. WTB; PDS giving 24% shield recharge/hp boost.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.06.03 10:07:00 - [7] Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 03/06/2009 10:09:27 Originally by: Andrest Disch Can you clarify what you think is wrong with shield or armour tanking? Ok I'll put it this way for way. Shields The immediate problem is the easiest to explain; Large Shield Extenders - Fit on Cruisers, Battlecruisers, Battleships, Not only do they give the benefit of adding a crapton of HP, they will end up adding around 15-30% recharge on shields at the same time depending on the ship and its HP, making pretty much all thought up shield modules kind of useless, the sig radius penalty isn't a big problem, you can fit several large extenders on ships like a curse and still EASILY speed tank cruise missiles. I can provide some screenshots to back this up from tests if you wish. One module should not be doing all that. Make shield extenders an active module or increase the shield hp bonus it give it a recharge penalty too. The way they'd stuffed up the module requirements on battlecruiser-battleships is quite apparent when comparing ships like the drake to the raven. I have absolutely no advantage for flying the raven over the drake if I use cruise missiles, despite how much extra isk a fitted raven puts on the line. Same dps except cruises won't hit most ships and heavy missiles will, same effective hp when buffer tanked, except the drake is much faster and locks much quicker.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.06.03 10:15:00 - [8] Edited by: Gypsio III on 03/06/2009 10:16:17 Good point about LSEs doing a lot of stuff. But LSEs are not overpowered. You should be arguing for changing other mods, rather than nerfing LSEs. Bad point about Cruise vs. Curse. Cruise missiles aren't designed to hit a Curse. HMs are. Cruise is a long-range anti-BS missile. Yes, I know that the concept of a long-range anti-BS missile is close to useless, but that's a problem with Cruise (and not a fixable one either). Also, Cruise on Raven is 50% faster and has 200% of the range of HMs on Drake.
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.03 10:39:00 - [9] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Shields The immediate problem is the easiest to explain; Large Shield Extenders - Fit on Cruisers, Battlecruisers, Battleships, Not only do they give the benefit of adding a crapton of HP, they will end up adding around 15-30% recharge on shields at the same time depending on the ship and its HP, making pretty much all thought up shield modules kind of useless, the sig radius penalty isn't a big problem, you can fit several large extenders on ships like a curse and still EASILY speed tank cruise missiles. I can provide some screenshots to back this up from tests if you wish. One module should not be doing all that. ORLY? Why then you don't have any problems with cruisers fitting 1600 RT plate for double the HP bonus of a large extender? I want XL extender for my BS Easily tanking cruise missiles isn't much of a feat now, it won't even do full damage against minmatar BS with no speed mods. _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Vigaz	Posted - 2009.06.03 10:48:00 - [10] Originally by: Gypsio III Edited by: Gypsio III on 03/06/2009 10:19:10 Good point about LSEs doing a lot of stuff. But LSEs are not overpowered. You should be arguing for changing other mods, rather than nerfing LSEs. If it's the regen tanks of passive failDrakes that concerns you (no idea why they should though) then you might argue that mods that affect shield-recharge time should be stacking-nerfed. Bad point about Cruise vs. Curse. Cruise missiles aren't designed to hit a Curse. HMs are. Cruise is a long-range anti-BS missile. Yes, I know that the concept of a long-range anti-BS missile is close to absurd, but that's a problem with Cruise (and not a fixable one either). Also, Cruise on Raven is 50% faster and has 200% of the range of HMs on Drake. Cruise raven is ok just for PvE. It should be written into the description of the ship imo. Cruise long range anti-BS/BC/whatever role is just a bad joke.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.06.03 11:43:00 - [11] You heard it here first chaps. Cruise Launchers are the single PVE only weapon system in Eve.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.06.03 14:09:00 - [12] Originally by: 5pinDizzy You heard it here first chaps. Cruise Launchers are the single PVE only weapon system in Eve. No, I really don't think that I heard this here first.
Beverly Sparks	Posted - 2009.06.03 16:35:00 - [13] I am not sure what the big problem is. Shield/Armor tanking seems relatively balanced to me. Reppers versus Buffer is a whole other ball of wax though that I believe has no solution. What is balanced for a 40v40 engagement is totally OP in a 5v5 one. Lets just leave active tanking for PvE and get on with it. Get a few people in your gang to carry some armor repper drones, and get out there and have fun.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.06.03 17:10:00 - [14] Originally by: Gypsio III Originally by: 5pinDizzy You heard it here first chaps. Cruise Launchers are the single PVE only weapon system in Eve. No, I really don't think that I heard this here first. touche
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.04 07:28:00 - [15] 5% resist > 7,5% boost in both ehp, and tanking ammout.... 60D GTC - shattared link

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.