| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
E Vile
   |
Posted - 2009.10.21 11:56:00 -
[61]
I disagree with the statement-Tanks have no role in PVP.
I once helped my fleet in a full passive shield tanked Myrm.
I flew up on some of my mates being ganked. The Myrm has too much DPS to ignore.
I was full passive shield with a rack of Auto cannons.
The gang switched prime to me and off my friends and I tanked all of them until my fleet arrived.
I've also been many times put on point as decoy. Enter the system and draw the fun. It rocks tanking a enemy gang :)
For a different "outside the box" fit my corp having issues with playing docking games with a enemy carrier. The carrier would always dock when in trouble.
We fit Domis and other Battleships with MWD and overdrives and rammed the carrier. We bumped the carrier so far off station I remember in vent people thought it was warping away.
Remember people. FOTM makes you too predictable.
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 13:20:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/10/2009 13:22:17
The fact that sometimes people are just incredibly amazingly stupid (and sometimes people who normally know what they're doing have a sudden and inexplicable attack of stupid; I once flew with a normally good FC who primaried a Prophecy literally sitting next to a Astarte for some reason) does not validate the position that tanking really is not a role.*
Not to mention that any gang which cannot break a tank BC of any variety in a pretty rapid fashion either failed to fit for DPS (maybe they fit for tank and failed for this reason) or is really just two people sitting in not so skilled BCs. Sure, 3 tanked BCs won't break a passive tank Myrmidon - but face 3 gank fit ones and it goes down pretty hard.
Overall, though, tanking simply isn't a PVP role. The (armour) tank ships would do much better if they could do some appreciable DPS while running a worthwhile active tank, which they currently cannot because of fitting and slots required.
*On a more humorous note, we once killed a gang of hurricane, another bc i cannot remember, blackbird, a stealth bomber and some other T2 frigate with a passive brick Drake and me in a Jaguar. Drake warped in first. They all shot at the Drake and jammed the Drake, because it was there first, while I went around killing their stuff in a Jaguar. Seriously 
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Marko Riva
Adamant Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 13:24:00 -
[63]
Tunnel vision ftw, large part of combat is strategy and a large part of strategy is making the target do what you want him to do.
-----------
ADM-I |
Hiroshima Jita
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 15:11:00 -
[64]
Baiting is a substantial role. And one element of baiting is being tough enough to last at very least until your guys get there, if not through the whole encounter.
If you die before your gang arrives the target gets away.
If you die in the time it takes for your gang to kill the target(s) your done playing until you can go buy a new ship and catch up.
Bait ships need good tanks. Normally this involves buffer tanking because you can put some dps out in a buffer tank and it won't be suprising when you take high burst damage.
On another note, active tanks feel extremely fragile to pilot, because you know that if you take a burst of damage beyond your ability to deal with you're going to fold over like a house of cards.
|
Pan Zhu'Liang
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 18:52:00 -
[65]
I can think of only one way to salvage active tanking in pvp. Make it scale with incoming damage.
Proposal: change boosters and reps to restore an additional amount of shield/armor equal to a percentage of damage taken since last cycle.
Working out an exact formula would require a lot of investigation, but it probably should not be linear. It should provide a minimal boost at most in a 1v1 situation, and a very significant tanking improvement with 10 ships pounding on you. At a certain point it would become irrelevant since you'll be burned down between rep cycles anyway, but making active tanking viable for large fleets is neither a necessary nor realistic goal.
|
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 19:40:00 -
[66]
I think a good solution would be what's implemented in Sins of a Solar Empire: as a ship takes damage, it gets an increasing amount of mitigation. It reduces the benefit of focus firing so if you micro your units and have them focus on different targets you can be more effective than just mindlessly having your whole blob attack one guy.
 Originally by: CCP Tuxford
Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Pan Zhu'Liang
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 20:47:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega
I think a good solution would be what's implemented in Sins of a Solar Empire: as a ship takes damage, it gets an increasing amount of mitigation. It reduces the benefit of focus firing so if you micro your units and have them focus on different targets you can be more effective than just mindlessly having your whole blob attack one guy.
That's along the same lines as my idea (and has the same anti-blob effect) but it would boost buffer tanks a lot too, and frankly I don't think they need it.
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 21:12:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/10/2009 21:15:05
Originally by: Pan Zhu'Liang
I can think of only one way to salvage active tanking in pvp. Make it scale with incoming damage.
Proposal: change boosters and reps to restore an additional amount of shield/armor equal to a percentage of damage taken since last cycle.
Working out an exact formula would require a lot of investigation, but it probably should not be linear. It should provide a minimal boost at most in a 1v1 situation, and a very significant tanking improvement with 10 ships pounding on you. At a certain point it would become irrelevant since you'll be burned down between rep cycles anyway, but making active tanking viable for large fleets is neither a necessary nor realistic goal.
While the idea is OK on paper, the problem is this: you're focused on tank ability.
Tank ability can be a problem (although generally speaking it is not what kills the active tank; anything which is going to burn through, a, eg. rep Myrmidon in 20s - rendering its reps largely useless - will burn through the platecane in 30s at most), but the real problem is that tanks don't do DPS.
DPS is not only a factor for tank/EHP/DPS calculations, having more is a strategic advantage insofar it enables you to end the fight sooner, to better exploit advantages of range, to better exploit hostiles being badly positioned (eg. separated from the rest, someone who shouldn't be up close getting tackled and so on), to kill and escape before reinforcements arrive and so on and on.
Local tank being mathematically worse as numbers go up then buffer is only a secondary concern when you consider how much it loses on the DPS area.*
If this was addressed, then the decision between a active tank, tank+buffer and buffer would be "do I want X tank at Y EHP or just Z EHP"? This is a more reasonable type of trade-off.
*People don't fit shield buffer on a Myrmidon because it tanks so much better - the situations where it (in a realistic fit anyway) outdoes reps with it's 50-ish K EHP, tankwise, involve very high amounts of DPS where both melt very very fast. They fit shield buffer because that way they can have 3 damage mods and non-gimped speed (thanks to rep rigs penalties) to apply this damage.
On the other hand, the rep Myrmidon is gimped speedwise (which needs to go), gimped with fitting so restricted to low tier guns (which needs to go) and gimped with lows so not even 2 damage mods can be fit with a non-laughable tank (which needs to go).
Edit: have you noticed that people actually DO solo/small gang work in shield active tanks, despite their misgivings when it comes to tackle (meaning you're often restricted to a scram or disruptor)? Sleipnirs (and Cyclones, too) still get used, and in XL booster versions, despite them having laughable cap issues using it (which is generally what plagues shield tanks tbh). The answer to their superiority over armour tanks is simple - they can do proper damage in a active tank fit.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
128th ABC123
Eve Liberation Force
Warped Aggression
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 10:01:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Vivian Azure
Simpliest solution would be to remove Trimarks and Core Field Extenders tbh.
They should remove you.
|
Neuronai
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 13:29:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Renarla
The three (t1) ships with active armor tank bonuses- Myrmidon, Brutix, and Hyperion, all perform best with buffer shield tanks or even active shield tanks (in the Hyperions case).
No, imo the Myrmidon performs best with an active armour tank. Brutix does well with a shield buffer yes, although it's a terrible buffer...
|
Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 13:56:00 -
[71]
Personally I find buffer tanks to be incredibly boring. I enjoyed the days when active tanks were actually decent and they were one more thing that you had to manage on your ship during a fight in order to stay cap stable.
Now I just slap as much armor or shields on as I can, and call for RR if I'm being primaried. *yawn*
The game has changed, and I have adapted, but that doesn't mean I have to like what changed. 
---------------------------------
|
Katarlia Simov
Minmatar
Cowboys From Hell
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 19:14:00 -
[72]
I think that active tanks are never again going to be the standard.
No matter how boring or irritating some people in this thread find the concept of buffers, people like staying alive for as long as possible.
With an active tank, if your tank breaks you drop like a ****ing stone. That happens before you can even get your drones onto a target on most occasions.
With buffer, you are guaranteed to survive long enough to damage the other guy, get your drones working, and generally actually contributing to the gang.
As has been pointed out plenty of times, fitting a local tank also gimps the hell out of most gun boats ability to fit decent guns, which is to the determent of the gang.
Also, buffer tanks are intrinsically linked to the use of remote reps, which forces a greater amount of co-ordination in a gang, and the use of gang focused fits that work well with other people.
10 guys fit to pvp solo SHOULD get its ass kicked by 10 guys fit to work together.
Also remote repping is just about the only way that you can make repair scale with gang size.
No matter what way you cut it, some kind of sloping damage resistance for fitting an active tank is ******ed and there's no way that it would make sense. It's ****ing stupid to suggest that you can tank one guy, two guys or five guys equally well. Its ******ed to say that shooting one guy a whole lot more won't kill him faster. Just thinking about it. What happens when you get to the point where each ship in a gang can tank so much damage personally that there's no way to kill him, not even blobbing the crap out of him. THINK IT THROUGH.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |