Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aerilis
Gallente Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 00:46:00 -
[1]
"Skill at preventing damage from penetrating the shield, including the use of shield hardeners and other advanced shield modules. Reduces the chance of damage penetrating the shield when it falls below 25% by 5% per skill level, with 0% chance at level 5."
But wouldn't you want some damage to bleed into your armor if your shields are on the verge of failing? If incoming DPS is greater than your shield is capable of tanking, having a bit of excess bleed into your armor would keep your shield higher, increasing the amount of recharge you're getting, and increasing your overall survivability. Or am I completely missing something?
|
Estel Arador
Minmatar Estel Arador Corp Services
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 01:15:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Aerilis But wouldn't you want some damage to bleed into your armor if your shields are on the verge of failing? If incoming DPS is greater than your shield is capable of tanking, having a bit of excess bleed into your armor would keep your shield higher, increasing the amount of recharge you're getting, and increasing your overall survivability. Or am I completely missing something?
a) You're missing that by the time TSM kicks in, your tank is broken. If you want to increase your survivability at that point, warp out.
That said, b) your reasoning assumes that damage is diverted from the shields to the armour. Some people claim that the damage to the armour is extra damage, on top of the normal damage to the shields. I've seen no definitive proof one way or another. (To anyone replying: if you're saying it is one way or another, please do so with a link to the definitive proof).
That said, c) if your reasoning is correct, the difference is marginal.
In sum: train TSM to IV for the T2 hardeners and then forget about the skill.
Free jumpclone service|874 stations - Truly Universal |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 01:47:00 -
[3]
considering you are about to crumple like an elephant stepping on a soda can do you really care?
|
Hack Harrison
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 03:35:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton considering you are about to crumple like an elephant stepping on a soda can do you really care?
Why on earth would an elephant crumple when stepping on a soda can?
Now I can understand crumpling like a soda can stepped on by an elephant for sure... Just not the other way around...
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 08:23:00 -
[5]
if it's a shield tank, then it's a shield tank. why let soft armor be damaged? it can't be repaired, unless it's dual tank. and dual tank is waste of resource, with either less overall tank or less damage.
so, back to the point: why would anyone want to bleed damage from hard shields to soft armor, if shield tank has already failed (under peak regen at 25%)? it's same as saying, DC is good for armor tank because it boosts up hull points. so freaking what? it's not like anyone in they right mind wants to rep hull after each fight.
tank failed = warp out /discussion ________________________________ : Forum Bore 'Em : Foamy The Squirrel |
fivetide humidyear
Gallente Fool Mental Junket
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 09:39:00 -
[6]
Edited by: fivetide humidyear on 05/03/2010 09:40:28
Originally by: Jagga Spikes it's same as saying, DC is good for armor tank because it boosts up hull points. so freaking what? it's not like anyone in they right mind wants to rep hull after each fight.
tank failed = warp out /discussion
muppet.
you fit the damage control to get the buffer to kill something so you can carry more gank than active tank mods need, to stay alive that little bit longer in fights against the odds to give you buffer for RR . NOT as insurance against your tank failing, and it's hard to warp out if you are tackled no?
active armour tanks for PVE and maybe bait ships, buffer is almost always better.
on topic, TSM to 4 unless you are doing shield tanked capitals / want the certificate.
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 09:44:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Jagga Spikes on 05/03/2010 09:44:14 discussing TSM bleed out of PVE context makes even less sense and is discussion i'm not getting myself into. ________________________________ : Forum Bore 'Em : Foamy The Squirrel |
Gavin DeVries
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 15:05:00 -
[8]
Originally by: fivetide humidyear on topic, TSM to 4 unless you are doing shield tanked capitals / want the certificate.
The skill to use capital shield boosters no longer requires TSM 5 as a prerequisite, so now there's no real reason to train it to 5 other than "I just want to". ______________________________________________________ Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you? |
Matalino
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 16:03:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Matalino on 05/03/2010 16:03:48
Originally by: Gavin DeVries
Originally by: fivetide humidyear on topic, TSM to 4 unless you are doing shield tanked capitals / want the certificate.
The skill to use capital shield boosters no longer requires TSM 5 as a prerequisite, so now there's no real reason to train it to 5 other than "I just want to".
This! TSM 5 is now only "required" for certificate collectors. It has no other useful purpose. It does no harm and it does no good.
|
Skippermonkey
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 16:11:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Matalino Edited by: Matalino on 05/03/2010 16:03:48
Originally by: Gavin DeVries
Originally by: fivetide humidyear on topic, TSM to 4 unless you are doing shield tanked capitals / want the certificate.
The skill to use capital shield boosters no longer requires TSM 5 as a prerequisite, so now there's no real reason to train it to 5 other than "I just want to".
This! TSM 5 is now only "required" for certificate collectors. It has no other useful purpose. It does no harm and it does no good.
Other than keeping your custom 'hello kitty' armor paint job from getting scratched
|
|
RaVeN Revenge
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 17:21:00 -
[11]
This has been hashed out a many many times ....Over 9000 if I recall.
My short answer is always this: Two pilots with exactly the same skills and fit ,face to face , no tactics, the first one with armor damage is going to die .
|
Tao Zun
The SOS Brigade
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 17:33:00 -
[12]
obvious noob is obvious, if a shield tanker is a shield tanker then its shield is the tank, if you get in armor your f'ed in the a no matter what.
|
Aerilis
Gallente Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 18:47:00 -
[13]
Originally by: RaVeN Revenge This has been hashed out a many many times ....Over 9000 if I recall.
My short answer is always this: Two pilots with exactly the same skills and fit ,face to face , no tactics, the first one with armor damage is going to die .
Wrong. If two pilots are exactly the same, and they're both in shield tanked ships, the one with TSM 4 will beat the one with TSM 5.
Originally by: Tao Zun obvious noob is obvious, if a shield tanker is a shield tanker then its shield is the tank, if you get in armor your f'ed in the a no matter what.
You've never made it out of a fight in low structure? And that's besides the point anyway. The point of the discussion is whether or not there may be negative aspects of training TSM, not whether those aspects are significant enough to make a difference in whether or not you survive an engagement.
|
Matalino
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 19:14:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Aerilis Wrong. If two pilots are exactly the same, and they're both in shield tanked ships, the one with TSM 4 will beat the one with TSM 5.
How do you figure that?
|
Aerilis
Gallente Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 19:32:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Matalino
Originally by: Aerilis Wrong. If two pilots are exactly the same, and they're both in shield tanked ships, the one with TSM 4 will beat the one with TSM 5.
How do you figure that?
Armor bleed reduces dps on the shield, keeping the shields at a higher level than they would be otherwise and improving regen. Unlikely to make you survive longer than a couple extra seconds in 99.9% of situations though
|
Ping Bong
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 20:18:00 -
[16]
if your passive shield tanking it is harmful, simple logic really - the longer you can keep your shield hp closer to optimal recharge the more it regenerates before failing completely alltho i imagine the actual difference is miniature and probably wouldnt even buy you a second considering the attacker already had enough dps to get through your peak recharge into the last 25%
|
Tao Zun
The SOS Brigade
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 21:06:00 -
[17]
i understand what your saying, your trying to say that you want to treat you armor like a reserve of shiled but the point we are trying to make is by the time you get to the point of bleed through your main tank is already broken so you are on your way to popping anyway.So in that case might as well to last as long as you can in your main tank because your armor will be like paper no matter what the case. And yes i have left a fight with low structure but that had nothign to do with my tank as much as my and my allies' dps on the target
|
Liquidium
Internet Spaceship Gamers Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 21:13:00 -
[18]
If your shield tanking and your bleeding into armor, its either too late or you need to GTFO.
That's the bottom line. Armor is irreparable unless you are active armor tanking. So for this reason alone, it makes sense you DON'T want bleedthrough, considering the shield would have the higher resists.
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 21:21:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Ping Bong if your passive shield tanking it is harmful, simple logic really - the longer you can keep your shield hp closer to optimal recharge the more it regenerates before failing completely alltho i imagine the actual difference is miniature and probably wouldnt even buy you a second considering the attacker already had enough dps to get through your peak recharge into the last 25%
Of course, this ignores the fact that you will have it to IV anyway, or you won't have access to T2 hardeners, which means that bleed-through will happen at 5% shields when you have roughly zero regen anyway. It also ignores the fact that, as a shield tanker, you will have fitted shield hardeners that reduce the damage that hits your shield – what bleeds through to armour does not get that reduction and thus hurt more than it would if it had been an all-shield hit.
So no, not having it as a shield tanker is harmful for two reasons: you receive more damage from having a sub-par tank and you receive damage from being hit where you have no resists. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
Matalino
|
Posted - 2010.03.05 22:15:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Aerilis
Originally by: Matalino
Originally by: Aerilis Wrong. If two pilots are exactly the same, and they're both in shield tanked ships, the one with TSM 4 will beat the one with TSM 5.
How do you figure that?
Armor bleed reduces dps on the shield, keeping the shields at a higher level than they would be otherwise and improving regen. Unlikely to make you survive longer than a couple extra seconds in 99.9% of situations though
So, in order for a player with TSM IV to gain an advantage over a player with TSM V, the player with TSM IV wouls need to have a shot bleed through shields without wiping out the shields completely. If that happened, the player with TSM IV would have a slightly higher shield recharge rate until his shield were destroyed. Is that the effect that you are refering to?
|
|
RaVeN Revenge
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 01:18:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Aerilis
Originally by: RaVeN Revenge This has been hashed out a many many times ....Over 9000 if I recall.
My short answer is always this: Two pilots with exactly the same skills and fit ,face to face , no tactics, the first one with armor damage is going to die .
Wrong. If two pilots are exactly the same, and they're both in shield tanked ships, the one with TSM 4 will beat the one with TSM 5.
I think Your wrong .If both tanks are broken , and your getting bleed through at 95% shield , and I'm not , then your going to die first . We're both WAY PAST optimal recharge and you have armor damage (where resists are weaker anyway) and I still have shield left ( strongest resists) . When we both hit 100% shield loss , your gonna be almost a volley into your armor , and I wont be.
If tank is not broken ,lets say we both stabilize at 95%, then we both will regen at exactly the same rate at 95% ..except bleed through will be turning you red on every volley.
TSM does not change regen rate .Two equal ships trading volleys will regen side by side all the way down .
And if we were both armor tankers , then the first person with armor damage has to start repping first , draining cap first , and eventually die first .
|
Zartrader
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 02:38:00 -
[22]
The skill is badly worded anyway. It says it reduces the chance of damage (an undefined percentage) when the shield is below 25% by 5% per level against this undefined percentage. It does not say it reduces the damage to nil at 20%, 15%, 10%, 5% then nil % shield at all.
I wish someone would go through these skills and check them for accuracy.
|
Aerilis
Gallente Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 08:35:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Aerilis on 06/03/2010 08:38:51
Originally by: Tao Zun i understand what your saying, your trying to say that you want to treat you armor like a reserve of shiled but the point we are trying to make is by the time you get to the point of bleed through your main tank is already broken so you are on your way to popping anyway.So in that case might as well to last as long as you can in your main tank because your armor will be like paper no matter what the case. And yes i have left a fight with low structure but that had nothign to do with my tank as much as my and my allies' dps on the target
You just said if a shield tanker gets into armor he's f'd either way. Am I to assume you structure tanked every ship that survived in low structure?
Originally by: RaVeN Revenge
Originally by: Aerilis
Originally by: RaVeN Revenge This has been hashed out a many many times ....Over 9000 if I recall.
My short answer is always this: Two pilots with exactly the same skills and fit ,face to face , no tactics, the first one with armor damage is going to die .
Wrong. If two pilots are exactly the same, and they're both in shield tanked ships, the one with TSM 4 will beat the one with TSM 5.
I think Your wrong .If both tanks are broken , and your getting bleed through at 95% shield , and I'm not , then your going to die first . We're both WAY PAST optimal recharge and you have armor damage (where resists are weaker anyway) and I still have shield left ( strongest resists) . When we both hit 100% shield loss , your gonna be almost a volley into your armor , and I wont be.
If tank is not broken ,lets say we both stabilize at 95%, then we both will regen at exactly the same rate at 95% ..except bleed through will be turning you red on every volley.
TSM does not change regen rate .Two equal ships trading volleys will regen side by side all the way down .
And if we were both armor tankers , then the first person with armor damage has to start repping first , draining cap first , and eventually die first .
Most people here have had some truth to their words, but this is completely wrong. For two identical characters, the one that has some dps bleed into his armor will at THAT POINT IN TIME have a higher shield regen then the one who is taking 100% of the dps with his shields. Thus reducing total incoming dps during that (albeit small) time period, thus increasing the amount of time that person will survive under that dps.
And a lot of people are still missing the point of this discussion. Obviously this effect is minuscule and has no practical use whatsoever, I was just presenting a counter-intuitive thought and seeing if there were other people who agreed.
edit: cant spell.
|
Estel Arador
Minmatar Estel Arador Corp Services
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 11:37:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Matalino BTW - As another result of my testing, I can confirm that damage that bleeds through is not "extra" damage. A portion of the raw damage is applied to shield using the shield's resistances. A portion is applied to armour using armour's resistance. However, the total raw damage remains the same.
Excellent information, thanks
Free jumpclone service|874 stations - Truly Universal |
Matalino
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 14:17:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Aerilis Most people here have had some truth to their words, but this is completely wrong. For two identical characters, the one that has some dps bleed into his armor will at THAT POINT IN TIME have a higher shield regen then the one who is taking 100% of the dps with his shields. Thus reducing total incoming dps during that (albeit small) time period, thus increasing the amount of time that person will survive under that dps.
And a lot of people are still missing the point of this discussion. Obviously this effect is minuscule and has no practical use whatsoever, I was just presenting a counter-intuitive thought and seeing if there were other people who agreed.
The problem with your theory is that it is meaningless. You cannot reproduce this effect with any experiment. You are arguing over an amount shield recharge that is probably lost due to rounding errors in float point precision. Try it! You will see how absurd this supposed effect really is. In theory you have what might be a one in a hundred chance of having a one hundredth of a percent extra shields and gaining the extra recharge that comes from that infinitesimal amount of extra shields up until the next volley obliterates your shields completely.
The effect is impossible to measure or reproduce. Either your methods of controlling damage require human interaction and the effect is lost due to errors in your ability to control damage, or your method of dealing damage is automated and the effect is lost because the shields are swapped too quickly to allow time for damage to bleed through the shields or for the different in recharge rate to affect the ship's hit points.
|
RaVeN Revenge
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 18:18:00 -
[26]
If we were to follow your theory to the extremes , your saying that Tsm 4 is better than TSM 5 , TSM 3 is even better , TSM 2... TSM 1... NO TSM AT ALL MAKES YOU UBER , because you take bleed through as early as possible !
Is that what you truly think ?
If you're a shield tanker , the Last thing you want to see is armor damage. You want to stay in shield as long as possible.
If you're an Armor tank , you still want to stay in shield as long as possible .
Taking Armor damage as soon as possible is not a recomended PvP strategy.
You mentioned words of truth . I think these are the ones your looking for.
|
Abelard Nightbringer
New Foundation
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 21:10:00 -
[27]
Originally by: RaVeN Revenge
If you're a shield tanker , the Last thing you want to see is armor damage. You want to stay in shield as long as possible.
both are happening. Armors going down, at its normal rate, yet the shieldtank is still active, and recharging/boosting and being able to take more punishment, until down to 0.
|
Dirk Culliford
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.03.06 23:43:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Aerilis
My short answer is always this: Two pilots with exactly the same skills and fit ,face to face , no tactics, the first one with armor damage is going to die .
If both pilots are in drakes, set up for maximum tank so that neither could beat the shield tank, the drake with TSM4 would die but the TSM5 would not.
If you are taking armour damage in a shield tanked ship you are going to die regardless of your on paper godly tank value. Saying that you're 'tanking' an extra 200 dps because it's eating into your hull is just ridiculous
|
Aerilis
Gallente Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.03.07 07:18:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Aerilis on 07/03/2010 07:22:07
Originally by: RaVeN Revenge Edited by: RaVeN Revenge on 06/03/2010 19:31:50 Edited by: RaVeN Revenge on 06/03/2010 19:15:51 If we were to follow your theory to the extremes , your saying that Tsm 4 is better than TSM 5 , TSM 3 is even better , TSM 2... TSM 1... NO TSM AT ALL MAKES YOU UBER , because you take bleed through as early as possible !
Is that what you truly think ?
"Thus reducing total incoming DPS during that time period" Those were your words , and the flaw in your theory . DPS is not reduced , its transfered to a lower resist point . Thus increasing total hitpoints lost . This is the point where the TSM 5 guy starts winning the fight , because the TSM 4 guy is losing more HP on every volley .
If you're a shield tanker , the Last thing you want to see is armor damage. You want to stay in shield as long as possible.
If you're an Armor tank , you still want to stay in shield as long as possible .
Taking Armor damage as soon as possible is not a recomended PvP strategy.
Transfering damage to a lower resist is not a recomended PvP stratagy.
You mentioned words of truth . I think these are the ones your looking for.
Oh wow where to start. I guess let's break it down from the beginning?
1. You have two identical ships, one with TSM4 and one with TSM5 2. These ships have the same EHP, say 100k. Now say they are both under 1k dps. If there is no repair being done, they will both explode simultaneously after 1000 seconds. 3. Now if any health is repaired, that damage needs to be done again. So the formula for how long the ship stays alive is (EHP+total health repaired)/1000 4. At any point in time, the TSM4 ship can only have a HIGHER passive shield regen than the TSM5 ship. 5. There are no other factors in this example that affect how long either ship stays alive, thus the TSM4 ship lasts longer.
On which point do you disagree?
Originally by: Dirk Culliford
Originally by: Aerilis
My short answer is always this: Two pilots with exactly the same skills and fit ,face to face , no tactics, the first one with armor damage is going to die .
If both pilots are in drakes, set up for maximum tank so that neither could beat the shield tank, the drake with TSM4 would die but the TSM5 would not.
If you are taking armour damage in a shield tanked ship you are going to die regardless of your on paper godly tank value. Saying that you're 'tanking' an extra 200 dps because it's eating into your hull is just ridiculous
I'm not saying taking armor damage is always a good thing for shield tankers, or that having a lower TSM allows you tank more. TSM only comes into play when your shield hits 25%, thus your tank is broken either way. I'm saying in situations where your tank has already become overwhelmed, having a lower TSM will actually make you survive longer.
|
RaVeN Revenge
|
Posted - 2010.03.07 09:34:00 -
[30]
The example assumes there are zero resists . So I disagree somewhat with point 5 , where you say there are no other factors. Every ship has natural , racial resists .
If damage bleeds through to a lower resist . It takes away more Hp than if it had been confined to the higher resist .
That said : I have thought about this a lot btw , My own reasoning has led me to a loophole . If the bleed through were to hit a Higher resist .... lets say both pilots EM resist is 15% in shield and 55% in armor , then the TSM 4 guy has truly reduced incoming damage by bleed x 40% .
Armor resists would probably be the determining factor in "The Great TSM Debate" I believe that lower resists would prove one point And higher resists would prove another .
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |