EVE Search - Caldari vs EM weapons

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Caldari vs EM weapons

» 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)
Mister LEM0NS Caldari	Posted - 2010.04.27 21:29:00 - [1] Why dont caldari ships (other than the ones that get the resist bonus per level) have any EM resist? Tech 1, 2 and sadly 3 have the inability to tank EM without sacrificing a rig slot or a med slot to do so. The amarr and gallente seem to have gotten over their Explosive weakness in t2 and t3 (and even their t1 have 10%, but thats an understandable makeup for having no self regeneration). Some of their ships even have the luxary of having the resist bonus per skill level. Im sure there is a reason for this but i have yet to see an understandable reason why. Any thoughts? Finder of the Ibis navy issue.
Maisonian Amarr The Green Machine Aeternus.	Posted - 2010.04.27 21:35:00 - [2] If you look at the overall resistances of sheild and armour tanks you will see that sheilds carry a stronger tank in other areas; sheilds are good Vs physical damage and armour works well Vs electromagnetic damage. It's simply the way they're designed. However, it's worth considering that sheild tanking is usually based on active modules (invulnerability fields/hardeners) which convey a larger tanking bonus, therefore the EM hole is not ad severe as that of Armour and explosive. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Navigator
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2010.04.27 21:38:00 - [3] Originally by: Mister LEM0NS Why dont caldari ships (other than the ones that get the resist bonus per level) have any EM resist? Tech 1, 2 and sadly 3 have the inability to tank EM without sacrificing a rig slot or a med slot to do so. The amarr and gallente seem to have gotten over their Explosive weakness in t2 and t3 (and even their t1 have 10%, but thats an understandable makeup for having no self regeneration). Some of their ships even have the luxary of having the resist bonus per skill level. Im sure there is a reason for this but i have yet to see an understandable reason why. Any thoughts? Checked any gallente and minnie t2 armor tanked ships lately? They all got a huge explosive hole. And caldari has quite many ships with a resistance bonus, contrary to gallente. Only minmatar shield tanked ships and amarr armor tanked ships have nice omni resists without resists holes, gallente t2 and t3 ships all also have resist holes.
Zilberfrid	Posted - 2010.04.28 07:11:00 - [4] Originally by: Mister LEM0NS Why dont caldari ships (other than the ones that get the resist bonus per level) ------- Some of their ships even have the luxary of having the resist bonus per skill level. Im sure there is a reason for this but i have yet to see an understandable reason why. Any thoughts? Could you explain this to me? seems like the resists scaling per level is something you see on amarr and caldari (non t3) ships. Gallente have similar ubalanced resists as Caldari, only t3 and the (not present in gallente) resist per level. If you want pretty shield resists: look at minnie.
ShahFluffers Gallente Ice Fire Warriors	Posted - 2010.04.28 07:33:00 - [5] Here's what I've noticed: each race's damage resistances are tailored to counter their "nemesis race." In the case of the Amarr and Minmitar... the Amarr damage type is EM and thermal, thus the Minmitar gain a bonus in those resists (an extra 5% to 10% on T1 ships and higher ones on T2)... the Minmitar damage type is Explosive and Kinetic, thus the Amarr ships gain a bonus in those resistances. The Caldari and Gallente on the other hand use similar weaponry (hybrid weapons), so their resistances are similar. But if you look closely, Caldari resistances in thermal damage and Gallente resistances in kinetic damage are respectively higher. Ironically enough, the way the resistances play out means that each race is weak against their ally. _______________________ "Just because I look like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown
Millie Clode Amarr Standards and Practices	Posted - 2010.04.28 08:41:00 - [6] Originally by: Zilberfrid Originally by: Mister LEM0NS Why dont caldari ships (other than the ones that get the resist bonus per level) ------- Some of their ships even have the luxary of having the resist bonus per skill level. Im sure there is a reason for this but i have yet to see an understandable reason why. Any thoughts? Could you explain this to me? seems like the resists scaling per level is something you see on amarr and caldari (non t3) ships. Gallente have similar ubalanced resists as Caldari, only t3 and the (not present in gallente) resist per level. If you want pretty shield resists: look at minnie. It's the way it is. Caldari and Amarr get resist bonuses, Minmatar and Gallente get active tank bonuses (ie booster/armour rep amount bonuses on battlecruisers/commandships). The only minnie or gal ships with native resist bonuses are the Hictors, mainly because huge buffer is part of the role that Hictors play. ---------- Who, me?
Zilberfrid	Posted - 2010.04.28 09:34:00 - [7] Originally by: Millie Clode Originally by: Zilberfrid Originally by: Mister LEM0NS Why dont caldari ships (other than the ones that get the resist bonus per level) ------- Some of their ships even have the luxary of having the resist bonus per skill level. Im sure there is a reason for this but i have yet to see an understandable reason why. Any thoughts? Could you explain this to me? seems like the resists scaling per level is something you see on amarr and caldari (non t3) ships. Gallente have similar ubalanced resists as Caldari, only t3 and the (not present in gallente) resist per level. If you want pretty shield resists: look at minnie. It's the way it is. Caldari and Amarr get resist bonuses, Minmatar and Gallente get active tank bonuses (ie booster/armour rep amount bonuses on battlecruisers/commandships). The only minnie or gal ships with native resist bonuses are the Hictors, mainly because huge buffer is part of the role that Hictors play. I was commenting how at first it was taken for granted that Caldari have a resistance bonus on some ships, and gallente are shown as an example of having resist bonusses they do not sport, I wondered where that went wrong. I suspect that minnie and gallente were confused (minnie have nice resists).
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2010.04.28 13:47:00 - [8] What you're seeing is the native resists for shields/armor combined with the T2/3 resists for different races. All player ships start off with very low shield resists to EM and low armor resists to EXP with KIN and THM somewhere in the middle. T2/T3 resists are based on the 'native' damage types of their opposing race, so Amarr get bonuses to EXP and KIN, Gallente KIN and THM, Caldari THM and KIN, and Minmatar EM and THM. As a result, T2/T3 Minmatar shield tanks have very strong and uniform resists, as do T2/T3 Amarr armor tanks. All other ships will have some resist 'hole' that they need to fill, even ships with +% resist per level (although the hole is a bit smaller). This is why T2/T3 Amarr/Minmatar ships that have +% armor/shield resists per level can have such staggeringly strong tanks with relatively few modules. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Kail Storm Caldari	Posted - 2010.04.28 21:03:00 - [9] Originally by: Maisonian If you look at the overall resistances of sheild and armour tanks you will see that sheilds carry a stronger tank in other areas; sheilds are good Vs physical damage and armour works well Vs electromagnetic damage. It's simply the way they're designed. However, it's worth considering that sheild tanking is usually based on active modules (invulnerability fields/hardeners) which convey a larger tanking bonus, therefore the EM hole is not ad severe as that of Armour and explosive. Both these are not true, Armor have Higher base resists. And shield tanking does use active invulns but so does Armor, EANM is the most popular module on a Armor tank bar none. EM being at 0% using 2 invulns copmes to what 50% Resist that is a huge hole, where as Explosive at 10% starts higher, its pretty simple, Armor has all round better resists. This really shows in ships like the Abaddon whos 25% Bonus is super high on everything. Shield Armor EM- 0% 60% Thrm-20% 35% Kin- 40% 25% Expl-50% 10% This is clearly an advantage, so regardless of active or passive etc Plates also get almost double the HP, and Armor RR is not just better because resists but its buffer is huge and you cant even fi a Good shield rr because reqs for CPU is *****ed. Im not saying its unbalanced but that statement was way wrong -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was Prn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
Henri Rearden Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.04.28 22:18:00 - [10] Originally by: Kail Storm Originally by: Maisonian If you look at the overall resistances of sheild and armour tanks you will see that sheilds carry a stronger tank in other areas; sheilds are good Vs physical damage and armour works well Vs electromagnetic damage. It's simply the way they're designed. However, it's worth considering that sheild tanking is usually based on active modules (invulnerability fields/hardeners) which convey a larger tanking bonus, therefore the EM hole is not ad severe as that of Armour and explosive. Both these are not true, Armor have Higher base resists. And shield tanking does use active invulns but so does Armor, EANM is the most popular module on a Armor tank bar none. EM being at 0% using 2 invulns copmes to what 50% Resist that is a huge hole, where as Explosive at 10% starts higher, its pretty simple, Armor has all round better resists. This really shows in ships like the Abaddon whos 25% Bonus is super high on everything. Shield Armor EM- 0% 60% Thrm-20% 35% Kin- 40% 25% Expl-50% 10% This is clearly an advantage, so regardless of active or passive etc Plates also get almost double the HP, and Armor RR is not just better because resists but its buffer is huge and you cant even fi a Good shield rr because reqs for CPU is ******ed. Im not saying its unbalanced but that statement was way wrong Two words: passive regen. Consider that on a ship with a 10hp/s shield regen, you're getting 600 free hp every minute without activating a module. That's almost as much as two cycles of a T2 medium armor repper without the 2x160GJ cap cost or the lost low-slot. My Maelstrom gets a 14hp/s regen, which comes out to 840 hp/minute. That's more than a T2 large armor repper cycle without the 400GJ capcost, the lost low-slot, and the 2300MW powergrid use. Or, to put things in perspective, that's like permarunning a T2 small armor repper with a cycle time of 5.7 seconds... but for free. I like armor tanks because of their strengths, but I like shield tanks just as much - I'm trained for and frequently use both - and I'd agree with you they're pretty well balanced. Admittedly, these are peak recharge rates which happen at something like 35% shields, but with a shield booster there's no reason you can't massage it so that you're near peak regen most of the time if you really want to.
scunner funk Minmatar Connoisseurs Of Hallucination	Posted - 2010.04.28 22:24:00 - [11] Originally by: Mister LEM0NS i have yet to see an understandable reason why. I don't think there's a simple answer to this, eve has evolved through of many years of nerf/buff threads, spreadsheet junkies, Icelandic beer, overworked devs and burned out hamsters. The 0% resist coupled with some ships having a resist bonus probably made sense back when kestrels were pwnmobiles and stacked MWDs were king. Over the years all the races have had their day but imo it was the laser buff that really kicked off the "caldari/solo/success choose two" meme, that 0% resist was nearly unplugable if you wanted to fit any form of tackle and shield tanks looked a bit weak for while until some genius at CCP came up with rigs. Rigs were a fantastic way to level the playing field between shield and armour tanks. Before they were introduced trying to fit tackle on to a shield tanker or damage mods on to an armour tanker was a nightmare. Fortunately shield rigs are cheap and easy to fit, damage rigs are usually ok to fit on turret ships but missile damage rigs are often harder to fit on missile boats due to CPU issues while armour rigs cripple your movement so are only viable for slugfest fits. I don't think I can remember a time when eve was as balanced as it is now yet it still retains diversity and we have rigs to thank for that. As a bonus the caldari can now shut their EM hole
Kail Storm Caldari	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:00:00 - [12] I do think its pretty balanced, except T3`s like Tengu honestlky should get a 25% EM resist naturally, I thinks its insane that on such an advanced ship they would leave the glaring hole. Same with all the HACS and other T2`s it needs at least a 25% Bonus. I understand That at PEAK recharge shields have an advantage but EFT numbers in passive regen is often over stated since only 28.4% is peak recharge most the time its closer to nothing when shields are full or even 70%. Have u ever joined gang and got 10% bonus to shields lol it takes 5 mins to recharge it. So for recharge we lose 2000 HP on LSE vs plates have worse resists have teribale RR that cant be viable in PVP and lose skills like Armor comp that increase DMG resist on all active modules. Can you imagine having skills that add 5% for each skill on Invuln fields ARM, SHields have good balance but I would liek a bit more resist in advanced ships towards em just doesnt make sense that a Made for war ship wouldnt protect against its bigest weakness. -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
Gartel Reiman The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:59:00 - [13] Originally by: Kail Storm I do think its pretty balanced, except T3`s like Tengu honestlky should get a 25% EM resist naturally, I thinks its insane that on such an advanced ship they would leave the glaring hole. Same with all the HACS and other T2`s it needs at least a 25% Bonus. That would be weird; the point of T2 resistances is not to omni-tank, in the same way that T1 resistances are not meant to be an omni-tank either. Besides, the nice thing about Caldari T2 resists is that you get no bonus to explosive resistances, a moderate boost to kinetic resistance and a larger boost to thermal resistance. Since these are in reverse order of the natural resistances, there's a nice balancing going on there. This leaves EM as a vastly lower resistance, which is thus very easy to fix with a single Photon Scattering Field. Quote: I understand That at PEAK recharge shields have an advantage but EFT numbers in passive regen is often over stated since only 28.4% is peak recharge most the time its closer to nothing when shields are full or even 70%. Have u ever joined gang and got 10% bonus to shields lol it takes 5 mins to recharge it. Shields and armour are very different tanking systems in many ways, of which this is just one. Personally I don't feel that the natural recharge is stronger or weaker than an extra 10% explosive resistances. Quote: So for recharge we lose 2000 HP on LSE vs plates have worse resists have teribale RR that cant be viable in PVP and lose skills like Armor comp that increase DMG resist on all active modules. Can you imagine having skills that add 5% for each skill on Invuln fields sigh, you don't lose 2000 HP from LSEs because of the recharge. You "lose" is because they never had it in the first place. One could easily claim that you "lose" 10 seconds on a LAR's cycle (compared to an XLSB) because of the 10% armour resists too, but that would be just as arbitrary. (Besides, comparing a 150-165 PG module to a 500-575 PG module, I don't know why you're surprised that the smaller-class module gives less HP. ) Most importantly, the armour compensation skills give their bonus to passive hardeners, not active modules. And you can be sure that the relevant skills were taken into account when balancing EANMs (20% resists -> 25% with max skills) and invulns (30% resists off the bat). Again - different systems, different compromises.
Alsyth Night Warder	Posted - 2010.04.29 00:46:00 - [14] In my opinion the only real injustice is the totally insane CPU requirement on shield transporters, which makes shield RR almost impossible.
scunner funk Minmatar Connoisseurs Of Hallucination	Posted - 2010.04.29 01:37:00 - [15] Originally by: Alsyth In my opinion the only real injustice is the totally insane CPU requirement on shield transporters, which makes shield RR almost impossible. +1
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2010.04.29 02:10:00 - [16] Originally by: Gartel Reiman Originally by: Kail Storm I do think its pretty balanced, except T3`s like Tengu honestlky should get a 25% EM resist naturally, I thinks its insane that on such an advanced ship they would leave the glaring hole. Same with all the HACS and other T2`s it needs at least a 25% Bonus. That would be weird; the point of T2 resistances is not to omni-tank, in the same way that T1 resistances are not meant to be an omni-tank either. Besides, the nice thing about Caldari T2 resists is that you get no bonus to explosive resistances, a moderate boost to kinetic resistance and a larger boost to thermal resistance. Since these are in reverse order of the natural resistances, there's a nice balancing going on there. This leaves EM as a vastly lower resistance, which is thus very easy to fix with a single Photon Scattering Field. Exactly... Bringing up the tengu as an example of "inadequate" tanking is so not right...the ship out tanks/ganks anything in it's class effectively - unless you greatly specialize an insane buffer armor tank on a proteus/legion that gimps your ability to fit stuff on your highs and do dmg with em... The Tengu cannot be buffed any further ffs... Just like all T1 armor tankers that wan't an omni-tank past the 2x EANMs fit an explosive hardener, so should shield tankers do... Yes, you don't get room for 3x hardeners on all of your ships, but i wish i had an over-heatable active omni-hardener for armor too...we can't have all the slots and all the fittings we would wish for tho...nor the native resists (ok, Minmatar do...but they fight in fall-off :P)... All-in-all, ships have to have a weakness...and the last "weakness" i see to most popular caldari ships is weak tank ... for both PvE and PvP... Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
altyaltyaltyalt	Posted - 2010.04.29 03:02:00 - [17] Originally by: Alsyth In my opinion the only real injustice is the totally insane CPU requirement on shield transporters, which makes shield RR almost impossible. This right here is the problem you people should be complaining about.

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.