| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dirk Mortice
   |
Posted - 2010.10.18 18:58:00 -
[31]
Hi guys, lets talk about TSM 5
|
Iceman62
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 19:06:00 -
[32]
Yes , your theory IS strange. It implies that IV is better than V , and so implies that TSM at level III, II, or I would be optimal goals.
It Implies that regen rate will more than compensate for taking damage to a lower resist.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 19:19:00 -
[33]
 Originally by: Iceman62
Yes , your theory IS strange. It implies that IV is better than V , and so implies that TSM at level III, II, or I would be optimal goals.
Not really. It makes no statements about the statistical differences between different non-100% probabilities; it simply makes the statement that the possible outcome of staying at higher shield is better than the certain outcome of not doing so.
àoh and of course, the tests have confirmed this.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Estel Arador
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 19:41:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Iceman62
"I can't comprehend it so it must be wrong."
Care to elaborate on what you think is wrong with the tests which have been done?
(Apart from the fact that you don't like/understand the outcome.)
|
Iceman62
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 19:47:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Iceman62 on 18/10/2010 19:50:33
Well, I've asked for the specific tests before and the links provided were either a mess of maybe/probable/what if/ terminology, or they just flat out didn't apply. I've not seen PROOF in ANY post, so why would I address any post?
To add though: In any PVE situation, where warping out is an option, TSM V will let you stay in a lot longer. In many cases its enough time to change the field. I believe that missions are designed to put a pilot right on the edge, and TSM V gives you the resources to hold the field. It lets you tank more vollies in your shields while you spit out more vollies into your opponents armor/hull.
And Estel: your not going to sink to edited mis-quotes are you ?
|
Estel Arador
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 20:35:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Iceman62
Well, I've asked for the specific tests before and the links provided were either a mess of maybe/probable/what if/ terminology, or they just flat out didn't apply. I've not seen PROOF in ANY post, so why would I address any post?
One
Two
Three
Four
If these tests don't constitute 'proof', please explain why. Also please elaborate how your theory would fit in with these test results.
Originally by: Iceman62
And Estel: your not going to sink to edited mis-quotes are you ?
It is an accurate summary of what you said.
|
Tau Cabalander
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 20:47:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Tau Cabalander on 18/10/2010 20:51:39
Originally by: Iceman62
Edited by: Iceman62 on 18/10/2010 19:50:33
Well, I've asked for the specific tests before and the links provided were either a mess of maybe/probable/what if/ terminology, or they just flat out didn't apply. I've not seen PROOF in ANY post, so why would I address any post?
These are the posts that I think are being referred to. I've summarized them in my own words.
Matalino, post 20 - Test: bleed is small.
Goa Vibe, post 64 - Test: bleed is chance based and doesn't add additional damage.
Lord Amatash, post 73 - Test: TSM 5 makes your tank weaker.
Has anybody spotted any others?
EDIT 1: Durn you Estel. Beat me to the post button.
EDIT 2: I think Shoogie's post is a simulation, not an actual test.
|
Estel Arador
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 21:01:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Tau Cabalander
EDIT 2: I think Shoogie's post is a simulation, not an actual test.
Ah yes, it is. Still it's so detailed it'd be interesting to hear where the simulation went wrong according to Iceman62.
|
Tigerras
Smash Incorporated
|
Posted - 2010.10.18 22:20:00 -
[39]
Trained the skill to 4 and didn't want to spend 16 days on lvl 5. I spent those days (and more) on Battlecruiser 5 instead, and that has netted much more reward.
My experience is mixed, but I've found in general that if I get to the 5% or below range, and am taking some armor damage, it is not a whole lot. If I take enough for it to matter, I'd be screwed whether I had rank 5 or not. Not saying this is true in every case, but in my case it is not worth it.
|
Iceman62
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 01:11:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Tau Cabalander
Edited by: Tau Cabalander on 18/10/2010 20:51:39
Originally by: Iceman62
Edited by: Iceman62 on 18/10/2010 19:50:33
Well, I've asked for the specific tests before and the links provided were either a mess of maybe/probable/what if/ terminology, or they just flat out didn't apply. I've not seen PROOF in ANY post, so why would I address any post?
These are the posts that I think are being referred to. I've summarized them in my own words.
Matalino, post 20 - Test: bleed is small.
Goa Vibe, post 64 - Test: bleed is chance based and doesn't add additional damage.
Lord Amatash, post 73 - Test: TSM 5 makes your tank weaker.
Has anybody spotted any others?
EDIT 1: Durn you Estel. Beat me to the post button.
EDIT 2: I think Shoogie's post is a simulation, not an actual test.
Regarding post 20: He controled the incoming for up to 5 minutes and somtimes turned off the incoming damage completely. He is definately on my side of the fence.
Regarding post 64: His Armor resist is actually higher than his shield resist. So by definition, I dont think that constitutes a shield tank. I think we determined that TSM is specificly a shield tank related skill, didn't we ?
He confirms that damage is consistent with resists. (which I agree with) And he quotes the skill description, which clearly states that results may be randomized.
His post is a da;mn good post and I believe its true, but it doesnt prove that IV is better than V for every ship in the game.
Regarding post 73: I addressed this post earlier and at best I can say that T2 purgers on a Rattlesnake test is not a good medium for some all inclusive conclusion. His test lacked a ton of info, and tbh I dont believe its a controlled test.
|
|
|
SitAndSpin
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 01:47:00 -
[41]
From The skill description:
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.
When I interpret this, it tells me that when I am at 24% shield for example, I have a 5% chance of damage bleeding through to armor at TSM IV, and 0% at TSM V.
Heres my beef with this. Why is it that people assume bleed through is happening at 5% at TSM IV? Unless that's just some clever math or something, I think 5% chance of bleed thru at < 25% shield is totally different.
With a huge buffer type tank (E.G. Doing a sanctum with my buffer fit drake), I find that with TSM V I have a lot longer before I need to warp out if I'm taking too much damage.
Another point to it, from http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Shield_recharge:
Shields, unlike armor and structure have the property that they regenerate naturally.
The peak shield recharge rate is aproximately given by:
Peak Recharge Rate = 2.4 x Maximum Shield Hitpoints / Shield Recharge Time
Peak recharge occurs at aproximately one third of shield hitpoints. As long as a ship does not sustain damage at a rate greater than its peak recharge and has more than one third shields, its shields will not go below the point of maximum damage. The recharge rate drops of to either side of the point of peak recharge.
Shield recharge is sometimes exploited to tank ships in what is known as passive tanking.
So what if it drops a little below peak recharge? I'm getting the attitude that your recharge rate is like 0 hp/s when you get low. Really? It goes down a little bit, but if you are dishing out the dps and lowering your incoming dps in a site...I've sat around 15% for a long time before, and then out tanked it as the npcs dropped. TSM IV, some of that would have bled thru while I was tanking that.
I don't see what's so difficult about the concept. I don't fit full passive though, so maybe that's where people do it. Full passive boats fail in 0.0. When you need to suddenly call to arms when you're in the middle of a sanctum.
|
Aerilis
Gallente
Percussive Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 02:04:00 -
[42]
Oh hey, the thread came to life. Well I'm going to sit this one out, I used to patiently explain things to people but the vast stupidity of these forums has made me lose a measure of faith in the human race. So /popcorn.
|
SitAndSpin
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 07:20:00 -
[43]
Edited by: SitAndSpin on 19/10/2010 07:21:58
I'm going to link to an old post about this.
Tau, your post in this thread (post 13) has to be the most well said explanation of the exact situation that TSM V wuld come into play, out of all the threads I've looked at on this forum about this. And yet...the concept still eludes so many players...
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1195566&page=1#13
This really should have been /thread and /tsmrelateddebate.
It's not one of those skills that is like night and day if you train it to V or not. The exact time that it comes in handy is in the linked situation (done it in my drake tanking L4's)
A lot of the simulations run, its factoring in a constant amout of incoming dps. The other factor to it is, your incoming dps is also going down over time as well, as you kill npc spawns (In a mission situation (and you don't accidentally aggro the whole room by popping the wrong spawn :P I've done that).
My conclusion:
PVP:
TSM V won't come into play in most circumstances.
PVE:
What Tau said in that linked post.
|
Aerilis
Gallente
Percussive Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 08:30:00 -
[44]
Originally by: SitAndSpin
Edited by: SitAndSpin on 19/10/2010 07:21:58
I'm going to link to an old post about this.
Tau, your post in this thread (post 13) has to be the most well said explanation of the exact situation that TSM V wuld come into play, out of all the threads I've looked at on this forum about this. And yet...the concept still eludes so many players...
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1195566&page=1#13
This really should have been /thread and /tsmrelateddebate.
It's not one of those skills that is like night and day if you train it to V or not. The exact time that it comes in handy is in the linked situation (done it in my drake tanking L4's)
A lot of the simulations run, its factoring in a constant amout of incoming dps. The other factor to it is, your incoming dps is also going down over time as well, as you kill npc spawns (In a mission situation (and you don't accidentally aggro the whole room by popping the wrong spawn :P I've done that).
My conclusion:
PVP:
TSM V won't come into play in most circumstances.
PVE:
What Tau said in that linked post.
Must... refrain... from... rebutting... *twitch*
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.19 08:39:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Iceman62
Regarding post 20: He controled the incoming for up to 5 minutes and somtimes turned off the incoming damage completely.
Makes no difference. He turned it off because he wanted to test the bleedthrough at <5% shield, not at 0%. Test confirms that bleedthrough is small.
Quote:
Regarding post 64: His Armor resist is actually higher than his shield resist. So by definition, I dont think that constitutes a shield tank. I think we determined that TSM is specificly a shield tank related skill, didn't we ?
Makes no difference. The test was to determine whether the "extra damage" myth was true or not and . Test confirms that bleedthrough is random. Test confirms that there is no extra damage.
Quote:
Regarding post 73: I addressed this post earlier and at best I can say that T2 purgers on a Rattlesnake test is not a good medium for some all inclusive conclusion. His test lacked a ton of info, and tbh I dont believe its a controlled test.
What is lacking? Why is it not a good medium? What he does is use a setup that magnifies a very marginal effect so that it becomes measurable. Test confirms the theory that staying at higher shields provides benefits over not having any shields at all.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Tau Cabalander
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.20 02:58:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Tau Cabalander on 20/10/2010 03:06:20
Originally by: Aerilis
Must... refrain... from... rebutting... *twitch*
Go ahead. You know you want to.
|
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 12:06:00 -
[47]
I have had missions where my shield was between 10-15% for a periods (got the aggro wrong) and I was glad that I didn't get any bleedthrough.
I got a copuple of BS down fast so my SB could overcome the damage and get over 33%...but I was close to overheating my racks...but as long as I don't go into amour, I don't see a need...as I take no bleedthrough.
<3 TSM5
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 12:21:00 -
[48]
Originally by: AterraX
I have had missions where my shield was between 10-15% for a periods (got the aggro wrong) and I was glad that I didn't get any bleedthrough.
I got a copuple of BS down fast so my SB could overcome the damage and get over 33%...but I was close to overheating my racks...but as long as I don't go into amour, I don't see a need...as I take no bleedthrough.
TSM IV or V hadn't made any difference in your case.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
AterraX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 12:48:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: AterraX
I have had missions where my shield was between 10-15% for a periods (got the aggro wrong) and I was glad that I didn't get any bleedthrough.
I got a copuple of BS down fast so my SB could overcome the damage and get over 33%...but I was close to overheating my racks...but as long as I don't go into amour, I don't see a need...as I take no bleedthrough.
TSM IV or V hadn't made any difference in your case.
Perhaps you should read and understand TSM:
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.
It dosn't mean that:
Level 3 = must be below 15% to bleedthrough.
Level 4 = must be below 10% to bleedthrough.
It means that when you go below 25% shield, there will be NO bleedthrough from 25-0% shield, if you have TSM at level 5.
So having TSM at level 5 meant that I had no chance on bleedthrough...even when my shield hovered at 10-15%...you have to kill ALL my shield before you give me ANY amour damage.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 13:09:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Tippia on 21/10/2010 13:11:06
Originally by: AterraX
Perhaps you should read and understand TSM:
Perhaps you should read and understand the threads where all of this has been actually tested,.
Quote:
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.
It dosn't mean that:
Level 3 = must be below 15% to bleedthrough.
Level 4 = must be below 10% to bleedthrough.
Actually, that's exactly what it means, as the tests have shown. Well, except that you got the level-to-percentage conversion wrong. At TSM IV, you start to bleed through at <5% shields. The description is simply poorly worded.
Quote:
So having TSM at level 5 meant that I had no chance on bleedthrough...
àand if you had had TSM IV, you still wouldn't have had a chance of bleedthrough, since you never went below 5% shields.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
|
|
Pantload
Gallente
The Underpants Gnomes
Deep Space Engineering
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 15:34:00 -
[51]
How many threads are required on this subject? It's very simple. TSM 5 is no longer required for Capital Shield Operation. TSM 4 is required for T2 hardeners. There is no good reason to take all the extra training time to go from 4-5. See! Isn't that simple?
TUG: The Underpants Gnomes.
Buy Corps here
|
Misanthra
|
Posted - 2010.10.21 23:50:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Pantload
How many threads are required on this subject? It's very simple. TSM 5 is no longer required for Capital Shield Operation. TSM 4 is required for T2 hardeners. There is no good reason to take all the extra training time to go from 4-5. See! Isn't that simple?
Nope, ocd says skill must go to 5. Cause at 5% it can save you in pvp. Must be the lucky ones who get 1v1. Me, not in bs first I see the tackle. Then I see his friends. Then I see my pod (sadly I alwasy run into people who know how to kill drakes lol). Or in bs, hell bs combat is easy. Once you see that first monster volley come in that hurts your shields fierce...you know you are primary. Pick a point to start spam warp at that point cause unless real lucky, the next volley or 2 coming in will not care if you have TSM 5 to prevent bleed through. Those volleys are tricksy, they says how about we jsut kill off your shields and hit armor anyway lol.
PVE...if running 5% alot, pick a better ship, tactics or fit. I was a cheap mission runner myself at one point, drake good enough dammit I sadi. Met Mr. blood rat 1.8 mil bs. He died......slow as hell. lemme try raven. Ohh crap, the 1.8 mil bs dies faster ergo he doesn't put out as much dps. But I hated bs speed. Now in tengu and speed tank it. Best tank I now of...too fast for gunbs to hit well and NPC rats don't run rigor rigs to hit small fast moving targets well. Kill the frgis first....any level 4 cake after that. Either path....the 19 days to TSM 5 applied to them makes happen much quicker lol.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:21:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Misanthra
Nope, ocd says skill must go to 5.
I think it has more to do with the intuitive, but actually very flawed, notion that higher level = better.
TSM, like many skills, have side-effects, and it's far from uncommon that those side effects can grow faster than the benefits, so as you increase in levels, you reach a peak where the benefits still outweigh the disadvantages but going one step extra flips that relationship. It's also a matter of what you consider a benefit and a disadvantage.
For instance, Repair Systems IV→Và great, you repair 6% more HP! But onoz, you lose cap 6% faster! I've seen plenty of posts from people who consider that disadvantage to greatly overshadow the benefit of faster repairsà
Or take Afterburner IV→Và great, you now expend 7% less cap! But onoz, you have to wait an extra second before the AB turns off when you actually need it to shut off right now so you can get your agility back and start manoeuvring properly.
TSM is the same. It has drawbacks. These drawbacks increase with level. There is a point where they even overcome the advantage the skill brings.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Vihura
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 13:14:00 -
[54]
A lot mambo jambo in this post but can someone explain me how 'penetrating the shield' is defined and when it happen ??
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 14:00:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Tippia on 22/10/2010 14:02:43
Originally by: Vihura
A lot mambo jambo in this post but can someone explain me how 'penetrating the shield' is defined and when it happen ??
Penetrating the shield = some damage isn't soaked up by the shield, and goes straight to armour (or hull, should it have gone that far) instead.
This has a chance to happen when your shield drops down below the threshold determined by your TSM level (in spite of what the skill description says): ≤25% shields if you don't have TSM trained at all; ≤20% for TSM I, ≤15% for TSM II; ≤10% TSM II and ≤5% for TSM IVà at TSM V you have to be ≤0 ù in other words, you won't take damage to armour before the shield is entirely gone.
Note, however, the "has a chance to" bit ù just because you drop below the threshold doesn't mean it will happen. Whether or not you get bleed-through is chance-based, and the exact nature of that mechanic is less well explored (except that tests have shown that the chance is fairly low, as is the amount of damage that is being transferred).
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Vihura
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 14:27:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Vihura on 22/10/2010 14:29:05
Did any one test how bleed behave when you have 25% shield and get hit by 95% left shield and when you have 25% and get hit by 5% shield? CCP love log() function.
|
Kalin Fisic
|
Posted - 2010.10.25 19:44:00 -
[57]
Short answer. No
Long answer. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
|
Tau Cabalander
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.10.25 20:13:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Vihura
Did any one test how bleed behave when you have 25% shield and get hit by 95% left shield and when you have 25% and get hit by 5% shield? CCP love log() function.
I think I read that has been tested and found not to matter,
Don't ask me which TSM thread, as there have been so many over the years.
|
Dtail
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 12:24:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Dtail on 26/10/2010 12:26:10
Originally by: Tippia
For instance, Repair Systems IV→Và great, you repair 6% more HP! But onoz, you lose cap 6% faster! I've seen plenty of posts from people who consider that disadvantage to greatly overshadow the benefit of faster repairsà
I have also seen idiots. Doesn't mean that there is a reason to share their logic. |
AureoLion
|
Posted - 2010.10.26 12:37:00 -
[60]
Let's use some basic-level Math to explain it in the most ******proof (if such thing exists) way.
Assumptions:
1) This is a buffertank situation, where bleed alone will NOT kill you, or provoke relevant damage of any influence beyond reducing armor buffer.
2) In the realm of sub 25% shield, the higher the shield, the higher the regen.
3) our test-ship has 100k shield, 50% across the board shield resists, and 50k armor / 0% across the board armor resists. I know this doesn't reflect reality, it's just a simulation. Changing around numbers won't matter.
4) The shields are currently at 10%, the armor at 100%.
at this point, rounds for exactely 20k damage, divided in small hits, are delivered.
the TSM V ship will have 0% shields, 100% armor.
the TSM IV ship will have ~1% shields, 98% armor.
Both ships have still the same EHP (50k), not counting Hull.
Since 1>0, the TSM IV ship will regen a small part of shields, increasing his EHP.
At the end of the day, the total EHP of both ships will be:
TSM V: Shields+Armor+Hull
TSM IV: Shields+Armor+Hull+Shieldregen-Shieldleft
We can safely assume that Shieldregen>Shieldleft, leading to TSM IV > TSM V.
Those numbers
We're talking about ******edly low numbers here, either way. The debate CAN be up on whatever is better: But we're one-hundred percent sure that in a buffertank situation, TSM V isn't worth your training time, even over some +2% damage for 30d of train.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |