EVE Search - Reactive Armor Hardener

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Reactive Armor Hardener

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nikuno Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers 60	Posted - 2012.08.09 15:57:00 - [1] - Quote It's new, it's shiny, it's been out a while. ASB is very good as we all know, fills a niche nicely between standard shield boosts and buffer - but what about the bone they threw armor tanks with the RAH? Seems weak and underwhelming; more a pve mod than pvp. Or is this just me missing something? PvP is almost always at least dual damage type, typically triple types. Anyone got suggestions? Or are we waiting for the t2 version to appear before it's useful?
Traejun DiSanctis School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 40	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:06:00 - [2] - Quote Nikuno wrote: It's new, it's shiny, it's been out a while. ASB is very good as we all know, fills a niche nicely between standard shield boosts and buffer - but what about the bone they threw armor tanks with the RAH? Seems weak and underwhelming; more a pve mod than pvp. Or is this just me missing something? PvP is almost always at least dual damage type, typically triple types. Anyone got suggestions? Or are we waiting for the t2 version to appear before it's useful? Numbers-wise, it appears to be underwhelming. Haven't tried it in practice yet, so we'll see. But, to be perfectly honest - with most gangs packing 3 damage types - I think RAH will be useful for smaller vessels with limited lows, while larger vessels will use single damage hardeners. I've got one fitted to my new ghetto tacklers (Executioner and Atron). We'll see how it goes.
Tor Gungnir Agenda Industries 379	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:27:00 - [3] - Quote I don't know. It can be useful. But then you need to skill up for it, and once you do it will hog your Cap like no tomorrow... Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you.
Transient Drifter Sturm Reich Sturmgrenadier Syndicate 3	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:27:00 - [4] - Quote i do not like how slowly it changes resists... even if they aren't affected by diminishing returns from other resist modules (please correct me if i am wrong on this) i still feel like there are better options...
Liang Nuren Heretic Army Heretic Nation 1787	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:32:00 - [5] - Quote I'll have to jump clone out of my Crystal set. I'm pretty sure that there's some really good frigate uses for the module. -Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
Equus Royal Order of Security Specialists Late Night Alliance 27	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:37:00 - [6] - Quote From what I have heard it is fairly underwhelming, in that it can take a long time to build up, that it doesn't start to build until your armour starts taking damage, shield damage doesn't start it (someone correct me if I am wrong here), and it is pretty cap hungry. I haven't tested it yet myself, I have been planning to though once I can train it up a little better in my queue, but from everything I have read my hopes are not too high.
Hrett Justified Chaos 145	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:39:00 - [7] - Quote I think it's pretty clearly a pve module right now. The cycle time is too slow and it makes you more vulnerable to cap warfare for pvp. So here is some complete theorycrafting - There is a really good discussion of its mechanics and algorithm for shifting resists on another forum. The work isn't mine, but if it's right, this is what I gather: It isn't stacking penalized against other armor mods, but it is stacking penalized against a DCU. I think they concluded this makes it about equal to a 3rd EANM on a tank, BEFORE resists start shifting. The algorithm seems to make sense depending on how many damage types you are getting shot with - from boosting a single resist when you are getting shot by one type, to filling your largest resist hole when you are getting shot by 4 types. The cap usage is pretty high, especially considering it will most likely be fit on cap sucking hybrid or laser ships. Thus it makes you more vulnerable to cap warfare. The cycle time is too long (or amount of resist shifted per cycle is too little) . So, if the above is true, I would view the current pvp uses for it might be long fights because this will play to its strengths: Massive brick tank. Like on a Maller or something similar. Especially supported by logi because will make the logi better as fight goes on. Very small gang/solo active armor rep where your tank won't get overwhelmed early. Better tank as time goes on. I still think the analysis is that the cycle time and cap usage need to be tweaked, because in its current form, it's not very useful. /theorycrafting off I'm probably typing on an iPad, which means the auto-correct is silly and fixing typos is a pain. I ain't fixing them.
Takeshi Yamato Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 285	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:53:00 - [8] - Quote Good for PvE armor tanking and that's pretty much it. An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846
CorInaXeraL Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz 127	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:54:00 - [9] - Quote Tried this in PVE and found it to be underwhelming. I'm better off using a type-specific than putting my bets on this. PVP it's too slow to change, so...guess it doesn't quite have a niche yet.
Luba Cibre Global Song Setup 180	Posted - 2012.08.09 16:57:00 - [10] - Quote This thing is amazing on an aeon. "Nothing essential happens in the absence of noise."-á
Zicon Shak'ra Vacuo Anomalia 35	Posted - 2012.08.09 17:01:00 - [11] - Quote This module is garbage. If it adjusted 2-3x faster, it would be worth it. Wormholes are cool, m'kay?
Ginger Barbarella State War Academy Caldari State 42	Posted - 2012.08.09 17:37:00 - [12] - Quote CorInaXeraL wrote: Tried this in PVE and found it to be underwhelming. I'm better off using a type-specific than putting my bets on this. PVP it's too slow to change, so...guess it doesn't quite have a niche yet. Fit two and cycle them. Very nice. But I hate boosters in general, so...
Jerick Ludhowe Toxic Waste Industries 129	Posted - 2012.08.09 17:49:00 - [13] - Quote Liang Nuren wrote: I'll have to jump clone out of my Crystal set. I'm pretty sure that there's some really good frigate uses for the module. -Liang You may want to look at the cap consumption with lvl 4-5 skill and reassess your statement
CorInaXeraL Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz 127	Posted - 2012.08.09 18:15:00 - [14] - Quote Ginger Barbarella wrote: CorInaXeraL wrote: Tried this in PVE and found it to be underwhelming. I'm better off using a type-specific than putting my bets on this. PVP it's too slow to change, so...guess it doesn't quite have a niche yet. Fit two and cycle them. Very nice. But I hate boosters in general, so... Yeah, fitting two when you're armor tanking takes that much more away from your cap (laserboats hurt here) and your openings for damage mods. I'd sooner not mess with them outright. I'm still better with EANM+specifics balanced based on need.
Veryez Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 26	Posted - 2012.08.09 20:00:00 - [15] - Quote CorInaXeraL wrote: Ginger Barbarella wrote: CorInaXeraL wrote: Tried this in PVE and found it to be underwhelming. I'm better off using a type-specific than putting my bets on this. PVP it's too slow to change, so...guess it doesn't quite have a niche yet. Fit two and cycle them. Very nice. But I hate boosters in general, so... Yeah, fitting two when you're armor tanking takes that much more away from your cap (laserboats hurt here) and your openings for damage mods. I'd sooner not mess with them outright. I'm still better with EANM+specifics balanced based on need. So you say you tried this? You realize you can't activate two of them at once, so why on earth would you fit two? Might as just leave the slot empty. To those theory crafting, here are my impressions. It's good, but it's a niche module atm. With armor resistance phasing at lvl 0, it uses about 3 times the amount of cap of a hardner. Boost this to level 5 and it jumps to about 5.6 times the amount of cap. Since most armor tanks use weapons that use cap (or in the minmatar case are on ships with the smallest capacitors), it's use is situational. It needs a skill to offset it's cap use, this would at least make 'armor resistance phasing' worth training. If you know you're going up against a missile boat (drake/tengru), it's very good, as 60% unstacking nerfed resistance is something very noticible, but without the skill trained, it takes a long time to get there. Remember it starts off as good as a DC II and only gets better. On my plated mega it effectively doubles the EHP over an ANP II against drakes/tengru's, but it requires a few fitting compromises. On my geddon it's not as effective since I normally remove the second EANM II to fit it (and it drops my fit from 606.25 CPU out of 606.25, something I love ) For PvE, I've played around with it on a kronos and a paladin, it works on the former (cap boosted), but I don't like it on the later (not cap boosted), but I really haven't tested it extensively. Obviously it's not too useful against omni damage NPC's like sleepers and sansha's. To Liang, you might find it's cap use a bit of a challenge on a frigate, it's like putting 3 active hardners on, but I'd like to hear your experiences. I haven't tried it on anything below cruiser size.
Liang Nuren Heretic Army Heretic Nation 1789	Posted - 2012.08.09 21:32:00 - [16] - Quote Veryez wrote: To Liang, you might find it's cap use a bit of a challenge on a frigate, it's like putting 3 active hardners on, but I'd like to hear your experiences. I haven't tried it on anything below cruiser size. Yeah, I am aware that the capacitor might be a bit brutal. But, I don't mind losing ships so it'll be an interesting experiment. I'm currently training the skill to 4 before I bother jump cloning from my highly successful Crystal clone. Though the clone that I'll be jumping to is hella fun too. Expect more Talos action! :) -Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
feihcsiM Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 14	Posted - 2012.08.09 21:45:00 - [17] - Quote Veryez wrote: CorInaXeraL wrote: Ginger Barbarella wrote: CorInaXeraL wrote: Tried this in PVE and found it to be underwhelming. I'm better off using a type-specific than putting my bets on this. PVP it's too slow to change, so...guess it doesn't quite have a niche yet. Fit two and cycle them. Very nice. But I hate boosters in general, so... Yeah, fitting two when you're armor tanking takes that much more away from your cap (laserboats hurt here) and your openings for damage mods. I'd sooner not mess with them outright. I'm still better with EANM+specifics balanced based on need. So you say you tried this? You realize you can't activate two of them at once, so why on earth would you fit two? It won't let you even FIT two to a ship, never mind activate them, making the above advice about fitting two a load of crap.
Liang Nuren Heretic Army Heretic Nation 1792	Posted - 2012.08.10 06:22:00 - [18] - Quote Veryez wrote: To Liang, you might find it's cap use a bit of a challenge on a frigate, it's like putting 3 active hardners on, but I'd like to hear your experiences. I haven't tried it on anything below cruiser size. You know, I went and looked at it again with a critical eye towards capacitor and it's actually more cap intensive than perma running your MWD and about half as much as a deadspace armor rep. That's pretty brutal. It might work on the ships I'm planning it for, but I admit I'm not really sure. It could make for some expensive loss mails. -Liang Ed: I'm training it to 5 anyway. It's not like I have much else to do. Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
Hrett Justified Chaos 145	Posted - 2012.08.10 06:26:00 - [19] - Quote I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I read with the skill trained up to 4 or 5 it uses a similar amount of cap as a SAR. That's going to be rough on a frigate. I'm probably typing on an iPad, which means the auto-correct is silly and fixing typos is a pain. I ain't fixing them.
marVLs 31	Posted - 2012.08.10 06:27:00 - [20] - Quote It's no good for everything, too small res bonus per cycle, and too much cap hungry
Luscius Uta Killers of Paranoid Souls 21	Posted - 2012.08.10 07:41:00 - [21] - Quote Its associated skill should reduce cap use in addition to cycle time. And, as pretty much everyone else said in this thread, 42 GJ per cycle is way too much for a hardener and makes in viable only on battlecruisers and above.
Zyella Stormborn Alpha Strategy In Umbra Mortis 39	Posted - 2012.08.10 07:52:00 - [22] - Quote I tinkered with it a bit and HATE it on my Amarr ships (rips my cap to pieces), but my buddy kind of likes his on some of his Gallente boats so far.
Alticus C Bear University of Caille Gallente Federation 63	Posted - 2012.08.10 08:20:00 - [23] - Quote Sad thing is all this feedback was given on the test server feedback threads. I see it as only good on anything with a large amount of EHP/or local tank and the cap to support it, remember if it deactivates even for a moment the resists reset. This basically means caps and injected battleships perhaps T3GÇÖs. It may be viable on a repping cap injecting myrm also. At first I figured it would replace the explosive hardener on my ships but now I feel that leaves to large a hole for too long. PVE it would be great if you could find any rats that dealt one damage type, it is perhaps more useful than a third hardener when tanking two damage types. My PVE Hype often had three hardeners and a rep but I havenGÇÖt tried that for a long time, could prob work on T2 battleships. My personal feeling is that they should borrow the cap injection mechanism from the ASB, if you could run it cap free for a minute (switch reload of) then keep it running and start paying the cap cost. At least at this point the resists have adapted and this makes it viable for Frigates and cruiser fights, at the moment on a frigate you are better off with a second SARII.
Jerick Ludhowe Toxic Waste Industries 132	Posted - 2012.08.10 13:03:00 - [24] - Quote Liang Nuren wrote: Veryez wrote: To Liang, you might find it's cap use a bit of a challenge on a frigate, it's like putting 3 active hardners on, but I'd like to hear your experiences. I haven't tried it on anything below cruiser size. Yeah, I am aware that the capacitor might be a bit brutal. But, I don't mind losing ships so it'll be an interesting experiment. I'm currently training the skill to 4 before I bother jump cloning from my highly successful Crystal clone. Though the clone that I'll be jumping to is hella fun too. Expect more Talos action! :) -Liang What's the "experiment"? EanmII gives more resistance up front, does not require cap, and does not take extra sp investment time... Frigs are already low on lows meaning you're not going to be able to fit enough eanmIIs to make the lack of stacking penalty on the reactive even worth it... You're also in a frig, meaning that if you get focused you're going to do anyway. As for the whole frigate 1v1 thing... Just fit specific platings or energized hardeners, you're going to have much better results. In conclusion? This module ******* blows ass. We get 2 broken tanking modules in inferno, asb which broke small gag and reactive armor hardeners which just suck. Well done ccp... (I'm being sarcastic)
Lili Lu 334	Posted - 2012.08.10 17:01:00 - [25] - Quote Jerick Ludhowe wrote: In conclusion? This module ***** blows ass. We get 2 broken tanking modules in inferno, asb which broke small gag and reactive armor hardeners which just suck. Well done ccp... (I'm being sarcastic) . . but truthful. Shield tanking got an op new module. Shield buffers were actually already doing better than armor buffers (even though the shield crowd likes to whine about 1600s v LSE) and continue to if you look at the monthly eve-kill top 20. Now active shield tanking is proving to be a necessity in small gang. This month is shaping up even more extremely tilted toward shield http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20 . Meanwhile armor tanking got a ** active hardener that as many have said makes laser and hybrid users even more susceptible to cap warfare, and just got a change to the tech II 1600 plate that is a "say what?!" I thought CCP had talked about making close range gunned armor tanking viable, but here we get more mass so congrats you are even more of a brick that can't apply your damage to buffer shield kiters or the new close range shield brawlers fittings asbs (merlins, hookbills, feroxes . . .). As some attempt at balance they propose an increase from 7.5 to 10% per level on active armor tanking. That will mean nothing except for pve (incursus and proposed for brutix - hyperion). It does not fix the necessity for mutliple (even 3 ) reppers with multiple cap boosters hoggin up all the grid and cap. The mass additions do nothing to fix the brick ** I can't get in range to apply damage buffer fits. Overall I'm baffled by the continued racial blinders the dev team seems to have on. They apparently feel that only Caldari ships should get an optimal or range bonus, or two (cormorant etc.) and fail to see how range bonuses combined with asbs allows those ships to not only reign supreme at kiting but also in some cases outperform the armor close range setups. They need to start giving range bonuses to non-caldari ships. They need to do something quick about armor tanking and the penalties they are only exagerating with their attempts to buff it. The game should continue to have racial flavors, but unfortunatley they are making it even more pidgeonholed for roles. Lasers should have sniping options. Gallente ships should not all have to be blaster fit when they can fit rails. And minmatar should get some range on arty as well. It should not become a game of shield tanking missile and rail kiters, or asb fit brawlers, with no viable armor tanking schemes. If they do not do some corrections fast armor will be joining the dodo, and everyone will be flying Caldari and Minmatar.
RavenPaine RaVeN Alliance 152	Posted - 2012.08.10 17:22:00 - [26] - Quote I used one on a PVE Proteus. For hard complex's the fit is tight and low slots are limited. The only logical thing to swap it for, was my DC II. Cap usage was huge and noticeable. Resist boost was neither huge nor noticeable. I realy tried to use it for a few days, just to say I gave it a fair chance. What I ended up with is a few days of harder plex's. When I think of PVE, I think of active tanked set ups. The RAH doesn't go well with active fits imo. Probly isn't a great mod for cap intensive ships in general. (Blaster boats, Amarr ships) And if it can't out-perform the DC II, then it's damn near useless. I admit, 1 ship test is limited. Just my oppinion at this time.
Liang Nuren Heretic Army Heretic Nation 1794	Posted - 2012.08.10 18:17:00 - [27] - Quote Jerick Ludhowe wrote: What's the "experiment"? EanmII gives more resistance up front, does not require cap, and does not take extra sp investment time... Frigs are already low on lows meaning you're not going to be able to fit enough eanmIIs to make the lack of stacking penalty on the reactive even worth it... You're also in a frig, meaning that if you get focused you're going to die anyway removing the long term usefulness of this module. As for the whole frigate 1v1 thing... Just fit specific platings or energized hardeners, you're going to have much better results. In conclusion? This module ******* blows ass. We get 2 broken tanking modules in inferno, asb which broke small gag and reactive armor hardeners which just suck. Well done ccp... (I'm being sarcastic) I'll be sure to post about the failed experiment then. :) -Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
Norm Tempesta The Konvergent League Sev3rance 6	Posted - 2012.08.10 21:46:00 - [28] - Quote I tried them on some lvl 4 missions. T2 specific hardeners are much better. They are way to slow to adapt. They suck in pve, I wouldnt even try them in pvp.
Lin-Young Borovskova Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 630	Posted - 2012.08.10 22:23:00 - [29] - Quote Norm Tempesta wrote: I tried them on some lvl 4 missions. T2 specific hardeners are much better. They are way to slow to adapt. They suck in pve, I wouldnt even try them in pvp. Actually when you tank with gank (PVE) those are useless for several reasons from cap consumption to adaptability delay but in pvp it's even worst, it's just something you offer to someone you really hate hopping he's dumb enough to fit it. Armor tanking users got heavy trolled with this crap module. As a mainly Gallente spec main character I'm happy I can fly almost everything, blasters+shield tanking+ASB 4TW brb
Muad 'dib The Imperial Fedaykin 374	Posted - 2012.08.10 22:30:00 - [30] - Quote seems like a lazy module that has no place in pvp. It needs to respond fast and adjust better to the incoming damage, right now its basically only seriously used by some mission runners and one time experimental pvp nutters. Its a great idea, totally pre nerfed to hell by ccp balance obsessed, tin foil hatted, devs http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.