EVE Search - time to nerf the buffer tank

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

time to nerf the buffer tank

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Pod Amarr	Posted - 2011.03.19 11:31:00 - [31] Originally by: Mr Kidd Edited by: Mr Kidd on 19/03/2011 11:22:50 I'm Gallente. The buffer tank is about all I have going for me in this game. So, if you want to nerf my buff, I'll raise you a passive shield tank nerf and a cap requirement for missile launchers. If you think that you fail at flying gallente Pod
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.03.19 11:40:00 - [32] Between rigs and twin HP buffs is it any wonder that buffer tanks rule supreme? +50% to extender and plate fitting requirements. +300%-400% to local repair amount and cap-use. Makes local tank bursty enough to survive alphas, vulnerable to cap warfare and sustained damage. First things first though, null needs to have mechanics that does not unilaterally benefit blobbing to bring sub-capital numbers in any given engagement down a few notches.
Abaroth Charmar	Posted - 2011.03.19 13:20:00 - [33] You can only nerf the buffer tank after the endless fleets of Alpha 1400mm Mael/Baddon *****s have been nerfed. Otherwise, what's the point of logistics?
Fon Revedhort Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2011.03.19 15:10:00 - [34] Yeah, it's quite funny actually: the sole reason they boosted aplha of arties was the amount of previous massive HP boosts. Cycle-jerking. I won't be suprised seeing them advocating for another HP boost since 1400mm Maels now clearly wtfbbqpwn everything in sight. ---[center] Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
1600 RT	Posted - 2011.03.19 18:42:00 - [35] tank rigs should be stack penalized and not stack buffed
HiRider Colonial Fleet Services Independent Faction	Posted - 2011.03.19 19:08:00 - [36] Originally by: Voogru Yes. Nerf the buffer tank so that my 8x Tobias Tempest Tribal Issue insta-pops every type of battleship. Dude, spread the wealth. .
Lhand	Posted - 2011.03.19 19:39:00 - [37] Buffer tanking is fine because 1) it's wasteful to use capacitor on an active tank in any fight, and lag means sometimes those tanks dont even activate 2) adding even more things to fights is a bad idea and just creates more lag 3) without good buffer, logistics ships are rendered useless. some may argue this a good thing, but you're better off nerfing logistics instead of buffers 4) if you think active tanking would be better in fights than buffer you've never been in a fight before
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.03.19 21:21:00 - [38] Edited by: Wacktopia on 19/03/2011 21:23:28 This is not a particularly well thought out proposition. Buffer tanks exist in this game ina reasonably balanced way between the two styles (shield and armor). That said you still really need slave implants to fully match an armor to shield buffer unless you're flying Amarr. Active tanking exists and serves two main purposes: 1) pve 2) solo/small pvp. Both exist in the game although the latter is an illusive art. Players like Kessah and Garmon have proved that it is totally possible to succeed using the existing active tank options. Even IF there were a good enough argument to nerf buffer tanks it should be balanced. Suggesting nerfing trimarks and 1600rt only is just plain dumb. Expecting an active tank to sustain monster dps is unreasonably dumb too. It smacks of "baw why can't I solo the blob"?
Mr Kidd	Posted - 2011.03.19 21:36:00 - [39] Originally by: Pod Amarr Originally by: Mr Kidd Edited by: Mr Kidd on 19/03/2011 11:22:50 I'm Gallente. The buffer tank is about all I have going for me in this game. So, if you want to nerf my buff, I'll raise you a passive shield tank nerf and a cap requirement for missile launchers. If you think that you fail at flying gallente Ok Mr. Amarrian, whatever you want. All I know is, at the time over a year ago, a friend and I sparred. With 3.6mil in hybrids, moderately mature drone skills and uber armor skills my friend's drake out tanked and out-dps'd my myrm. He had 1.8mil in missile skills and not quite uber shield skills. So, don't tell me there's isn't imbalance in favor of races not Gallente.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.03.19 22:35:00 - [40] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 19/03/2011 22:36:21 Originally by: Wacktopia This is not a particularly well thought out proposition. Buffer tanks exist in this game ina reasonably balanced way between the two styles (shield and armor). That said you still really need slave implants to fully match an armor to shield buffer unless you're flying Amarr. You cant really compare the two, and in fact on ships that are not Drakes you'll have severe trouble even remotely matching armor buffers that are not using slave implants with a shield buffer. With realistic fittings (tackle, propulsion), you'll be matching unrigged armor buffers with your shield buffer and thats it. But yea, you cannot compare the two at all, armor is supposed to have the edge in buffer, tackle (or sensor strength / cap stability) and signature while shield fittings enjoy a damage and mobility advantage.

Theodoric Darkwind Gallente	Posted - 2011.03.19 22:38:00 - [41] Originally by: Abaroth Charmar You can only nerf the buffer tank after the endless fleets of Alpha 1400mm Mael/Baddon *****s have been nerfed. Otherwise, what's the point of logistics? this pretty much, if you want to nerf buffer you need to nerf Arty and Beam alpha. nerfing buffer and logi without nerfing alpha would result in nullsec warfare being a contest of whos modules can get into the queue first through the lag because any ship would instapop. absolutely nothing short of dramatically limiting the number of ships that can be in a system will do anything to reduce blob warfare in null. Then again the huge blob vs blob battles aren't the issue there its the titan bridging in a 100+ blob on top of a single ship that should be nerfed out in null, nerfing that wouldn't stop blobbing but you would actually have to chase and hunt down said target rather than just lighting a cyno and instantly getting a blob on top of them.
Michael J Fox	Posted - 2011.03.19 23:07:00 - [42] i dunno, there are some good points here, i kind of started this discussion because im sick of seeing EFT pastes that end "trimark x 3". theres like a logic for me that says if something is used by everyone it is due a nerf or in better terms a rebalance. I wasnt arguing specifics im not really a game designer. I have always find that once a module, ship or fit in eve reaches a critical mass of over-use the balancing gets done anyway, i think it needs highlighting that that time is probably sooner rather than later. that said here are a few answers to replies: logistics are a good point. However they could use some work on their capability - perhaps a range of balancing dependant on the security of the space you are in. null sec battles in fairness do require a buffer however it should be noted that (1) lag is playing a part in this and (2) the constant production of capital class vessels could perhaps fill this gap? maybe lower ehp and improve agility for caps?
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.03.19 23:16:00 - [43] Originally by: Michael J Fox theres like a logic for me that says if something is used by everyone it is due a nerf or in better terms a rebalance. By that logic warp disruptors are due for a ~~nerf~~ rebalance. I'm not really sure we want to follow this logic and go there.
oldmanst4r Minmatar oldmanst4r's Corporation	Posted - 2011.03.19 23:49:00 - [44] Originally by: Abaroth Charmar You can only nerf the buffer tank after the endless fleets of Alpha 1400mm Mael/Baddon ***s have been nerfed. Otherwise, what's the point of logistics? This is slightly off-topic but I thought it was drakes that were overpowered, wait no, that was last month. This month its arty bs'es that are overpowered. Next month it'll be a-hacs then back to drakes then back to, back to, back to, back to, back to...... You mean people are actually thinking of counters to the current fotm, and that those counters WORK, and that people have to think up different counters to counter the counters, counter-counters to counter the counters, counter-counter counters to counter the counter-counters for ever and ever until the servers shut down??? Working as intended. Originally by:** CCP Shadow snip Castration successful. Shadow.
Millia Severasse	Posted - 2011.03.19 23:50:00 - [45] Edited by: Millia Severasse on 19/03/2011 23:50:57 Originally by: oldmanst4r Originally by: Abaroth Charmar You can only nerf the buffer tank after the endless fleets of Alpha 1400mm Mael/Baddon *****s have been nerfed. Otherwise, what's the point of logistics? This is slightly off-topic but I thought it was drakes that were overpowered, wait no, that was last month. This month its arty bs'es that are overpowered. Next month it'll be a-hacs then back to drakes then back to, back to, back to, back to, back to...... You mean people are actually thinking of counters to the current fotm, and that those counters WORK, and that people have to think up different counters to counter the counters, counter-counters to counter the counters, counter-counter counters to counter the counter-counters for ever and ever until the servers shut down??? Working as intended. Still waiting on hybrid turret ships to be fotm. Oh right they were and they got drastically rebalanced.
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.03.19 23:56:00 - [46] Originally by: Millia Severasse Edited by: Millia Severasse on 19/03/2011 23:50:57 Originally by: oldmanst4r Originally by: Abaroth Charmar You can only nerf the buffer tank after the endless fleets of Alpha 1400mm Mael/Baddon *****s have been nerfed. Otherwise, what's the point of logistics? This is slightly off-topic but I thought it was drakes that were overpowered, wait no, that was last month. This month its arty bs'es that are overpowered. Next month it'll be a-hacs then back to drakes then back to, back to, back to, back to, back to...... You mean people are actually thinking of counters to the current fotm, and that those counters WORK, and that people have to think up different counters to counter the counters, counter-counters to counter the counters, counter-counter counters to counter the counter-counters for ever and ever until the servers shut down??? Working as intended. Still waiting on hybrid turret ships to be fotm. Oh right they were and they got drastically rebalanced. Remind me again how many years ago this was?
Millia Severasse	Posted - 2011.03.20 00:12:00 - [47] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: Millia Severasse Edited by: Millia Severasse on 19/03/2011 23:50:57 Originally by: oldmanst4r Originally by: Abaroth Charmar You can only nerf the buffer tank after the endless fleets of Alpha 1400mm Mael/Baddon *****s have been nerfed. Otherwise, what's the point of logistics? This is slightly off-topic but I thought it was drakes that were overpowered, wait no, that was last month. This month its arty bs'es that are overpowered. Next month it'll be a-hacs then back to drakes then back to, back to, back to, back to, back to...... You mean people are actually thinking of counters to the current fotm, and that those counters WORK, and that people have to think up different counters to counter the counters, counter-counters to counter the counters, counter-counter counters to counter the counter-counters for ever and ever until the servers shut down??? Working as intended. Still waiting on hybrid turret ships to be fotm. Oh right they were and they got drastically rebalanced. Remind me again how many years ago this was? An eternity by blaster-toting friend. An eternity.
Michael J Fox	Posted - 2011.03.20 00:52:00 - [48] Originally by: oldmanst4r Working as intended. like nanos? blasterthrons? heavy drone eos? heavy drone myrm? nos domi? i could go on but i think the point is made: I would be prepared to bet fairly heavily that Gallente are next on the buff list for the same reasons - they are at a low ebb in terms of capability.
Sigras	Posted - 2011.03.20 01:04:00 - [49] I dont want to nerf buffer tanks, I do want it to be a choice as to what is fit to the ship in a PvP situation, as right now it isnt; even the hyperion which gets a 37.5% active tanking bonus is usually running a buffer tank. My current idea is to make the following changes. 50% PG reduction to armor repairers 300% increase in mass penalty for armor plates. 25% reduction in CPU usage of shield boosters 100% increase in CPU usage of shield extenders. This would at least make the player make a choice as to whether or not they want their ship to be able to warp off of a gate in less than a minute in the case of armor tanking and would ease the fitting problems that active tankers run into without changing the dynamic of buffer vs active tankers or making PvE unbalanced.
Val'Dore Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided	Posted - 2011.03.20 01:11:00 - [50] Slaves giving an active tanking bonus would be a start. ~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~ Tiericide

Sigras	Posted - 2011.03.20 01:48:00 - [51] Originally by: Val'Dore Slaves giving an active tanking bonus would be a start. see but I like the fact that there is a difference between the shield and the armor implants . . .
Straight Edged	Posted - 2011.03.20 02:09:00 - [52] Give a duration decrease bonus then. Still different, but the same thing. (compared to rep boost bonus)
Target Painter Minmatar	Posted - 2011.03.20 05:14:00 - [53] I just want Crystals to work with capital-class modules. 420 tank 3 Nyxes in my dread errday Other than that, this thread is a lot of hurf being blurfed by people on opposite spectrums of the PvP scale. Solo and small gang dudes want to be able to kill more stuff before the blob can land, the blob wants buffer so logistics can actually work and more skilled, better organized blobs prevail consistently.
Riley Moore Sentinum Research	Posted - 2011.03.20 05:33:00 - [54] How about giving active reps/boosters a raw hp bonus too, so active tankers get a bigger buffer so their cycles can actually mater. The bonus would ofc be slightly smaller then pure buffer modules. Also adjust the cycle time to half it is now, but dynamically so cap use and amount repped per min doesn't change. There, fixed.
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.03.20 08:23:00 - [55] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 19/03/2011 22:36:21 Originally by: Wacktopia This is not a particularly well thought out proposition. Buffer tanks exist in this game ina reasonably balanced way between the two styles (shield and armor). That said you still really need slave implants to fully match an armor to shield buffer unless you're flying Amarr. You cant really compare the two, and in fact on ships that are not Drakes you'll have severe trouble even remotely matching armor buffers that are not using slave implants with a shield buffer. With realistic fittings (tackle, propulsion), you'll be matching unrigged armor buffers with your shield buffer and thats it. But yea, you cannot compare the two at all, armor is supposed to have the edge in buffer, tackle (or sensor strength / cap stability) and signature while shield fittings enjoy a damage and mobility advantage. I'm not comparing the two I am saying that they are balanced and you cannot focus on nerfing one and not the other. Shield tankers hate the sig bloat as much as armor tankers hate the speed and agility reduction. Id like to see some same-class fits where un rigged armor matches rigged shield buffer without implants or lol fit....
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.03.20 08:45:00 - [56] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 20/03/2011 08:51:16 Originally by: Wacktopia Id like to see some same-class fits where un rigged armor matches rigged shield buffer without implants or lol fit.... I'm not really sure if that is a trick question? It applies to plenty of buffer fits >frigs and <battleships that arent resist bonused with the hull, for example these: standard shield buffer Harbinger (~52k ehp) versus armor buffer Harbinger (~57k ehp unrigged) shield buffer Hurricane (~51k ehp) versus armor buffer Hurricane (~53k ehp unrigged) Rupture shield (~21k ehp) versus Rupture armor (~25k ehp unrigged with 1600mm, 19k ehp with 800mm unrigged) Thorax shield (~20k ehp) versus Thorax armor (20k eph with 800mm unrigged, 26k ehp with 1600mm unrigged and cant even fit triple trimarks) There are more, but the above come with standard cookie cutter fittings that leave little room for arguing this-module-over-that-one. Of course the respective shield buffers offer their very own advantages in mobility and dps projection that make up for the lack of damage soaking potential. Tbh, I see no reason to nerf either (or boost active tanks for that matter). People need to wrap their head around the fact that buffer will always be superior in fleet battles or small gang engagements, while active tanked fits tend to be superior in solo fights and pve.
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.03.20 08:56:00 - [57] Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 20/03/2011 08:48:38 Originally by: Wacktopia Id like to see some same-class fits where un rigged armor matches rigged shield buffer without implants or lol fit.... I'm not really sure if that is a trick question? It applies to plenty of buffer fits >frigs and <battleships that arent resist bonused with the hull, for example these: standard shield buffer Harbinger (~52k ehp) versus armor buffer Harbinger (~57k ehp unrigged) shield buffer Hurricane (~51k ehp) versus armor buffer Hurricane (~53k ehp unrigged) Rupture shield (~21k ehp) versus Rupture armor (~25k ehp unrigged with 1600mm, 19k ehp with 800mm unrigged) Thorax shield (~20k ehp) versus Thorax armor (20k eph with 800mm unrigged, 26k ehp with 1600mm unrigged and cant even fit triple trimarks) There are more, but the above come with standard cookie cutter fittings that leave little room for arguing this-module-over-that-one. Of course the respective shield buffers offer their very own advantages in mobility and dps projection that make up for the lack of damage soaking potential. No no no. You are comparing shield fits on typically armor boats. Of course they are lower! I said the same class meaning "BC" or "bs" not comparing an off-tank on the same ship. So compare your armor Harbi to shield Drake?
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2011.03.20 09:36:00 - [58] Originally by: Wacktopia No no no. You are comparing shield fits on typically armor boats. A Hurricane is by no means a typical armor tank, neither is the Rupture. What makes a 'typical' armor or shield tanker is having bonuses to the specific tanking type, e.g. a resist bonus or a repair amount bonus. Originally by: Wacktopia So compare your armor Harbi to shield Drake? Drake is resist bonused and a tier2 BC, so you'd actually have to compare the Ferox and Prophecy, or the Damnation and Vulture, if you want to stay true to your criteria.
Fon Revedhort Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2011.03.20 10:01:00 - [59] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Michael J Fox theres like a logic for me that says if something is used by everyone it is due a nerf or in better terms a rebalance. By that logic warp disruptors are due for a ~~nerf~~ rebalance. I'm not really sure we want to follow this logic and go there. That's a primitive demagogy. First of all, point is a basic PvP module, you simply have no other means for PvP. Warp scramblers are used quite a lot as well. So, every module in this category is in active use (both warp disruptors and warp scramblers). Hence everying works just fine. On the other hand, most rigs are NOT used a lot, not even close. As already stated, only CCC, trimarks, shield-extenders and freaking purgers are seen quite often. And this surely doesn't happen just because you absolutely need to have those installed, but rather since other rigs are kind of weak and some are just pathetic. ---[center] Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.03.20 12:24:00 - [60] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Wacktopia No no no. You are comparing shield fits on typically armor boats. A Hurricane is by no means a typical armor tank, neither is the Rupture. What makes a 'typical' armor or shield tanker is having bonuses to the specific tanking type, e.g. a resist bonus or a repair amount bonus. Originally by: Wacktopia So compare your armor Harbi to shield Drake? Drake is resist bonused and a tier2 BC, so you'd actually have to compare the Ferox and Prophecy, or the Damnation and Vulture, if you want to stay true to your criteria. By 'typically' I was referring to the larger number of slots available between mid and low. So the most logical way to tank most ships is to the slot they have most of unless the ship has a bonus otherwise. That said you still see shield hyperions, ECM drakes etc so even a ship bonus does not have to dictate tank. My point over your original fits is that you will have more slots available for the armor tank version and hence it is higher - the shield cane and thorax and rupture all give up tank for gank. I agree with you that comparing un bonused would be clearer. Let's leave the specific ships out of it then... What about we say you have 3 slots to fit armor or shield tank. On the armor you go 1600, dcu, EANM and on the shield you go 2x LSE and an invul. Quite similar fitting, ok not exact but in the same ball park. How do the buffers compare?



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.