EVE Search - Passive Armor tanking idea (not buffer)

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Passive Armor tanking idea (not buffer)

» 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)
Ark Anhammar EVE University Ivy League 28	Posted - 2012.10.15 09:47:00 - [1] - Quote I was just reading an article about armor tanking, and we all know there isn't currently any method to passively armor tank the same way we can currently with shields. But why does it have to be that way? In the article, it mentioned an "Adaptive Regenrative Nano Membrane," which I believe has been renamed to "layering membrane," and it occurred to me that a passive module that slowly regenerated armor would totally create a method to passively armor tank. Certainly more iteration on this idea would be required (which mid/low modules/rigs would affect this, how would various bonuses be affected, etc.), but I think it's worth some idea brainstorming. Any thoughts? Oh, here's that wiki entry: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Item_Database:Ship_Equipment:Hull_&_Armor_:Energized_Plating
Paikis Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking 206	Posted - 2012.10.15 11:17:00 - [2] - Quote Thoughts? Stop trying to make armor tanking into shield tanking. Differences are NOT a bad thing. Armor is better for some things, and shield is better for others. Tanking styles are mostly balanced.
Robert Caldera Caldera Trading and Investment 446	Posted - 2012.10.15 12:15:00 - [3] - Quote Ark Anhammar wrote: But why does it have to be that way? because armor isnt shield. if you want passive regen, use shield tank.
Sang-in Tiers Hedion University Amarr Empire 44	Posted - 2012.10.15 13:28:00 - [4] - Quote Paikis wrote: Thoughts? Stop trying to make armor tanking into shield tanking. Differences are NOT a bad thing. Armor is better for some things, and shield is better for others. Tanking styles are mostly balanced. No difference is not bad but currently shield tanking is better. I think OPs suggestion is quite bad though.
Ark Anhammar EVE University Ivy League 28	Posted - 2012.10.15 17:48:00 - [5] - Quote Robert Caldera wrote: Ark Anhammar wrote: But why does it have to be that way? because armor isnt shield. if you want passive regen, use shield tank. I'm not sure if you realize this, but not all ships are capable of shield tanking. Shocking, I know!
De'Veldrin East India Ore Trade Intrepid Crossing 405	Posted - 2012.10.15 18:10:00 - [6] - Quote Ark Anhammar wrote: Robert Caldera wrote: Ark Anhammar wrote: But why does it have to be that way? because armor isnt shield. if you want passive regen, use shield tank. I'm not sure if you realize this, but not all ships are capable of shield tanking. Shocking, I know! Snarkiness aside, that doesn't explain why armor tanking needs to have passive regen. Also, all ships are capable of shield tanking - some of them are just much better at it. Unsub or don't.-á I don't care what your reasons are, and neither does anyone else.-á Just click the button and go away - or don't.
Kahega Amielden Rifterlings Damu'Khonde 518	Posted - 2012.10.15 18:33:00 - [7] - Quote Quote: I'm not sure if you realize this, but not all ships are capable of shield tanking. Shocking, I know! not all ships are meant to shield tank, which means not all ships are meant to be able to passively regenerate hitpoints. Shocking, I know!
Romvex Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 80	Posted - 2012.10.15 22:08:00 - [8] - Quote i used to fancy this feature when i was a little nooblet, not taking balance of game implications into concern. it would really eliminate almost all differences, save a few, from shield and armor tanking. although i have been trapped inside wormholes with buffer armor ships after a fight, and have had to find my way back to k-space with 10% armor left. Gÿ+/ /Gûî /n++ \ This is Bob, post him into your forum sig and help him conquer the forums.
Asuka Solo Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises 1724	Posted - 2012.10.16 03:57:00 - [9] - Quote Explain to me, given the passive recharge nature of shields.... if armor tanking got the same treatment... how buffer armor tanking would not become the is all and end all for armor tanks... Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
Ark Anhammar EVE University Ivy League 28	Posted - 2012.10.16 04:03:00 - [10] - Quote Asuka Solo wrote: Explain to me, given the passive recharge nature of shields.... if armor tanking got the same treatment... how buffer armor tanking would not become the is all and end all for armor tanks... You can active armor tank faster than you can passively regen. That keeps active armor tanking competitive.
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 125	Posted - 2012.10.16 04:43:00 - [11] - Quote Paikis wrote: Thoughts? Stop trying to make armor tanking into shield tanking. Differences are NOT a bad thing. Armor is better for some things, and shield is better for others. Tanking styles are mostly balanced. They really really really aren't. But this is still a silly idea... Just buff reppers/nos.. <.<
Robert Caldera Caldera Trading and Investment 448	Posted - 2012.10.16 07:28:00 - [12] - Quote Ark Anhammar wrote: I'm not sure if you realize this, but not all ships are capable of shield tanking. Shocking, I know! what others already said. You arent meant to - ships arent all the same, why should you be able to do everything you want? Proper tool for the job etc. Shocking, I know.
Ark Anhammar EVE University Ivy League 28	Posted - 2012.10.16 08:51:00 - [13] - Quote Robert Caldera wrote: Ark Anhammar wrote: I'm not sure if you realize this, but not all ships are capable of shield tanking. Shocking, I know! what others already said. You arent meant to - ships arent all the same, why should you be able to do everything you want? Proper tool for the job etc. Shocking, I know. While I realize this sounds good, no one has given me any concrete reasons against a passive armor tank idea, other than "use another ship," which doesn't really address the original question. It doesn't make sense that shield ships have the luxury, for example, to pick between buffer, active or passive styles (to "do everything," as the posters here are fond of faulting me for wanting for armor), and armor tankers get stuck with buffer or active, and that's not even addressing the other points I brought up regarding instant shield filling from docking regardless of repair shop being present and for no cost. Unless someone gives me a compelling reason why armor shouldn't have some option to passively tank, "go fly a different ship" isn't gonna cut it.
Robert Caldera Caldera Trading and Investment 448	Posted - 2012.10.16 08:59:00 - [14] - Quote becus armor isnt shield. this is a viable reason.
Paikis Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking 207	Posted - 2012.10.16 11:15:00 - [15] - Quote A 'passive' tanked drake it completely useless in PvP. Are you really asking for armor tankers to have the option to fit an 8 slot tank to do exactly the same as a 3-slot active tank will do? Things armour tanking is good for: - Larger buffer - More cap efficient active reps. - More (and different) base resists - Passive omni-tank module. Resistant to neuts. - Oversized armor plate (1600mm plate has no shield extender equivalent) - Easier to signature tank due to smaller signature due to not lighting up like a small moon by using shield mods. Down sides? - Slower ship speeds - Reps land at the end of the cycle (But more buffer means you are more likely to be alive when they do) - Longer rep times. - No passive regeneration.

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.