Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
123
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 17:17:00 -
[31] - Quote
Gangname Style wrote: The true of the matter is...
The bonused resist bonus is vastly superior to the active tank bonus in almost all ways.
Buff active tank bonus to like 10-12% per level.
Gangname Style wrote:Takeshi Yamato wrote:Amarr/Caldari = best in fleet Gallente/Minmatar = best in small gang/solo
Active tanking does have some problems but that doesn't mean one should throw away racial differences.
Then buff the active tanking bonus so it doesn't get the short end of the stick compared to the 25% resist bonus.
It doesn't matter how much you rep (see XLASB on Maelstroem, which gives insane EHP/s), because in fleet fights the only things that matter is how much buffer you have (against alpha) and how effective remote reps you get (because you need the logis to survive).
Plus, if you fit an active tank, you won't have slots left for some buffer.
The resist bonuses just adress all three tanking issues at the same time, which is why they are so much better. Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Gangname Style
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 17:22:00 -
[32] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:Gangname Style wrote: The true of the matter is...
The bonused resist bonus is vastly superior to the active tank bonus in almost all ways.
Buff active tank bonus to like 10-12% per level.
Gangname Style wrote:Takeshi Yamato wrote:Amarr/Caldari = best in fleet Gallente/Minmatar = best in small gang/solo
Active tanking does have some problems but that doesn't mean one should throw away racial differences.
Then buff the active tanking bonus so it doesn't get the short end of the stick compared to the 25% resist bonus. It doesn't matter how much you rep (see XLASB on Maelstroem, which gives insane EHP/s), because in fleet fights the only things that matter is how much buffer you have (against alpha) and how effective remote reps you get (because you need the logis to survive). Plus, if you fit an active tank, you won't have slots left for some buffer.
True, but thats where the different playstyles comes into the equation.
I agree with the assertion that min and gal are more suited to small gang warfare (active > buffer), the only thing I'm worried about it the fact that the shield boost bonus is downright worthless compared to a 25% resist bonus. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
222
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 17:22:00 -
[33] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank. Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank. So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse. What is so hard to understand here? I think I understand what you're saying. You're saying that the Gallente and Minmatar ships with the +7.5% repair/boost rate aren't as good as the Amarr and Caldari ships with +5% resists?
Actually come to think of it, I do sort of agree with you there. While missioning, it does feel like the repair bonuses only barely match the resist bonuses in value to just a regen tank. I think it might make more sense to change the Amarr and Caldari bonuses to HP bonuses, so that they have a racial purpose and individuality, and give all races some ships with resist bonuses. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
123
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 17:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Iris Bravemount wrote:Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank. Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank. So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse. What is so hard to understand here? I think I understand what you're saying. You're saying that the Gallente and Minmatar ships with the +7.5% repair/boost rate aren't as good as the Amarr and Caldari ships with +5% resists? Actually come to think of it, I do sort of agree with you there. While missioning, it does feel like the repair bonuses only barely match the resist bonuses in value to just a regen tank. I think it might make more sense to change the Amarr and Caldari bonuses to HP bonuses, so that they have a racial purpose and individuality, and give all races some ships with resist bonuses.
Yeah, but then incoming remote reps will suffer from that. This would be a huge nerf. Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
547
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 18:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank. Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank. So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse. What is so hard to understand here? Why do you post if you have no intention of having a discussion? My point is perfectly valid. The ships with an active tanking bonus aren't meant to be good at buffer tanking and are in fact not. It's common knowledge, no case studies needed. It's a design choice. |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
123
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 18:52:00 -
[36] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Iris Bravemount wrote:Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank. Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank. So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse. What is so hard to understand here? Why do you post if you have no intention of having a discussion? My point is perfectly valid. The ships with an active tanking bonus aren't meant to be good at buffer tanking and are in fact not. It's common knowledge, no case studies needed. It's a design choice.
I am not closed to discussion, but you keep missing the point.
The resist ships can do everything the active ships can do, but not the other way around. That's the problem. It's a poor design decision. There is no downside to the resist bonus, but there are two downsides to the active bonus. Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Goldensaver
Vorbild Industries Inc.
85
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 18:54:00 -
[37] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Iris Bravemount wrote:Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank. Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank. So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse. What is so hard to understand here? Why do you post if you have no intention of having a discussion? My point is perfectly valid. The ships with an active tanking bonus aren't meant to be good at buffer tanking and are in fact not. It's common knowledge, no case studies needed. It's a design choice. Except the issue is that resist bonuses give almost the same benefit to active tanking as the active tanking bonuses, while causing the buffer to be even stronger, and remote reps to be far more potent. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
224
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 19:02:00 -
[38] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:Yeah, but then incoming remote reps would suffer from that. This would be a huge nerf.
Just give all ships with tanking bonuses resist bonuses and everyone is happy. It's a prooven concept on HICs. I just meant that some of the ships should have those racial tank bonuses. If balanced correctly, they could be more powerful than the resist bonuses in the right situations. Ships that do best in fleet combat should have resist bonuses, but small gang and solo ships as well as ratting ships could do well to have repair or buffer bonuses. In fact, mission ships will do best with repair bonuses (if the bonus is effectively higher than the resist bonus), and light-roam and strike craft do great with buffer tanks. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
547
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 19:05:00 -
[39] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote:Except the issue is that resist bonuses give almost the same benefit to active tanking as the active tanking bonuses, while causing the buffer to be even stronger, and remote reps to be far more potent.
I'm aware of that. It doesn't mean that you should hand out resist bonuses to ships that previously had active tanking bonuses.
|
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
123
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 19:20:00 -
[40] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: I just meant that some of the ships should have those racial tank bonuses. If balanced correctly, they could be more powerful than the resist bonuses in the right situations. Ships that do best in fleet combat should have resist bonuses, but small gang and solo ships as well as ratting ships could do well to have repair or buffer bonuses. In fact, mission ships will do best with repair bonuses (if the bonus is effectively higher than the resist bonus), and light-roam and strike craft do great with buffer tanks. It leaves more options that way and keeps things interesting. And if all races have some ships with the resist bonus, then all races have a place in large fleets.
This is part of the problem. ATM it seems like the lineups of the three races make you wonder how Amarr and Caldari aren't completely dominating the universe, because they are the only ones to have true ships of the line.
I'm absolutely in favor of some ships performing better in one area or another, but all races should have an option for every situation, which just isn't the case right now.
BUT this is a bit off-topic.
There are three types of tanking:
Local Tanking (increase the recharge rate of ones EHP pool; works against sustained dps, does not scale) Buffer Tanking (increase the size of ones EHP pool, works against alpha strikes, does not scale) Remote Tanking (rely on others to resplenish ones EHP pool, works against sustained dps, does scale)
There are four types of bonuses I can think of:
Bonus to locally generated HP (such as on the Myrmidon): Helps with Local Tanking only. Bonus to HP pool (such as on the Auguror): Helps with Buffer Tanking only. Bonus to remotely generated HP (no ship has this ATM): Helps with Remote Tanking only. Bonus to HP to EHP rate (AKA resists): Helps with all tanking types.
Does this make it any clearer? Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
|
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
125
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 19:24:00 -
[41] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:I'm aware of that. It doesn't mean that you should hand out resist bonuses to ships that previously had active tanking bonuses.
By the way, the best buffer tanks are mediocre at best at active tanking in practice even if in theory the 5% resist bonus is just as good as a 7.5% rep amount bonus. Why? Because they're cap hungry laser ships.
They have better capacitors to deal with that part.
Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
224
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 19:35:00 -
[42] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:There are four types of bonuses I can think of:
Bonus to locally generated HP (such as on the Myrmidon): Helps with Local Tanking only. Bonus to HP pool (such as on the Auguror): Helps with Buffer Tanking only. Bonus to remotely generated HP (no ship has this ATM): Helps with Remote Tanking only. Bonus to HP to EHP rate (AKA resists): Helps with all tanking types.
Does this make it any clearer? Yeah I get it. But I don't think giving all tanking ships one kind of tank skill bonus will solve anything. If that bonus is too powerful, it needs to be nerfed or the others buffed. They don't need to be eliminated. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
125
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 19:39:00 -
[43] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Iris Bravemount wrote:There are four types of bonuses I can think of:
Bonus to locally generated HP (such as on the Myrmidon): Helps with Local Tanking only. Bonus to HP pool (such as on the Auguror): Helps with Buffer Tanking only. Bonus to remotely generated HP (no ship has this ATM): Helps with Remote Tanking only. Bonus to HP to EHP rate (AKA resists): Helps with all tanking types.
Does this make it any clearer? Yeah I get it. But I don't think giving all tanking ships one kind of tank skill bonus will solve anything. If that bonus is too powerful, it needs to be nerfed or the others buffed. They don't need to be eliminated.
Well how about giving the current "resist ships" bonuses to HP pool and received HP instead and adding a bonus to received HP to current "active" ships?
This way, the imbalance would be gone, because both could be efficiently remote repped in fleets and we would still have two different types of tanks. Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 20:27:00 -
[44] - Quote
Just because it is different and/or not as good, doesn't mean its a problem. |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
129
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 20:30:00 -
[45] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Just because it is different and/or not as good, doesn't mean its a problem.
I have no problem with different, but a big problem with not as good.
Especially when it's not as good to the point of not being viable. Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 20:32:00 -
[46] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:Paikis wrote:Just because it is different and/or not as good, doesn't mean its a problem. I have no problem with different, but a big problem with not as good. Especially when it's not as good to the point of not being viable.
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.
Iris Bravemount wrote:I have ... a big problem
Yes you do. Stop thinking that your blob warfare is the only kind of PvP in EVE and perhaps you'll see where active tanking shines. |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
129
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 20:34:00 -
[47] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Yes you do. Stop thinking that your blob warfare is the only kind of PvP in EVE and perhaps you'll see where active tanking shines.
*cough*... I'm in FW... *cough*
And I'm not saying active tanking sucks. I'm saying the bonus to active tanking sucks, because the bonus to resists does the same and more; Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 20:53:00 -
[48] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:*cough*... I'm in FW... *cough*
And I'm not saying active tanking sucks. I'm saying the bonus to active tanking sucks, because the bonus to resists does the same and more;
Resists are stacking penalised. Repair modules are not.
Ever been in a wormhole with the wolf-rayet effect? What about a fleet with a bonused, mind-linked armor booster? All of this stuff stacks and is stacking penalised so that after 3 of them, the effect of a resist bonus is very minimal. A repair bonus however is always good, providing you get time to run your repper for a few cycles, and have the capacitor required for it. |
Goldensaver
Vorbild Industries Inc.
89
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 20:56:00 -
[49] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Iris Bravemount wrote:*cough*... I'm in FW... *cough*
And I'm not saying active tanking sucks. I'm saying the bonus to active tanking sucks, because the bonus to resists does the same and more; Resists are stacking penalised. Repair modules are not. Ever been in a wormhole with the wolf-rayet effect? What about a fleet with a bonused, mind-linked armor booster? All of this stuff stacks and is stacking penalised so that after 3 of them, the effect of a resist bonus is very minimal. A repair bonus however is always good, providing you get time to run your repper for a few cycles, and have the capacitor required for it. Ship bonuses don't receive stacking penalties. That base 25% is increasing EHP and rep amount by 25%. It is a universally damn good bonus. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:26:00 -
[50] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote: Ship bonuses don't receive stacking penalties. That base 25% is increasing EHP and rep amount by 25%. It is a universally damn good bonus.
I didn't say it was a bad bonus. I was under the impression that it was stacking penalised though. From what I knew, everything that is a % effect is penalised, with the Damage Control and the new adaptive plating being a second category that are stacking penalised with each other but not with everything else. Google tells me that ship bonuses are exempt. Ah well, live and learn.
I still don't see this as a problem, merely a difference. 5% rate of fire is inherently better than 5% damage, yet no one complains about this difference. I also think you're looking at these bonuses in complete isolation, when they are only part of the whole. |
|
Goldensaver
Vorbild Industries Inc.
90
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:38:00 -
[51] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Goldensaver wrote: Ship bonuses don't receive stacking penalties. That base 25% is increasing EHP and rep amount by 25%. It is a universally damn good bonus.
I didn't say it was a bad bonus. I was under the impression that it was stacking penalised though. From what I knew, everything that is a % effect is penalised, with the Damage Control and the new adaptive plating being a second category that are stacking penalised with each other but not with everything else. Google tells me that ship bonuses are exempt. Ah well, live and learn. I still don't see this as a problem, merely a difference. 5% rate of fire is inherently better than 5% damage, yet no one complains about this difference. I also think you're looking at these bonuses in complete isolation, when they are only part of the whole. It's only a problem because this 25% bonus to resists is equivalent to a 25% bonus to rep amount, so it obsoletes those. Then it's also a 25% bonus to incoming remote reps AND buffer. You get the best of all 3 worlds. It's too universally strong. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
226
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:46:00 -
[52] - Quote
They should lower the resist bonus to 4% per level. That would be plenty. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:55:00 -
[53] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote:It's only a problem because this 25% bonus to resists is equivalent to a 25% bonus to rep amount, so it obsoletes those. Then it's also a 25% bonus to incoming remote reps AND buffer. You get the best of all 3 worlds. It's too universally strong.
Last time I checked, 37.5% was better than 25%... |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
226
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:57:00 -
[54] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Last time I checked, 37.5% was better than 25%... But is it better than two 25%s? -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
130
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:58:00 -
[55] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:They should lower the resist bonus to 4% per level. That would be plenty.
As it has been said, it doesn't matter how strong or weak the bonuses are. The resistances apply in all three tanking scenarios, while the active tanking bonuses apply only in one.
However, I must say that I didn't think about wormhole effects at all. Are some WH sites only runnable with active repairing bonuses? If so, why? What do they do exactly? Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:00:00 -
[56] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Paikis wrote:Last time I checked, 37.5% was better than 25%... But is it better than two 25%s?
Nope, but so what? You only get one 25% |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
130
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:05:00 -
[57] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Last time I checked, 37.5% was better than 25%...
Please check:
Iris Bravemount wrote:First of all, let's demonstrate that the resist bonuses are (almost) just as good for active tanking than the active tank bonuses.
All skills at V Prophecy with just a medium armor repairer II fitted: up to 70 ehp/s repaired. All skills at V Myrmidon with just a medium armor repairer II fitted: up to 72 ehp/s repaired.
That's less than 3% more for the Myrmidon. Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
242
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:25:00 -
[58] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:Paikis wrote:Last time I checked, 37.5% was better than 25%... Please check: Iris Bravemount wrote:First of all, let's demonstrate that the resist bonuses are (almost) just as good for active tanking than the active tank bonuses.
All skills at V Prophecy with just a medium armor repairer II fitted: up to 70 ehp/s repaired. All skills at V Myrmidon with just a medium armor repairer II fitted: up to 72 ehp/s repaired.
That's less than 3% more for the Myrmidon.
Yup, 37.5% is still bigger than 25%. Also 72 is bigger than 70.
But you are STILL looking at only a single part of the balance of these ships. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
226
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:37:00 -
[59] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:However, I must say that I didn't think about wormhole effects at all. Are some WH sites only runnable with active repairing bonuses? If so, why? What do they do exactly? I haven't run the sites myself but I was talking with someone who had significant experience and strong ties with groups running these. Apparently, the lower classes have lesser effects, but in class 4 and up, the bonuses and penalties get really strong. I was noticing that some of the anomalies had no clear way to take advantage of it, while others were easy to take advantage of. Apparently the sleepers are the same in any case, and totally unprepared for the local anomalies, so the best systems for ratting are the ones in which you can reap the largest advantage over them. For instance, a Cataclysmic Variable increases your remote reps while decreasing on-board reps. So you have to use logi, but since you have to at that level anyway (for subcaps at least), it's easily taken advantage of. Magnetars, on the other hand, only boost your damage while reducing your range. High-class sleepers probably can't be killed fast enough (even with double damage) to make up for not having a massive tank boost.
But by simple math, it seems that the ship's tank bonuses will stack cumulatively (not additively) with the anomaly effects, and should therefore have the same amount of advantage either way, provided they are being used. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
131
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:46:00 -
[60] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Iris Bravemount wrote:Paikis wrote:Last time I checked, 37.5% was better than 25%... Please check: Iris Bravemount wrote:First of all, let's demonstrate that the resist bonuses are (almost) just as good for active tanking than the active tank bonuses.
All skills at V Prophecy with just a medium armor repairer II fitted: up to 70 ehp/s repaired. All skills at V Myrmidon with just a medium armor repairer II fitted: up to 72 ehp/s repaired.
That's less than 3% more for the Myrmidon. Yup, 37.5% is still bigger than 25%. Also 72 is bigger than 70. But you are STILL looking at only a single part of the balance of these ships.
And you are STILL talking about ships, while I only talk about the bonuses. I know that the PWG, CPU, slot distribution, base HP and even base resistances vary between hulls and races.
If replacing all active tank bonuses with resist bonuses requires some tweaking of the other stats for balance sake, I have no problem with that. I just think that all defensively inclined ships should benefit from the versatility the resist bonuses offer. (Or none should, and the resist bonuses should be replaced with HP bonuses). Why active tank bonuses are bad for you |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |