| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pottsey
   |
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:04:00 -
[1]
For a while now I have been saying Passive tanks are useable in PvP with the test server changes others said itÆs useless or just not good enough.
Elve Sorrow who has always been a little critical of passive tanking and asked me to meet him on the test server. Now thereÆs nothing wrong with being critical as long as you have an open mind and are up for testing, after all being critical is how you improve setups. So I happily agreed to prove my point to Elve or be proven wrong. After all why should he take my word for it? Seeing with your own eyes is usually better then taking someoneÆs word for it.
For those that donÆt want to read a long post here are Elve own words "Test results of Active and Passive shield tanks vs a Raven in various setups.
In other words, I decided to try and have Pottsey convince me this works. Which he did. we had several test runs:"
On to the testing. The best way we could think of to test was to warp to a planet I told Elve me weakest and stronger resistanceÆs he then shot EM missiles (My weakest resistance) recorded how long my shields lasted. Then if he broke the tank he tried Explosive missiles. We skipped explosive testing a lot you can see why below in the results.
The above was done with a standard Raven no damage mods and with an Active and Passive tanked Dominix. Then after all that we restarted with a Raven with damage mods and again an active and passive tanked Dominix.
Note 1: Although he was only shooting 1 damage typed we tried to make the ships where like real PvP ships IE both my active and passive tanks took thermal and other hardeners which where turned on in combat even if he was shooting EM. I believe thatÆs fair as people donÆt do into combat with just 3 EM hardeners they take a mix.
Note 2: Elve Sorrow wanted to try staggered firing and bursts which turned out to be a good idea. I never realised the difference but in short staggered firing got my shields down to 38% while bust got me down to 35%. So in theory if staggered got me down to 30% then burst would just push me over the edge of peak recharge. But thatÆs still not enough you have to knock the shields way below peak recharge or when you reload the shields are back.
But this is a new weakness I didnÆt know about. So if youÆre ever against a passive tank make sure you burst fire not stagger.
Note 3: Interestingly my passive tank in theory has a regen of 102.7hp/s (I think it was 106 with the gang skill) but the DPS done by the Raven was bang on 107.8 after resistanceÆs. The reason being you have to be quite a bit over the peak recharge to kill the shields as if you are only doing say 10dps over my regen when you reload I get back all the lost hpÆs.
Note 4: The test server graphics where a little unstable and buggy often my numbers where a few % different from Elve Sorrow. At once point my shields where showing at 50% to me and 100% to him. He shot 1 missiles and my shields jumped to 99.5%. So any minor differenceÆs put down to a buggy display.
Note 5: My gang shield skill was at lvl 2 all other shield skills at lvl 5 we where in a gang.
Elve Sorrow notes:
Some numbers:
Raven in normal setup had a 14.4 second RoF with each Torpedo doing 517.5 damage.
Raven in gank setup had a 10.65 second RoF with each Torpedo doing 648.8 damage.
(Against unhardened targets of course.)
Results to be edited in a few mins.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:05:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Pottsey on 02/06/2005 20:36:18
First test Raven vs Active shield tanked Dominix test 1
Elve Sorrow: Dominix's shield lasted 2:50 minutes, with the Raven using 6 Arbalest Siege with EM torps against 50% resistance on the Dominix's shields. No damage mods involved. (Dominix using XL, Amp, 3 hardners) Tank kept up with damage but ran out of cap.
Pottsey: The lows slots where filled with 7 PDS modules T2 for a cap boost and small passive regen. I didnÆt have the new shield skill that lowers booster cap. But if I did the booster would have lasted I reckon 30 to 60 seconds longer. The mid slots modules where all T1 and no named modules. I hand timed it at 2mins 45 seconds which is close enough, we expected some minor differenceÆ in time which is why we both timed.
Raven vs Passive shield tanked Dominix test 1, staggered fire rate
Elve Sorrow: Dominix once again has 50% EM resistance, Raven once again fires 6 Arbalest Siege with EM torps. No damage mods involved. Launchers fired staggered. Raven had to reload. 2 Full siege volleys (2 * 18 torps) did not manage to break the Dominix's tank. Subsequent volleys would not have made a difference.
Pottsey: I used active hardeners, yes against popular believe passive tanks can have the cap regen to run active hardeners none stop. As passive tanks go this setup has mid hitpoints with a high regen. I thought shields stabilised at 38% but Elve had 36%. See note 4 above about glitchÆs.
Shield = 12250 hitpoints
Regen = 102.7
EM and Thermal hardeners.
Combat results, Passive shield tank = Win.
The Raven failed to take down the passive tank with the shields holding at 36%. Raven had to reload. 2 Full siege volleys (2 * 18 torps) did not manage to break the Dominix's tank clearly a win for the passive tank as the active shield tank failed. There was no pointing testing other damage types due to higher resistanceÆs then EM. EDIT: I made a mistake and got my resistanceÆs muddle up Kinetic was my lowest at 40%. We didnÆt test Kinetic.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Raven vs Passive shield tanked Dominix test 2 burst fire rate
Elve Sorrow: Same as above, but launchers firing as one burst each volley. Dominix's tank held at 32% shield.
Pottsey: I agree with Elve same as above though on my screen it looked more like 36% close enough for me. I think the difference here is how we measure when he hit me my shields did drop to 32% then half way between the next volley they hit 36%.
Combat results, Passive shield tank = Win. But we found out for sure is burst hurts more then a staggered volley as my shields where clearly lower on burst.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Raven vs Passive shield tanked Dominix 3
Pottsey: This was the same as above but all the hardeners swapped from T1 active to T2 passive.37.5% Resistance. Once again, Raven fires 6 Arbalest Siege with EM torps. Dominix's tank broke 6 volleys after the first reload. (24 volleys + 10 sec reload).
Combat results, Passive shield tank = Win. Although the Raven broke the passive tank it almost lasted a full 6 minuets this time, thatÆs still longer then the active shield tank. I was surprised at how much a difference losing 12.5% resistance makes. If 12.5% has that big an impact I think I made a mistake overlooking T2 active hardeners at 3% more or even the named hardeners.
Note: I think with level 5 Siege Warfare or some named passive hardener I could have lasted against the Raven.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Now onto the Gank setups
___________________________________________________________________________________
Raven vs Active shieldtanked Dominix 2
Elve Sorrow: Raven in full gank mode (6 Arbalest Siege, 5 Basic Ballistic thingies (Cant afford named ones:P)). Dominix in same Active tank setup as above. Dominix's shields down after 6 volleys.
Pottsey: At this point I sort of got lost with the timings. The tank lasted around about 1 min, 3 seconds.
Combat results: not a lot to say we expected it to die faster then last time. One thing of note is my shields died before I ran out of cap to run the shield booster I could have ran the booster while taking amour damage but I wouldnÆt have got more then 1 more boost off before losing amour, perhaps 2 if I was lucky.
Raven vs Passive shield tanked Dominix 5
Elve Sorrow: Raven in setup as above, Dominix setup as listed in Passive tank 1. Dominix's tank lasted 9 volleys.
Pottsey: About 95 seconds the tank lasted.
Combat results: Again the passive tank won, if I recall correctly I had 5 to 10% shields left but we stopped as his next volley would have taken my amour down and we didnÆt want to waste time fixing amour.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:06:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Pottsey on 02/06/2005 11:18:29
Raven vs Passive shield tanked Dominix 4
Elve Sorrow: Raven as above, Dominix in high hitpoints, lower recharge setup. Dominix lasted 13 volleys.
Pottsey: This was my anti gank defence I came up with a few weeks ago and its not had any real testing. Until last night it was purely a paper spec setup. So I was keen to see how it lasted. I did make 1 mistake though I fitted an EM hardener which I didnÆt notice until after Elve started firing. My idea was to fit an Invulnerability Field or 2 to give an all round good resistanceÆs. Even after testing I am not sure what to make of this setup it lasted longer then the high regen setup again a gank ship but against a none gank setup this setup would have died while the other one would have lived.
Shield = 21977 hitpoints
Regen = 71.8
ResistanceÆs = all at base apart from EM at 50%
ResistanceÆs with Invulnerability Field and no EM.
EM = 25%
Explosive = 70%
Kinetic = 55%
Thermal = 40%
What I really like about this setup is even with the Invulnerability Field I have lots of free cap and I have 11920 powergrid for weapon systems.
Combat results: The best tank so far against a gank ship as it lasted 138 seconds. As the gank ship had no defence I think I could have shot back and killed his ship in that time.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Conclusions. We both agree passive tanks can last in PvP and have there use as tank ships. There are two options for a passive tank go pure tank or give up some mid and low slots lowering you lasting ability to the same as an active shield tank and fit some EW modules. Personally due to the gang skills that boost shield hitpoints I like to go for a pure tank ship and bring a friend for EW. My point is Passive tanks donÆt have to use up all there slots for tanking. ThatÆs an option. They can free up some slots lower the regen and gain flexibility.
Both Elve and me talked about swapping to named Ballistic thingies but we decided I could have countered that by using named hardeners and as getting module in a pain on the test server we didnÆt test them out. I donÆt know how much a difference T2 missile would make but he already using Arbalest Siege which I believe are the best named version of that type. Ones things for sure I cannot wait for T2 shield relays.
EDIT: I am not trying to say passive tanking is better then active tanking. Both clearly have there useÆs, disadvantage and advantages. What I am trying to say is Passive tanking is not useless for PvP with the new changeÆs.
Post 3 saved to be edited with average passive regen over a battle as requested by people.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Zaintiraris
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:08:00 -
[4]
I <3 you Pottsey 
---
 Originally by: CCP Hammer
This game was so much better back before people knew math.
|
Neon Genesis
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:14:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Neon Genesis on 02/06/2005 11:14:32
V nice. The modules forum wouldnt be the same without u pottsey 
Promising results.
__
There, i just contributed nothing to your thread
|
Brisi
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:17:00 -
[6]
Very interresting. Now you just gotta figure out a setup which does comparable damage at the same time
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:21:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Pottsey on 02/06/2005 11:22:17
ôVery interresting. Now you just gotta figure out a setup which does comparable damage at the same time ö
Perhaps you missed the bit where I had on my anti gank defence ship 13k powergrid free to put the best weapons in all my high slots. Or the bit where I could give up low slots and fit damage mods and still last as long as the active shield tank.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
jamesw
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 11:24:00 -
[8]
Was the poor Dominix fighting back?
Seriously though, interesting test results!
--
jamesw
Rubra Libertas Militia
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
I fly a dominix, its like a portable blob in a can
|
Elve Sorrow
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 12:05:00 -
[9]
No, Dominix didnt fire back atall, but as Pottsey mentioned he has grid and cap spare.
I think the only fights i would've won in my Raven, if Pottsey had guns / drones on me and i had the usual midslots, are the ones where i was in gank setup. The other Passive tanks lasted long enough for my Raven's cap to go down.
Test was mainly done to confirm actual shield recharge, and actual combat testing over just the number crunching Pottsey had been doing so far.
/Elve
New Video out! Watch me!
|
LordHong
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 12:40:00 -
[10]
not to mention the amount of heavy drone dthe dominix could send after the raven, even without pg for guns
-----------------------------------------------
--No Apologies, No Regrets-- |
Sergej
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 12:48:00 -
[11]
OMG nerf the passive tank:) Just kidding, I find the post really interesting.
I am wondering however, how useful is this on some other, smaller ships. I'll do the maths myself for the Vagabond, but I assume a very good passive setup could be done for that ship, with really nice resistances to start with, 1 large extender, and 5 PDU2s, 20k scramble, AB, kinetic hardner.
The idea of course is to fit oversized modules on cruisers to counter the lack of slots for it, right?
Regards, Sergej
|
Vee Bot
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 12:53:00 -
[12]
Good post and good tests.
One thing i thought of that would definatly change things is by doing a bit of both, a passive tank with a large shield booster II, and while you have crappy recharge, 6 heavy NOS and the drones would prolly win over the raven.
------------------
(_8(|) BEWARE. EBIL HOMER. IF SPOTTED CALL THIS NUMBER 0-800-I-C-HOMER |
Magunus
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 13:22:00 -
[13]
Just out of morbid curiousity, have you checked the cap usage vs. shield recharge if you replace a mid slot recharger with an undersized shield booster?
---
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-- Douglas Adams, 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe' |
Frank Horrigan
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 13:25:00 -
[14]
just wondering... how did you get
Shield = 21977 hitpoints
Regen = 71.8
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination |
Acuna Traos
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 13:31:00 -
[15]
IÆve wondered about passive shield tanking for a long time, but due to general poking of fun in my direction I never really tested it. Think I tested a partial passive tank against a gankagedon a long time ago and died in about 50 sec, so just ignored it. What IÆve been thinking recently though is what about Battle cruisers, would they be good for passive shield tanking? They have higher resists and have an odd ratio of shield regen and PG stats allowing you to put large shield extenders on easily enough (well 2 anyway or 1 and a few mediums), each large one being a much larger boost to regen than on a battleship. The downside is I fear a lot of fire power would be sacrificed in this case. (not that there fire power is that great anyway)
Would probably work best on a ferox as it has the highest passive regen already and 5 med slots + lots of CPU and using assault launchers or rocket launchers for weapons making it an anti frig platform. (after missile changes)
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 13:31:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Frank Horrigan
just wondering... how did you get
Shield = 21977 hitpoints
Regen = 71.8
passive tanking to boosted on Sisi
Wanna fly with me?
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 13:33:00 -
[17]
Pottsey, one question
since your more into passive tanking, could you find a decent passive tanking for tempest, where I can fit 3 midslots and 3 lowslots for other things?
imho, thats the problem with my tempest fittings so far
Wanna fly with me?
|
Nyxus
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 13:52:00 -
[18]
Yes - how would this fair on other ships?
Can you walk us through the calcs you used Pottsey so we can try applying it to other ships? Also - exactly what how many midslots you needed in order to run a decent passive tank?
I wanna know if I can passively tank a gankapoc. 
Nyxus
|
Acuna Traos
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 14:10:00 -
[19]
Low slots are very important too for a passive setup. Each slot is like a 20% boost to regen or more. Pottsey has a post some pages back on the calc's but basically (Shield HP/regen time)*2.4
In fact itÆs just a few posts down now, as of this posting. Here
|
Nomen Nescio
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 14:24:00 -
[20]
im sorry i must have missed something, but what exact setup did the passive Domi had with active hards on?
PS
Pottsey for the win anyway
|
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 14:34:00 -
[21]
I have done passive shield defence and I have found it takes quite a bit of modules. As a result I was not able to mount any proper offence. Certainly no offence capable of winning a fight.
Passive tanking is hell on your CPU with all those PDS and all. Yea you will have lots of MW but...
Thats a lot of good work, but i really wish you would have given us a full loadout for the Dom. Now people will be left to speculate whether or not that Dominix could even scratch that Raven. If it can not, its not a valid PvP setup.
Whats the point of passive tanking? What advantage has been gained?
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Alter Nomen
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 14:38:00 -
[22]
The advantages are pretty clear = no cap need. Runs forever. Can't be nosed out. Works on itself.
At the same time, look at domi. Drones provide damage, passive tank holds, and you can have what is it... 4 large noses to make it interesting for the enemy.
|
jamesw
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 14:42:00 -
[23]
That last setup (11920 grid) could fit 1 large neut, 4 nosses and a large smartbomb, cpu allowing.
If I was in a raven, I would not really want to go up against that 
--
jamesw
Rubra Libertas Militia
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
I fly a dominix, its like a portable blob in a can
|
Alowishus
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 15:01:00 -
[24]
Should do the same tests with both ships fighting, it would mean more if you blew up a few Ravens. Though I suppose in passive tank mode you have no tackle gear.
Raven 4TW! Rank(1) SP: 243745/256000 |
Serret
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 17:55:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Elve Sorrow
I think the only fights i would've won in my Raven, if Pottsey had guns / drones on me and i had the usual midslots, are the ones where i was in gank setup. The other Passive tanks lasted long enough for my Raven's cap to go down.
You would have warped out in the other setups.
also I found this interesting:
Originally by: Pottsey
Raven vs Passive shield tanked Dominix test 1, staggered fire rate
...
Shield = 12250 hitpoints
Regen = 102.7
EM and Thermal hardeners
...
There was no pointing testing other damage types due to higher resistanceÆs then EM.
So, you have a higher base shield resistance against Kinetic without that hardener?
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 20:18:00 -
[26]
ôShould do the same tests with both ships fighting, it would mean more if you blew up a few Ravens. Though I suppose in passive tank mode you have no tackle gear.ö
One problem is the test server build is 4months out of date so I have bad combat skills but I could do it. If I went against someone without the best named missiles I could take a webber and out tank him. Against someone with the best named weapons I tank might fail if I fit a webber and I donÆt know if I could kill him before he killed me.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 20:18:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Pottsey on 02/06/2005 20:19:44
ôWas the poor Dominix fighting back?ö
No but I figure his none gank setup couldnÆt break my shields so no matter what weapon system I fit I would have won or he could have warped out. If He had anything apart from the best named weapons I could have fitted a webber and forced him to stay while still holding out against his tank. In fact I believe I could fit a Webber and still out tanked him.
His gank setup I would place it at 50/50 for winning. I had lots of time to shot back and break his tank but at the same time he was pounding me hard.
ôI am wondering however, how useful is this on some other, smaller ships.ö
My Thorax Cruiser just broke 70 hp regen with 6k shields and 1 EM hardener which I personally think is very useful. Over 70hp with the gang skill.
ôa passive tank with a large shield booster II, and while you have crappy recharge, 6 heavy NOS and the drones would prolly win over the raven.ö
I never managed to get a Hybrid setup to work well. I always found a pure active or pure passive worked better. Perhaps someone else can pull that idea off. As for you idea about Nos I have yet to make my mind up whats better fit weapons, Nos or Cap Neutralizes.
ôjust wondering... how did you get
Shield = 21977 hitpoints
Regen = 71.8 ö
Shield recharge rate 765 seconds
Shield cap / Shield recharge = 28.7 times by 2.5 = 71.8 regen. Without the gang skill which boosts it.
ôWhat IÆve been thinking recently though is what about Battle cruisers, would they be good for passive shield tanking?ö
For Gallente I had more luck with my cruiser then Battlecruiser. The Caldari battlecrusier can pull off some impressive setups see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=186931
ôim sorry i must have missed something, but what exact setup did the passive Domi had with active hards on?ö
7 power relays T1, 3 large T2 shield extenders, 1 Em, 1 Thermal active hardeners. Weapons or Nos + Cap Neutralizes. ThatÆs for short range engagements with a 2 to 5 jump area from home base. For longer jumps I fit an afterburner plus to 2 PDS modules that way I donÆt have cap problems. I wonÆt lie 7 relays means you run out of cap every 10th jump. 2 PDS modules get rid of the cap problem and you can jump as much as you want. Combat is the same without 1 nos you run out of cap after 10 minuets of firing which is fine for NPC missions in the same sector but not good enough for long range engagements. I still class 10 minuets as ok compared to an extra large shield booster ship that runs out of cap in 3 minuets or less.
Two alternate solutions are to dock every 9th jump at a star base or Nos a friend while moving to the gate  .even if you fit to PDS modules you still get more regen then the active shield tank.
The flexible anti gang defence setup was 7 PDS modules. 4 large shield extenders and 1 hardener or Inv Field.
ôo, you have a higher base shield resistance against Kinetic without that hardener?ö
I think I made a mistake there and got my active and passive hardeners muddled up. With the passive EM was my lowest with the active Kinetic at 40% was my lowest. Thanks for spotting that I will edit my first post.
ôI have found it takes quite a bit of modules. As a result I was not able to mount any proper offence. Certainly no offence capable of winning a fight.ö & ôYou would have warped out in the other setups. ô
As I said before you donÆt have to use up all you slots, I had a better defence then an active shield tank with the same amount of slots used up and same offence. The difference was I could free up some slots while lowering my defence to the same as an active shield tank.
I agree passive tanking does take up a fair amount of modules but so does a full active shield or amour tank. The passive method takes up no more slots. ItÆs an option to use extra slots but you can match the shield tank without using every slot up.
ôPassive tanking is hell on your CPU with all those PDS and all. Yea you will have lots of MW but...ö
I had 125 free CPU and there is nothing stopping someone from fitting 1 CPU booster module if thatÆs not enough. But you do need weapon upgrade at level 5 for this setup to work. Taking off 1 PDU lower my defence to
Shield = 20930 hitpoints
Regen = 62.5
Shield recharge rate 836 seconds. Without the gang skill.
So even with the CPU booster I last longer then the active shield tank.
For comparison the active shield tank had 275 free CPU but it couldnÆt afford to give up a low slot like the passive tank.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 20:30:00 -
[28]
Just because you can tank forever, and fit 1 gun does not mean you win the fight. You have to BREAK the tank of the Raven. No easy task.
Sure, I'll give it to you that its a helluva travelling setup.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 20:38:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Pottsey on 02/06/2005 21:02:50
Edited by: Pottsey on 02/06/2005 20:42:03
I can fit a full set of guns and still have more defence then the active sheild tank. Where did you get the 1 gun from? It only takes 1 CPU booster.
Edit: docking now to double check I can fit a full set.
Update: I just checked. I had to fit 2 CPU booster to fit 5 Neutron Blasters. The problem is the server build is so old I only have level 1 weapon upgrades. I will try the same fitting on the live server soon.
Two CPU boosters drops my defence to
18984 hitpoints
913 shield recharge
51.9 regen without the gang skill.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.06.02 20:48:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Selim on 02/06/2005 20:49:55
Pottsey rules.
Is the setup entirely devoted to tanking, though? No webs, warp scramblers, etc?
If so it seems like its operating as it should. If you're entirely devoted to tanking, which is passive's strong point (as you cant really -totally- tank actively) it should be pretty damn hard to kill.
edit- nevermind, just saw the setup. Looks pretty nice, dominix seems to do it best considering it has more non-highslots than any other ship.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |