EVE Search - Passive shield tank V Active shield tank against a Raven in PvP

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Passive shield tank V Active shield tank against a Raven in PvP

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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.
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.02 20:55:00 - [31] Originally by: Imhotep Khem You have to BREAK the tank of the Raven. No easy task. 4 large noses will break raven tank like a ocean breaks sand castle on a beach
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.02 20:58:00 - [32] Originally by: Pottsey 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 What about T2 shield power relays? I thought you used them, are they in the game? Because I saw their stats pretty long time ago, but yesterday on a SISI I didnt find them. (well market lags in SIS like hell). If they are in, r they expensive and do they get a lot of advantage over T1?
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.02 21:07:00 - [33] Edited by: Pottsey on 02/06/2005 21:38:51 ôWhat about T2 shield power relays? I thought you used them, are they in the game? Because I saw their stats pretty long time ago, but yesterday on a SISI I didnt find them. (well market lags in SIS like hell). If they are in, r they expensive and do they get a lot of advantage over T1?ö If my maths are right I would be invincible 1v1 against a Raven even a gank setup if I had a full load out of T2 relays, think solo lvl 4 mission point blank among the rats. Relays are not for sale and oddly they get a massive advantage over T1 not just a bigger shield recharge boost but also a 2nd bonus of 10% more powergrid per module. Something tells me they will get nerfed before we can buy them. ôIs the setup entirely devoted to tanking, though? No webs, warp scramblers, etc?ö My version is a full tank but it can be modified to fit webs and warp scramblers. Edit: trying a few webs and scrambler setups now. will edit them into this post soon. Update: The hitpoint based ship with a Webber and warp scrambler has 13543 hitpoints 765 recharge Regen 44.2 regen. Or 9625 hitpoints 298 recharge 80 Regen 1 hardner, 7 shield relays, 337 free CPU. ( no weapons and 2 empty mid slots for EW) 6045 free powergrid. 3rd option 10511 hitpoints 390 recharge 67.3 Regen 1 hardner, 5 shield relays, 2 PDS T2 modules, 518 free CPU. ( no weapons and 2 empty mid slots for EW) 11698 free powergrid. I believe the named shield relays use up 0 CPU If you need more CPU are dirt cheap. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Alexander Reikson	Posted - 2005.06.02 21:15:00 - [34] This is arcane magic. I fear to even read all of it. ;)
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.02 21:16:00 - [35] You probably should stop talking about your setups then and delete all your posts, so no1 will suspect that T2 relays are uber and we will have some time to enjoy them before the nerf comes.:) Extremely good work Pottsey. PS Those who say "you used all slots for tank", oh come on, that friking point of all the damn testing is to show that PASSIVE full tank is better then ACTIVE full tank. no1 said this is "domi of doom best in everyhing"
David Goodwill	Posted - 2005.06.03 11:14:00 - [36] Pottsey you are my hero. I have actually bought a Domi to try out this stuff! ----------------------------- Mating call of a pirate... "rarrggghhh, omg r0x0r, ph34r meeeee" Average age: 12..
Papermate	Posted - 2005.06.03 11:43:00 - [37] Why do u need a webber one the domi? More likely u need a AB or mwd to get into nos range. Drones dont need a webber, and if u want guns, fit dual 250's/350's(if u cant afford to fit mwd/web) "Master of Papercuts"
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 11:50:00 - [38] Edited by: Pottsey on 03/06/2005 12:09:25 ôWhy do u need a webber one the domi? More likely u need a AB or mwd to get into nos range. Drones dont need a webber, and if u want guns, fit dual 250's/350's(if u cant afford to fit mwd/web)ö Not sure. Someone was complaining that I might be able to out tank the Raven but not kill it without webber and scrambler as it would just warp away so I made a setup with both on. I guess you could take a MWD and warp scrambler instead. The hitpoint ship should have enough cap to run the MWD. I will see if I can fit and run one and edit the results into this post. Anyone else got anything they want me to try? Update: 1 solution to the CPU problems might be an using those cheap hardwire implants like the KUA1000 or KUA 2000. As for the MWD yes itÆs fit's but even with PDS modules cap would run out. But then again I assuming anyone doing this would use Nos and have Navigation skills past lvl 2 to reduce cap usage. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Ki Chung	Posted - 2005.06.03 12:24:00 - [39] In terms of the theoretical 1 vs 1 argument, was the Raven using its 6 heavy drones (and whatever was in the other two highslots)?
Thyro	Posted - 2005.06.03 12:32:00 - [40] good topic about tanks, but... Did you know that only less than 10% of the torps/cruises launched from a Raven would eventually hit the target? (And I'm not talking pos-patch "missile nerf". No! this can occur today!) If you have a good setup to counter measure missiles (not even is necessary to tank your BS at all) So the fact is even a gankgeddon wins a tanked raven. It's just a matter of right setup, attention, preciseness and above all how the raven pilot engages in pvp. If the raven pilot launches like the 90% of the raven players do. Then for sure that would lose his raven independent of how good the shields are. Now if the raven pilot has a good launching sequence then will be hard to counter act and eventually defeat the raven. So in effect if the raven pilot doesn't go against an tank BS then might have some chance of success. So from what I read so far, some good points were made. However, even without a tank you can easily defeat or make a raven pilot wish to run away from the place and fast. All ends up how you/he engage in pvp. But for sure after that, tank might play an important part if the pvp engagement fails.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 12:41:00 - [41] ôIn terms of the theoretical 1 vs 1 argument, was the Raven using its 6 heavy drones (and whatever was in the other two highslots)?ö I would assume a Dominx would out drone the Raven. IE its drones kill the Raven drones. The Dominx loserÆs a few then launchÆs more and focus on the Raven. Assuming the Raven sent his drones to the Dominx then smart bombs on the Raven wouldnÆt work. If the drones donÆt go towards the Dominx then they are not shooting so it doesnÆt matter. Yes the Raven could use the other two high slots but assuming it had the cap to after the Domi used Nos. But thatÆs assuming the Domi got into range with MWD/AB. What do Ravens normally take in the 2 highs lots? To many assumptions. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
LUKEC	Posted - 2005.06.03 12:47:00 - [42] ravens usually have 1 heavy nosf and empty slot or small gun. That is if they have 1 bcu. Else they have 2 nosfs if 5pduII. Gankaraven with xl booster has 2x empty hislots, as he does not have cpu for nothing really.(well if it is ecm raven with mwd, then it has no pg) This was with standard stuff(ok cheap named nosf maybe, don't remember).
XpoHoc	Posted - 2005.06.03 12:56:00 - [43] Pottsey, I find your work very interesting. I do not believe that passive tanking is good for PvP, but I would like make sure about it. Sorry but your tests are just a few numbers, that's not PvP. If you have some spare time I would like to do some tests with you on test server, real battles. PvP has too many variable to cover to do it all on paper, having enough grid to use good guns, doesn't mean you can deal any damage with a ship ect. Just drop me a mail (test or tq server) on where you will have some time, if you like.
Thyro	Posted - 2005.06.03 13:13:00 - [44] Originally by: Pottsey ôIn terms of the theoretical 1 vs 1 argument, was the Raven using its 6 heavy drones (and whatever was in the other two highslots)?ö I would assume a Dominx would out drone the Raven. IE its drones kill the Raven drones. The Dominx loserÆs a few then launchÆs more and focus on the Raven. Assuming the Raven sent his drones to the Dominx then smart bombs on the Raven wouldnÆt work. If the drones donÆt go towards the Dominx then they are not shooting so it doesnÆt matter. Yes the Raven could use the other two high slots but assuming it had the cap to after the Domi used Nos. But thatÆs assuming the Domi got into range with MWD/AB. What do Ravens normally take in the 2 highs lots? To many assumptions. Drones are easily dealt destroyed by FOFs or even with a SB The 2 high slots usually have these 2 types: 2x Named Nosferatuns (large/Medium) or 1x Named Nos (large) + 1x Smartbomb If a raven gets into NOS range then its a killer and might survive otherwise has a very reduced chance of survival. Jst avoid to rely your survival on drones. Because they only work "better" if the targeted ship doesn't have launchers or smartbomb. 2 cruise FOFs and a heavy drone is gone 2 blasts of large smart bomb and the heavy drone is gone.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 13:31:00 - [45] ôIf you have some spare time I would like to do some tests with you on test server, real battles.ö I am up for that if anyone else wants to do the same add me to your friends list and look me up when I am online. But I do have a few ground rules. Stop firing at 50% amour or even after the shields drop, replacing ships is a pain on the test server and someone else might want to have a go at beating me or test. Also itÆs an old build I only started training for combat 3 months ago which is about how long old the test server build is. I am around Ouelletta sector on the test server. ôDrones are easily dealt destroyed by FOFs or even with a SBö I agree but what I meant the Dominix drones should last long enough to kill all the Ravens drones. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Nekhad Jormuzzar	Posted - 2005.06.03 13:55:00 - [46] Edited by: Nekhad Jormuzzar on 03/06/2005 13:59:49 IMHO shield power relay IIs should be that good. For two reasons: active tanking will enjoy cap relay IIs as well and passive tanking takes up more slots and has a peak recharge in contrast with a constant recharge, which leaves it vulnerable to burst damage as you already witnessed. <edit> By the way, my (very much limited) experience in 1v1 agaisnt ravens on a domi indicates the active tank would be performing better with a couple multispecs.
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.06.03 13:56:00 - [47] * ponders about passive tanking a Typhoon * ~Sobe Captain Cutie, Razor's Kiss What is your Radical Dream?
XpoHoc	Posted - 2005.06.03 14:03:00 - [48] Originally by: Pottsey ôIf you have some spare time I would like to do some tests with you on test server, real battles.ö I am up for that if anyone else wants to do the same add me to your friends list and look me up when I am online. But I do have a few ground rules. Stop firing at 50% amour or even after the shields drop, replacing ships is a pain on the test server and someone else might want to have a go at beating me or test. Also itÆs an old build I only started training for combat 3 months ago which is about how long old the test server build is. I am around Ouelletta sector on the test server. Go to PF-346. Join Fight Club Co., there you have anything for free. We will adjust our test on your skills, that's no problem. I don't want to see how good you are at PvP, I want to see how good passive tanking is at it.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 14:12:00 - [49] As soon as the test server is back up I will head to Fight Club. I wonder how many people will turn up to shoot at me.? _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Magunus	Posted - 2005.06.03 14:16:00 - [50] Originally by: Pottsey As soon as the test server is back up I will head to Fight Club. I wonder how many people will turn up to shoot at me.? I'm already there. :D Come and get some. :P --- 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'
XpoHoc	Posted - 2005.06.03 14:16:00 - [51] Originally by: Pottsey As soon as the test server is back up I will head to Fight Club. I wonder how many people will turn up to shoot at me.? Fighting on Sisi server is consentual only, everyone attacking you without asking will get banned, if you petition him. There is a FFA beacon for pure fighting without agreement, everywhere else nobody will touch you.
Inspiration	Posted - 2005.06.03 15:29:00 - [52] Edited by: Inspiration on 03/06/2005 15:33:19 Originally by: Pottsey 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. You are not the only one in EVE, the effect of hardeners are hugely underestimated IMHO. Let me clarify with an easy EM damage example as it is the most easy one show the effect: Assume we hot a hypothetical weapon doing 100 HP EM type damage. It will do the following damage on different ammounts of shield EM resistance. 0% = 100 HP damage 50% = 50 HP damage, 50% improvement over 00% resistance 55% = 45 HP damage, 10% improvement over 50% resistance 60% = 40 HP damage, 11% improvement over 55% resistance 65% = 35 HP damage, 12% improvement over 60% resistance 70% = 30 HP damage, 14% improvement over 65% resistance This clearly demonstrates that stronger hardening requires far less shield regen/boosting. What you should also considder is a setup that does not rule out limited active boosting. If as you say you got cap to spare, then it stands to reason that 1 slot fitted with a efficient active booster migh work very well. Of course the sustainable boost rate must be higher then the implicit loss of passive recharge rate cause by removing a shield extender. Try a sinlge gisii a-type small shield booster, as it can boost 28.5 HP/sec without ever running out of cap. Or try 2 hardener in combination with it. This would not cost you a single passive recharge (shield extender) slot and still increase recharge rate per second considerably. Drop the hardener for the strongest base resistance or the least expected damage type. Check out my Shield/Armor resistance calculator.
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.03 15:42:00 - [53] The most amazing thing about hardening is that people do understand that if you have 0 resist and add 50% hard you will take twice less damage. AT THE SAME TIME, if you have 50% resist and you add 50% hard you get "only" 25% more resist, BUT in fact it works as good as first 50%. Because you actually will take again twice less damage (4 times less damage then with 0 resists). So for example if you add one hard you need half of HP boosting to maintain same tank, and if you add another hard you need 1/4 of HP boosting for the same tank (arguably stacking makes it a bit less, but in general it is true). So cap wise with any active tank hardening is very good and every small addition of resistanse counts.
Dewar Scrabulous	Posted - 2005.06.03 15:59:00 - [54] Edited by: Dewar Scrabulous on 03/06/2005 15:59:46 That would be true if there weren't stacking penalties. The penalties muck things up pretty bad. It doesn't keep me from using uber-resistance AF though. -Dewar PS: I see I was an idiot and skipped a paragraph when reading the post. Whoops. ---
Dimitri Forgroth	Posted - 2005.06.03 16:18:00 - [55] The stacking penalty isn't too bad when using 2 hardeners. The second will still give ~36% reduction in damage, which imo is well worth it. \| Don't be a bad loser \|
Shayla Sh'inlux	Posted - 2005.06.03 16:33:00 - [56] Edited by: Shayla Sh''inlux on 03/06/2005 16:33:55 Edited by: Shayla Sh''inlux on 03/06/2005 16:33:33 So what did you prove? You proved that passive tanking works under the following conditions: 1) You sit in a Dominix. A ship with a lot of cpu and the perfect passive tank slot layout. 2) You have the shield skills maxed, and use shield implants along with gang skills. 3) You fight in a limited environment (ie 1v1, knowing each others ships beforehand). Also, in real PvP you run into 4 damage, so that kinetic weakness is gonna hurt. For example,a Megathron throws out up to 500-600 dps easily in a standard light tank blaster fit and up to 900 in gank fitting with rails. Assuming you have 50% resistance, that's still 300 dps received, or 200 more that your tank can handle at its peak. Sure, it'd last a while, but die for sure. 4) You settle for not being able to keep your opponent where he or she is, IF you are able to kill that person in the first place. I see you throw out new numbers; one for where you have a scrambler fitted, one for where you have an AB fitted, one for where you have actual guns fitted. The shield/sec numbers dwindle pretty fast. I seriously doubt you can kill a Raven with that setup, let alone a tanked Apoc. So this passive tank tanks really good in 1v1. What use is that if you can't kill anything? I'm also getting curious on what you have fitted in that Thorax. 2 Extenders and a Hardner? Awesome PvP setup =/ I think everyone pretty much agreed it can be useful for the lazy kind of PvE, but no matter how you twist and turn it, passive tanking is not a workable setup for PvP. Proof me (and others) wrong with actual killmails. ------------------------------------------------------- "Do you really think that's air you're breathing?"
Jennae	Posted - 2005.06.03 16:56:00 - [57] Originally by: Shayla Sh'inlux Edited by: Shayla Sh''inlux on 03/06/2005 16:33:55 Edited by: Shayla Sh''inlux on 03/06/2005 16:33:33 So what did you prove? You proved that passive tanking works under the following conditions: 1) You sit in a Dominix. A ship with a lot of cpu and the perfect passive tank slot layout. 2) You have the shield skills maxed, and use shield implants along with gang skills. 3) You fight in a limited environment (ie 1v1, knowing each others ships beforehand). Also, in real PvP you run into 4 damage, so that kinetic weakness is gonna hurt. For example,a Megathron throws out up to 500-600 dps easily in a standard light tank blaster fit and up to 900 in gank fitting with rails. Assuming you have 50% resistance, that's still 300 dps received, or 200 more that your tank can handle at its peak. Sure, it'd last a while, but die for sure. 4) You settle for not being able to keep your opponent where he or she is, IF you are able to kill that person in the first place. I see you throw out new numbers; one for where you have a scrambler fitted, one for where you have an AB fitted, one for where you have actual guns fitted. The shield/sec numbers dwindle pretty fast. I seriously doubt you can kill a Raven with that setup, let alone a tanked Apoc. So this passive tank tanks really good in 1v1. What use is that if you can't kill anything? I'm also getting curious on what you have fitted in that Thorax. 2 Extenders and a Hardner? Awesome PvP setup =/ I think everyone pretty much agreed it can be useful for the lazy kind of PvE, but no matter how you twist and turn it, passive tanking is not a workable setup for PvP. Proof me (and others) wrong with actual killmails. I was also thinking this.. I just would have said it nicer!! lol :)
PASTOR TROY	Posted - 2005.06.03 16:57:00 - [58] Thanks again Pottsey for your hard work, I applaud you for keeping going even though youve gotten alot of forum abuse for trying to prove that passive shield tanking is valid. Keep the test results coming in. Youve won over a few more people. Once again, thanks alot.
Finix Jaeger	Posted - 2005.06.03 17:10:00 - [59] Originally by: Shayla Sh'inlux Edited by: Shayla Sh''inlux on 03/06/2005 16:33:55 Edited by: Shayla Sh''inlux on 03/06/2005 16:33:33 So what did you prove? You proved that passive tanking works under the following conditions: 1) You sit in a Dominix. A ship with a lot of cpu and the perfect passive tank slot layout. 2) You have the shield skills maxed, and use shield implants along with gang skills. 3) You fight in a limited environment (ie 1v1, knowing each others ships beforehand). Also, in real PvP you run into 4 damage, so that kinetic weakness is gonna hurt. For example,a Megathron throws out up to 500-600 dps easily in a standard light tank blaster fit and up to 900 in gank fitting with rails. Assuming you have 50% resistance, that's still 300 dps received, or 200 more that your tank can handle at its peak. Sure, it'd last a while, but die for sure. 4) You settle for not being able to keep your opponent where he or she is, IF you are able to kill that person in the first place. I see you throw out new numbers; one for where you have a scrambler fitted, one for where you have an AB fitted, one for where you have actual guns fitted. The shield/sec numbers dwindle pretty fast. I seriously doubt you can kill a Raven with that setup, let alone a tanked Apoc. So this passive tank tanks really good in 1v1. What use is that if you can't kill anything? I'm also getting curious on what you have fitted in that Thorax. 2 Extenders and a Hardner? Awesome PvP setup =/ I think everyone pretty much agreed it can be useful for the lazy kind of PvE, but no matter how you twist and turn it, passive tanking is not a workable setup for PvP. Proof me (and others) wrong with actual killmails. She/he proved that it works. But just as everything in eve it is all dependent on the circumstances. Under the right circumstances I can out tank an Apoc with my ibis. I would be very interested in the possibilitys of passive tank on a Tempest. Sorry for any spelling mistakes, you should know what i mean
Nekhad Jormuzzar	Posted - 2005.06.03 17:37:00 - [60] Wish I could help you guys test, but my battleship skills on Sisi are non-existant.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 17:41:00 - [61] Edited by: Pottsey on 03/06/2005 17:42:44 ö1) You sit in a Dominix. A ship with a lot of cpu and the perfect passive tank slot layout.ö I use a Dominix because I am a drone pilot whoÆs useless with Turrets and I only fly Gallente ships. I am happy to test any Gallente ship out that I can get my hands on. Other people have proven it works on None Gallente ships and I have shown it working on other none Dominix Gallente ships. Lots of Caldari pilots seem happy with it. As for CPU the Dominx has average CPU only 1 BS has less CPU then the Dominx. So where did you get the lots of CPU from? I thought as BS go the Dominix had average CPU and low powergrid. So if you can fit that you can fit anything. ö2) You have the shield skills maxed, and use shield implants along with gang skills.ö Of course I have maxed shield skills it takes 4 days per skill, I would be stupid not to max them. Most pilots have max shield, max powergrid, max cap skills and the max in there area of tanking. I donÆt have max gang shield skills and most of my math are without the shield gang skill. The gang skill boosts the HP regen in game even more which is nice for group work. I donÆt add the gang skill into my math. If I do I say so. If you go back and re read I often posted without the gang skill. In the Raven battle I had lvl 2 gang skill and posted that. 3) You fight in a limited environment (ie 1v1, knowing each others ships beforehand). Also, in real PvP you run into 4 damage, so that kinetic weakness is gonna hurt.ô When youÆre testing you need a limited environment for repeatable results. Even in my testing I didnÆt know the opponents ships but I did tell him my ship so he could shoot me weakest and strongest defence. After all how can we test compare active and passive tanking without shooting at each ones weakest resistanceÆs. kinetic doesnÆt hurt even on Kinetic I lasted over twice as long as the active shield tank. I am happy to meet anyone in a flight club arena for a 1v1 match without knowing what they will take. Other people have asked me to meet them and prove what I say is true and I have always shown up. I donÆt expect people to take my word for it. I expact people to try my setup for them self and improve it and say it does or does not work. öFor example,a Megathron throws out up to 500-600 dps easily in a standard light tank blaster fit and up to 900 in gank fitting with rails. Assuming you have 50% resistance, that's still 300 dps received, or 200 more that your tank can handle at its peak. Sure, it'd last a while, but die for sure.ö Perfect example of how my ship lasts. The active shield tank lasts what 30 seconds if that? Even at 900 DPS I last well over a minuet or 2 with the new test server changes. Which is often enough time to gives the gank setup a run for its money as thatÆs a good minuet shooting at him and he doesnÆt have a defence. ôAssuming you have 50% resistance, that's still 300 dps received, or 200 more that your tank can handle at its peak. Sure, it'd last a while, but die for sure.ö Of course it would die if I didnÆt fire back but I would last a good x3 longer then an active tank and during that extra time I am shooting the defenceless gank ship. If you donÆt believe me come shoot me on the test server. I would be surprised if you took my shields down in under am minute. So far no one has done that even with a gank ship. ö4) You settle for not being able to keep your opponent where he or she is, IF you are able to kill that person in the first place. I see you throw out new numbers; one for where you have a scrambler fitted, one for where you have an AB fitted, one for where you have actual guns fitted.ö The numbers I posted where full tank no useful mods and a tank empty mid slots so people could fit warp scramblers or what ever they wanted. Some people requested certain layouts to see if it works at which point I posted a full weapon layout with free slots. I am not going post every single combination out there so I posted useful general setups that I expected people to tweak to suit there play style. Lots of people seem to think you have to use up every single slot to passive tank. I am getting a little fed up of saying you donÆt have to. You are free to adjust the module layout to what suits you. If you want more damage mods then fit the damage mods it wonÆt make the tank useless only lower the HP.s regen a bit. ItÆs not like a active shield tank where you fit damage mods then you donÆt have the regen to run your tank. Most people who PvP go around in gangs. Not all the gang will EW which means as a passive tank you have two options. Have a high defence and let someone else do EW or you can lower your defence and fit EW. HowÆs that different from an active tank? The active tank has to give up cap regen so he runs his booster for less time if he wants to EW. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 17:44:00 - [62] Edited by: Pottsey on 03/06/2005 17:57:54 öThe shield/sec numbers dwindle pretty fast. I seriously doubt you can kill a Raven with that setup, let alone a tanked Apoc. So this passive tank tanks really good in 1v1. What use is that if you can't kill anything?ö Why do so many people think I cannot kill anything? I have a full drone load out and a full weapon system. I can fit a warp scrabbler and lose 10DPS regen, or there abouts. I can then fit a CPU booster and lose 10 more regen. I can even fit a 7 damage mods if I want to but that lowers my regen a lot. ôI'm also getting curious on what you have fitted in that Thorax. 2 Extenders and a Hardner? Awesome PvP setup =/ö 2 shield extender so you last against gang setups. 1 hardener as EM is weak. This leaves you with triple the regen of an amour tank with the test server changes and without the changeÆs its still better as you donÆt run out of cap in battle. Now I have the option of keeping the strong tank or lowering the hp regen and fitting damage mods. WhatÆs wrong with that? It seems to compare well against a amour tanked thorax that does have cap problems. öI think everyone pretty much agreed it can be useful for the lazy kind of PvE, but no matter how you twist and turn it, passive tanking is not a workable setup for PvP.ö Right now on the live server I agree itÆs next to impossible to make a passive tank that works in PvP. But with the new changeÆs on the test server itÆs not only possible but good. Did you try out the new changeÆs? _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.03 17:48:00 - [63] Lets also laught at apoc with miners - LOL you can't deal damage, such a crappy setup! No one said passive tanking is an uber setup which will work everywhere. But have decency, a guy comes and proves that passive full tank can be actually better then active one. And as far as I understand it like proving that there is no God to the Holy Inquisition itself.
Shayla Sh'inlux	Posted - 2005.06.03 18:28:00 - [64] Quote: As for CPU the Dominx has average CPU only 1 BS has less CPU then the Dominx. So where did you get the lots of CPU from? I thought as BS go the Dominix had average CPU and low powergrid. So if you can fit that you can fit anything. ahem What game are you playing? Dominix 600 Megathron 550 Tempest 550 Apoc 500 Geddon 450 ------------------------------------------------------- "Do you really think that's air you're breathing?"
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.06.03 18:35:00 - [65] Keep it up Pottsey, I'm a fan of passive shield tanking, as much from your efforts as from my experimentation with out-of-the-box setups ~Sobe Captain Cutie, Razor's Kiss What is your Radical Dream?
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 18:36:00 - [66] I made a mistake while reading the CPU list sorry about that. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.06.03 18:42:00 - [67] Originally by: Shayla Sh'inlux Quote: As for CPU the Dominx has average CPU only 1 BS has less CPU then the Dominx. So where did you get the lots of CPU from? I thought as BS go the Dominix had average CPU and low powergrid. So if you can fit that you can fit anything. ahem What game are you playing? Dominix 600 Megathron 550 Tempest 550 Apoc 500 Geddon 450 Scorp 750 Raven 700 Typhoon 600 Dominix 600 Tempest 550 Megathron 550 Apoc 500 Geddon 450 Not the best CPU wise, but then not the worst. I think the ultimate passive test with CPU in mind would be on the geddon ~Sobe Captain Cutie, Razor's Kiss What is your Radical Dream?
xaioguai	Posted - 2005.06.03 20:48:00 - [68] perhap armor tanking is doing the very similar thing with passive shield tanking. dominix armor tanking item list dominix.....base cap 4000, base cap recharge 870 second 2 armor hardne......(just to match pottsey's setup) 2 Large armor repairer1........again, to match pottsey's setup, not to use name or t2 item 5 cap recharger1 (15% cap recharge) 3 cap relay (20% cap recharge) first, aromr repairer time 2x600/11.75=102.127 armor/second, almost the same with full passive shield tank (we want to compare top skill with top skill so armor repairer lvl5) then cap recharge time 40001.25=5000 (energy system operations 5) 8700.75=652.5 (energy management 5) 652.5(0.85^5)=289.52 (5 cap recharger) 289.52(0.8^3)=148.23 (3 cap relay) 5000/148.23=33.73 (average cap per second) peak cap recharging rate according to cap theory, 33.732.5=84.33 cap per second 2 armor repairer cap useage 4002/11.75=68.09
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.03 21:01:00 - [69] Edited by: Pottsey on 03/06/2005 21:13:31 Thank you xaioguai thatÆs a very useful Comparison. Apart from the total shield hitpoints to total amour hitpoints difference between the two methods, they seem to be very similar from a hardener and HP regen point of view. Though I guess the amour repairer has the option of using T2 putting it ahead on the HP regen front. Whats your powergrid and CPU like. Do you have more or less free then my setup? I am assuming you have more free CPU but less free powergrid. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.03 21:09:00 - [70] Edited by: Nomen Nescio on 03/06/2005 21:11:01 Drop 1 large repair and relay, put 4 hards and a nos - will be better because you really dont know what kind of hards you need:) Having thermal, kinetic, 2 exp you will take exp torps and laugh and in worst case scenario you will be 20% better tanking em then shield tank with 1 active em hard.
xaioguai	Posted - 2005.06.03 21:30:00 - [71] Originally by: Nomen Nescio Edited by: Nomen Nescio on 03/06/2005 21:11:01 Drop 1 large repair and relay, put 4 hards and a nos - will be better because you really dont know what kind of hards you need:) Having thermal, kinetic, 2 exp you will take exp torps and laugh and in worst case scenario you will be 20% better tanking em then shield tank with 1 active em hard. heh, the setup is not to counter raven, it is just to compare regular armor tanking with passive shield tanking. as far as i see, each has their pro and cons, passive shield tanking does has larger shield however, the max regain penalized by taking one module off and replace it with other stuffs like damage mods or tracking/ew mods. armor tanking however remain at its peak all time at the expense of total duration. so at the end, passive shield tank isn't all that superior but rather give us an alternative way to fit our ships.
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.04 00:19:00 - [72] Edited by: Nomen Nescio on 04/06/2005 00:41:19 Edited by: Nomen Nescio on 04/06/2005 00:25:59 Originally by: xaioguai perhap armor tanking is doing the very similar thing with passive shield tanking. Lets make it a bit more interesting shall we? Same poor Domi I'll use onl lows: 2 hards (to match your and Pottsey hards that is) 5 x 1600 plates = 18000 extra armor (skill level 4, armor 3k per plate) Now evil part. Originally by: xaioguai first, aromr repairer time 2x600/11.75=102.127 armor/second, almost the same with full passive shield tank (we want to compare top skill with top skill so armor repairer lvl5) So 2 large repairs with maxed skills will catch up with my extra armor in... 180 seconds = 3 minutes. At the same time you will use 6800 capacitor for this. During 3 first minutes all your armorregen has absolutely no advantage over my armor stack. But I have bonus of 68 cap per second, and 1500 extra grid which is very valuable for Domi. Moreover, I have 5 (five) open med slots for anything you name it. You guys both have no space left. To take it more to the real life, I would have 4 hards and 3 plates. Which give over 60% across the board resistance and 10800 extra armor. Again, 2 large repeairers will catch up with me in 100 seconds, but in fact i have 2 extra hards, so in most cases I'll take twice less damage then you. PLUS 5 friking open meds. I'll go even thurther and say that in case of huge nemy firepower my setup is better because I have high resists and huge HP and you need time to work it out: Some enemy does lets say 600 dps raw damage For the sake of argument I'll drop my 2 hards which "wont match the damage type", and you are "lucky" and we both have 60% resists on armor and Pottsey have 50% = we have 240 and 300 dps coming through respectively Your regen will give you 100 dps less in actual damage I have 2-3 times of HP. For instance my 3 plates will run out in 45 seconds(10800 HP, i take 240dps). And I'm on my regular domi armor At the same 45 seconds you will recieve 6300 damage on armor (all gone) or 10350 damage on shields (half gone) My regular armor will hold for another 24 seconds. And both of you will blow up. And I let my 2 hards go for nothing, and I have 5 meds free For simplicity I dont count my shields. And I dont speculate on my possible 5 x 1600 2 hards setup to "excatly match yours". And 5 meds free, remember? And normal cap recharge and no cap usage expect 4 hards which is nothing. PS I assumed wrong numbers somehow for Pottsey tank, I said 100 regen, 12k HP, but in fact he said in the first post: Shield = 21977 hitpoints Regen = 71.8 ResistanceÆs = all at base apart from EM at 50% Which makes makes me to be blown second, then goes Pottsey, but I droped my shields and 2 hards... well, hard to say, I would definetely live longer with 2 hards and 5 plates... but well. POTTSEY HAS BETTER TANK, but I have more usable setup for real life - 4 hards, all meds free Pottsey for the win anyway
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.04 08:08:00 - [73] Edited by: Pottsey on 04/06/2005 08:11:00 ôShield = 21977 hitpoints Regen = 71.8 ResistanceÆs = all at base apart from EM at 50%ö What I just started doing with that setup is fitting a Dread Guristas Invulnerability over the EM hardener. You still have loads of cap free but instead of base resistanceÆs you get 37.5% to all resistanceÆ. But I cannot make my mind up fit a 2nd EM hardener or more hitpoints. At the monument and from testing I am learning towards more hitpoints. Check out the Siege Warfare skill. Its not only improves my shield tank a lot but it gives a large bonus to your amour tank. ôSo 2 large repairs with maxed skills will catch up with my extra armor in... 180 seconds = 3 minutes. At the same time you will use 6800 capacitor for this. During 3 first minutes all your armorregen has absolutely no advantage over my armor stack. But I have bonus of 68 cap per second, and 1500 extra grid which is very valuable for Domi.Moreover, I have 5 (five) open med slots for anything you name it. You guys both have no space left. ö I fully agree with you now, every active tank I tied died in under 1 min 30 seconds so it never healed as much hitpoints as I had base. After spending 6 hours yesterday fighting various people in Flight Club I learnt two things. My combat skills on that server are beyond useless, most of my opponents have large T2 weapons while I had T1 with mostly lvl 1 and lvl 2 combat skills and weapons upgrade 1 made it hard to fit weapons due to CPU usage, I had to fit more CPU boosters then I would have on the live server. But the main point is extra hitpoints from the new shield and amour extenders are better then active tanks. Every single time the extra hitpoints ships out lasted the shield booster tanks. I even asked other people to tell me how to setup my active tank to make sure it was good. There where all live tests with me fireing back and not knowing what I was up against. A ship with 5 to 7 damage mods, a bunch of hardeners and shield extenders is deadly compared to an active shield tank. Even an amour player with hardeners and amour plates with free mid slots beats an active amour tank. I do recommended more people look into it. ôAnd I dont speculate on my possible 5 x 1600 2 hards setup to "excatly match yours". And 5 meds free, remember?ö I think you are onto something; you just gave me an idea. Why not have 2 amour hardeners, 5 x 1600 plates = 18000 extra armour, then 3 shield extenders, and 2 hardeners or 1 Invulnerability field and extra shield extenders or AB? Assuming thatÆs even possible from a powergrid and CPU point of view thatÆs got to be nasty. I guess you might need 1 reactor, 1 CPU booster but thatÆs still 3 amour plates and the shield tank. Does 1 Regenerative Plating II with 8% to hitpoints give you more or less then 1, 1600 plate? It might be fun just to see someone ones face when they break your shields after a while then suddenly have to try and break a tough amour tank. EDIT: Not had time to work it out but precisely but isnÆt that 40 to 50k hitpoints with hardeners? _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Shayla Sh'inlux	Posted - 2005.06.04 11:17:00 - [74] This discussion is, however, going towards having a huge amount of hitpoints to survive long enough, which is what the passive shield tank is all about in the first place. To be honest, those 71 hp/sec max regen mean nothing to a gunship. The whole point of 'passive' tanking goes out of the window when you start compring it with armor plates. The question is what you want: 1) Do you want to passively tank anough hp/sec to last forever? 2) Do you want to mass an enormous amount of hitpoints to make sure you last long enough? From reading this and many of your other threads, it's the second, at which point we're not talking about passively tanking anymore. Also in this second situation it's pretty f*cking obvious shields have the advantage (aside from the ridiculous cpu requirements) due to them having access to t2 shield extenders (as opposed to t1 1600mm plates) and having a passive regeneration, although it's neglicable. Assuming you last a total a 2 minutes, which is pushing it in the first place, a 71 shield/sec regeneration means 8500 extra shields (but it's far less due to that peak thing), which is 5 extra salvo's fired at you at best. ------------------------------------------------------- "Do you really think that's air you're breathing?"
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.04 13:36:00 - [75] ôAssuming you last a total a 2 minutes, which is pushing it in the first place, a 71 shield/sec regeneration means 8500 extra shields (but it's far less due to that peak thing), which is 5 extra salvo's fired at you at best.ö You spend a lot more time near peak them most people realise peak might be x2.5 but the average over a battle is x2.2 ish. As for 2 minutes pushing it I have yet to last less the 2 minuets in battles even when someone was shooting me with T2 large weapons and damage mods, I just checked my logs and not a single battle lasted under 2 minutes yesterday with a passive tank so I cannot agree with you that 2 minuets is pushing it and 5 extra salvos on top of already lasting 2 minuets is a lot of extra time as PvP goes. So that regen really did help. XpoHoc shot me with T2 large weapons and I believe some damage mods. I lasted over 3 minuets with 1 setup and over 2 minutes with my other setups. So thatÆs a good 9000+ hitpoints I healed over the battle. If you donÆt believe me, meet me at Fight club and try and knock my shields down in under 2 minuets. The active shield tank never lasted much longer then 1 minutes. Note: some of my older setups used to last under 2 minuets but now even a gank Raven with max damage mods takes 2 minuets. ô1) Do you want to passively tank anough hp/sec to last forever? 2) Do you want to mass an enormous amount of hitpoints to make sure you last long enough?ö ThatÆs not really true as due to the new shield exytender boosting hitpoints also means you get a large boost to regen. You no longer need to pick between Hp/sec to last forever or high hitpoints. What you need to decide is do you take PDS for a hitpoint boost and regen boost or do you take shield relays for a larger regen boost but no hitpoint boost but both setups now have high hitpoints due to the new changeÆs. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Dimitri Forgroth	Posted - 2005.06.04 13:47:00 - [76] Originally by: Pottsey some of my older setups used to last under 2 minuets but now even a gank Raven with max damage mods takes 2 minuets. Raven isn't exactly the most damaging of ships. Would be nice to see how long it lasts against a gankageddon. (Look at that, use of a quote tag ) \| Don't be a bad loser \|
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.04 14:07:00 - [77] ôRaven isn't exactly the most damaging of ships. Would be nice to see how long it lasts against a gankageddon.ö I also lasted 3 minuets against a Tempest with T2 weapons. Not gone against a Gankageddon yet. I will be on the test server as much as I can today. If there are any Gankagaddon ships that want a match either open a chat with me on the live or test server. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Nyxus	Posted - 2005.06.04 15:07:00 - [78] Pottsey - Thanks from the community for all your hard work in testing these setups and finding effective, interesting alternatives to testing. 2 questions: Would it be possible to passively shield tank a harpy? Would it even be worthwhile to try? What about an apoc? Does it have enough midslots and base shields? Nyxus
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.04 15:19:00 - [79] I cannot fly either of those ships. The only frigate I managed to passive tanked was a Halios. All others where better as active. As for the Apoc. It should work but it might be best to try the new amour plates and see how they work for you over shield tanking. 5 plates and 2 hardeners should be a useful setup. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
xaioguai	Posted - 2005.06.04 15:56:00 - [80] Originally by: Nomen Nescio 5 x 1600 plates = 18000 extra armor (skill level 4, armor 3k per plate) Now evil part. shouldn't 1600 plates give 1600 extra armor instead 3k?
Papermate	Posted - 2005.06.04 16:22:00 - [81] WhatÆs wrong with that? It seems to compare well against a amour tanked thorax that does have cap problems. I dont mean to be mean or anything but although it might be a good tank, it doesn have a webber, scrambler or mwd, so its naff for pvp :P "Master of Papercuts"
Dark Shikari	Posted - 2005.06.04 16:25:00 - [82] Originally by: Pottsey ôRaven isn't exactly the most damaging of ships. Would be nice to see how long it lasts against a gankageddon.ö I also lasted 3 minuets against a Tempest with T2 weapons. Not gone against a Gankageddon yet. I will be on the test server as much as I can today. If there are any Gankagaddon ships that want a match either open a chat with me on the live or test server. Did it have damage mods on? Those make a hell of a difference. With T1 megapulses, I two-hit a Dominix's normal shield. -- The best description of alliances, ever:
Sally	Posted - 2005.06.04 16:55:00 - [83] Well done, Pottsey. I was very sceptical about that passive tanking at first, but after i took myself a look at test server i'll say its a very viable alternative to active shield tanking. Right now its useless at live server, but new shield extenders on test server have changed that. 2 Large shield extenders with 2 or 3 hardeners are not bad for some setups which use a lot of cap for weapon. Now its even quite usefull for uber-tanking setups - like shield extenders + armour plating. I have also tryed a Scorp with passive tanking - i should say it's probably better than active tanking. -- Stories: #1 --
Fred0	Posted - 2005.06.04 17:29:00 - [84] Is the exact dominix setup posted somewhere?
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.04 17:42:00 - [85] Edited by: Pottsey on 04/06/2005 18:21:35 Edited by: Pottsey on 04/06/2005 18:18:56 ôI dont mean to be mean or anything but although it might be a good tank, it doesn have a webber, scrambler or mwd, so its naff for pvp :Pö I was testing it in flight club todayÆs and my cruiser is useless. Regen I got up to 72 but the lack of thermal resistanceÆs killed it. You can fit 1 scrambler and MWD. But that still leaves you with bad resistanceÆs. I have learnt a lot from fight club and stopped working on my cruiser for now as itÆs no where near good enough. But my Battleship Passive tank has improved 10x fold as a PvP setup and I am giving most pilots a good run for there money. If anyone wants a match log on and meet me. EDIt: Thanks to XpoHoc for eveything he showed me. I learnt a lot of new stuff. ôDid it have damage mods on? Those make a hell of a difference.ö I cannot be sure about the last Tempest as I havenÆt seen the guy to ask him. But I won another match against a different Tempest today that had damage mods on. Update: Make that 2 more matchÆs against battleships and 1 HAC. I wonder how many match's I have to win before people believe Passive tanking works for PvP some of the time. "Is the exact dominix setup posted somewhere?" Its in the 2nd post. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
XpoHoc	Posted - 2005.06.04 18:18:00 - [86] I have to say I was suprised about the passive tank. It held better than most other people's active tanks against my tempest (all t2, all lvl5 skills). So speaking of the passive tank in PvP, yes it is able to tank well enough for such combats to my own suprise. But the real problem is not the tank itself, it's the need of slots for it. The best tank was the first one with 2 active hardenerns I believe, but you need all your low and med slots for that config. That leaves no place for EW/tackling or damaging setups. There are workarounds for that thought which we are going to test soon and let you know about the results.
XpoHoc	Posted - 2005.06.04 18:21:00 - [87] Edited by: XpoHoc on 04/06/2005 18:21:28 Additional note: We have tested long range combat since the damage there is not as extreme as in some close range battles. But I think the key to make passive tanking work in PvP lies in close range... we'll see soon.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.04 19:14:00 - [88] Edited by: Pottsey on 04/06/2005 19:18:39 ôWould be nice to see how long it lasts against a gankageddon.ö I found one with Plutonium ammo due to no antimatter being out there, he had 7 weapons and my shields lasted 45 seconds not fighting back. We then had a real match but the other pilot didnÆt have the best equipment on and had fitting skill problems, but then again I had the same problem due to the skills being old. The real match lasted just over 2 minuets he won. I bealive but its hard to guess, he would have lasted another 30 seconds or there about if I didnÆt die. I think with better skills I could have lasted. But due to CPU problems and powergrid problems I have to fit more CPU boosters and reactors then I would normally. For this method to really work you need weapons upgrades on lvl 5 and Shield upgrades on lvl 5. Weapons upgrade on lvl 1 is really hurting my CPU. Without Shield upgrades at lvl 5 shield extenders take up to much powergrid. Just before this I had a match with an Apocalypse it was close lasted over 4 minuets both shield tanking and I got hid amour down to 50% amour before he got me. XpoHoc is right the key to a Passive tank is close range. I have gone from loseing all my match's to a 50/50 win/lose ratio via moveing to close range with MWD. I bet I can push the win ratio over 50/50 once I train more usefull skills up. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.04 19:38:00 - [89] To clarify, "that other pilot" used mega with: 7 blasters, mwd, cap injector, damage mods on low, 1 power diag (skills r crap), 2 meds free, 1 high free Gun dmage mod 8.3.... rof 3.89 (skill r crap, tech 1 named gear used from fight club hangar) No drones used at all No antimatter was available, plutonium was used Fight started at about 5km, with approach without mwd. Pottsey used a lot of noses together with neutralizes, he didnt fired back or used drones though. Mega cap hold for some time together with huge damage I put him in a half of shields for my half capacitor. Hovewer cap drain is HUGE and i start injecting right away (20 seconds after start), he puts me out of cap having around 15% shields (he has how much? 12k Pottsey?) my injector reloads. He feels that he won but here comes injection and fire blowing up all shield and armor in a under 20 seconds. Total 800 charges used - 4 initials, plus 2 from a reload. He was on structure and i had 2 charges loaded and 4 more in cargo. Bottom line: Recharge can't hold a thing against ganking setup. Mainly because huge damage drops the shields below the optimum for recharge Mega had unused advantage of drones. Domi didnt used frones either, but one can argue that drones could just be neglected since mage could use drones to fight domi drones or have extra firepower to kick down Domi tank Mega had 2 med free and 1 high free which can be extremely valuable Domi had all slots used as far as I understand and could not have any other advantages lik jams or scramlbers or distruptors wihout lowering the tank Range is crucial, with mwd approach mega could have a lot of problems and could lose it, however, at the same time if mega goes for rails and keeps beyond 25km Domi can't nos ****, so it is totaly useless. Also domi had no mwd or webs, so mega could force the distance In general main EVE combat point holds - "tanking is useless then any decent damage is present", but amazingly Pottsey tank is extremely good, since I belive active shield tank wont last half of the time. PS Been a pleasure
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.06.04 20:04:00 - [90] Edited by: Pottsey on 04/06/2005 21:22:21 ôHe feels that he won but here comes injection and fire blowing up all shield and armor in a under 20 seconds.ö I didnÆt mean to sound like I won, I clearly lost. What I meant was with decent skills and tweaking the setup I think I could stand a chance at winning. To give people an idea why I say that these are my skills on the test server. 360k in drones so no good drone skills and most of that was in mining drones, 390k in combat so no good combat skills. 122k in Mechanic so almost no bonus to hull or amour. I donÆt have Energy Management, energy systems, shield upgrade and other must have skills at lvl5. The test server build is so old it was before I started doing combat and back when I was a miner / cargo pilot. Edit: By lasting 30 seconds longer I didnÆt mean to sound like you would die in 30 seconds. I meant 30 seconds longer and I donÆt think you would have had enough cap left to shoot, warp out or heal. So I could have killed you slowly. But that was a guess you no better then me, how long would your cap have hold? Would I have lasted long enough to kill your cap if I had 5k more shields & more shield resistance? ô(he has how much? 12k Pottsey?)ö It was 15k I had to lower it from 20k due to having to fit reactors and CPU boosters. If my live server skills and modules where on the test server I could have 20k+ shields and higher shield resistances along with better cap regen so more Neut cap drainers and less nos and more base speed from implants and T2 MWD. But then again your skills would be better as well. I was trying to say the setup has good potential at lest I think so but it needs tweaking still. ôRecharge can't hold a thing against ganking setup. Mainly because huge damage drops the shields below the optimum for recharge I fully agree for this battle recharge was next to useless. Pure hitpoints with resistance is the only way to do it. ôMega had unused advantage of drones. Domi didnt used drones either, but one can argue that drones could just be neglected since mage could use drones to fight domi drones or have extra firepower to kick down Domi tankö Not sure I agree the Domi has more drones in space if the Mega kills drones with weapons then that gives the Domi more time to cap drain. In the drone V drone battle the Mega would lose then the drones would turn on the mega. Which would not do much as either the Dom dies before the domi drones kill the megea drones or the Mega runs out of cap and the drones slowly kill it. öAlso domi had no mwd or webs, so mega could force the distanceö I forget to tell you I had an MWD fitted but only T1 due to limited skills. I didnÆt see a point for a Webber as drones hit fine without Webbers and I donÆt have enough skills for turrets. No need for warp scrabbles because if everything works the enemy ship has no cap to warp out. Anyway thanks for the match I learnt a lot and am already working on improvements. I also have to test your amour plates idea. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Sergej	Posted - 2005.06.04 22:29:00 - [91] if everything works the enemy ship has no cap to warp out. There is pretty much always at least some cap so you can warp out. NOS drains in bursts, same for neutralizers, not in actual cap/second. Regards, Sergej

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.