Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 06:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
Most people will say shields are superior to armor right now on the subcapital level. While the AAR somewhat aleviates this it still has a number of large drawbacks to shields. The biggest of these differences is speed. Buffer armor tankers are slower due to direct penalties, and active tankers don't have the option of fitting nanos.
Shield modules have a direct penalty of signature radius, but it is pretty much ignored in most circumstances. While both speed and sig affect tracking, only speed gives you control of the battlefield. Shields should have a new counter to their strength, something that reduces their tactical options like how speed reduces armor options.
My proposal is that all shield modules that don't use capacitor (rechargers, extenders, ASB's, passive hardners, rigs) will cause a penalty to capacitor recharge rate.
A shield tanked kiting ship will be unable to run its microwarp drive for extended periods of time, forcing it to manage how it kites more carefully. On a brawling vessel, you will be more vulnerable to capacitor warfare obviously, forcing you to fit noses in your utility highs or capacitor boosters in order to keep ewar or weapons running. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
androch
Chillwater Ltd Persona Non Gratis
25
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 07:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
translation" WAAAAAAAAA my armor ships not as cool as shield ships so they need to be nerfed |
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 10:57:00 -
[3] - Quote
It's dangerous what you are asking for ... i mean you want shields to have some sort of penalty :D ? That would be fair and balanced idea, but who cares about fairness and balance those days. |
androch
Chillwater Ltd Persona Non Gratis
25
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 11:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
why should shields have a penalty? is it not punishment enough that shields take more damage than armor and eat twice that cap that armor mods do? theres a reason they cycle faster you know |
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 11:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
androch wrote:why should shields have a penalty? is it not punishment enough that shields take more damage than armor and eat twice that cap that armor mods do? theres a reason they cycle faster you know
Take more damage ? Really ? Something new , seems you don't have proper skills to use invul field tech 2. It doesn't take much time to train go on do it.
Eat twice that cap ? If your math is correct then armor reps take 0 cap now. Because 2 x 0 cap is still 0.
Reason they cycle faster ? Well they regenerate more hp per second , they take less cap per second - no the other way.
Oh i would also forget that you can put oversized shield boosters , when armor reps just eat too much pwg.
Have you ever seen high meta (deadspace) shield boosters ? You saw hp regenerated/ gj used ratio and alos hp/per second ? Then take a look . Deadspace reps are not much better than T2 , when deadspace shield boosters are omgwtf pwnage not from this world. There is reason why they are THAT EXPENSIVE.
In both pve and pvp - shields are superior. CCP knows that, they admit that. That's why they are trying to fix this issue and make changes. But looks like some people still think that everything is fine. Sure they enjoy dem shields too much atm. |
androch
Chillwater Ltd Persona Non Gratis
25
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 13:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
and yet armor ships yield much higher ehp than shield ships at all times and run dual reps to make their tank just as stable at shield, i see nothing wrong with this i dont see sheild extenders giving nearly the amount of hp buffs as an armor plate has, and no shield ship has more than 7 mid slots (and thats only one ship) to armors 7 or 8 low slots which many ships from each race have, this is perfectly balanced as/is |
Mikhael Taron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 15:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
If you want the - supposed - advantages of shield tank then fly a ship that's designed to use it. How it sounds is you like your football but you want it in the same colour as that tennis ball. You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.
|
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 15:24:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mikhael Taron wrote:If you want the - supposed - advantages of shield tank then fly a ship that's designed to use it. How it sounds is you like your football but you want it in the same colour as that tennis ball.
Yeah you cannot beat them, join them right ? Time to give up dem pretty Amarr ships and get myself into bellicose, moa or blackbird monstrosity (oh my God ...) |
Seranova Farreach
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
414
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 15:37:00 -
[9] - Quote
if the OP has actually read armor tanking 1.5 they are makeing all armor ships/plates lighter and giving a skill to make them even lighter. quit whineing cause armor is balanced vs shield atm cause of ASBs. |
Rroff
The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
195
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 15:49:00 -
[10] - Quote
Shield mods that directly affect shield regen already have a cap penalty, most cases active hardeners use more capacitor for shields. Active boosters are a bit whacked but thats more the armor ones being broken rather than shield ones being broken. Most skirmish ships already have to do a fair degree of capacitor management when using MWD.
Armor needs some tweaks but shield skirmish is one of the least broken things in the game right now.
EDIT: IMO it would be a counter productive move anyway - people are more likely to burn out and escape the first chance they get rather than risking it later when they might not have the cap to GTFO. The current setup gives more chances for people to make mistakes and/or play too close to the edge. |
|
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 15:49:00 -
[11] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:if the OP has actually read armor tanking 1.5 they are makeing all armor ships/plates lighter and giving a skill to make them even lighter. quit whineing cause armor is balanced vs shield atm cause of ASBs.
ASBs are source of all imbalance not balance. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
669
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:13:00 -
[12] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:Seranova Farreach wrote:if the OP has actually read armor tanking 1.5 they are makeing all armor ships/plates lighter and giving a skill to make them even lighter. quit whineing cause armor is balanced vs shield atm cause of ASBs. ASBs are source of all imbalance not balance.
Introduce AAB. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
1031
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:19:00 -
[13] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Naomi Anthar wrote:Seranova Farreach wrote:if the OP has actually read armor tanking 1.5 they are makeing all armor ships/plates lighter and giving a skill to make them even lighter. quit whineing cause armor is balanced vs shield atm cause of ASBs. ASBs are source of all imbalance not balance. Introduce AAB.
They are. Read the aforementioned thread. |
Iagus Damaclese
Zero-G Dogs
13
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
If anything shield tanking needs a bit of love, but only for T1 ships to be honest. As it stands right now Armor tanking is considerably more efficient than shield tanking, especially when your in fleets with armor logi. How do we know this? Go look at the standard fittings for incursion fleets and tell me what you see. I do Active and Passive tanking for both Armor and Shield and I can tell you from personal experience, once I switched to armor tanking I almost hated flying shield tank ships because of how inefficient the shield tank really is in comparison to armor tank. Yeah sure you cant throw on a X-large shield booster and aim for cap stable and be pretty darn hard to kill but there is one thing that really sucks about shield tanking and that is the penalty to sig radius meaning everything can hit you. If you armor tank, you fit a DCU II, 1600mm RT II, and a EANP II with three medium trimark armor pump I's and a AB to make up for the speed lose be pretty well off. For shield tanking though there really is not much you can do to get that sig radius down. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:46:00 -
[15] - Quote
Seranova Farreach wrote:if the OP has actually read armor tanking 1.5 they are makeing all armor ships/plates lighter and giving a skill to make them even lighter. quit whineing cause armor is balanced vs shield atm cause of ASBs. I think this is the wrong approach, CCP can't think of how to make the two balanced so they just make them both the same. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Iagus Damaclese wrote:If anything shield tanking needs a bit of love, but only for T1 ships to be honest. As it stands right now Armor tanking is considerably more efficient than shield tanking, especially when your in fleets with armor logi. How do we know this? Go look at the standard fittings for incursion fleets and tell me what you see. I do Active and Passive tanking for both Armor and Shield and I can tell you from personal experience, once I switched to armor tanking I almost hated flying shield tank ships because of how inefficient the shield tank really is in comparison to armor tank. Yeah sure you cant throw on a X-large shield booster and aim for cap stable and be pretty darn hard to kill but there is one thing that really sucks about shield tanking and that is the penalty to sig radius meaning everything can hit you. If you armor tank, you fit a DCU II, 1600mm RT II, and a EANP II with three medium trimark armor pump I's and a AB to make up for the speed lose be pretty well off. For shield tanking though there really is not much you can do to get that sig radius down.
When I used to run with ISN we always used shields, even on my vindicator it was shield tanked. That boost to sig radius shields give only matters if you aren't moving, and if you aren't moving you either are a super brick tanked maelstrom, have a tackle ship on you that you need to kill, or an entire fleet has tackle and your ****** anyway.
When you armor tank an AB doesn't make up for the speed because every pvp ship has a propulsion mod, armor plates reduce AB effectiveness on top of your base speed due to increased mass. The shield tanked ship still outruns you, who gives a **** your sig radius is slightly higher, just keep your traversal up and they will still miss. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
ORCACommander
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:54:00 -
[17] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Seranova Farreach wrote:if the OP has actually read armor tanking 1.5 they are makeing all armor ships/plates lighter and giving a skill to make them even lighter. quit whineing cause armor is balanced vs shield atm cause of ASBs. I think this is the wrong approach, CCP can't think of how to make the two balanced so they just make them both the same. that is the definition of balance. the point where two things become equal because they function exactly the same. which imo is a horrible thing to have in a game. the See saw is difficult to use but if its perfectly level you might as well not have the other half.
Also in the pvp environment shield modules are predominantly mid slots. iirc this is where a pvp player puts all of his utility modules. Armor tanks in the lows giving armor ships free reign in the mids.
Also OP if you browsed the shield modules you would find that a couple that have to deal with passive regen have capacitor penelties |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 16:58:00 -
[18] - Quote
ORCACommander wrote:[ that is the definition of balance. the point where two things become equal because they function exactly the same. which imo is a horrible thing to have in a game. the See saw is difficult to use but if its perfectly level you might as well not have the other half.
Also in the pvp environment shield modules are predominantly mid slots. iirc this is where a pvp player puts all of his utility modules. Armor tanks in the lows giving armor ships free reign in the mids.
Also OP if you browsed the shield modules you would find that a couple that have to deal with passive regen have capacitor penelties
Balance should not be two things being the same, but those two things having the same value.
Herpaderp I know shield modules use more midslots, they also use less lowslots granting more speed and more dps. Yet those ships specilized in armor tanking are not often given enough mids to utilize those lowslots other than the holy trinity of scram web prop. Then on ships that do have enough midslots like the thorax, you will see people fit them with a shield tank anyway.
I know some shield modules have cap penalties which is the exact reason I proposed cap being the penalty. However you don't see very many pvp fits with shield power relays now do you?
Also I see many people talk about how armor or shield gangs are superior in different circumstances. Each style should be viable in all circumstances. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Iagus Damaclese
Zero-G Dogs
14
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 22:22:00 -
[19] - Quote
There is absolutely nothing wrong with shield tanking as it is and no reason to nerf it, especially since armor tanking is going to be getting buffed. Shields are fine where they are, I personally will not take a shield tanked vessel into a PVP environment but i use shields for PVE all the time, and I would not take an armor tanked vessel into a PVE environment as it is best used for PVP. A player who does not pursue both should do so, as it only makes your character more versatile and expands your options for fitting ships. It also make your life a whole lot easier. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 22:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
Iagus Damaclese wrote:There is absolutely nothing wrong with shield tanking as it is and no reason to nerf it, especially since armor tanking is going to be getting buffed. Shields are fine where they are, I personally will not take a shield tanked vessel into a PVP environment but i use shields for PVE all the time, and I would not take an armor tanked vessel into a PVE environment as it is best used for PVP. A player who does not pursue both should do so, as it only makes your character more versatile and expands your options for fitting ships. It also make your life a whole lot easier. Why? You provide no specifics for why one is better you just say that one is. I will argue that shield is the supierior tanking type in many more cases than armor is. Prove me wrong. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
|
Iagus Damaclese
Zero-G Dogs
14
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 22:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Iagus Damaclese wrote:There is absolutely nothing wrong with shield tanking as it is and no reason to nerf it, especially since armor tanking is going to be getting buffed. Shields are fine where they are, I personally will not take a shield tanked vessel into a PVP environment but i use shields for PVE all the time, and I would not take an armor tanked vessel into a PVE environment as it is best used for PVP. A player who does not pursue both should do so, as it only makes your character more versatile and expands your options for fitting ships. It also make your life a whole lot easier. Why? You provide no specifics for why one is better you just say that one is. I will argue that shield is the supierior tanking type in many more cases than armor is. Prove me wrong.
In the case of T1 vessels, Armor tank reigns king, why? well it probably has something to do with the fact that all vessels, ALL VESSELS, get better armor resists than they do shield resists to begin with. Dont believe me? go look for yourself. About the only vessels where Shield tanking is truely worth using in either PVP or PVE is in the case of the Tengu, and of course caldari ships as well, and even still i would not use a Tengu in PVP. Yeah sure you got all those nice shields and that nice shield booster but I just disrupted your tracking computer, started draining your cap, webbed you, warp disrupted you and I am moving at 300kms or more with a light armor tank and you wanna know why? because as it stand right now, any ship running a shield tank of any type is more than likely just barely cap stable in one way or another which even a small energy destabilizer can throw off and make worse than it is.
As I said before if anything shield tanking needs a bit of a buff, especially to the AI field II's resist boosts. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 22:58:00 -
[22] - Quote
Iagus Damaclese wrote:[ In the case of T1 vessels, Armor tank reigns king, why? well it probably has something to do with the fact that all vessels, ALL VESSELS, get better armor resists than they do shield resists to begin with. Dont believe me? go look for yourself. About the only vessels where Shield tanking is truely worth using in either PVP or PVE is in the case of the Tengu, and of course caldari ships as well, and even still i would not use a Tengu in PVP. Yeah sure you got all those nice shields and that nice shield booster but I just disrupted your tracking computer, started draining your cap, webbed you, warp disrupted you and I am moving at 300kms or more with a light armor tank and you wanna know why? because as it stand right now, any ship running a shield tank of any type is more than likely just barely cap stable in one way or another which even a small energy destabilizer can throw off and make worse than it is.
As I said before if anything shield tanking needs a bit of a buff, especially to the AI field II's resist boosts. Let us also not forget that shields have a more powerful omni resist buffing module so the fact they have lower base resists is not that relevant. Wut? SHield tanking is terrible for pvp? Look out for all those 200 man drake fleets and maelstroms, the fact that the most popular fits on gallente ships battlecruiser and below are shield, the fact that shield passively regenerate health and control the battlefield, also your small neut is not going to do jack **** to stop my MASSIVE asb buffer. Try using your small neut as a trump card against my shield thorax. Try the fact that the drake and shield hurricane are the two most popular battlecruisers out their, the merlin will rock the **** out of any punisher.
In all the time ive been playing I don't think ive met anyone who says armor is straight up better for pvp (except on capital ships).
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Iagus Damaclese
Zero-G Dogs
14
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:11:00 -
[23] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Iagus Damaclese wrote:[ In the case of T1 vessels, Armor tank reigns king, why? well it probably has something to do with the fact that all vessels, ALL VESSELS, get better armor resists than they do shield resists to begin with. Dont believe me? go look for yourself. About the only vessels where Shield tanking is truely worth using in either PVP or PVE is in the case of the Tengu, and of course caldari ships as well, and even still i would not use a Tengu in PVP. Yeah sure you got all those nice shields and that nice shield booster but I just disrupted your tracking computer, started draining your cap, webbed you, warp disrupted you and I am moving at 300kms or more with a light armor tank and you wanna know why? because as it stand right now, any ship running a shield tank of any type is more than likely just barely cap stable in one way or another which even a small energy destabilizer can throw off and make worse than it is.
As I said before if anything shield tanking needs a bit of a buff, especially to the AI field II's resist boosts. Let us also not forget that shields have a more powerful omni resist buffing module so the fact they have lower base resists is not that relevant. Wut? SHield tanking is terrible for pvp? Look out for all those 200 man drake fleets and maelstroms, the fact that the most popular fits on gallente ships battlecruiser and below are shield, the fact that shield passively regenerate health and control the battlefield, also your small neut is not going to do jack **** to stop my MASSIVE asb buffer. Try using your small neut as a trump card against my shield thorax. Try the fact that the drake and shield hurricane are the two most popular battlecruisers out their, the merlin will rock the **** out of any punisher. In all the time ive been playing I don't think ive met anyone who says armor is straight up better for pvp (except on capital ships).
One may speak softly, or scream as loud as the wind can howl, but a wall is still a wall and will not agree with you on any matter. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:15:00 -
[24] - Quote
Iagus Damaclese wrote:
One may speak softly, or scream as loud as the wind can howl, but a wall is still a wall and will not agree with you on any matter.
So your not even going to attempt to put up counterpoints? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Iagus Damaclese
Zero-G Dogs
14
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:18:00 -
[25] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Iagus Damaclese wrote:
One may speak softly, or scream as loud as the wind can howl, but a wall is still a wall and will not agree with you on any matter.
So your not even going to attempt to put up counterpoints?
You can show a man the world over, but if he is blind he will not see. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:22:00 -
[26] - Quote
Iagus Damaclese wrote:
You can show a man the world over, but if he is blind he will not see.
You put up points I put up points to counter those, so instead of pursueing an argument you will just put out that I am to ignorant to ever understand your correct point of view, Please stop posting if that is all you have to contribute.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Iagus Damaclese
Zero-G Dogs
14
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:26:00 -
[27] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Iagus Damaclese wrote:
You can show a man the world over, but if he is blind he will not see.
You put up points I put up points to counter those, so instead of pursueing an argument you will just put out that I am to ignorant to ever understand your correct point of view, Please stop posting if that is all you have to contribute.
Well at least you have admitted to your ignorance. You do make good points about the shield tanking ships however it is very specific vessels that are capable of these shield tanking fits, armor tanking efficiency is pretty universal though until of course you get to T2 vessels in which case shield tanking begins to be more efficient thank armor tanking, however I have seen people drop shield tanking in favor of armor and still be just as successful. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
1035
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:37:00 -
[28] - Quote
Iagus Damaclese wrote:Commander Ted wrote:Iagus Damaclese wrote:There is absolutely nothing wrong with shield tanking as it is and no reason to nerf it, especially since armor tanking is going to be getting buffed. Shields are fine where they are, I personally will not take a shield tanked vessel into a PVP environment but i use shields for PVE all the time, and I would not take an armor tanked vessel into a PVE environment as it is best used for PVP. A player who does not pursue both should do so, as it only makes your character more versatile and expands your options for fitting ships. It also make your life a whole lot easier. Why? You provide no specifics for why one is better you just say that one is. I will argue that shield is the supierior tanking type in many more cases than armor is. Prove me wrong. In the case of T1 vessels, Armor tank reigns king, why? well it probably has something to do with the fact that all vessels, ALL VESSELS, get better armor resists than they do shield resists to begin with. Dont believe me? go look for yourself. About the only vessels where Shield tanking is truely worth using in either PVP or PVE is in the case of the Tengu, and of course caldari ships as well, and even still i would not use a Tengu in PVP. Yeah sure you got all those nice shields and that nice shield booster but I just disrupted your tracking computer, started draining your cap, webbed you, warp disrupted you and I am moving at 300kms or more with a light armor tank and you wanna know why? because as it stand right now, any ship running a shield tank of any type is more than likely just barely cap stable in one way or another which even a small energy destabilizer can throw off and make worse than it is. As I said before if anything shield tanking needs a bit of a buff, especially to the AI field II's resist boosts.
Two words for you:
Buffer Tank. |
Commander Ted
Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance
461
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:45:00 -
[29] - Quote
Iagus Damaclese wrote:
Well at least you have admitted to your ignorance. You do make good points about the shield tanking ships however it is very specific vessels that are capable of these shield tanking fits, armor tanking efficiency is pretty universal though until of course you get to T2 vessels in which case shield tanking begins to be more efficient thank armor tanking, however I have seen people drop shield tanking in favor of armor and still be just as successful.
Being condescending is not appreciated in a public discussion area for mature arguments. Stop it.
What your saying is utterly false. http://eve.battleclinic.com/item_database.php?id=i627&tab=recommended_loadouts#kbLoadouts Taking one of the more popular t1 cruisers as an example you will see that most of the fits seen in combat are shield thoraxes.
You will see the same thing with the vexor http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i626-Vexor-details.html#kbLoadouts A surprisingly large number are either shield fitted or tankless rather than fitting armor.
Shield arbitrators are effective to, http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i628-Arbitrator-details.html#kbLoadouts
On a ship that lacks t2 resists, the cynabal all the fits are shield despite having a dizzying array of both low and mid slots. http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i17720-Cynabal-details.html#kbLoadouts
Almost nobody in their right mind flies a armor brutix, small sample size but still http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i16229-Brutix-details.html#kbLoadouts
Nobody fits armor on a talos, period http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i4308-Talos-details.html#kbLoadouts
The mighty rupture even prefers shields: http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i629-Rupture-details.html#kbLoadouts
Don't forget shield hurricanes and shield harbingers are enormously popular.
Point being on a ship where both setups are possible, most usually prefer shields over armor, why? Because its fast, does facemelting dps, and provides adequate buffer even when the fit doesn't need it.
The drake is a brick that when fitted with hams hurls enourmous dps. The brutix on the other hand gains little from its extra mid and lacks tactical options in an armor setup. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec. |
Iagus Damaclese
Zero-G Dogs
14
|
Posted - 2013.02.03 23:54:00 -
[30] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Iagus Damaclese wrote:
Well at least you have admitted to your ignorance. You do make good points about the shield tanking ships however it is very specific vessels that are capable of these shield tanking fits, armor tanking efficiency is pretty universal though until of course you get to T2 vessels in which case shield tanking begins to be more efficient thank armor tanking, however I have seen people drop shield tanking in favor of armor and still be just as successful.
Being condescending is not appreciated in a public discussion area for mature arguments. Stop it. What your saying is utterly false. http://eve.battleclinic.com/item_database.php?id=i627&tab=recommended_loadouts#kbLoadoutsTaking one of the more popular t1 cruisers as an example you will see that most of the fits seen in combat are shield thoraxes. You will see the same thing with the vexor http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i626-Vexor-details.html#kbLoadoutsA surprisingly large number are either shield fitted or tankless rather than fitting armor. Shield arbitrators are effective to, http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i628-Arbitrator-details.html#kbLoadoutsOn a ship that lacks t2 resists, the cynabal all the fits are shield despite having a dizzying array of both low and mid slots. http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i17720-Cynabal-details.html#kbLoadoutsAlmost nobody in their right mind flies a armor brutix, small sample size but still http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i16229-Brutix-details.html#kbLoadoutsNobody fits armor on a talos, period http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i4308-Talos-details.html#kbLoadoutsThe mighty rupture even prefers shields: http://eve.battleclinic.com/item/i629-Rupture-details.html#kbLoadoutsDon't forget shield hurricanes and shield harbingers are enormously popular. Point being on a ship where both setups are possible, most usually prefer shields over armor, why? Because its fast, does facemelting dps, and provides adequate buffer even when the fit doesn't need it. The drake is a brick that when fitted with hams hurls enourmous dps. The brutix on the other hand gains little from its extra mid and lacks tactical options in an armor setup.
The above links mean nothing, I have seen fleets off both types of tanks win fights and there for I continue to stick with my original stance in that there is nothing wrong with shield tanking.
Oh by the way, I was not being condescending, I was simply agreeing with you being condescending towards yourself. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |