| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KIAEddZ
   |
Posted - 2005.07.19 11:53:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Kaeten
Originally by: KIAEddZ
The simple fact is, the Shield Boost penalty of CPRs is ridiclous.
Total bs. If the penalty was taken away there would be ravens shield tanking all day and we all know shield tanking repairs shields faster than an armor tank. So you want ravens to go around with 5 CPR and a full shield tank? Ok... Thats jsut stupid.
The problem is also the pricing. Cap recharger 2's and cap power relays cost ah hellof alot diffrent form each other.
if you actually spent time reading, you will see I am not advocating the total removal of the penalty,. just its size.
Not being able to fit ANY cprs (megas apocs can all fit 1 or 2 Tech 2 Cap Rechargers with no penalty) makes the tanking of a Raven unbalanced with other tier 2 BS.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=176347
www.kia-corp.co.uk/killboard
CEO of KIA Corp - Been doing it for the Laydeez since 1993, now we i |
Selak Zorander
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 12:48:00 -
[32]
As for the comment of the Raven can repair more hp way faster than any armor tank, the difference is a whole 4 HP a second between a Apoc with 2 large tech 2 reps (which with tech two mods it can run forever even with 5 nos on the apoc) while the Raven (caldari so it is supposed to be a shield tanker) lasts all of 30 seconds to a minute before its cap is dry and it cant tank anymore (thats with PDU 2 in lows and 1 or 2 cap recharge 2 in mids).
Both "top of the line" set-ups had 3 hardeners. The apoc had 2 large repairers, and the raven had one Xlarge booster and 1 Boost amp.
Yes I can see the reason for the CPR nerf being there (shield tanked apoc with 4 invulnerability fields anyone). The problem with it is that you can make a decent armor tank on a raven (one almost as good as the Apoc's (just that the cap dies if it has more than 1 heavy nos on it)) that far outshines the ravens ability to shield tank when it comes to sustainability.
As for the new shield compensation skill, at lvl 5 it reduces cap need on the booster by 10%. Concidering that a raven with 2 heavy nos, 5 PDU 2, and any remaining mid slots devoted to Cap Recharger 2 after the tank is fit only has a max cap recharge of about 60% of the cap needed by its tank, that 10% does not do much of anything at all.
|
Kaeten
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 13:06:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Kaeten on 19/07/2005 13:08:36
Originally by: KIAEddZ
Originally by: Kaeten
Originally by: KIAEddZ
The simple fact is, the Shield Boost penalty of CPRs is ridiclous.
Total bs. If the penalty was taken away there would be ravens shield tanking all day and we all know shield tanking repairs shields faster than an armor tank. So you want ravens to go around with 5 CPR and a full shield tank? Ok... Thats jsut stupid.
The problem is also the pricing. Cap recharger 2's and cap power relays cost ah hellof alot diffrent form each other.
if you actually spent time reading, you will see I am not advocating the total removal of the penalty,. just its size.
Not being able to fit ANY cprs (megas apocs can all fit 1 or 2 Tech 2 Cap Rechargers with no penalty) makes the tanking of a Raven unbalanced with other tier 2 BS.
Power diagnostics are good enough, they jsut boost the shields. Also ravens pilots can fit a tank and damage mods ( I know some that use that kinda setup), is that fair? Also can megas hit up to 250km with rails and can hit up to what was it 80km with short range guns? If you take one thing into accoutn you have to take everything into account.
|
Andrew Redburn
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 14:46:00 -
[34]
Originally by: P1rate Dave
Originally by: KIAEddZ
So a Apoc/Mega with 3 Hardeners and 2 reps, vs a Raven with 3 Hardeners and XL booster. (Range setup is even worse as Cruise vs Tachs or 425s is a little silly, Torps vs Balsters and Megabeams is closer, but still no cigar) There is only 1 winner.
Ho hum, easy win for mega or apoc.
thats just completely wrong... mega/apoc setup for range combat with the same number of slots dedicated to armor tanking as the raven will not win if you fit your ship correctly, i fought a mega at 70km, in his optimal with 425s broke his tank and put him into structure using cruise missiles before he got my cap below 40% or my shields below 50% - mega pilot has excellent gunnery skills too, much better than my missile skills
I play Raven since a long long time and got all relevant skills maxed. From my experience the only tank that is nearly infinite usable is a Large Tech II with using 4 PDUIIs and one heavy nos.
Everything else will run out of cap quickly (as i said, i got all relevant cap / shield / fitting skills maxed).
Since this patch, an average to well tanked armor tanker will tank more dps than a Raven and still do way more damage at his optimal range. There are special situations were a Raven will always win (close combat against 425/1400) but dmg output of turrets is way more and also tanking possibilities are way more. The only advantage of Ravens is being able to do both average to good, while on all ships but Apocs u need to choose if you want to do best dmg or best tanking, a mix between is usually not liked much (but possible!).
Armor tanking is better than shield in overall, just not for Ravens (slot layout, powergrid, cap)
|
Andrew Redburn
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 14:49:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Kaeten
Power diagnostics are good enough, they jsut boost the shields. Also ravens pilots can fit a tank and damage mods ( I know some that use that kinda setup), is that fair? Also can megas hit up to 250km with rails and can hit up to what was it 80km with short range guns? If you take one thing into accoutn you have to take everything into account.
Shield tanking means med slots, med slots used means not targeting range for doing anything you mentioned with a Raven. U need a full set of PDU IIs to sustain an average tank on Ravens (or Heavy Nos which will then require PDUs for powergrid) and have no chance of improving the damage.
On turret ships you can use meds to boost locking range, range and tracking, cap recharge plus use low slots for tanking AND Cap recharge. In fact you can hit at 200km and have a decent tank at the same time, while Shield Users cannot. Prepatch we had the constant and good damage, now we have none.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 14:55:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Dionysus Davinci on 19/07/2005 14:59:35
Originally by: Andrew Redburn
In fact you can hit at 200km and have a decent tank at the same time,
U == 
You can get 120kms maybe and have a decent tank. But you load rubber bullets and requires lots of SP investment and a Cruise missle raven is going to out range, out damage and out tank you still.
|
El Principe
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 15:26:00 -
[37]
Eddz, i most certainly repsect your point.
TII armor repping is way better/more cap efficent/ better slot layout than TII shield repping.
its simple math. armor tanking is just plain better. i do like the new Shield Compensation skill its nice, but just not enough.
As for the comparison of a Neut Mega with an armor tank VS a full tank raven, is like comparing apples and oranges. no self respecting raven pilot is gonna bring a full load of PDU's into combat. its just plain stupid with the direction Pvp has gone in eve.
I garuantee your tank wont hold agaisnt a PvP raven.. or at least mine. 6 torps with an 8 sec rof. good luck tanking that... I pop apoc's before they even know what hit them.
This still doesnt change the fact that raven is still a pretty missplaced ship in EVE combat.
As for the Armor tanked Raven. i love it. it is teh pwnzor. too bad there's no such thing as Med slot dmg mods for missles. or it would be the only setup i'd ever use.
and as for the moron who says that raven is a "long range ship", learn to do simple math. even with Maxed skills and ship bonuses, it takes over 15 secs for a cruise missle to hit something at 100km. and even then the damage is crap, and if the ship was moving towards you (turrets get o trav velocity, but have a speed to reduce missle dmg) you wont be doing crap for dmg.. how many volleys would a turret ship have gotten off by the time the missles even start to hit? 4, 5? do you realize most combats in eve are almost over after that long?
in anyu case. this is a shield vs armor tanking thread. and Eddz has proven his point. TII Armor tanking beats shield tanking any day of the week. period.
|
Elfaen Ethenwe
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 15:43:00 -
[38]
im a raven pilot and i fly my tank setup of
2 seige 4 cruise 2 hvy nos
c5 xl shield booster, 3 hardners, shield boost amp, tech large shield extendor.
5 pdu2
i play with the high slots and put 2 tech 2 extendors in the moids instead of the boost amp
12k to 15k shields in gang is reasonable.
<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->
Together we Gank, Divided we Pop.
<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<-> |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 15:50:00 -
[39]
Anyone else finds it odd that in discussion about shield vs armour tanking the main argument revolves around not-tanked Raven at long distance with the lows full of BCU?
Yes, this clearly show shield and armour tanking is balanced with each other when the general advice regarding shield tanking is "just don't because ganking from long range works better"... :s
|
El Principe
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 16:54:00 -
[40]
Originally by: j0sephine
Anyone else finds it odd that in discussion about shield vs armour tanking the main argument revolves around not-tanked Raven at long distance with the lows full of BCU?
Yes, this clearly show shield and armour tanking is balanced with each other when the general advice regarding shield tanking is "just don't because ganking from long range works better"... :s
where did you pull that out of? Eddz's whole argument centered around the use of a 5 PDU II raven setup. i remotly mentioned a gank style raven to prove the point that his combat functionality comparison was moot, since it is unlikely you wouls see such a raven piloted by a half decent pvp'er.
but the heart of the argument still revoloves around the basic retence that armor tanking is fundamentally better than shield tanking.
the current preception of shield tanking is slightly warped. since a Raven is considered the premier ship for it. the only problem. Shield tanking is good on a raven, not because of shield tanking being so good. it works becuase a raven has virtually ALL the features needed to make it work.with most other ships, shield tanking's depravities REALLY start to show.
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 17:59:00 -
[41]
ôbut the heart of the argument still revoloves around the basic retence that armor tanking is fundamentally better than shield tanking.ö
ThatÆs true but the passive shield recharge more then makes up for less resistance. Decent skills with a bunch of PDUÆs is still a reasonable amount of passive regen to add on top of the active shield booster.
That and amour repairers are not more cap effecting then all forms of shield tanking.
_________________________________________________
Nominate famous people in Eve who had an impact on you. |
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 18:51:00 -
[42]
Shield tanking sux on anything that isnt a Raven/Eagle/Gisti ship.
|
Zaintiraris
|
Posted - 2005.07.19 18:54:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Selim
Shield tanking sux on anything that isnt a Raven/Eagle/Gisti ship.
Yeah that sounds about right.
However... there are some ships that you don't really need to tank. I need to test my cerberus going 700m/s with an afterburner 140km from someone. I don't know if they'd be able to hit me or catch me. I can outrun most of my friends' assault frigates and shoot down their interceptors. 
---
Originally by: CCP Hammer
This game was so much better back before people knew math.
|
Hiram
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 07:41:00 -
[44]
Originally by: CptEagle
But you're forgetting the Raven can always have a decent tank on while other armor tanked ships cannot because they need dmg mods, Raven can do both pretty decent. Offcourse since patch the Raven can now tank less good...
That would almost be funny! Damage mods since the patch seem only to affect the RoF and not damage so in effect they are useless, plus the crippling requirements on launchers now means you cant fit a top row of siege and have a ballistic mod in place.
If fact it means you cant have a top row of siege and decent shield tank set up at all, you do not have the grid/ cpu to be able to fit a large shield booster and shield extender!!
That dont seemed very ballanced to me?
|
Elfaen Ethenwe
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 08:52:00 -
[45]
the ferox also tanks well
4 pdu2's 1 L Shield Boost + 3 Hardners + Large extendor II
6500 shields with 60%+ res isnt to be sneezed at
<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->
Together we Gank, Divided we Pop.
<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<->-<-> |
Shadowsword
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 09:13:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 20/07/2005 09:18:05
Originally by: KIAEddZ
Okies.
I am a lvl 5 Cal Pilot, and a lvl 5 Gallente Pilot.
The Shield tanking vs Armour tanking argument, I know has been totally "done" before.
But I now fly an Armour tanked Raven, because you have VERY little choice if you want to tank a Raven but to do so.
The simple fact is, the Shield Boost penalty of CPRs is ridiclous.
Without that penalty, CPRs become again THE no-brainer module. Do you remember shield tanked apocs with 8 CPR in lows? I don't want to see again battleships with a capacitor recharging in 115 secondes.
Originally by: KIAEddZ
On my Mega, I can run constant a FULL tank (1 x Large Tech 2 1 x Med tech 2 & 3 Hardeners) and still have room for MWD and Warp Scramble.
Running 3 hardeners on a Raven, is impossible, as you will be capless VERY quickly.
How weird,I tested it and my conclusion is the contrary. Maybe it was because I used 2 large repairers II on my mega. your test is irrelevant, because the level of HP repaired per second in both cases is simply not in the same league.
Originally by: KIAEddZ
Large Armour Rep 2s do 800 repair for 400 energy, WAY more than the best named Tech 1 Reps.
The XL Shield Booster 2 does EXACTLY the same repair as the best named tech 1, for a Meagre cap saving.
That, is only because named XL shield boosters are overpowered.
A large Acco repairer repair 20% more than a normal armor repairer.
Large armor repairer II is 33% better than large armor repairer I.
A XL C5-L not only boost 20% more, but also cycle 20% faster, which mean that it is 44% more efficient than a vanilla XL SB.
XL SB II is 50% better than the T1 version
Originally by: KIAEddZ
The Raven USED to be able to counter its tanks inneffectiveness using its Offensive Power, but the nerf has seen to that.
That wasn't a nerf, it was a fix. I bet you never tried to tackle a pre-patch Raven ,did you?
Raven users whined that their ship wasn't good in fleet battles, and that the target had time to warp out before the torps hit him. Missiles are now much faster, so be happy.
Originally by: KIAEddZ
I worry for the Ravens place in PvP warfare, and that in itself is a great shame.
Before the patch a great many ships were sitting ducks when confronted to a Raven. Assault frigs, interceptors, frigs, cruisers, even a lot of HAC. Even with 75% resistance to damage, taking 6 torps in the face, each of them doing 600+ base damage, was way more than what a med armor repairer II can absorb.
Originally by: KIAEddZ
I would like to see the Shield Boost penalty of CPRs dropped a little, so they become a viable option once again, and RAven pilots can use a sustainable Tank in combat.
ps. The Shield Compensation skill is way underpowered aswell if that was supposed to be the answer to this problem, 2%???? Pointless.
You, Sir, are utterly clueless. Here's one:
Armor repairer II: 2 HP repaired per cap.
XL SB II+AMP: 1.95 HP boosted per cap.
With shield compensation even trained simply to lv2, shield tanking become MORE cap efficient than armor tanking.
PS: sorry for the flaming, but that was one whine too much.
|
FraXy
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 09:15:00 -
[47]
just like to point out smth:
XL Shield Booster II uses 400 cap every 5 sec for a 600 boost = 120 HP/sec
Large Armor Repper II uses 400 cap every 15 sec (11.25 w/skills) for a 800 boost = 71.11 HP/sec
The shield booster can do TWO cycles every Armor Reppers ONE..
Shield booster is meant to be high cap consuming with high HP/sec, while Armor Repper is meant to be cap-efficient and low HP/Sec.
----------------------------------------
Honor and Serve, 'till u Betray and Die! |
Andrew Redburn
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 10:02:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Andrew Redburn on 20/07/2005 10:06:43
Originally by: Pottsey
That’s true but the passive shield recharge more then makes up for less resistance. Decent skills with a bunch of PDU’s is still a reasonable amount of passive regen to add on top of the active shield booster.
That and amour repairers are not more cap effecting then all forms of shield tanking.
I don't know how you could ever say that because with 4 PDU IIs in lows and maxed shield skills, I get a passive recharge of 7/s in average. That's way not enought to help at all.
The main problem is that to make a shield tank work, you have to sacrifice so much damage, that you cant break a decent armor tank, while the decent armour tank can still break your tank.
Long range and missles is a nono:
1.) you can only lock that far if you fit loads of mods in meds and YES, shield tanking mods are meds as well!!! doh!
2.) If you fit enough mods to lock 120km + your cruise missles at MAX SKILLS will need 11s to hit the target at 120km, but don't do nowhere enough dmg.
If you use torps to do enough dmg it will still take 35s to hit the ship (1st volley, btw).
Quote:
Before the patch a great many ships were sitting ducks when confronted to a Raven. Assault frigs, interceptors, frigs, cruisers, even a lot of HAC. Even with 75% resistance to damage, taking 6 torps in the face, each of them doing 600+ base damage, was way more than what a med armor repairer II can absorb.
with Torps lv5 and one dmg mod in lows, I did 574dmg to structure. 600dmg plus means you had no tanking (since cap is not available) and it means you had no pg to fit mods in your 7/8 slot. So that was a setup I would have NEVER recommended for anything but GANKING.
|
Sun Ra
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 10:09:00 -
[49]
Well the thing with shield tank is u can soak up a much larger ammount of dmg than armour tank but for a shorter time. So you stack your lows with as many damage mods and have to have a cap inject in the the mids and 2 vamps
Shield tanking means you can gank AND tank at the same time, tho its a very short time
We're coming for you |
Andrew Redburn
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 10:13:00 -
[50]
Originally by: FraXy
just like to point out smth:
XL Shield Booster II uses 400 cap every 5 sec for a 600 boost = 120 HP/sec
Large Armor Repper II uses 400 cap every 15 sec (11.25 w/skills) for a 800 boost = 71.11 HP/sec
The shield booster can do TWO cycles every Armor Reppers ONE..
Shield booster is meant to be high cap consuming with high HP/sec, while Armor Repper is meant to be cap-efficient and low HP/Sec.
See it this way:
2 large tech II need 800 cap each 11.25s => 71,1cap/s.
1 xlarge II needs already 80 cap/s.
It its true that you need cap for guns, but you got loads of med and lows for cap recharge, while shield tank cant use good lows (CPR) and has no slots for med cap recharge as well.
1 large II and one med II repair more than 1 XL II but use way less cap as well.
|
Andrew Redburn
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 10:16:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Sun Ra
Edited by: Sun Ra on 20/07/2005 10:12:33
Well the thing with shield tank is u can soak up a much larger ammount of dmg than armour tank but for a shorter time. So you stack your lows with as many damage mods and have to have a cap inject in the the mids and 2 vamps
Shield tanking means you can gank AND tank at the same time, tho its a very short time
ALSO
XL sb is too heavy on cpu 
basicly right, but how long can u run your tank? 1Min? A big part of that time is already needed for torps to reach their target. Not to mention how long you will need postpatch to kill a nontanked moving BS.
|
Nomispanco
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 10:35:00 -
[52]
OMG are u whiners all noobs? 
Ever thought about a Cap Booster?
A well tanked Tempest 6x800mmT2 and a well tanked Raven (6xSiege) are almost equal in dmg and tanking. livetime > 4min
And yes the Raven does still decent dmg on a BS!
so long 
|
Sun Ra
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 10:40:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Andrew Redburn
Originally by: Sun Ra
Edited by: Sun Ra on 20/07/2005 10:12:33
Well the thing with shield tank is u can soak up a much larger ammount of dmg than armour tank but for a shorter time. So you stack your lows with as many damage mods and have to have a cap inject in the the mids and 2 vamps
Shield tanking means you can gank AND tank at the same time, tho its a very short time
ALSO
XL sb is too heavy on cpu
basicly right, but how long can u run your tank? 1Min? A big part of that time is already needed for torps to reach their target. Not to mention how long you will need postpatch to kill a nontanked moving BS.
Well i dont fly a raven anymore, i shield tank my ac tempest sometimes, which can outdamage a 2xlarge rep ship tank.
But yes i have a simlair prob that i need to get into AC range also.
We're coming for you |
Antic
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 10:58:00 -
[54]
CPR has a penality to boosting. So even suggesting that those are a good alternative for shield tanking for low slots is quite uninformed.
Also missile ships like the cerebus and the Raven has limited cargospace for ammo as it is (i laugh at the people who keeps saying that missiles strenght is its ability to change damage types, well missile ammo takes 3 times the cargospace turret ammo does so you cant bring all damagetypes or even enough ammo of one damagetype alone) And now people claim that ravens and cerbs should stuff their hold with cap boost charges too to be able to tank? :P You guys using cargo expanders or something? 
|
Fred0
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 12:54:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Fred0 on 20/07/2005 12:55:58
Originally by: Selim
Shield tanking sux on anything that isnt a Raven/Eagle/Gisti ship.
That's not true. shield tanking owns for anything that requires max damage output. Especially if it has more spare cpu than pg.
|
DrunkenOne
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 13:45:00 -
[56]
Edited by: DrunkenOne on 20/07/2005 13:46:20
Originally by: Selim
Shield tanking sux on anything that isnt a Raven/Eagle/Gisti ship.
Shield tanked gankvaga? Shield tanked ACGankPest? Shield tanked GankDom?
Shield tanking is utterly superior in PVP to armor tanking, and disagreeing means you are wrong. The problem is that far less ships can shield tank than armor tank. But those that can, own. If I can fit a tank and lows full of damage mods, while my opponent simply fits lows full of damage mods, who wins?
Armor tanking is better for NPCing because of the lower cap use. But who cares about NPCing imbalances.
|
Zarquon Beeblebrox
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 14:30:00 -
[57]
100% agreed to author.
A shiel tanked raven in any way will go boom to a ganka-temp-gedon-thron before the raven have the ship locked and first missile hit.
--
Lady Beeblebrox
Teddybears: Forum - movies |
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 14:36:00 -
[58]
Originally by: DrunkenOne
Edited by: DrunkenOne on 20/07/2005 13:46:20
Originally by: Selim
Shield tanking sux on anything that isnt a Raven/Eagle/Gisti ship.
Shield tanked gankvaga? Shield tanked ACGankPest? Shield tanked GankDom?
Shield tanking is utterly superior in PVP to armor tanking, and disagreeing means you are wrong. The problem is that far less ships can shield tank than armor tank. But those that can, own. If I can fit a tank and lows full of damage mods, while my opponent simply fits lows full of damage mods, who wins?
Armor tanking is better for NPCing because of the lower cap use. But who cares about NPCing imbalances.
So you can shield tank and fit damage mods. So what? It means less meds for web/warp scrambler, both of which are more important than damage mods in almost anything besides lame gank fleets. Armor tanking doesnt just use less cap, it also repairs more per second because of that repair systems skill. If shield tanking actually repaired more per second than armor but burned more cap (like now) everything would be fine.
|
DrunkenOne
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 14:44:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Selim
So you can shield tank and fit damage mods. So what? It means less meds for web/warp scrambler, both of which are more important than damage mods in almost anything besides lame gank fleets. Armor tanking doesnt just use less cap, it also repairs more per second because of that repair systems skill. If shield tanking actually repaired more per second than armor but burned more cap (like now) everything would be fine.
Have you seen a shield tanked gankdom in action?
|
Sun Ra
|
Posted - 2005.07.20 14:49:00 -
[60]
btw anyone have that new shield skill? is it worth training?
We're coming for you |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |