EVE Search - Cyclone/Sleipnir/Claymore, Why shield tanks..

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Cyclone/Sleipnir/Claymore, Why shield tanks..

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Blind Man	Posted - 2006.04.26 22:38:00 - [1] Edited by: Blind Man on 26/04/2006 22:39:27 [rant] I've come to a point where I am giving up on shield tanking in general. Im flying a Sleipnir that only had 5 mids to start with. I NEED to fit a scrambler at least.. Then I cant fit a web or a cap injector without hurting my tank. I dont have an afterburner or MWD to get into AC range, and since I cant fit 720's properly (entire different subject) Im always 5km+ from people, and most of the time farther since I don't have a web either. Now I could accept the lack of abilities to tackle if it had an uber tank, but it dosn't have that either. Now 5 lows on a shield tanking ship is unessecary tbh.. I can fit 3 damage mods and a damage control, and i only put a PDU on because there is nothing else I can fit..I might need the pdu a bit more for fitting 425's but since there is no point in fitting them either (another subject) I dont... I feel like giving up and training for an Astarte [/rant] Passari will never be safe again
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.04.26 22:39:00 - [2] its shield bonous should apply to armor too imo -------------------Sig----------------------- IPO idea: give it a read, feedback wanted, thanks
OrangeAfroMan	Posted - 2006.04.26 22:48:00 - [3] Best Cyclone I saw used artillery, Jammers and an armor tank :o Originally by: Slink Grinsdikild CAPS LOCK IS THE CRUISE CONTROL FOR AWESOME
Grimpak	Posted - 2006.04.26 22:50:00 - [4] Originally by: OrangeAfroMan Best Cyclone I saw used artillery, Jammers and an armor tank :o what about a shield tanked AC cyclone with close range support? ---------------- Originally by: Abdalion Shoot him ingame if you don't like this person. If you do like him, go mine veldspar with him.
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2006.04.26 22:52:00 - [5] Ive never had a problem with shield tanking (well more buffering) my vagabond, and thats only got 4 mids. If i had a sleipnir id fit an invul and a shield booster, surely thats gotta be a good enough tank considering the 7 guns and 5 lows for pdus and gyros Then again i dont fly one yet, what do you care Blind Man not killing enough poor peeps in that beast you rove low sec with?
Blind Man	Posted - 2006.04.26 23:03:00 - [6] Well the main thing is 2x invuln + booster + amp isnt enough when you are sentry tanking and people fire back without the scram its okay but then people warp off and I get yelled at for being useless. Passari will never be safe again
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2006.04.26 23:14:00 - [7] (You knew this was coming... did'nt you) Originally by: Blind Man Well the main thing is 2x invuln + booster + amp isnt enough when you are sentry tanking and people fire back without the scram its okay but then people warp off and I get yelled at for being useless. Then perhaps its not the ship of choice for gate hustlers like yourself, im sure for War pvp and belt piracy its the bomb still. Just get back in your BS, spend your extra dough on that instead Oh and GET BACK TO WORK, if youve got time to post on the forums you could be out letting ppl get away from you in your shiney Sleipnir
j0sephine	Posted - 2006.04.27 03:57:00 - [8] Edited by: j0sephine on 27/04/2006 03:57:46 "Ive never had a problem with shield tanking (well more buffering) my vagabond, and thats only got 4 mids." It could have a lot to do with Vagabond typically operating at speeds and distances which let it avoid quite a bit of damage coming its way, combined with far smaller signature radius and difference in shield resistances which are close to having extra invulnerability field (or pair of passive hardeners, depending how one would count) All together it makes Vagabond an exception rather than 'typical' example of shield tanking...
Foulis	Posted - 2006.04.27 04:15:00 - [9] Originally by: j0sephine Edited by: j0sephine on 27/04/2006 03:57:46 "Ive never had a problem with shield tanking (well more buffering) my vagabond, and thats only got 4 mids." It could have a lot to do with Vagabond typically operating at speeds and distances which let it avoid quite a bit of damage coming its way, combined with far smaller signature radius and difference in shield resistances which are close to having extra invulnerability field (or pair of passive hardeners, depending how one would count) All together it makes Vagabond an exception rather than 'typical' example of shield tanking... Sleip still has a fairly good set of resists to start with (62.5/60/40/50) so it shouldn't be too difficult to throw on say... 2 invulns and a booster, ab and scramb (or web and scramb) and do ok. Especially with 3x Gyro and 2x PDU. ---- Cake > Pie - Imaran Originally by: CCP Hammer Boobies
Wizie	Posted - 2006.04.27 04:20:00 - [10] Originally by: Foulis Originally by: j0sephine Edited by: j0sephine on 27/04/2006 03:57:46 "Ive never had a problem with shield tanking (well more buffering) my vagabond, and thats only got 4 mids." It could have a lot to do with Vagabond typically operating at speeds and distances which let it avoid quite a bit of damage coming its way, combined with far smaller signature radius and difference in shield resistances which are close to having extra invulnerability field (or pair of passive hardeners, depending how one would count) All together it makes Vagabond an exception rather than 'typical' example of shield tanking... Sleip still has a fairly good set of resists to start with (62.5/60/40/50) so it shouldn't be too difficult to throw on say... 2 invulns and a booster, ab and scramb (or web and scramb) and do ok. Especially with 3x Gyro and 2x PDU. Autocannons need a web (aside from on a Vaga)... But slow ships like a slepneir also need an mwd/ab to get into range with autocannons. Its not an OR relation.. its an AND.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2006.04.27 04:20:00 - [11] These Minmatar ships get 37.5% built in shield boosting, and like, 60-70% base EM resist on their shields, and they still complain about shield tanking? /disgruntled caldari ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD
Wizie	Posted - 2006.04.27 04:22:00 - [12] Originally by: Jim Raynor These Minmatar ships get 37.5% built in shield boosting, and like, 60-70% base EM resist on their shields, and they still complain about shield tanking? /disgruntled caldari Practically every ship I run into aside form Amarr does kinetic dmg.
Uglious	Posted - 2006.04.27 04:25:00 - [13] I think I got one of the first Sleipnir's on the market when they hit, and still haven't lost it (thank god). With a good large shield booster, and a shield boost amp, you can get some hefty tankage out of the thing. I would go with a second SBA over an invuln field because it will magnify the ships already good bonus of 37.5%, despite the minimal stacking penalty vs. an invuln field, while costing no extra cap. Throw in two or three PDU II's depending on what else you have fitted, and you have a nice ganker that can tank a long time. I have yet to meet a BS 1-1 I can't tank, and in pve belts, I can kill frigs and cruisers MUCH faster than any BS, while keeping up on even a moderate BS for BS spawns (pve). Trying to fit on a good armor tank just isn't worth it considering the bonuses it gets.
Phelan Lore	Posted - 2006.04.27 04:32:00 - [14] Yeah I really hope that the tier 2 Matari BC uses an armor tank. ________________ ~Phelan Lore Your isk has become my isk, by way of my actions...
Ephemeron	Posted - 2006.04.27 05:18:00 - [15] Ships dedicated to shield tanking should never have less than 6 med slots. It's really not the same as 6 low slots for armor tank, since EW is so critical, at least 2 med slots need to be for EW (scrambler, web) Armor tankers get unfair advantage in a way that they can both tank and use EW
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2006.04.27 05:32:00 - [16] Originally by: Ephemeron Ships dedicated to shield tanking should never have less than 6 med slots. It's really not the same as 6 low slots for armor tank, since EW is so critical, at least 2 med slots need to be for EW (scrambler, web) Armor tankers get unfair advantage in a way that they can both tank and use EW yes its kinda annoying to shield tank and contribute with scramblers and webs, not only do shield tankers need more slots for good resists/boosting but they generally have less slots to work with too ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD
Ginaz	Posted - 2006.04.27 05:40:00 - [17] Amor tankers might have EW but amor tanks aren't really good for pvp. in PvP, you have to deal with alot of burst dmg and you need atleast 2 large repper and good resists to last some time. Shield tanks just need the right booster, 2 invuls (compared to THREE (3) Amor hardener) and put an amplifier instead of the 3rd hardening slot. With that shield tank, they have way more PG left, can mostly tank more dmg/sec and can fit dmg mods without ruining their tank Everything has pros and cons and i hardly see shield tank left behind for pvp. Not on the Sleipnir/claymore and not on any shield-tankable ship. Even an Ishtar can fit a better shieldtank then amortank. (but that's more for npcing) - Veto. ftw!
Toksin	Posted - 2006.04.27 05:50:00 - [18] Originally by: Blind Man Edited by: Blind Man on 26/04/2006 22:39:27 [rant] I've come to a point where I am giving up on shield tanking in general. Im flying a Sleipnir that only had 5 mids to start with. I NEED to fit a scrambler at least.. Then I cant fit a web or a cap injector without hurting my tank. I dont have an afterburner or MWD to get into AC range, and since I cant fit 720's properly (entire different subject) Im always 5km+ from people, and most of the time farther since I don't have a web either. Now I could accept the lack of abilities to tackle if it had an uber tank, but it dosn't have that either. Now 5 lows on a shield tanking ship is unessecary tbh.. I can fit 3 damage mods and a damage control, and i only put a PDU on because there is nothing else I can fit..I might need the pdu a bit more for fitting 425's but since there is no point in fitting them either (another subject) I dont... I feel like giving up and training for an Astarte [/rant] It's because your a n00b at flying the Sleip. --------------- My views do not reflect the views of my corp, or my own views.
Waragha	Posted - 2006.04.27 06:02:00 - [19] Problem isnt with the ship, the problem is you're trying to use it as a tackling sentry tanker. It clearly isnt good at this, there are many other ships that are.
Harry Voyager	Posted - 2006.04.27 06:25:00 - [20] Edited by: Harry Voyager on 27/04/2006 06:33:15 The Cyclone, Sleipnir, and Claymore are designed as long range, tanked artillery platforms, and have, basically, the completely wrong bonuses and stats to be any sort of short range or EWar ship. They are extremely inflexible ships in that reguard. If you fill the lows with PDU IIs, all three ships can fit a full rack of 720 IIs and Nos or missiles, with a 1x LSB II, 1xAmp, 2-3x Invul II/1x AB tank very easily. Any deviation from that, and the ship is a nightmare to fit. Welcome to specialization. Please check your inovation at the door. Harry Voyager On a side note, you can get around 25km out of 425 IIs with Barrage. That fall-off bonus is a 10%, not a 5%, and I strongly suspect it's the same with the Astarte and Damnation's range bonuses, as well, the Neutron IIs don't get quite the same compounding out of Null, and only end up at around 17km, and Ion IIs stop at only 14km.
Uglious	Posted - 2006.04.27 06:51:00 - [21] Originally by: Harry Voyager If you fill the lows with PDU IIs, all three ships can fit a full rack of 720 IIs and Nos or missiles, with a 1x LSB II, 1xAmp, 2-3x Invul II/1x AB tank very easily. Any deviation from that, and the ship is a nightmare to fit. BTW, Invul field II's provide a direct 30% resist (which combined with a t2 minne ship's worst shield resist of 40% results in a net 18% bonus when comparing it to shield boosting), so until the stacking bonus causes a SBA to fall below 18%, it is better to add more SBA's then to add invul fields. Add to the fact that SBA's don't add more cap usage per cycle, the ONLY time I would use an invuln field on a T2 Minnie ship is if you needed to fit a fourth or fifth med slot exclusively for SBA's would I consider an invuln field. The only exception to this would be for fleet conflict when you will die so fast you won't have a chance to boost your shields anyway. In that case, a set of invuln fields would help you last longer.
Harry Voyager	Posted - 2006.04.27 07:00:00 - [22] Edited by: Harry Voyager on 27/04/2006 07:02:07 Your math is a bit scrambled. 2x Invul II's provide a 49% reduction in incoming damage, or increasing your soak by a factor of 96%, reguardless of the ship's base resists. A T1 Shield Boost Amp, however, provides a maximum increase of 30% to your soak, and 2x, could provide a maximum of 69% bonus to your soak if there were no stacking penalty. A 69% improvement in soak is far short of a 96% improvement. However, it is true that past 2 Invuls, you are getting minimal benefit from them. As such one must maintain a balance between shield amps and hardeners. Harry Voyager
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2006.04.27 07:08:00 - [23] 2 Invul Field IIs is virtually the same as having 1 of each hardener on your ship, maybe 1.5% less effective, but saves you two slots. ------ FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD
Gariuys	Posted - 2006.04.27 07:27:00 - [24] Cause they're not short range boats, but artillery platforms??? And arti platforms shield tank, with a couple of slots less then Caldari but in the case of tech2 ships that's made up for by 2 free em hardners. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Testy Mctest	Posted - 2006.04.27 08:46:00 - [25] Originally by: Harry Voyager Edited by: Harry Voyager on 27/04/2006 07:02:07 Your math is a bit scrambled. 2x Invul II's provide a 49% reduction in incoming damage, or increasing your soak by a factor of 96%, reguardless of the ship's base resists. A T1 Shield Boost Amp, however, provides a maximum increase of 30% to your soak, and 2x, could provide a maximum of 69% bonus to your soak if there were no stacking penalty. A 69% improvement in soak is far short of a 96% improvement. However, it is true that past 2 Invuls, you are getting minimal benefit from them. As such one must maintain a balance between shield amps and hardeners. Harry Voyager The large difference being, amps dont use cap. Testy's Eve Blog!
LUKEC	Posted - 2006.04.27 09:19:00 - [26] Originally by: Gariuys Cause they're not short range boats, but artillery platforms??? And arti platforms shield tank, with a couple of slots less then Caldari but in the case of tech2 ships that's made up for by 2 free em hardners. Only problem is: artys suck at closer than 15km, so the question is why to tank at all if you can stick few wcs on and EW on mids and be far more useful? Die, die, die.
Nafri	Posted - 2006.04.27 10:28:00 - [27] Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: Gariuys Cause they're not short range boats, but artillery platforms??? And arti platforms shield tank, with a couple of slots less then Caldari but in the case of tech2 ships that's made up for by 2 free em hardners. Only problem is: artys suck at closer than 15km, so the question is why to tank at all if you can stick few wcs on and EW on mids and be far more useful? Signed: Matari tanking for beginners: Howitzers + EW and no tank at all Autos + ew and armor tank Summertime - Campingtime!
Al Haquis	Posted - 2006.04.27 11:24:00 - [28] HELLO IS SOMTHING REALLY WRONG HERE. Finally we get a minnie ship that has cap to tank. AND YOU COMPLAIN. YOU dont deserve a Sleipnir. With love from Al Haquis ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Council Member, Tahiri Warrior Masuat'aa Forums
Twilight Moon	Posted - 2006.04.27 11:43:00 - [29] Originally by: Nafri Matari tanking for beginners: Howitzers + EW and no tank at all Autos + ew and armor tank **** the bonuses then yeah? Theres little point in having a bonus to shield boost ammount and trying to use it if it leaves you dead.
Hehulk	Posted - 2006.04.27 11:50:00 - [30] Originally by: LUKEC Originally by: Gariuys Cause they're not short range boats, but artillery platforms??? And arti platforms shield tank, with a couple of slots less then Caldari but in the case of tech2 ships that's made up for by 2 free em hardners. Only problem is: artys suck at closer than 15km, so the question is why to tank at all if you can stick few wcs on and EW on mids and be far more useful? Hate to argue with a BoB guy, but my 720mm IIs hit fine at everything up to 8KM. That's on a cyclone, Muninn it's next to point blank ---------- Please choose one signature image, as per the forum rules. - Teblin

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.