Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 11:10:00 -
[1]
I am a bit confused with this, please bear with me. I used to fly a Ferox, with shield resists, However I am now in a Drake which I am begining to like very much. I want to passive tank, but the main point that I am confused about is do I use resists or hardners? When I put resist T2's on I can see my % go up dependig on EM Therm etc. they don't use cap, fair enough happy with that, for now. When I look at stats for hardners, they only really kick in when swithced on, thus they use cap. Is that, even though they do drain cap, if I am not using other modules apart from missiles I will have more than enough cap to run them? I have not played for nearly a year due to work, however I have always kept building up my skills for when I can come back, and have been concentrating on engineering and missile skills. A lot has changed since then, making a whole new set of surprises to learn lol
|
Sedai Hara
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 11:37:00 -
[2]
First off.
Its called shiled resist AMPlifiers and shield harderners. The passive ones always boost your resists. but about 10% units lower than the t2 active harderner(with maxed out compensation skills, should be about 45->55). Well in PvP. the passive ones got a clear advantage, as if say a pilgrim or any other mean little NOS boat engage you.. you will ALWAYS have ultimate tank. whatever happense you do tank optimal. But for missions. tats another thing. As nothing drains your cap (and i recon you dont use t2 fury HMs rihgt?) the active t2 ones are better. That is if you can have them running 24/7 (cap should stable at somepoint) Still. i like my passive t2 ones, as i got good comp-skills and i like a full non-cap dependant tank (+ the t2 fury HMs hurt my cap recharge like hell) Its all a matter of taste and what you think is best
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 21:56:00 -
[3]
Thanks for the help, at the moment due to my skills, I have 7 x HM named 1 x Tractor beam (saves loads of time lol) 2 x Large Shield Extenders T2, 2 x Shield Recharger T2, 1 x EM and 1 x Therm resists Amps to take all my resists above 50%. In Lows I have 2 x BCS T2 and 2 x named Shield Power Relays (I still need to kill rats). In about 10 days I'll be able to put on HM T2s This is not as "uber" as some set ups that I have seen, but the technicality of it all baffles me!!
|
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 21:59:00 -
[4]
for example it's really funny to put a crazy passive tank on a drake that can not in any way be broken by a curse/pilgrim =P it'll break their head
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 23:36:00 -
[5]
Hopefully I will get to grips with this shield tanking. I lost my Raven and my alts Skorp in one lvl 4 mission.... ouch. On most lvl 4's I was ok running 2 ships at once, but I haven't been on a while and didn't realise the nerf with warp stabs. I double fly 2 x Drakes on lvl 3 missions, I just fight 1 whilst testing different set ups, the other is back up in case my main gets swarmed. Sometimes I fight both to save time and clock up more missions. Once I figure it out, I will go back to BS's. Not sure whether to go back to Raven and tackler Skorp or 2 x Ravens
|
Neuromandis
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 01:05:00 -
[6]
First of all, let me say your lows are a perfect balance of gank and tank. Apart from that, do a nice test if you don't mind simple 3'rd grade multiplications on a calculator. On the fitting window, divide total shield hp with shield recharge, multiply by 2.5. That's the shields peak recharge rate in hps/sec, which will happen at around 30-35% shield (if your shield ever drops below 30% on a passive setup, run away fast, you can't tank it. If it is playing around any other number, you can go for a cup of coffee and it will never drop) Then swap T2 shield rechargers for T2 large shield extenders and vice versa, to find the point where you get THE BEST peak recharge. If two setups are very close, use the one with the extenders (so apart from tank you also get a couple of thousand hp buffer ti kill someone you can't tank forever. It may mean the difference between getting a kill and losing a pod)
|
PartyVaN
Minmatar The Hand Trade Alliance ORION FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 01:13:00 -
[7]
Edited by: PartyVaN on 15/01/2007 01:09:21 Do not fit midslot Shield recharger's on Drake...
2x T2 Large Extenders, 3x Active Hardeners (1x EM 2x Invul for PvP, or all rat spec for missions), Utility Mod (Painter AB web etc etc)
in the lows 2x SPRs (Shield Power Relay) 2x BCU. You'll do a lot better.
|
Soporo
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 01:44:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Soporo on 15/01/2007 01:42:09 I sometimes use a mix of active and passive tanking when I think I might be hurting for Cap (pvp) or when I am just Cap handling lazy.
Say 2 Active Hardeners and 2 Shield Resist Amplifiers, Inv field, Named Damage controll.
Might be n00bness, but it seems to work ok for me.
|
degini
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 02:07:00 -
[9]
Would large extenders be too much for a battlecruiser like the Brutix? How bout mediums?
|
Dahak2150
Chaos Monkeys
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 03:08:00 -
[10]
Shield tanking a brutix is pretty much always a no-no. Use that armor rep bonus.
If you're on IE, pretend this is transparent while you get a better browser. |
|
SN3263827
The Black Rabbits Fatal Persuasion
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 03:09:00 -
[11]
Originally by: degini Would large extenders be too much for a battlecruiser like the Brutix? How bout mediums?
Do not shield tank a brutix. Ever. _____________________________________________
|
degini
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 04:58:00 -
[12]
Yeah that doesn't help unless you explain why or suggest an alternative.
|
Waenn Ironstaff
Caldari Colossus Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 05:12:00 -
[13]
If you can't figure that out then you shouldn't fly a brutix. First of all it gets a bonus to armor tanking so might as well enjoy that.
Obviously you wouldn't gain anything from shield tanking it if not the huge loss of mids you would need for sramblers and other mid slot toys.
Do not shield tank a brutix.
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 16:18:00 -
[14]
So, I divide total HP by Recharge rate. I multiply this by 2.5 and get the optimu recharge rate. Mess about with diffrent set ups to gat best mumber? Thanks wish I had done this before losing my Raven and Skorp LOL
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 16:42:00 -
[15]
Been doing a it of maths as per Neuromandis' formula (May the fleas of a thousand mangy camels infest the armpits of your enemies). I will keep my lows 2 x BCS and 2 x SPR for balance. with my original mids 1 x EM resit amp, 1 x Therm resist Amp, 2 x T2 Large Shield Ext, 2 x T2 shield Rech I got 77.00. I swapped out 1 x Shield Rech for another Shield Ext (Making 3) and got 81.49. I take it I should try different layouts with these and Shield Hardners to get different figures. Am I after the highest mumber or lowest?
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 16:56:00 -
[16]
Sorry forgot to add a couple of examples
1. hp 13880 div rech rate 448 = 30.803 x 2.5 = 77.008 2. hp 17180 div rech rate 527 = 32.599 x 2.5 = 81.499
Which example is the best for me to use. 1 or 2? Thanks!!!
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 18:34:00 -
[17]
Ok did a quick fire test. I had my main and alt in Drakes. Both with lvl 4HM and lvl 4BC skills. Both using 7 x 7 x arby and xr3200 launchers. circling at 45k, both have good shield skills. Loads 2 x Scourge 2 x Thunderbolt 2 x Widowmaker 1 x Havoc
Karl 2x largeSE T2, 2 x invulT2, 1x EM resist amp T2, 1 x Therm resit amp T2 Low 2 x BCU 2 x SPR
Alt 1 x large SB t2, 1 x large SE t2, 2x EM 1x Kinetic and 1 x Heat resist amp T2s low 2 x BCS t2 2 x PDS T2
switched in invuls and let rip. Both did well, Karl never below 50% shield, alt went quicker, but when switche SB on regained %. Had to switch Alts SB on and off a few times to conserve cap. After about 24 minutes got bored. Each fired over 4 x complete loads of HM. Karl maintained shield at about 45 - 50%, Cap at 60% Alt shield 50% conserving cap ended up with 45%cap
|
Corwain
Gallente Infinite Innovations
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 18:45:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Deathbarrage for example it's really funny to put a crazy passive tank on a drake that can not in any way be broken by a curse/pilgrim =P it'll break their head
This is 100% true. When you don't need cap to tank you can laugh at anything but Blasterthron/AC Tempest type DPS. Seriously.
It does screw with your head! As an Amarr recon pilot I have been trying for weeks to find some way to kill a Drake solo. I've tried all the ships I can fly and even my Blasterthron can't break my corp-mates rigged passive shields. If I could fit T2 blasters...maybe. But it'd still take a long time to break down.
A T2 fitted Brutix or BlasterMyrmidon can't break a well skilled passive Drake tank if you add shield recharge rigs. I imagine the other race BCs will have similar problems.
Oh, and the rigs are only T1. I can only imagine a T2 rigged one.
BTW the mentioned setup is well skilled and has 70-80% resists on everything and 250ish passive shield recharge at max recharge.
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 18:48:00 -
[19]
I'm still not sure which maths result is better, the higher number or lower. look 3 above
|
William Hamilton
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 19:17:00 -
[20]
I beleive you want the higher number, swapping out your resistance amps for other modules could increase this, but at the expense of resistance. I would personally suggest you leave resistance as is and go with the best you can get from the other slots, but I'm also a newb....
|
|
Dahak2150
Chaos Monkeys
|
Posted - 2007.01.15 22:38:00 -
[21]
Originally by: degini Yeah that doesn't help unless you explain why or suggest an alternative.
*earlier*
Originally by: Dahak2150 Use that armor rep bonus.
If you're on IE, pretend this is transparent while you get a better browser. |
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 06:46:00 -
[22]
Hmmm, with one set up doing the maths formula hp div recharge x 2.5 I got a score of 105.7. This was a total passive set up with 3 x large shiehld ext T2's. On another I got as low as 35.6. I should therefore go for the highest? To be honest I've never done the maths thing, just went for best shields, didn't take into consideration the resisits and recharge. Explains why I lost a Raven and a Skorp in one lvl 4 mission. ouch.. That made me sit up and read the forums to get educated by such an abundance of experienced and knowledgeable players, who are good enough to share their ideas. I am now a regular reader of these Forums and I have found a whole new aspect to this game!!! Thanks All!!!
|
WredStorm
Gallente Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 18:02:00 -
[23]
Karl, I'm no expert on passive shield tanking, but I have read a fair bit in the forums, so maybe I can help out a bit.
A common choice is going to be whether you increase your shield's resists or add more shield hp (using shield extenders). Let's use a Ferox as an example and just use the base numbers from that ship (not taking into consideration any skill bonuses at all).
Base shield = 3125 hp Base shield recharge = 1000 seconds
If you did nothing else at all, the shields on this ship would recharge at a rate of (3125 hp / 1000 seconds) = 3.125 hp/sec. The key here is that 3.125 is the average hp regenned per second. In actual fact, the rate that your shields recharge varies... they recharge fastest when your shields are at around 30-35% (e.g.: around 938-1094 in our example). At their peak, your shields recharge at approximately 2.4x (some people round this up to 2.5) the average rate. In other words, in our example, when your shields are down to around 938-1094hp they would be regenerating at a rate of (2.4 x 3.125hp/sec) = 7.5hp/sec.
Now, does that mean you can only tank 7.5hp/sec of damage? No, because your shields are naturally resistant to certain damage types. If you divide 7.5hp/sec by the percentage of damage of a given type that will actually get through and harm your shields you can determine what your true tanking rate (hp/sec) is versus each damage type. If we go with the base Ferox shield resists we end up with the following numbers: EM damage: Shields resist 60%, which means 40% "gets through": 7.5hp/sec divided by 40% = 18.75hp/sec of EM damage the Ferox can tank.
Exp damage: Shields resist 10%, which means 90% "gets through": 7.5hp/sec divided by 90% = 8.33hp/sec of Exp damage the Ferox can tank.
Kin damage: Shields resist 25%, which means 75% "gets through": 7.5hp/sec divided by 75% = 10hp/sec of Kin damage the Ferox can tank.
Therm damage: Shields resist 45%, which means 55% "gets through": 7.5hp/sec divided by 55% = 13.63hp/sec of Therm damage the Ferox can tank.
So we end up with an effective tank rate for EM/Ex/K/T of 18.8/8.3/10.0/13.6 (rounded to 1 decimal).
Now let's put on a medium shield extender, which adds 600 hp to the shields (it also adds 1% resistance which we'll just ignore for this example as it is so small).
Our new base shield recharge rate is now (3125hp + 600hp)/1000seconds = 3.725hp/second.
At peak this becomes 2.4 x 3.725 = 8.9hp/sec.
Our tanking rate vs the damage types becomes: EM/Ex/K/T = 22.3/9.9/11.9/16.2
Instead of putting on a medium shield extender let's use a basic explosion dampening amplifier instead (increases shield resists vs explosions by 25%). The 25% boost to explosion resists means our new explosion resist is 10% + 25%*90% = 32.5%
Our shields are back to their original amount (no medium shield booster), so we're back to the base peak recharge of 7.5hp/sec and all of the other resists are the same as we calculated earlier. Only our Exp tanking rate will change:
Exp damage: Shields resist 32.5%, which means 67.5% "gets through": 7.5hp/sec divided by 67.5% = 11.1/sec of Exp damage the Ferox can tank.
So, here are the final "tanking numbers" for EM/Ex/K/T Basic Ferox: 18.8/8.3/10.0/13.6 Shield extender: 22.3/9.9/11.9/16.2 Exp amplifier: 18.8/11.1/10.0/13.6
So, would you use a shield extender or an explosion dampener? That would, of course, all depend on what you figured you'd be engaging. If your up against something that does primarily Exp damage then the amplifier would be the choice, as it lets you tank 11.1hp/s of explosive damage vs the shield extender's rate of only 9.9hp/s.
Every choice in passive shield tanking comes down to similar choices. What will you be up against? Will reducing your shield recharge time do more for you than extending your shield? You just have to work it out. :)
Hope this helps a bit, Wred
|
Karl Wyvern
|
Posted - 2007.01.16 23:38:00 -
[24]
Thanks for taking the effort to explain this
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |