EVE Search - Heavy Dictor Disparity

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Heavy Dictor Disparity

» 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)
Dr Buffer	Posted - 2007.11.01 01:39:00 - [1] The Broadsword and Onyx shield tanks are too good compared to their armor counterparts the Phobos and the Devoter, especially when using passive tanks.
jongalt	Posted - 2007.11.01 01:41:00 - [2] Originally by: Dr Buffer The Broadsword and Onyx shield tanks are too good compared to their armor counterparts the Phobos and the Devoter, especially when using passive tanks. i wonder if the passive voice is appropriate usage here... -jg.
Yukisa	Posted - 2007.11.01 02:07:00 - [3] Thats because passive tanks are imbalanced on small ships with naturally low shield recharge times.. ships that can equip large shield extenders to abuse the game mechanics. Either way, who cares. HI are situational and does it really matter when 0.0001% of people ever use it regularly? CCP has a LOT of other imbalance issues they need to sort through right now with much higher priorities.
Dr Buffer	Posted - 2007.11.01 02:45:00 - [4] Originally by: Yukisa Thats because passive tanks are imbalanced on small ships with naturally low shield recharge times.. ships that can equip large shield extenders to abuse the game mechanics. Either way, who cares. HI are situational and does it really matter when 0.0001% of people ever use it regularly? CCP has a LOT of other imbalance issues they need to sort through right now with much higher priorities. With a T2 passive tank a Broadsword can tank 1069 dps (5% shield capacity/recharge hardwirings), 1258 dps overheated, and given that you cannot recieve remote repping while deploying the warp sphere, and that it negates your propulsion module the bigger the tank the better.
Transcendant One	Posted - 2007.11.01 02:47:00 - [5] Edited by: Transcendant One on 01/11/2007 02:54:23 I have a question for you: Which lasts longer under fire greater than a passive tank's recharge? A passive shield tank, or a passive armor tank. You guessed it, the passive armor tank. The shield one is good at tanking moderate amounts of damage for extended periods of time, but melts like butter to high burst damage. ->It's called balance.<-
Sinnbad Mayhem Amarr Suicidal Mercenaries Pure.	Posted - 2007.11.01 02:51:00 - [6] It really doesnt matter. You will be primary, you will die, passive tanked or not. These HI are very specialized and not meant for tanking. I would be surprised to see many Sabre pilots willing to climb into them unless their FC is willing to pay for a new one. Do the math, Sabre > HI (everytime) S&M
Dr Buffer	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:09:00 - [7] A passive tanked broadsword while being able to tank over 1k dps still has an effective hp of ~121.5k hp vs normalized damage. This is almost equivalent to a plated (2x 1600mm RT, 3 trimark, 2x eanm II, dc II) Megathron (no slaves) which has ~124.2, but only 16 dps passive regen.
Pattern Clarc Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:12:00 - [8] Originally by: Transcendant One Edited by: Transcendant One on 01/11/2007 02:54:23 I have a question for you: Which lasts longer under fire greater than a passive tank's recharge? A passive shield tank, or a passive armor tank. You guessed it, the passive armor tank. The shield one is good at tanking moderate amounts of damage for extended periods of time, but melts like butter to high burst damage. ->It's called balance.<- If the HP levels where even then the shield tank would win... As the passive shield tanked versions have potencially far more HP than the armour tanked versions, taken into account with the ease of fitting shield extenders as opposed to the equivient hp in armor, not only can you have a strong passive active tank but you can also fit a decent rack of weapons without fitting mods... I don't want the shield tanking HIC's nerfed however, god knows if CCP plans to keep them none remote repible during combat - they'll need all the tank the can get however the armour tanking versions need something else, another niche, mo damage, speed or other bonuses that would make them more useful in other situations. Quote: [02:31:17] ISD BH Kestrelprime > The Pally is powerful enough. [02:31:27] ISD BH Kestrelprime > All it needs is a hearthstone so it can Bubblehearth.
Transcendant One	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:23:00 - [9] Edited by: Transcendant One on 01/11/2007 03:23:24 Your objective when flying this ship should be to survive as long as you can and let your gang do the killing. The uber passive tanked shield tanked setups for heavy interdictors don't have the grid for medium weapons (well maybe the broadsword does, the onyx doesn't), a comparable fit for armor involves cramming as many 1600mm plates as you can and filling up the rest with resists. No way you can get as much hp with shields.
Pattern Clarc Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:25:00 - [10] Originally by: Transcendant One Edited by: Transcendant One on 01/11/2007 03:23:24 Your objective when flying this ship should be to survive as long as you can and let your gang do the killing. The uber passive tanked shield tanked setups for heavy interdictors don't have the grid for medium weapons (well maybe the broadsword does, the onyx doesn't), a comparable fit for armor involves cramming as many 1600mm plates as you can and filling up the rest with resists. No way you can get as much hp with shields. huh? Then we agree then? Shield extenders > Plates? Quote: [02:31:17] ISD BH Kestrelprime > The Pally is powerful enough. [02:31:27] ISD BH Kestrelprime > All it needs is a hearthstone so it can Bubblehearth.
Dr Buffer	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:30:00 - [11] Originally by: Pattern Clarc Originally by: Transcendant One Edited by: Transcendant One on 01/11/2007 03:23:24 Your objective when flying this ship should be to survive as long as you can and let your gang do the killing. The uber passive tanked shield tanked setups for heavy interdictors don't have the grid for medium weapons (well maybe the broadsword does, the onyx doesn't), a comparable fit for armor involves cramming as many 1600mm plates as you can and filling up the rest with resists. No way you can get as much hp with shields. huh? Then we agree then? Shield extenders > Plates? If you're going for max hp (I think my setup is max hp, barring pirate implants) you can get over 180k hp substituting SPR IIs for PDS IIs and field extenders for field purgers. Oh, by the way you still tank 600 dps.
Transcendant One	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:54:00 - [12] Originally by: Pattern Clarc huh? Then we agree then? Shield extenders > Plates? LSEs > 800mm plate. Without a doubt. But the Phobos and Devoter both have enough grid to fit two 1600mm plates + resist mods and 150-200 grid left over, without skills and come out ahead in terms of effective hp. Now that also means they can't fit medium guns, but they should be fit for survival anyway, and the dps coming out of an onyx with no damage mods as in the op isn't exactly impressive either. Originally by: Dr Buffer If you're going for max hp (I think my setup is max hp, barring pirate implants) you can get over 180k hp substituting SPR IIs for PDS IIs and field extenders for field purgers. Oh, by the way you still tank 600 dps. That 600 dps is at peak, dropping rapidly before and after. In practice it won't make a notable difference against high burst damage. If you've ever taken down a passive drake with a gang you should see what I'm talking about. The regen might as well not be there.
Gaogan Gallente Solar Storm Sev3rance	Posted - 2007.11.01 03:57:00 - [13] Originally by: Transcendant One Edited by: Transcendant One on 01/11/2007 02:54:23 I have a question for you: Which lasts longer under fire greater than a passive tank's recharge? A passive shield tank, or a passive armor tank. You guessed it, the passive armor tank. The shield one is good at tanking moderate amounts of damage for extended periods of time, but melts like butter to high burst damage. ->It's called balance.<- Ummm... 1000 dps IS high burst damage. You will not get an armor tank on a cruiser that can last longer than this shield tank, unless you have 15 blaster megathrons shooting at it.
Transcendant One	Posted - 2007.11.01 04:10:00 - [14] It all depends what on what scale you fight, but 1000 dps is less than a gank mega. It's very easy for a gang to surpass that and no it won't take 15 battleships (exageration - I know) for armor to come out ahead. Once you have enough incoming dps to quickly bypass peak it's effective hp that matters. Two battleships should do it, three or more and the 1600mm plated setup will definately last longer. I don't think that's unreasonable.
Pattern Clarc Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.01 04:15:00 - [15] Originally by: Transcendant One Originally by: Pattern Clarc huh? Then we agree then? Shield extenders > Plates? LSEs > 800mm plate. Without a doubt. But the Phobos and Devoter both have enough grid to fit two 1600mm plates + resist mods and 150-200 grid left over, without skills and come out ahead in terms of effective hp. Now that also means they can't fit medium guns, but they should be fit for survival anyway, and the dps coming out of an onyx with no damage mods as in the op isn't exactly impressive either. Originally by: Dr Buffer If you're going for max hp (I think my setup is max hp, barring pirate implants) you can get over 180k hp substituting SPR IIs for PDS IIs and field extenders for field purgers. Oh, by the way you still tank 600 dps. That 600 dps is at peak, dropping rapidly before and after. In practice it won't make a notable difference against high burst damage. If you've ever taken down a passive drake with a gang you should see what I'm talking about. The regen might as well not be there. I've taken out a passive tanking drake, and I had to overload my guns to get past that peak regen - so I don't quite know what the hell your talking about... And also, the broadswoard and onyx can both fit 4 LSE, a rack of PDU's and shield extender rigs easily with enough grid to fit a few medium weapons. (eg assualt launchers on the onyx) The equivelent on a phobos would be substancially less, would mean you'd warp and turn like a brick (use more cap whilst warping) have less hp and no recharge what so ever. I'm not too interested in homogenising the ships, I just want one more useful for one thing, and the other more useful than the next in specific circumsances. Quote: [02:31:17] ISD BH Kestrelprime > The Pally is powerful enough. [02:31:27] ISD BH Kestrelprime > All it needs is a hearthstone so it can Bubblehearth.
Transcendant One	Posted - 2007.11.01 04:39:00 - [16] Edited by: Transcendant One on 01/11/2007 04:39:38 Originally by: Pattern Clarc I've taken out a passive tanking drake, and I had to overload my guns to get past that peak regen - so I don't quite know what the hell your talking about... The recharge can be a brick wall but once you get enough damage it doesn't matter. I've killed a properly set up passive drake with gangmates, specifically 1 BS and 3 cruisers, and the shields melted without the peak being noticeable. Quote: And also, the broadswoard and onyx can both fit 4 LSE, a rack of PDU's and shield extender rigs easily with enough grid to fit a few medium weapons. (eg assualt launchers on the onyx) The way I see things these ships are designed to work with a gang. With no damage mods, no drone bay, and no mobility with the field active their damage won't make much of a difference, medium guns or not. Quote: The equivelent on a phobos would be substancially less, would mean you'd warp and turn like a brick (use more cap whilst warping) have less hp and no recharge what so ever. You'd also take take longer to lock and take less damage from battleship sized missiles, for what that's worth. Granted lack of self repair is indeed a significant disadvantage. Quote: I'm not too interested in homogenising the ships, I just want one more useful for one thing, and the other more useful than the next in specific circumsances. I understand that, and agree with your intention. The difference is that I think the ability for passive shield tanked interdictors to perform better in small gangs is counter balanced by the armor tankers having better relative survivability as gang size increases. To be honest the only one I see a potential problem with is the phobos. broadsword and onyx both get 6 mids, Devoter 7 lows. With 6 lows and no flagrant gain from the 4th mid towards its intended role the phobos seems left out.
Pattern Clarc Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.01 04:47:00 - [17] I see these ships pimarily on anti carrier/mom op's - in which you need to last long enough for the rest of the gang to deal with the fighters etc - yeah, 600-1000 dps tanked passivily will really help, it's like tripling your effective hp in this circumstance which I imagine would be the most common sinario just because the dps needed to tank is so close to peak regen. Like I said before however, i'm not interested in getting these ships nerfed, lets think of solutions forthe devoter and phobos :) Quote: [02:31:17] ISD BH Kestrelprime > The Pally is powerful enough. [02:31:27] ISD BH Kestrelprime > All it needs is a hearthstone so it can Bubblehearth.
Kevrlet Gallente The Knighthawks FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.01 05:53:00 - [18] I didn't even read all this. Let me save you all a lot of trouble. I recently got into a Myrm on SiSi to test actual tanking ability of armor vs passive shield. The results are in folks. Armor tank: MAR II x2 EXP/KIN/THERM Hardener x2 DC II x1 CCC x1 Aux armor rig x2 Effective tank: about 330 with my skills Shield tank: SPR II x4 PDU II x1 LSE II x2 passive EM II x2 Invul II x1 shield purger x3 Effective tank: about 550 with my skills Now guess which lived longer and tanked more? That's right! Armor! The armor tank took 63k damage before dropping, and this from 6 BCs (took several minutes to kill it). The shield tank took about 20k...why? Because when a passive shield tank gets broken, you're DEAD. You don't keep regening (well, you do, but really slowly). You just die. When an armor tank breaks, if you still have cap, you STILL tank that much DPS. You keep repairing at the same speed until you blow up. Passive shield tanks are ONLY good in PvE (or on a Drake with insane skills...until it gets primary'd. boom). Kind of like the ships that can field them well...Drake, Nighthawk, Myrm...all pretty much PvE ships (Myrm was good in PvP until the NOS nerf. Now it's just another drone boat. Or a fairly good piece of bait). We need this. Badly.
Dr Buffer	Posted - 2007.11.01 13:23:00 - [19] Edited by: Dr Buffer on 01/11/2007 13:23:41 Originally by: Kevrlet I didn't even read all this. Let me save you all a lot of trouble. I recently got into a Myrm on SiSi to test actual tanking ability of armor vs passive shield. The results are in folks. Armor tank: MAR II x2 EXP/KIN/THERM Hardener x2 DC II x1 CCC x1 Aux armor rig x2 Effective tank: about 330 with my skills Shield tank: SPR II x4 PDU II x1 LSE II x2 passive EM II x2 Invul II x1 shield purger x3 Effective tank: about 550 with my skills Now guess which lived longer and tanked more? That's right! Armor! The armor tank took 63k damage before dropping, and this from 6 BCs (took several minutes to kill it). The shield tank took about 20k...why? Because when a passive shield tank gets broken, you're DEAD. You don't keep regening (well, you do, but really slowly). You just die. When an armor tank breaks, if you still have cap, you STILL tank that much DPS. You keep repairing at the same speed until you blow up. Passive shield tanks are ONLY good in PvE (or on a Drake with insane skills...until it gets primary'd. boom). Kind of like the ships that can field them well...Drake, Nighthawk, Myrm...all pretty much PvE ships (Myrm was good in PvP until the NOS nerf. Now it's just another drone boat. Or a fairly good piece of bait). For starters your passive shield tank setup is bad (and according to your setup has an open low slot), and isn't even close to an optimal setup. The armor tank looks to be the standard 3 hardener setup. So bad shield tank vs standard armor tank and the armor tank comes out on top... thanks for not contributing. Also fighting random gang x with lacking skills doesn't tell anything
Nasair	Posted - 2007.11.01 13:49:00 - [20] Edited by: Nasair on 01/11/2007 13:49:23 Edited by: Nasair on 01/11/2007 13:49:01 My setup (phobos): 4 Medium Ion blaster IIs, 1 Medium Electron blaster, 1 field gen AB II, Large cap battery II, Cap recharge II, WEB II 2 MAR II, Explosive hardner II, Damage control II, Blood adaptive resistance plating, Cap relay II 1x Cap amount rig, 1x Aux nano pump
Haldor Gret Minmatar	Posted - 2007.11.01 14:38:00 - [21] I'm not sure how good this set up is. I tryed it on SiSi and lasted for a while. (i also can't fit the warp disruptor thing yet, and not sure if it would fit on this set up) Broadsword: 5x 425mm II 4x LSE II, 1 Passive kin hardener II, 1 Invul II fill lows with PDS II's got me up to 17k shields (can't remember recharge around 400 secs i think) and resists were 79% to 90% though this might be good for comparison In Rust We Trust Duct Tape Forever
Kublai Khan Caldari TAOSP Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.11.01 17:45:00 - [22] Bring two HI and a logistic cruiser or two in ur gang, logistic locks the two HIs, one pops up the field, the other stays put. When it takes too much damage, the other pop up the field, the other drop it and it can be repped. win :D
Exlegion Caldari New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.01 17:58:00 - [23] Originally by: Dr Buffer The Broadsword and Onyx shield tanks are too good compared to their armor counterparts the Phobos and the Devoter, especially when using passive tanks. Have you compared the shield and armor resists on these ships? I ask because usually armor resists outclass shield resists on same class ships. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Guru
Dr Buffer	Posted - 2007.11.03 16:52:00 - [24] With the addition of the new focused warp disruption script this now frees up a mid which might have been used for tackling, strengthening the shield tankers.
Gecko O'Bac Aquilae Stellaris	Posted - 2007.11.03 17:49:00 - [25] People... We're talking about ships supposed to tank supercapitals at least for a while... They're supposed to tank well, VERY well.
Dr Buffer	Posted - 2007.11.03 17:53:00 - [26] Edited by: Dr Buffer on 03/11/2007 17:52:58 Originally by: Gecko O'Bac People... We're talking about ships supposed to tank supercapitals at least for a while... They're supposed to tank well, VERY well. This is my issue, the shield tanks are better than the armor tanks, with the phobos being the worst my a significant ammount.
Gecko O'Bac Aquilae Stellaris	Posted - 2007.11.03 18:30:00 - [27] Originally by: Dr Buffer Edited by: Dr Buffer on 03/11/2007 17:52:58 Originally by: Gecko O'Bac People... We're talking about ships supposed to tank supercapitals at least for a while... They're supposed to tank well, VERY well. This is my issue, the shield tanks are better than the armor tanks, with the phobos being the worst my a significant ammount. I understand that, I was directing my "rant" to the people that said that HI should not tank or something on this line... Maybe, and I say maybe, they shouldn't use weapons very well but tanking is integral to their role.
Maliber Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.11.03 18:42:00 - [28] The large shield tanks wont turn like a brick but will have a sig radius spottable from miles away wich will make em more shootable by bs. imho its a moot point.
Red Harvest	Posted - 2007.11.03 20:45:00 - [29] Originally by: Maliber The large shield tanks wont turn like a brick but will have a sig radius spottable from miles away wich will make em more shootable by bs. imho its a moot point. True, especially if they also engage the Warp Disruption Field which adds another 50% to the sig. Using large shield extenders + WDF is like flying around with a big bullseye painted to the hull.
Fird	Posted - 2007.11.03 21:19:00 - [30] So if the shield tankers are better, then get one. Whining causes nerfing :) HI 5 425 T2 1 Med Nos MED 1 cap booster w/11 800's 1 warp disruptor 1 web 1 shield boost amp 1 LSB T2 1 invul field T2 LOW 1 Damage control T2 1 cap flux T2 2 Gyro Stabs T2 RIGS 2 Anti-kinetic shield thingies :) = PopMachine

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.