| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
   |
Posted - 2008.05.19 06:33:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Pottsey on 19/05/2008 06:33:00
öPassive tanking means not using shield boosters or anything that requires energy.ö
No it does not that would just be a complete waste of ship resourceÆs. Passive tanks are ment to use the spare cap. There is nothing wrong with using active hardeners, itÆs still a passive tank.
____
ôToo many times. Too many times have the addictions of man destroyed the progress of ages. History is about to fail us again, and deny us the right to walk among you once more.ö |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 11:11:00 -
[2]
ôBy your definition, a cap stable shield booster setup is passive tanking, whereas I would define a passive tank as one that is immune to NOS/neuts.ö
What! By the definitions I came up with a shield booster is never a passive tank. The problem with your definition is 99% of passive tanks from the first few years of passive tanks are not counted as passive tanks.
Any definition which excludes the original passive tanks in my mind is a bad definition. Active hardeners are fine and Active hardeners have a passive mode for when youÆre against nos ships. Passive tanks can have activated modules on, otherwise my railgun ships wouldnÆt count as passive tanks.
ôI think that a lot of people get confused by the term 'passive tank', as they are told that a Drake is best as a passive tank, yet this isn't really true. A Drake is best tanked as a hybrid mix of passive shield rechargers and active hardeners.ö
But thatÆs a passive tank not a hybrid. Passive tanks are tanks where you heal 100% passively without turning modules on and off. No matter if your afk or hit lag you heal passively.
ItÆs still a passive tank no matter what hardeners you choose as hardeners are not to do with HPregen/healing directly.
____
ôToo many times. Too many times have the addictions of man destroyed the progress of ages. History is about to fail us again, and deny us the right to walk among you once more.ö |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 11:58:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Pottsey on 19/05/2008 11:58:14
ôPassive means that no cap is used.ö
That is wrong. Passive means you heal passively without turning modules on and off. It does not mean you use zero cap.
Hybrid is when you use a mix a boosting passive HP regen and shield boosters. Passive can have cap use.
____
ôToo many times. Too many times have the addictions of man destroyed the progress of ages. History is about to fail us again, and deny us the right to walk among you once more.ö |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.05.19 21:55:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Pottsey on 19/05/2008 21:56:22
ôYou keep tying yourself in knots. Please read what you write. You heal faster if you TURN ON hardeners whilst still taking damage,ö
I am not trying myself in knots. You donÆt heal faster with active hardeners; you take less damage big difference. With hardeners on or off it takes the same amount of time to heal to 100% as your HP regen stays the same if the same setup is used apart from hardeners. The person with higher resistance might need to heal less as he might be on say 60% instead of 50% but both tanks have the same HP regen rate. Healing from 70 to 100% takes the same amount of time with what ever resistance modules you use.
ôwhich contradicts your definition of passive tanking, but not mine.ö
It does not contradict my definition. Read my guide for the full definition. There is no contradiction.
Your definition means 99% of the original passive tanks are no longer passive tanks. ThatÆs why I donÆt like your definition. When you come up with a definition that means the 2+ years worth of original passive tanks setups are no longer classed as passive tanks you have something wrong with the definition.
ôYou claim that for passive tanking, how you use your resists is irrelevant, yet hardeners are an active device and amplifiers are a passive device. You cannot say that how you use your resist modules is irrelevant, as they are an inherent part of your tank.ö
I never said resist modules are irrelevant. I said resist modules are not part of what makes a ship a passive or active tank. Just like the speed mods and weapon systems donÆt change if itÆs a passive or active tank.
If active hardenersÆ are no longer passive tanks then what next activated missile launchers are no longer passive tanks!
ôMy ship's tank with passive regen and active hardeners is not cap stable. Is this an active tank or a passive tank, as I use Cap Boosters to sustain it? Personally, I think it's a hybrid tank.ö
Going by my guide and definitions thats a passive tank that needs extra cap as you have a lot of none HP regen modules that need cap. Unless xx% of the cap is going towards defence then its a hybrid.
If you use cap to HP regen itÆs a active tank, if you donÆt use cap to HP regen its a passive tank. ItÆs that simple. Hardeners donÆt factor into it by my original definition, the extended definition factors in cap used for defence. Why after all these years should we change the definition? There is no need to change the original definition itÆs been clear and working fine for years. If I ever get the guide fully rewritten I dont see a need to update the definition's in a way to make original passive tanks no longer passive tanks.
____
ôToo many times. Too many times have the addictions of man destroyed the progress of ages. History is about to fail us again, and deny us the right to walk among you once more.ö |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 06:58:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Pottsey on 21/05/2008 06:57:48
ô Originally by: Leeluvv
My last post on this:
You sound like you know your wrong and gave up. My post is not full of inconsistencies as I said the person with more resistance has less to heal. You donÆt heal faster in that 10% takes the same amount of time to heal if you have active or passive hardeners. But the one with more resistance has less. How is that inconsistent?
Generally speaking it goes like this. Two pilots with the same setup and skills, one has active and one passive hardeners. The Pilot with higher resistance shields stabilise at 60% in combat. Guy with lower resistance shields stabilise at 50%. Combat over both heal at the same speed. Going form 60 to 100% takes the same amount of time for both pilots only one pilot will be behind as he starts from 50%. But technically both heal the same speed as both take the same amount of time to heal from 60 to 100%.
One pilot has more to heal, but he still heals at the same speed as the other pilot.
I understand you fully; itÆs you who doesnÆt appear to understand me. You telling me I am saying things that I am not.
ô Originally by: Leeluvv
you don't even try to understand what I am saying, so I'll quit bothering.ö
I do understand, I donÆt agree. There is a diffrence from not trying to understand and not agreeing.
I do understand what youÆre saying, your saying I want new definitions that mean all the original passive tanks are no longer classed as passive tanks. Anyone still using those passive tanks today are not really flying passive tanks. Can you not see the problem I have with that?
Instead of explaining this you are just picking holes at my post that are not there.
ôOriginally by: Derek Sigres
A true passive tank is one that does not use cap to sustain itself.ö
So the original true passive tanks are no longer passive tanks! The passive tanks that did all the passive tank research and worked out the formulas are not true passive tanks! The passive tanks that got into the news as passive tanks are not classed as passive tanks! The modules which for the most part are only found on passive tanks in the first few years now make todayÆs ships not a passive tanks?
How can modules only found on true passive tanks in 2004/2005 make a ship not a passive tank in 2007?
Passive tank means you heal passively. ThatÆs it. A passive tank does not mean 100% of all modules are cap free and passive. Any new definitions should not make the original passive tanks no longer be classed as passive tanks. ThatÆs just silly and wrong.
____
ôToo many times. Too many times have the addictions of man destroyed the progress of ages. History is about to fail us again, and deny us the right to walk among you once more.ö |
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.05.21 09:50:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Pottsey on 21/05/2008 09:54:29
EDIT: This was a strange double post, it appeared hours after my first post when I wasnÆt at the computer.
____
ôToo many times. Too many times have the addictions of man destroyed the progress of ages. History is about to fail us again, and deny us the right to walk among you once more.ö |
| |
|