| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gurkhador
   |
Posted - 2008.11.22 20:44:00 -
[1]
Sorry for the noobish question but I'm new to EFT and I was wondering why there is a so great difference between DPS you can tank with shield vs. armor.
With "All lv 5" character a Kronos with 2 LAR II and 3 armor res can tank around 300-400 dps and a golem with XL shield booster + 2 SBAmp + 3 shield res 800-900, how can be? Its more then double 
|
Chicken Wing
|
Posted - 2008.11.22 21:17:00 -
[2]
AFAIK it's because with armour rep, all you get is the rep, meanwhile shields get regen bonuses. Don't quote me on that tho.
|
Sigos
ORIGIN SYSTEMS
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.22 21:29:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Gurkhador
Sorry for the noobish question but I'm new to EFT and I was wondering why there is a so great difference between DPS you can tank with shield vs. armor.
With "All lv 5" character a Kronos with 2 LAR II and 3 armor res can tank around 300-400 dps and a golem with XL shield booster + 2 SBAmp + 3 shield res 800-900, how can be? Its more then double
Well...you are using 2 ship-sized reps as opposed to 1 over-sized booster and 2 modules to increase the efficiency of said booster.
Additionally, shield boosters are designed to be provide a better impulse whereas armor reps are designed to be more sustainable.
|
NoNah
|
Posted - 2008.11.22 21:52:00 -
[4]
Edited by: NoNah on 22/11/2008 21:54:18
Originally by: Gurkhador
Sorry for the noobish question but I'm new to EFT and I was wondering why there is a so great difference between DPS you can tank with shield vs. armor.
With "All lv 5" character a Kronos with 2 LAR II and 3 armor res can tank around 300-400 dps and a golem with XL shield booster + 2 SBAmp + 3 shield res 800-900, how can be? Its more then double
With the presumtino that I might be ending up trolled, as usual here goes.
Shields are always more effective than armortanks. It starts out that way and in the absolute high end(Officer harderners, crystal set, officer booster etc) it's extreme.
Armortanks on the other hand get other boons such as having a larger bufer and better(any) passive omniharderners(EANMs).
Basically, in a short pros and cons list for shieldtanks (compared to armor):
Pro:
* Effectiveness
* Cap-effectiveness
* Instant effect
* Larger post-armor buffer
* Room for damage upgrades
Cons:
* Less buffer
* More capreliant
* No midslots for propulsion or EW
As for your specific example, you're using different amount of modules to begin with. Evening that out to say 2 LAR II's, 2 EANM's versus 1 XL boost, 1 SBA, 2 Invuln the actual difference is 705 versus 542. Which honestly isn't that huge of a difference. You will find that most people prefer shieldtanks for pve and armor for pvp, mostly thanks to damage upgrades versus EW/Propulsion. This also leads to the huge overprice on shieldmodules and relatively cheap armormodules. You're correct that 1 XL booster and an SBA normally is comparable with a dual repper setup, however if you need to omnitank it invulns will always be superior to EANM's as all active are superior to passive, if you went for a specific damagetype they would be a tad more similiar.
Parrots, commence!
Postcount: 211327
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.11.22 22:07:00 -
[5]
You could always join the club and passive shield tank that Kronos.
____
Telltale sign of their presence is non-linear teleportation
(www.eve-online.com/races/theodicy/Theodicy_All.pdf)
|
Polly Prissypantz
Dingleberry Appreciation Society
|
Posted - 2008.11.22 22:11:00 -
[6]
Shield tanking is stronger, but it uses mid slots which are needed for all forms of electronic warfare. Armor tanking is weaker, but leaves your mid slots free for other stuff.
Also, most armor tanking ships tend to have more low slots than their equivalent shield tanking ships have mid slots.
In short: Shield tanks blow for solo/small gang PvP where you need to fit tackle, which means armor tankers (and nano pre-nerf) are the preferred choice for PvP, while shield tanks are more popular for PvE and for PvP where they don't need to fit tackle.
|
Gurkhador
|
Posted - 2008.11.22 22:23:00 -
[7]
Thx to everybody for the informations^^
|
Thenoran
Caldari
Hegemony Enterprises
E L I T E Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.24 09:34:00 -
[8]
Yep, shield tanks are more effective when sustained (active tank) in comparison to most armor tanks (except against EM obviously) due to the passive regen rate.
On some setups the passive regen rate + shield capacity + shield resists can make up for a lot of tank already without any boosters plugged in.
On top of that, you got Invul fields which can be great for tanking any mission.
The downside is it will take up roughly all your midslots, so EWar or AB/MWD are much harder to fit.
------------------------
Ship Yield Calc
Low-sec is like sailing along the coast of Somalia...
|
Meiyang Lee
Gallente
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.11.24 10:06:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Meiyang Lee on 24/11/2008 10:06:38
Originally by: Gurkhador
Sorry for the noobish question but I'm new to EFT and I was wondering why there is a so great difference between DPS you can tank with shield vs. armor.
With "All lv 5" character a Kronos with 2 LAR II and 3 armor res can tank around 300-400 dps and a golem with XL shield booster + 2 SBAmp + 3 shield res 800-900, how can be? Its more then double
Armor tanks tend to be easier to make sustainable, and while a shield tank is much more potent sustainability tends to be an issue unless you're using high-meta shield boosters.
When you do get a sustainable shield-tank it tends to work very well though, but you'll be sacrificing quite a few slots to do so. Passive shield regeneration is also a factor obviously, armor doesn't regenerate on its own afteral.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |