open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Myrmidon - passive shield tanking vs. armor tanking comparison
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Author Topic

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:39:00 - [1]
 

Greetings to my fellow Myrmidon pilots,
It seems as if on a daily basis there are discussions regarding the Myrmidon (my favorite ship), and of course the common thought for most folks when building their setup on the Myrmidon is to use medium armor repairers due to the 7.5% per Battlecruiser skill level armor rep bonus the Myrmidon gets. What many folks don't realize is that the Myrmidon can actually have a much more effective tank if it is setup with a passive shield tank, instead.

I will state right up front, a passive shield tank is not necessarily going to be ideal for all situations. In PvP, if you need to use slots for AB/MWD, warp disrupting, and webbing, then your mileage may vary greatly, but for PvE (e.g.: mission running) where you don't need to use those mid-slot modules, or even in PvP situations where someone else is taking care of tackling, you might be pleasantly surprised at how effective a Myrmidon can be passive shield tanked.

Before I get into my comparison I want to give credit to all the other people whose posts on the forums have helped teach me what I’ve managed to learn so far about this subject. Most notably I must acknowledge the excellent passive shield tanking guide written by Pottsey, which even though it is almost 2 years old now is still relevant and, in my opinion, a “must read” for every EVE pilot. I also highly recommend you use the program called QuickFit to test sample setups.

Acronyms/terms used:
CDFP: Core Defence Field Purger
CR: Cap Recharger
DC: Damage Control
DPS: Damage Per Second
EANM: Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
EM: EM (as in EM damage type)
EX: Explosive (as in explosive damage type)
KI: Kinetic (as in kinetic damage type)
LSE: Large Shield Extender
MAR: Medium Armor Repairer
PDS: Power Diagnostic System
SPR: Shield Power Relay
Tankable DPS: This is the effective DPS versus a specific damage type you can tank. The higher your resistance is the higher your effective tankable DPS would be against that damage type.
TH: Thermal (as in thermal damage type)

Skills Levels Used (when needed for the build given):
Battlecruisers lvl 4
Cybernetics lvl 3
EM Armor Compensation lvl 4
Energy Grid Upgrades lvl 4
Energy Management lvl 4
Energy Systems Operation lvl 4
Engineering lvl 4
Explosive Armor Compensation lvl 4
Gallente Cruiser lvl 3
Gallente Frigate lvl 4
Hull Upgrades lvl 5
Jury Rigging lvl 3
Kinetic Armor Compensation lvl 4
Mechanic lvl 4
Repair Systems lvl 4
Science lvl 3
Shield Management lvl 4
Shield Operation lvl 4
Shield Rigging lvl 1
Shield Upgrades lvl 4
Spaceship Command lvl 4
Tactical Shield Manipulation lvl 4
Thermic Armor Compensation lvl 4

(continued)

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:40:00 - [2]
 

You may notice in the skills above that I’ve tried to go with level 4 on skills wherever it will have a reasonable benefit. Some skills are lower where they are simply pre-requisites to another skill or module and where having a higher skill level wouldn’t improve the quality of the tank. Not all of the setups below will require all of the skills above (e.g.: you don’t need Shield Management at level 4 in order to create the armor repairing setup below, but for the shield setups it is used and that is the level I used for the calculations provided. Please note that even where the above skills are not needed for a particular setup, I still use them at the levels indicated above (thus in the armor repairing setup the shield levels indicated assume the above skills are achieved by the pilot).

With regards to implants and modules indicated in the setups below, I’ve gone with readily available items that are reasonable in price. I’m not aware of any implants that can help with armor repairing, but there are a couple that can help with shields, so I’ve used those as they are available in Jita -- I think you can pick up both 5% variants for about 120M ISK total last time I checked and there are 3% variants available for less. For modules I’ve used tech II variants as they are easily acquired and at “reasonable” prices, but for rigs I’ve only gone with tech I variants as the tech II ones tend to be much more rare or extremely expensive, from what I’ve seen at this time. I’ll be more than happy to adjust to different modules if folks indicate there are better components readily available and at reasonable prices.

In the setups I provide below, I’ll focus on creating an “omni-tank”, which means we’re looking at creating the most well-rounded tank versus all damage types.

(continued)

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:41:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: WredStorm on 12/04/2007 19:13:14
Let’s start out with a fairly common armor repairer setup on a Myrmidon which we’ll then use as our comparison point for passive shield setups.

ACTIVE ARMOR TANKED MYRMIDON
Highs: Anything you want, main damage is from drones
Mids: 6x CR II
Lows: 2x MAR II, 1x DC II, 1x Armor EX Hardener II, 2x EANM II
Rigs: 1x Nanobot Accelerator I, 2x Auxiliary Nano Pump I
Implants: None

Your ship would have:
Shields: 4687 hp regenerating over 1000 seconds, which gives a peak regen of ~11.72hp/s
Shield resistances would be:
EM = 12
EX = 64
KI = 47
TH = 29
In this setup, your shields are sort of a “free buffer” of damage you can take before you have to worry about turning on your armor repairers. Once depleted, your shields regenerate very slowly, so will not significantly impact the amount of damage that would be applied against your armor.

Capacitor:
3375 regenerating over 196.61 seconds, which gives a peak regen of ~42.06 cap/s
Peak usage (with all modules turned on) is ~40.75 cap/s
In other words, you can fully run everything in this setup all the time (as long as you don’t get NOS’d) and you won’t run out of cap.

Armor:
Each of your MAR IIs would repair 550.16 hp every 8.16 seconds (it is probably closer to 540 hp repaired due to a recent stacking change with the auxiliary nano pumps, but I’m going to use the 550 value unless I get definitive information from someone more in the know about such things to indicate otherwise). This means you are capable of repairing 2 x 550.16hp / 8.16s = ~134.8 hp/s of armor damage.

You would have 5860 armor hp
Armor resistances & tankable DPS would be:
EM = 79.55% = 659 tankable DPS
EX = 76.49% = 573 tankable DPS
KI = 66.77% = 406 tankable DPS
TH = 66.77% = 406 tankable DPS
Average = 511 tankable DPS

Hull:
5156 hp with 60% resistance (due to the DC II) versus all damage types which equates to an additional 12890 damage that would have to be done to you before your ship would blow up. This is your buffer in case your tank fails and you have to try and escape.

(continued)

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:41:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: WredStorm on 12/04/2007 19:13:43
Now let’s look at a typical passive shield tanking setup for a Myrmidon for comparison:

PASSIVE SHIELD TANKED MYRMIDON
Highs: Anything you want, main damage is from drones
Mids: 4x LSE II, 1x Invulnerability Field II
Lows: 5x SPR II, 1x PDS II
Rigs: 3x CDFP
Implants: Zainou 'gnome' kva2000 (+5% shield hp), Zainou 'gnome' kya2000 (-5% shield recharge time)

Your ship would have:
Shields: 19059 hp regenerating over 112.85 seconds, which gives a peak regen of ~422hp/s
Shield resistances & tankable DPS would be:
EM = 30.00% = 603 tankable DPS
EX = 72.00% = 1507 tankable DPS
KI = 58.00% = 1005 tankable DPS
TH = 44.00% = 754 tankable DPS
Average = 967 tankable DPS

Capacitor:
3543 regenerating over 2462 seconds, which gives a peak regen of ~3.53 cap/s
Peak usage (with the Invulnerability Field II turned on) is 3.2 cap/s
In other words, you can fully run everything in this setup all the time (as long as you don’t get NOS’d) and you won’t run out of cap. You may have problems with cap, though, if you have to do a bunch of long warps… they could potentially drop your total cap below the 30% mark which is where you get the peak regen rate.

Armor:
5860 hp
Armor resistances would be:
EM = 60%
EX = 10%
KI = 35%
TH = 35%

Hull:
5156 hp with resistance of 0%

Assuming your passive shield tank failed and the worst damage versus your armor was being done to you (EX), your armor would absorb another 6511hp of damage. Added to your hulls 5156 gives you a “buffer” of 11667hp if you need to escape. Considering your shields are capable of tanking 1507 EX DPS, it is more likely that an opponent would be hitting you with either EM or TH damage if they’ve broken your passive shield tank. If it was TH, then your armor would be capable of absorbing 9015hp of damage instead of 6511, giving you a buffer of 14171hp instead. If it was EM damage being done to you then your armor would absorb 14650 giving you a total buffer of 19806hp.

(continued)

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:42:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: WredStorm on 12/04/2007 19:14:44
Comparing Both Setups
I suspect the most significant numbers for most people will simply be the tankable DPS numbers. The values for both setups in a side-by-side comparison are:

Tankable DPS in the armor setup vs. the passive shield setup:
EM: 659 vs. 603
EX: 573 vs. 1507
KI: 406 vs. 1005
TH: 406 vs. 754
Average: 511 vs. 967

From this perspective, it is pretty obvious that the passive shield tanked setup can be much stronger than the active armor setup, with the only exception being vs. EM type damage.

These numbers don’t speak the whole story, though, of course. Most notable is the fact that I’ve created setups that are “omni-tanks” with the highest overall resistances. Active armor tanks have a bit more flexibility to adjust what they are best against… just swap out the 4 low slot modules that aren’t the MAR IIs and put in a couple of active hardeners against the two most common damage types you know you’ll be facing and you can end up with high tankable DPS values. For example, if you know you’ll only be facing KI and TH damage you could pop in 2 hardeners for each of those types and end up with resistances vs. KI and TH of 84.73% which would allow you to tank 883 DPS for those two types… slightly less than the 1005 a passive shield tank can do vs. KI and slightly more than what it can do vs. TH. You would need to NOS your opponent to maintain such a tank indefinitely, however, as your peak cap usage would be about 3 higher than your peak regen.

The passive shield tank doesn’t have as great a flexibility to modify what it is best at resisting, but it still can hold its own. In order to adjust what you are best at resisting you’d have to take out the Invulnerability Field (which covers all 4 resistances for you) or an LSE II (which would reduce your overall shield regen rate) to do so. Generally, you want to try and keep 3x LSE IIs in place and then harden against 1 or 2 specific damage types. In effect, you’ve got just a couple of mid slots to play with when it comes to adjusting your resistances, whereas an armor tanker has 4 low slots to play with. The passive shield tank still holds its own, though, as detailed in the next paragraph.

Assuming you want to protect against KI and TH (similar to the armor example used above), you would take out an LSE II and the Invulnerability Field II and replace them with a Ballistic Deflection Field II and a Heat Dissipation Field II, giving you KI and TH resists of 73.0% and 64.0% respectively. Your peak shield regen rate would drop to ~345.3hp/s, allowing you to tank KI and TH DPS of 1279 and 959 respectively (compared to the 883 tankable DPS of the KI and TH focused armor setup in the above paragraph). Your cap usage would be 4 cap/s with a peak cap regen rate of 3.53 cap/s, so you’d ultimately need to NOS your opponent in order to sustain this indefinitely.

(continued)

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:43:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: WredStorm on 12/04/2007 19:15:17
I’ve mentioned above in the section about the passive setup that your cap recharge rate is fairly slow. This could cause someone doing a lot of long warps problems. My personal experience with this setup has been using it for mission running where I don’t typically have to go more than 3 jumps, so I’ve never had any problems with that setup and running out of cap, but you should keep this in mind and do some personal testing to see how far you can go before running into issues. Bare in mind, if you are traveling through areas with stations, you can always dock at a station to completely fill up your cap, even if it is running on empty.

Another thing to take into consideration is how dependant each of these tanks is (or isn’t) on your cap. If you run into a worst case scenario where an opponent is capable of NOS’ing or neutralizing your cap you could end up with zero cap. In the case of the armor tank your tank would be gone at that moment as you’d have no ability to run your MAR IIs. In the case of the passive shield tank, though, all that would happen is that your invulnerability field would shut down and your resistances would drop. You would still regenerate ~422hp/s at peak shield recharge levels and still have resistances and tankable DPS of:
EM = 0.00% = 422 tankable DPS
EX = 60.00% = 1055 tankable DPS
KI = 40.00% = 703 tankable DPS
TH = 20.00% = 528 tankable DPS
Average = 677 tankable DPS

As you can see, those numbers are better than the armor tanks numbers with the exception of EM damage. Overall, that isn’t too shabby a tank to be able to maintain even with no cap left at all.

Another thing to take into consideration is the ever-present “lag monster”. If you are suddenly hit by lag before turning on any of your modules you would be in dire straights with the armor setup since you rely on your MAR IIs completely. In the passive shield setup all you have to turn on is the Invulnerability Field II, but if lag prevents you from doing so you still have the regen, resistances, and tankable DPS mentioned above in the scenario of having no cap left. Again, it’s a nice little “bonus” in favor of the passive shield setup.

(continued)

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:43:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: WredStorm on 12/04/2007 19:15:55
One area where the passive shield setup may not do quite as well is in PvP. This all depends, though, on the situation you are in. If you need to fit an AB/MWD, a webber, and a warp disruptor, then your passive shield tank is going to be hurt dramatically as that would require you to remove 3 of the LSE IIs and powering those 3 replacement modules becomes an issue. The cap issues aside though, your tank would now become:

Shields: 8640.5 hp regenerating over 112.85 seconds, which gives a peak regen of ~191.4hp/s
Shield resistances & tankable DPS would be:
EM = 30.00% = 273 tankable DPS
EX = 72.00% = 684 tankable DPS
KI = 58.00% = 456 tankable DPS
TH = 44.00% = 342 tankable DPS
Average = 439 tankable DPS

In terms of the cap issue in such a setup (where you have an AB/MWD, webber, and warp disruptor), the active armor tank would have similar cap issues. It would have to remove 3 of the CR IIs, meaning its cap regen would drop to ~21.5 cap/s at peak and it would still need 40.75 cap/s just to keep its tank running. It is more likely that it would have to shut down at least one MAR II (which would reduce cap costs by 19.6/s), thus cutting its tankable DPS numbers in half. Both setups would require three NOS in the high slots in order to give them enough cap to keep the AB/MWD, webber, and disruptor all running. You could fit 5 medium NOS and 1 small NOS if you wanted, which would give the armor tanked setup the option to cycle the second MAR II on and off as cap permitted.

Which setup is best for PvP? I think that comes down to your personal preferences and the situation you expect to be in. There are scenarios where the passive setup could be great, such as if you are facing someone you expect to use EX and KI damage against you, or someone who can out NOS you (and thus having a tank that won’t quit when your cap is sucked dry). Also, if you’re in a gang and someone else is going to handle tackling, then you don’t have to fit a webber or disruptor and can keep those LSE IIs in place, thus giving you the stronger overall tank. If your enemy might hit you from a long distance (meaning you can’t NOS them for a while and thus the armor tanked setup could only run one MAR II) then you might also be better off with the passive setup. Most other scenarios, though, and you may want to consider going with an armor tank, instead.

Conclusion
In the end, I think it’s up to the reader to come to their own conclusions on what everything above really amounts to. What works for one person doesn’t always work for another, simply because we all have different preferences that will affect our choices. Even though a passive tank might be superior in many ways doesn’t mean everyone will want to go that route… if the tank you have now suffices for what you’re doing, then why change? If you simply think it’s more fun to armor tank, then definitely play whatever is most fun.

For myself, I love my passive shield tanked Myrmidon setup. I run level 4 missions with it and although I may not run them as fast as someone in a Caldari Navy Raven (or whatever the fastest mission running ship is these days) I am able to do my missions in a time frame that is fun for me, and with the knowledge that I’m very well protected. I can’t afford to agro everything in a mission, necessarily (although frequently I can and do), but I really like knowing that I can go AFK if I need to (such as for my kids) and not worry too much about whether my tank will have kept my ship alive while I was gone.

I hope that the above numbers and information will give folks who aren’t as adept, or willing, to number crunch or sift through these forums for helpful tidbits, a good place to start from in deciding what might best suit their style. For those that are willing to do more number crunching or share their experiences, I hope you’ll add some new ideas to this thread. :)

WredStorm

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:44:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: WredStorm on 09/05/2007 13:00:42

Here are some ideas presented by folks in the thread below. I'll try to keep this updated with some of the most relevant ones to this subject so that they'll be in one space (thus making it easier for someone reading this thread to get the key points without having to read every single post, if they want):

----------------
demonfurbie made the suggestion of turning off your SPR IIs while travelling long distances.

This will leave your cap recharge rate more "normal" so you can do a lot of long jumps without running out of cap (the SPR IIs dramatically lower your cap recharge rate a the trade off for their effect on your shield recharge rate). Just keep in mind that you'll want to dock at a station to turn them back on... you can do so in space (undocked) but it costs you cap to do so and I think you have to be at or near full cap to do it.
----------------
Zirth pointed out using a Medium Cap Booster can give you 37.5 cap per second, which can easily power your dual MAR IIs and negate the need to have 6 CR IIs in your mids.

Keep in mind, though, that Cap Boosters require charges, which take up space both in the booster and in your cargo hold (if you carry extras). For PvP, though, it would allow you to power both MAR IIs. Even if you're being NOS'd dry, you can do little tricks with the Boosters in terms of timing their use with your MAR IIs to still let you keep your armor reps going (although maybe at a slightly slower rate). Either way, Cap Boosters would appear to be a very good thing to consider in any armor setup.
----------------
Pilk pointed out:
ZET100, ZET1000, and ZET400 all affect armor reps. ZET4000 would affect armor reps, too, but it's not seeded.

An invuln field with no cap to fuel it does *not* drop to 0% resists. With maxed shield-comp skills, it'll actually still give 15% or 16% resists (I forget how the math works at the moment). Of course, few people max out their damage-specific shield-comp skills, but getting them even to III would help quite a bit in that situation.
----------------

If you need help understanding how resistances work and how to calculate how much damage per second (DPS) you are able to tank given a specific regeneration rate and resistance level, I have a post in this thread about such here.

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:45:00 - [9]
 

<reserved for future edits>

Caldari Online
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:49:00 - [10]
 

for pvp the shield tank can be nice.

in smaller gangs it might be a good idea to jump that in first and let it take fire for the team. they would also waste their nosf on him for a while. if you could get some smartbombs on there too (even small ones) you might be able to take out a lot of their drones too


either way. pure passive tanks are getting uber

demonfurbie
Minmatar
Drunken Wookies
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2007.04.12 17:51:00 - [11]
 

nice read.. was reading it as you where posting it. Very Happy
i have a drake that i passively tank. i have tryed with good results with a myr set up was.

highs anything but i do put 2 nos ti help with the tank
mids 3 hards(2 main damage 1 secondary damage) 2 extenders
lows all power relays

it works well for me and the cap holds well but for long travel i tend to put the relays off line and put them back on line when i arrive to my station.

Ozzie Asrail
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2007.04.12 18:06:00 - [12]
 

Yup, it's pretty sad that a boat with armour rep bonus actually tanks better using shields.

Shield relays need stacking penalties.

Zirth
Caldari
Domination Heavy Industries
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2007.04.12 18:24:00 - [13]
 

Look into the Medium Cap Boosters, they can add 37.5 capacitor a second and power your dual reppers and pretty much anything else. Don't need 6 capacitor relays for that.

Therefor I only use a passive shield tank for PvE, PvP just requires the midslots for tackling. If you want to fit a medium cap booster next to your scram, mwd and web, your tank is gonna hurt even more and an armor tank probably would be better. If not, the shield relays won't yield enough capacitor to run your med slots. And we also shouldn't ignore the fact that blasters take capacitor, and while you get no bonuses to em, they're damn popular and work very well on the Myrmidon.

All in all, I can honestly say an armor tank would be better for pvp. You can't warp around, tackle or power any cap-needing guns or tackling gear with those shield relays in the lows, which is so important for pvp.

A shield tank would definately be better for PvE, nothing I didn't know already though. Either way, great guide, really combines alot of info that probably many others didn't know yet.

xenodia
Gallente
DYNAMIC INTERVENTION
ORPHANS OF EVE
Posted - 2007.04.12 18:44:00 - [14]
 

Ive been using a myrmidon passive tank for the last few weeks in both pvp and pve.

Its great for pve. Stick some medium artillery on it and a tractor beam (or get an alt to tractor and salvage) and you have cap free tanking and damage.

For PvP, its good in a gang setting, where you have someone to tackle for you and/or you are bubble camping. The myrmidon does too much damage to ignore, but if they try to kill you, your damage plus your gangs is going to rip them up while they try to bust your tank. I wouldnt recommend it for solo work though, as you have to seriously compromise the tank to put on an AB and/or scram, and both of those eat cap that you wont have with the SPR nerfing your recharge.

Best combat test Ive had of my passive myrmidon to date was a few weeks ago in low sec. Sitting outside station while waiting for a freighter op to get ready, and I notice this domi warping in on us and then warping away, desperately trying to get someone to follow him to a planet. I figure Ive got my passive tanked myrmidon, and I have backup in the system, so what the heck. I follow him to the planet and come out of warp right on top of not only the domi, but a vexor as well, and they have a scorp standing off about 50k away for jamming support.

I kicked out my drones immediately upon exiting warp, so when the first guy aggressed me (the vexor) he got wtfpwned by 5 ogre IIs. I didnt even have a scram on but he wasnt aligned or moving so they ate him before he could warp off. During the 10 seconds or so it took the vexor to die, I call my gang on vent and tell them to warp to me for a good time. As soon as the vexor popped, my drones went after the scorpion cause he had jammed me by that time, and the Domi starts hitting me with t2 drones, explosive (probably thinking I was armor tanked and explosive was his best bet). Oopsie for him. Explosive is my strongest resist. Scorp warps away leaving a brown trail across space, and right about that time my gang comes out of warp, so we proceed to introduce the domi to what he was hoping to throw on me. The domi tried to the end to break my tank, but they never got me below about 75% shields.


Rogue Clone
Posted - 2007.04.12 18:53:00 - [15]
 

Shameless self promotion here, but if anyone is interested in trying the passive tanked myrmidon, I've got one on contract in jita with the 3 Core Defence Field Purgers in Jita for 90 mil (about 10 mil below market for the ship and rigs)

n0thing
Executive Intervention
Controlled Chaos
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:00:00 - [16]
 

Read the whole post(s), and well that very well proved that in current state of things passive shield tanks are:

- Vastly overpowered, none non-capital ship will not ever break this tank.
- Do not need specialized ship nor deep skill specialization.
- Leave alot of space for damage dealing and nosf/guns.
- The penalty on cap doesnt solve the issue since cap is not used at all and moreover penatly is too low for average 2-3 BS capable tank on a lower class ship.


nerf?Laughing

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:16:00 - [17]
 

demonfurbie,
A great idea about turning off your SPRs when doing long distance warping, and then turning them back on at your destination. I've done that in the past with haulers (turning off cargo expanders to increase their speed) but hadn't thought of doing it for the SPRs.

Zirth,
Thanks for pointing out the rate at which the cap booster can recharge your cap. I'm not familiar with using them and thought about including them in my write-up but it then slipped my mind.

WredStorm

Scordite
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:28:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Scordite on 12/04/2007 19:27:31

Pretty sure you have enough cap recharge left over in passive shield tank setup to swap the power diag for a shield flux, which will make a noticable impact on peak recharge.

Then again, you need the pg from the power diag to fit 5x 650mm arty II if you go for the 4 lse setup Wink

Brian Kith
Elite Underworld Special Forces
OWN Alliance
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:30:00 - [19]
 

The problem with passive tanks is not the passive tank itself, it's the mechanic that makes it possible: Missile Launchers.

Because a ML uses no cap, you can basically throw your cap in the toilet and not worry about. If ML's used cap, you'd see a lot of that go away. Dun matter how much you can tank if you can't do any damage.

Caldari Online
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:31:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: n0thing
Read the whole post(s), and well that very well proved that in current state of things passive shield tanks are:

- Vastly overpowered, none non-capital ship will not ever break this tank.
- Do not need specialized ship nor deep skill specialization.
- Leave alot of space for damage dealing and nosf/guns. that is not true, you cant use hybrids or lasers and pg would be staped for nosf
- The penalty on cap doesnt solve the issue since cap is not used at all and moreover penatly is too low for average 2-3 BS capable tank on a lower class ship.


nerf?Laughing



not really becuase it is using every single slot for a tank.
it can not web, scram, mwd, or shoot a weapon that uses any cap

also 1 BS would find it hard to beak the tank, bar amarr pulse, but 2 BS would have no problem

Deus Ex'Machina
Amarr
modro
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:39:00 - [21]
 

WredStorm,

Your myrm setup has one major flaw, it can be nossed.

Check this one:

5x LSE II
6x SPR II
3x CFP
3x 280 mm t2 arties and 3x 720 mm t2 arties.
Both hardwires of 5% shield regen and size.

22353 shields with 87.87 full regen,
636 peak shield regen
1020 average tank/second.
It can't be nossed to death, it uses no cap ^^
The arties can deal almost 150 dps, with t2 ammo and implants.

However , this setup has little to no practical uses except for the most powerfull cheap tank possible because , with the current prices i think the ship + modules can get up to 150 mill...

With Core Field Purger tech 2 this setup can rake 771.8 shield regen / second, that's 1238 average tank/second ...

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:45:00 - [22]
 

Scordite,
If you put in a Shield Flux Coil II instead of the PDS II, your peak cap regen would be 3.07 cap/s vs. your usage rate of 3.2 cap/s. In other words, you couldn't sustain it forever, which was one thing I tried to achieve with both setups I proposed above.

If you're willing to make the change though, it drops your shields to 15429 (from 19059) and your recharge rate goes to 86.33 seconds (from 112.85), giving you a peak shield regen of ~446.8 (compared to 422), so yes, it does give you a stronger tank to make such a change. Increasing your Engergy Systems Operation skill to 5 puts you at a 3.28 peak cap regen, just a fraction more than what you'd be expending, so if you want a tank that can run forever you can achieve such just by training that skill up one more level.

Someone might also consider simply going with a 6th SPR II. Your shields would go to 18151.56 with a recharge time of 93.73 giving you a peak recharge rate of 484.15 hp/sec. Your peak cap regen would be 2.28, which really isn't that different than 3.07... pop on one medium NOS and you can suck a target for 6 cap/s, thus making either scenario work.

Again, the two setups I discussed in my original post are both capable of sustaining their tanks indefinitely (as long as your not NOS'd), but there are tons of variations that will give you different results if you're willing to accept other criteria, such as accepting that you'd have to NOS your opponent, or kill them before you cap ran out, or train up some more skills, etc.

Wred

n0thing
Executive Intervention
Controlled Chaos
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:47:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Caldari Online
Originally by: n0thing
Read the whole post(s), and well that very well proved that in current state of things passive shield tanks are:

- Vastly overpowered, none non-capital ship will not ever break this tank.
- Do not need specialized ship nor deep skill specialization.
- Leave alot of space for damage dealing and nosf/guns. that is not true, you cant use hybrids or lasers and pg would be staped for nosf
- The penalty on cap doesnt solve the issue since cap is not used at all and moreover penatly is too low for average 2-3 BS capable tank on a lower class ship.


nerf?Laughing



not really becuase it is using every single slot for a tank.
it can not web, scram, mwd, or shoot a weapon that uses any cap

also 1 BS would find it hard to beak the tank, bar amarr pulse, but 2 BS would have no problem



Well, he says 900ish tankable DPS on average, means say round it up to 1000 to take into account all kinds of damage/fit layouts, still makes it hard since tanked ship still eats them with drones or guns or missles.

Moreover, a tank can easily be lightened to say tank 500-600 dps, still too much for solo and still can swap one slot for scrambler, wich uses same as invul field. You can even deactivate it between cycles if enemy not aligned anywhere yet.

Imo, the tanking that takes all slots isnt enough, for example difference in gank setup is that it can damage great but hardly can tank, the tank supposed to be opposite, hardcore damage absording while barely can go into offence. Ofc, major part of setups is a mix, but when you push your ship to the end of setup specialization tanking ship has more versatile role then ganking ship.

Caldari Online
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:48:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Deus Ex'Machina
WredStorm,

Your myrm setup has one major flaw, it can be nossed.

Check this one:

5x LSE II
6x SPR II
3x CFP
3x 280 mm t2 arties and 3x 720 mm t2 arties.
Both hardwires of 5% shield regen and size.

22353 shields with 87.87 full regen,
636 peak shield regen
1020 average tank/second.
It can't be nossed to death, it uses no cap ^^
The arties can deal almost 150 dps, with t2 ammo and implants.

However , this setup has little to no practical uses except for the most powerfull cheap tank possible because , with the current prices i think the ship + modules can get up to 150 mill...

With Core Field Purger tech 2 this setup can rake 771.8 shield regen / second, that's 1238 average tank/second ...


nice if it fits.

only thing i would change perhaps is the guns for 6x medium AC. although 6x small t2 arts seems nice for anti small ship and t2 ehavy drones for larger stuff

Caldari Online
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:52:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: n0thing

Well, he says 900ish tankable DPS on average, means say round it up to 1000 to take into account all kinds of damage/fit layouts, still makes it hard since tanked ship still eats them with drones or guns or missles.

Moreover, a tank can easily be lightened to say tank 500-600 dps, still too much for solo and still can swap one slot for scrambler, wich uses same as invul field. You can even deactivate it between cycles if enemy not aligned anywhere yet.

Imo, the tanking that takes all slots isnt enough, for example difference in gank setup is that it can damage great but hardly can tank, the tank supposed to be opposite, hardcore damage absording while barely can go into offence. Ofc, major part of setups is a mix, but when you push your ship to the end of setup specialization tanking ship has more versatile role then ganking ship.




80% of its damage is coming from 5 drones which can die very easily


also a BS can actively tank 1000DPS and still do great DPS, while still having a webber, 24km, mwd and a cap injector

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:52:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Deus Ex'Machina
WredStorm,

Your myrm setup has one major flaw, it can be nossed.

Check this one:

5x LSE II
6x SPR II
3x CFP
3x 280 mm t2 arties and 3x 720 mm t2 arties.
Both hardwires of 5% shield regen and size.

22353 shields with 87.87 full regen,
636 peak shield regen
1020 average tank/second.
It can't be nossed to death, it uses no cap ^^
The arties can deal almost 150 dps, with t2 ammo and implants.

However , this setup has little to no practical uses except for the most powerfull cheap tank possible because , with the current prices i think the ship + modules can get up to 150 mill...

With Core Field Purger tech 2 this setup can rake 771.8 shield regen / second, that's 1238 average tank/second ...

Deus,
I've actually posted that same setup (minus the high slots) in another thread. It's definitely viable and if you're expecting to be NOS'd may be the best way to go. If, however, you're not worried about being NOS'd (such as in most PvE missions) then swapping out one LSE II for an Invulnerability Field II gives you higher tankable DPS in all 4 damage areas. If you don't mind relying on NOS to keep your Invulnerability Field IIs going then actually putting in two is the best solution.

With 3x LSE II and 2x Invuln II in your mids and 6x SPR IIs in your lows you can achieve the following:

Peak Regen/sec: 395.93
Resists & Tankable DPS
EM = 48.25% = 765 tankable DPS
EX = 79.30% = 1913 tankable DPS
KI = 68.95% = 1275 tankable DPS
TH = 58.60% = 956 tankable DPS
Average = 1227 tankable DPS

It costs 6.4 cap/s to run both Invuln IIs, you'd regen 2.28 cap/s at peak, so one medium NOS (sucking 6 cap/s) would be enough to let you run it non-stop.

Just another variation that is possible. :)

Wred

Terianna Eri
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:55:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Terianna Eri on 12/04/2007 19:53:30
Yep.
I concur.
the myrmidon is some good.
Extremely good you might even say.
Or even...
overpowered?

Stacking penalty on SPR might help, I suppose. Would keep people from, say, fitting ALL their lows with SPR IIs, while 2 or 3 remains effective. Frankly though 'global module nerf' seems a little ridiculous.

IMHO
the problem is that the myrmidon can
a) shield tank better than a drake (??????????) with lots and lots of SPR
(I fly a passively tanked drake, fully t2, and it tanks like 600-700 dps, rigged, running the full 13slot tank, and i have all those skills and some minor shield implants and I still fall 200ish dps short for some reason)
b) use lots of highs for nos (nos ftw Sad) (see also: "HAI LOOK I DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THIS SPR CAP THING")
c) uh, something involving 5x bonused ogre IIs? Something like... uh... as much damage as a nosdomi?
That's... definitely not even remotely unbalanced. At all.

Edit: Not screaming for "OMFG NERF MYRMIDON" (that would make my signature somewhat ironic), nor am I opposing outside-the-box setups, but imho...
when the battlecruiser... with an armor rep bonus... tanks better by using (virtually and sometimes) ZERO cap than it does by using [more than zero] cap?
seems a little bit silly to me D:

WredStorm
Posted - 2007.04.12 19:59:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: WredStorm on 12/04/2007 20:02:33
Originally by: Brian Kith
The problem with passive tanks is not the passive tank itself, it's the mechanic that makes it possible: Missile Launchers.

Because a ML uses no cap, you can basically throw your cap in the toilet and not worry about. If ML's used cap, you'd see a lot of that go away. Dun matter how much you can tank if you can't do any damage.


Brian,
Don't forget to include projectile weapons and drones in the category of weapon systems that use no power. My standard mission running setup has no weapons in my uppers other than a civilian gatling gun for getting agro at a distance... the rest are tractors and salvagers and 1 NOS (to help power the tractors and salvagers). Ogre IIs and Hammerhead IIs are my main damage dealing source.

Whether this is all too powerful or not is up to the devs to decide, and of course players can weigh in on the issue. Personally, I like that I can do this as it suits my playing style very well and I just kind of stumbled onto the idea of doing this after discovering that I really disliked armor tanking my Myrmidon and Domi.

I hope the devs decide that the tradeoffs are such that they won't change how passive shield tanking works... I don't think it is overly unbalanced and I think it would be better for the devs to work on improving the effectiveness of armor tanking rather than nerfing the effectiveness of passive shield tanking. That is of course just my (admitedly biased) opinion. :)

Wred

Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
Posted - 2007.04.12 20:07:00 - [29]
 

The problem with a stacking penalty is it would make a lot of ships unusable as passive tanks.

T2 SPR's only just let Gallente become the leaders of passive tanks again like they should be. If you nerf them Caldari will pull ahead again and that’s not right.

Its extenders that need nerfing and shield recharges need boosting.

Terianna Eri
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2007.04.12 20:12:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Pottsey
The problem with a stacking penalty is it would make a lot of ships unusable as passive tanks.

T2 SPR's only just let Gallente become the leaders of passive tanks again like they should be. If you nerf them Caldari will pull ahead again and that’s not right.

Its extenders that need nerfing and shield recharges need boosting.


Sure, why should caldari do ANYTHING aside from run missions and snipe in rokhs in fleet combat? Rolling Eyes


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only