These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Armor Tanking VS Shield Tanking

Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Siigari Kitawa
New Eden Archery Club
#21 - 2013-04-03 12:31:22 UTC
Drake Doe wrote:

Are you comparing armor ships vs shield ships or shield setups on armor ships and vice versa?

This is mostly native. Most armor boats (meant for doing damage) have high raw damage which is counterbalanced by their poor speed.

Need stuff moved? Push Industries will handle it. Serving highsec, lowsec and nullsec - and we do it faster and more reliably than anyone else. Ingame channel: PUSHX
Perihelion Olenard
#22 - 2013-04-04 11:20:38 UTC
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
Drake Doe wrote:

Are you comparing armor ships vs shield ships or shield setups on armor ships and vice versa?

This is mostly native. Most armor boats (meant for doing damage) have high raw damage which is counterbalanced by their poor speed.

But, if you shield tank them, they can put out an insane amount of damage at a longer range with no speed or agility limitation.
Ned Plantagenet
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#23 - 2013-04-04 11:31:50 UTC
I flew with armor fitted rupture with t2 AC's along with a fleet of 5-6 other guys. Just make the tank buffer with passive hardeners with a damage control. Mid slots are free for your choosing.

In just a straight cruiser fleet we killed BS and BC along with cruiser fleets its fun and cheap when you lose them 30mil a ship with fit. Makes a fun time in pvp
Gitanmaxx
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2013-04-04 17:15:52 UTC
Every answer in this thread will be anecdotal. So I'll add one of my own.

I've been armor tanking for a long time. But I was a pve only kind of awful player. I started doing pvp a couple months ago and quickly decided that all my sp on armor tanking felt like it was a waste so I spent a month and half training shield tanking skills because everything I fit with shields ends up looking a lot better.

just one point of view from one player, but that's how it felt to me. And the usual line you'll hear of "with armor tanking you have more free slots for tackle is a little misleading because shield tanking ships will have more mids and armor tanking ships will have more lows so that's a wash on the slot argument.
Lucian Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2013-04-04 19:53:13 UTC
Gitanmaxx wrote:
Every answer in this thread will be anecdotal. So I'll add one of my own.

I've been armor tanking for a long time. But I was a pve only kind of awful player. I started doing pvp a couple months ago and quickly decided that all my sp on armor tanking felt like it was a waste so I spent a month and half training shield tanking skills because everything I fit with shields ends up looking a lot better.

just one point of view from one player, but that's how it felt to me. And the usual line you'll hear of "with armor tanking you have more free slots for tackle is a little misleading because shield tanking ships will have more mids and armor tanking ships will have more lows so that's a wash on the slot argument.



This is how i am starting to feel. But I am so invested right now in my armor tanking sp's, .... part of me wants to just go ahead finish out the training. Just don't know if i will be happy with the finished results.
Umega
Solis Mensa
#26 - 2013-04-04 21:56:50 UTC
Flat DPS number doesn't really mean ****, people.

It is applied DPS that matters. Can pee out numbers all day long, but the numbers that matter are the ones that actually land on target, you know.. in the game itself. Tracking/gun rez/sig radius/speed/trans-angular velocity/optimal/falloff all need to be factored. Not simply what eft tells you.

Armor ships have the better base caps, also the open mids to fit boosters without sacrificing resist slots. DCU favors armor tanking (and amarr/gallente have better structures too). RR armor is better.

When Tracking Enhancers get nerfed.. TCs could be more favorable, increasing the gap between armor/shield when comparing Applied DPS.

Just some things missing from the arguements being had I'd like to point out.

Speed = GTFO.. unless you're slow-wited, it doesn't equate to iwin. To the person complaining in every thread about speed.. stop sucking. Kite vessels are popular so people can pick fights.. that doesn't mean they win all fights, infact they can't handle a lot of ships. Slower ships, pilgrim easy example.. can handle more targets than say a cynabal. Also.. GTFO is favored because it can negate 'hot-drops/reinforcements' arrival by using dscan/local properly and warping off when warrented.

 Ume-Pro Studios
Hakaimono
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2013-04-04 22:07:12 UTC
Armor < shield < hull
Hull tanking is for champions.

Armor is good for ships that do well with ewar. Also drone ships have space for omnis, eccm, and prop when armor tanked. Exploration Ishtar is a good example of a ship that succeeds well with armor tanking.
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#28 - 2013-04-05 00:26:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Angelique Duchemin
The game is pretty balanced between Armour and Shield. The decider is what ships your fleets fly really. You pick a ship you like and whatever is best for that particular ship is what you use.


One day I am going to build a Hull tanked Carrier. Fill the cargo with quafe. Bring it to low sec and fight pirates for as long as it lasts.

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2013-04-05 19:47:59 UTC
Armour means mids free for ewar and arguably superior logistics fleets since remote support modules are also mid slots.

Shield means speed as it frees lows for nanos and mostly superior damage as all damage mods are in the lows. And obviously plates on armour ships widen the gap further but less so now because of honeycombing.

For small gangs you're likely to want to shield fit, larger gangs either way is fine. The new osprey moa brawl fleet doctrine can rival any armour brawl doctrine these days

Art of Explosions
Perihelion Olenard
#30 - 2013-04-05 20:48:31 UTC
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
Armour means mids free for ewar and arguably superior logistics fleets since remote support modules are also mid slots.

Shield means speed as it frees lows for nanos and mostly superior damage as all damage mods are in the lows. And obviously plates on armour ships widen the gap further but less so now because of honeycombing.

For small gangs you're likely to want to shield fit, larger gangs either way is fine. The new osprey moa brawl fleet doctrine can rival any armour brawl doctrine these days

The benefit of armor honeycombing is rather small in reality, but still better than nothing.
Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2013-04-06 09:56:32 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
Armour means mids free for ewar and arguably superior logistics fleets since remote support modules are also mid slots.

Shield means speed as it frees lows for nanos and mostly superior damage as all damage mods are in the lows. And obviously plates on armour ships widen the gap further but less so now because of honeycombing.

For small gangs you're likely to want to shield fit, larger gangs either way is fine. The new osprey moa brawl fleet doctrine can rival any armour brawl doctrine these days

The benefit of armor honeycombing is rather small in reality, but still better than nothing.


the benefit on mwd and AB speed is small but the agility you gain from it is actually quite significant.

Art of Explosions
Perihelion Olenard
#32 - 2013-04-06 16:57:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
Tsukino Stareine wrote:


the benefit on mwd and AB speed is small but the agility you gain from it is actually quite significant.

When combined with the base mass reduction on selected plates, yes. With the others, not so much. They all should have had their base mass reduced. At least the new ancillary armor repairer made it worth putting an 800mm plate and a MAAR on a cruiser instead of a 1600mm plate. It requires less PG and adds much less mass while giving the potential for taking more damage than before. The unfortunate part is using two slots for HP instead of one.
Markus Navarro
Osmon Integrated Robotics
#33 - 2013-04-06 17:21:09 UTC
Real men hull tank.

I sell drones and drones accessories.
Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#34 - 2013-04-07 00:21:35 UTC
A lot of Proteus pilots would disagree with this thread.
Gallion
Malevelon Roe Industries
Convocation of Empyreans
#35 - 2013-05-15 11:50:17 UTC
in this whole topic I have to reguard that Amarr ships in general feel to be the worst in pvp. (as much i hate saying it)
the amarr strenghts are in:
Armor tank, Tracking disruption, Cap-disruption (nos/neut), and High sheild Damage,
All of which are nearly not a weakness in most other Faction's pvp ships.
Like it literally feels the amarr only play Majority Supportive role and less Frontline.
Since more Gallente/minmatar/Caldari are Ideal to Either Greater Ewar or Kiting/DPS or tanking/DPS roles.
Amarr in general just feels so underpowered in comparision to Frontline battlers of the other factions.

This is a Signature, It makes people Stare. (Man I gotta Make one , or Find one to steal)
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-05-18 22:04:03 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Siigari Kitawa wrote:
Drake Doe wrote:

Are you comparing armor ships vs shield ships or shield setups on armor ships and vice versa?

This is mostly native. Most armor boats (meant for doing damage) have high raw damage which is counterbalanced by their poor speed.

But, if you shield tank them, they can put out an insane amount of damage at a longer range with no speed or agility limitation.




That's why the best armor ships shield tank in many many occasions.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
amGreat
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#37 - 2013-05-19 15:03:11 UTC
Lucian Crendraven wrote:
Is it just me or is armor tanking not the way to go for pvp. Any thoughts?


not at all. Shield buffer is better than armor buffer when you want to still fly fast and light.

For very small engagements, crystal implants let faction and officer active shield tanks go into beast mode and far out tank their armor counterparts.
Ziester
State War Academy
Caldari State
#38 - 2013-05-20 00:11:05 UTC
There's one reason Shieldtanking is favored in fleets.

Shield boost/transfer amount is applied immediately on activation.
Armor rep/transfer has to cycle all the way to completion to apply the rep amount.
You simply can't afford to wait 5-10 seconds for the armor repair cycle to deliver the boost in fleets.

(Unless you have a Nidhoggur buddy around using Shield Xfers as a buffer for the Armor Xfers to kick in, but I don't think that's even used anymore)

Pop, rock, Metal radio station
Alexander McKeon
Perkone
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-05-20 05:23:04 UTC
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
Armour means mids free for ewar and arguably superior logistics fleets since remote support modules are also mid slots.

Shield means speed as it frees lows for nanos and mostly superior damage as all damage mods are in the lows. And obviously plates on armour ships widen the gap further but less so now because of honeycombing.

For small gangs you're likely to want to shield fit, larger gangs either way is fine. The new osprey moa brawl fleet doctrine can rival any armour brawl doctrine these days

Tsukino has a very relevant point about leaving the mids free for ewar; if you want to fit ECCM & prop mod your logistics ships, that's a lot easier to do with Guardians than Basilisks since it doesn't eat into their tank, and the T3s that see heavy use in PvP (Proteus for DPS, Loki for webs, ECM-Tengus, neut legions, etc) all end up working better with an armour tank. Being able to fit lots of webs, scrams, tracking disruptors, etc. is a very significant advantage for an armour-tanked fleet.

As to the point concerning superior damage, as Klymer says, many Proteus pilots would disagree.

I would very, very much like to see an Osprey / Moa brawl gang show up in our system looking for a fight. Twisted

Gallion wrote:

Like it literally feels the amarr only play Majority Supportive role and less Frontline.
Have you seen the DPS that HAM legions put out?
Previous page12