These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

When is the AAR getting added to the game?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Goremageddon Box
Guerrilla Flotilla
#21 - 2012-07-29 13:41:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Goremageddon Box
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
saltrock0000 wrote:
I disagree with this strongly.

For a long time shields have excelled in burst tanking whilst armor have done well at passive tanking...

I dont see why they should change this... Armor EXCELL at pvp where as shields excell at PVE!!

I really wish the cry babies would stop before they have CCP turn every ship into the same beuge uniform stats.

Afterall who wants to play SpaceBricks online?? So yeah STOP IT!


I'm not sure what game you have been playing, but shields have excelled in PvP for some time now. With shields you're much more agile, faster, can fit for gank and shield RR isn't delayed. Those are pretty big benefits in PvP, especially since the drawbacks of armor buffer makes you specifically vulnerable to range control.

Now shield burst tank has been buffed to the point, that trying to active armor tank just seems silly in comparison. Armor tankers got a module too, that is limited to a single one/ship, the resists it gives aren't impressive, it's slow to adapt, bad at adapting(doesn't take damage type proportions in to consideration) and resets if it shuts off for any reason. What an absolute sack of crap in comparison to the ASB. With armor you can still get a bigger buffer, but you sacrifice mobility and damage module slots to do it and armor RR is delayed, so it's starting to look like a one trick pony and that trick isn't all that impressive.

More importantly this isn't about making every tanking type the same. It's about making them all useful and good for something relevant. They guy in CCP who did the shield module leaned on the side of making it overpowered to get a lot of people to use it and planned to nerf it if/when problems come up. The armor guy created a prenerfed module, that has some marginal use cases, but isn't going to be in any way game altering.


This.

+1.


Shield is so much "safer" to fly because you can survive. Here, look at this... a Claymore with over 2,500 tanking ability and enough room for 30 navy cap booster 400's plus ammo. Armor buffer cant survive 30 cap boosters. Armor tanking is somewhat possible, but its a command ship and will have a fleet with it.

http://i.imgur.com/p8hVu.jpg
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
#22 - 2012-07-29 15:21:09 UTC
a sleip with one large and one x-large ASB has 38709 shield hp before any has to reload now that is about what your standard triple plate BS has armor...

Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.
Elvis Fett
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2012-07-29 15:27:13 UTC
ASB does not do much to protect one from getting alpha'ed, armor plates do.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2012-07-29 15:27:56 UTC
I don't really see why we need an Ancillary Armor Repairer.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Soi Mala
Whacky Waving Inflatable Flailing Arm Tubemen
#25 - 2012-07-29 15:31:31 UTC
When shields get a slave equivalent, an EANM equivalent, and the ability to fit EWAR in their lows, then maybe armor will need an ASB. Until then, enjoy the little diversity that is left in the game. If you prefer shield, there is nothing stopping you training it.
Katalci
Kismesis
#26 - 2012-07-29 16:44:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Katalci
The point of the ASB is that it frees up a midslot, previously needed for a cap booster, for more buffer, resistances, or ewar. You don't have this problem with an armor tank.

Crazy KSK wrote:
a sleip with one large and one x-large ASB has 38709 shield hp before any has to reload now that is about what your standard triple plate BS has armor...

Now, which one survives when it's shot by five 1400mm Machariels?
Manar Detri
#27 - 2012-07-29 17:37:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Manar Detri
Katalci wrote:
The point of the ASB is that it frees up a midslot, previously needed for a cap booster, for more buffer, resistances, or ewar. You don't have this problem with an armor tank.

Crazy KSK wrote:
a sleip with one large and one x-large ASB has 38709 shield hp before any has to reload now that is about what your standard triple plate BS has armor...

Now, which one survives when it's shot by five 1400mm Machariels?


Letsee, an armor repair brutix gets an overheated tank of 574.5hp/s in omni resists while sacrificing 5x lowslots, a middle slot and 3 rig slots for it's armor tank. It has 410 turret dps with faction ammo. It has 1050m/s speed with mwd on and can run for 1 minute 21seconds untill dry and having to wait till cap booster is ready from reloading, this is while running tank. Sig radious without mwd on is 300.

An x-lasb brutix sacrifices 1 medium slot and 3 rigs to get a 665.6hp/s omni tank that lasts about 60 seconds. It has 602 turret dps with faction ammo. It's speed is 1239m/s with mwd on and can run it for 3m10s, this is while running tank. Sig radious without mwd on is 338

A cyclone sacrifices 3 mid slots and 3 rig slots for its tank. Overheated tank mods both lasb's able to tank 537.8hp/s meaning 60 seconds of 1075.7hp/s or 537.8hp/s perma. The cyclone can put out 445 turret/missile dps with faction ammo. It also has 1311 speed with mwd on and can run it for 4 minutes 40 second, this is while running tank. Sig radious without mwd on is 270.

The armor repairer brutix is the only one that suffers from neuts as it is the only one that requires cap to run it's tank. Both of the brutixes have a stasis webifier, the cyclone can be fitted with one but that will drop it's tank to 418.5hp/s per large booster.


So now, riddle me this, which one of these ships sacrifices the most, which one is the best and which one the worst, all of them are meant to engage at the same range (though the cyclone does have some dps advantage at longer ranges 4-15km)

Also bear in mind the brutix hull bonus is Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage and 7.5% bonus to Armor Repairer effectiveness per level

Edit: small note, the armor brutix has to use navy 800's (volume 24m3) while the shield brutix and cyclone use navy 400's (volume 12m3) which are half the size.

2nd Edit: I would like to state though that i do not think ancillary shield boosters need a nerf, I actually think it was well done and atlast brought active tanking back to the game. I do think though that something needs to be done to active armor tanking and the speed reductions on armor tanking need to be re thinked as they give a whole lot more punishment than shield tanking does.
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-07-29 18:26:15 UTC
Well I think we could use more YARR tbh.

Sugar Von MurdererTits : Jake Warbird gets my vote for most intriguing and attractive male character in Eve.
Conrad Makbure
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-07-29 19:00:23 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
saltrock0000 wrote:
I disagree with this strongly.

For a long time shields have excelled in burst tanking whilst armor have done well at passive tanking...

I dont see why they should change this... Armor EXCELL at pvp where as shields excell at PVE!!

I really wish the cry babies would stop before they have CCP turn every ship into the same beuge uniform stats.

Afterall who wants to play SpaceBricks online?? So yeah STOP IT!


I'm not sure what game you have been playing, but shields have excelled in PvP for some time now. With shields you're much more agile, faster, can fit for gank and shield RR isn't delayed. Those are pretty big benefits in PvP, especially since the drawbacks of armor buffer makes you specifically vulnerable to range control.

Now shield burst tank has been buffed to the point, that trying to active armor tank just seems silly in comparison. Armor tankers got a module too, that is limited to a single one/ship, the resists it gives aren't impressive, it's slow to adapt, bad at adapting(doesn't take damage type proportions in to consideration) and resets if it shuts off for any reason. What an absolute sack of crap in comparison to the ASB. With armor you can still get a bigger buffer, but you sacrifice mobility and damage module slots to do it and armor RR is delayed, so it's starting to look like a one trick pony and that trick isn't all that impressive.

More importantly this isn't about making every tanking type the same. It's about making them all useful and good for something relevant. They guy in CCP who did the shield module leaned on the side of making it overpowered to get a lot of people to use it and planned to nerf it if/when problems come up. The armor guy created a prenerfed module, that has some marginal use cases, but isn't going to be in any way game altering.


This. If not an AAR-like module, then something to make active armor tanking better. I was suggesting taking the load off of the cap without giving up another slot.
Eternal Error
Doomheim
#30 - 2012-07-29 19:12:02 UTC
Hopefully never.
Garreth Vlox
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2012-07-29 19:39:20 UTC
Conrad Makbure wrote:
What is an AAR you ask? Well, Ancillary Armor Repairer. The ASB has no real counterpart on the armor tank side, correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of something that compliments it. I mean, the ASB is an odd add to the game; did active shield tanking really need something like this added?

Oooo-k, cool, but can something like this be added for active armor tanking? Thanks.



this woul dbe nice to see, I used to love armor tanking and with this mod added it would be viable again and maybe even fun.

The LULZ Boat.
Manar Detri
#32 - 2012-07-29 20:00:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Manar Detri
Muad 'dib wrote:
U lot can haz AAR when shields get an X-L extender :)


The comment of a man that does not know how the game works. Lemme enlighten you.

First off, there are 2 modules in this game that every pvp ship "needs" to have, one is the damage control, a low slot module that increases shield, armor and hull resistances (12.5% shields, 15% armor and 60% struct with t2 module). The other item that is pretty much need to have is a propulsion module, a medium slot module. Universally in most pvp fits both of these modules are present. What this means is that every armor tanker loses a low slot to a damage control module and every shield setup loses a medium slot for a propulsion module.

Now if we fit an armor ship with all low slot modules towards tanking we will receive a tank that is around the same as a ship that has all his mediums -propulsion used for tanking. Lemme give you some actual number.

Brutix vs Cyclone,
- A brutix will have 74.9k ehp when all low slots and rigs -dmg control are used for armor tanking
- A cyclone will have 68.7k ehp or 77.5k ehp when overheated when all medium slots & rigs -propulsion mod used for shield tanking

Prophecy vs Ferox
- A prophecy will have 112k ehp when armor tanked fully (the same way as the brutix above)
- A ferox will have 97.9k ehp or 112k ehp overheated when fully shield tanked (the same way as the cyclone above)

Now if we had an x-large shield extender in the game shield tankers would have clearly higher ehp than armor tankers.

What this leaves us about tanking differences is the fact that a shield tanker gets free low slots and an armor tanker gets free medium slots, both slot types are used for different things while having some overlap. Where the difference really in ehp only comes to play is when you're using very little slots for tanking. Letsay 2 slots +rigs, in those circumstances armor gets higher ehp, but that rather shows us the power of shield resistance modules on shield side, showing us more of the difference between armor and shield tanking, rather than a flaw.

Do not come talk about scramblers and such, you do not need those when someone else is tackling and to have a fair comparison, both tanking types need to sacrifice the same amount.
Sid Hudgens
Doomheim
#33 - 2012-07-29 20:50:12 UTC
Good lord if you want an ASB so bad then go fly a shield tanked ship!

"....as if 10,058 Goon voices cried out and were suddenly silenced."
Suddenly Forums ForumKings
Doomheim
#34 - 2012-07-29 20:52:20 UTC
Sid Hudgens wrote:
Good lord if you want an ASB so bad then go fly a shield tanked ship!


That was my conclusion too.
Freezehunter
#35 - 2012-07-29 21:19:23 UTC
Soi Mala wrote:
When shields get a slave equivalent, an EANM equivalent, and the ability to fit EWAR in their lows, then maybe armor will need an ASB. Until then, enjoy the little diversity that is left in the game. If you prefer shield, there is nothing stopping you training it.


Yes, because EVERYONE has a slave set in their head.

Also, you do have that, it's called Invulnerability field.

Inappropriate signature, CCP Phantom.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#36 - 2012-07-29 22:11:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Simi Kusoni
Manar Detri wrote:
Muad 'dib wrote:
U lot can haz AAR when shields get an X-L extender :)


The comment of a man that does not know how the game works. Lemme enlighten you.

First off, there are 2 modules in this game that every pvp ship "needs" to have, one is the damage control, a low slot module that increases shield, armor and hull resistances (12.5% shields, 15% armor and 60% struct with t2 module). The other item that is pretty much need to have is a propulsion module, a medium slot module. Universally in most pvp fits both of these modules are present. What this means is that every armor tanker loses a low slot to a damage control module and every shield setup loses a medium slot for a propulsion module.

Now if we fit an armor ship with all low slot modules towards tanking we will receive a tank that is around the same as a ship that has all his mediums -propulsion used for tanking. Lemme give you some actual number.

Brutix vs Cyclone,
- A brutix will have 74.9k ehp when all low slots and rigs -dmg control are used for armor tanking
- A cyclone will have 68.7k ehp or 77.5k ehp when overheated when all medium slots & rigs -propulsion mod used for shield tanking

Prophecy vs Ferox
- A prophecy will have 112k ehp when armor tanked fully (the same way as the brutix above)
- A ferox will have 97.9k ehp or 112k ehp overheated when fully shield tanked (the same way as the cyclone above)

Now if we had an x-large shield extender in the game shield tankers would have clearly higher ehp than armor tankers.

What this leaves us about tanking differences is the fact that a shield tanker gets free low slots and an armor tanker gets free medium slots, both slot types are used for different things while having some overlap. Where the difference really in ehp only comes to play is when you're using very little slots for tanking. Letsay 2 slots +rigs, in those circumstances armor gets higher ehp, but that rather shows us the power of shield resistance modules on shield side, showing us more of the difference between armor and shield tanking, rather than a flaw.

Do not come talk about scramblers and such, you do not need those when someone else is tackling and to have a fair comparison, both tanking types need to sacrifice the same amount.
Yeah, you're right, fitting points on your PvP ships is totally overrated.

Also, not fitting a cap booster is a severe hinderance in PvP even when using an ASB. As it makes you extremely vulnerable to neuts, once neuted you will likely be unable to hold your point or pulse MWD to escape. In extreme cases even running hardeners won't be possible.

This is why in quite a few situations and fits standard booster fits are far superior to ASBs, it just depends on the ship. But either way, armor versions would be ridiculous.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]
Rellik B00n
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2012-07-29 22:19:04 UTC
buffer. armor you get buffer. also mid slots you can use for something.

shield you get no useful mids.

if you wanted to argue armor and shield should have the same mods available then you should also allow low slot versions of all mid slot modules.

at which point you might as well not have shield and armor.

so to answer the OP: never, hopefully.
[Of a request for change ask: Who Benefits?](https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=199765)
Manar Detri
#38 - 2012-07-30 09:35:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Manar Detri
Rellik B00n wrote:
buffer. armor you get buffer. also mid slots you can use for something.

shield you get no useful mids.

if you wanted to argue armor and shield should have the same mods available then you should also allow low slot versions of all mid slot modules.

at which point you might as well not have shield and armor.

so to answer the OP: never, hopefully.


There are no midslot hull upgrades, there are no midslot damage modules, no midslot cpu modules, powergrid modules, no propulsion upgrades.

So i really don't see why there should be low slot versions of ewar modules when the comparative mid slot damage modules do not exist.

It's part of the choice, armor tank and you get more mid slots, shield tank and you get more spare low slots.

But the big problem still is, for active armor tanking you'll be sacrificing alot of low slots and a mid slot or 2 for cap booster and still get alot less tank than a shield setup. Also those modules eat so much pg off a ship that it's impossible to fit higher tier turrets, which ofcourse is possible with shield setups.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#39 - 2012-07-30 09:50:16 UTC
Grumpymunky wrote:
When are hull reppers going to get a shorter cycle time?

THIS

all the monkeys know that hull tanking needs to be made a serious alternative

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
VLAD VIRONS
Evolve Xcellence
#40 - 2012-07-30 10:46:45 UTC  |  Edited by: VLAD VIRONS
shield tank +/-
+good passive tank, u just no need to care about anything and only press f1 mainly.
+its have selfregen which in some situation double your ehp or even tripple if u fast/agile enough (tengu etc)
+new ASB, there not much to add its OP enough.
+u have low slotes for enough dmg/tracking/speed/agility etc. mods.
- less or sometimes even no slotes for EW modules but u still can have 1 disruptor atleast which is enough if u take in count all pluses.

armor:
+/-?relative good passive tank(if not adding bonuses from imps, commands, titans, but what if u add same to shields?).
+/- u have enough med slotes for EW (but still sometimes u alsoo adding capbooster)
- forget about speed/agility.
- forget about good set up of tank/dmg etc mods.
- no self regen.
- lack of mods like invuls or AAR.
- horrible cycles rates/boosts ammounts of ehp if active.
- that new armor hardner, pls.... its just a trolling or)?
- mostly amoror fited ships using cap therefor r not capstable as its shield mates, and if u still can use your firepower on shield ships there will a problem on armor one.

I so want fly Proteus, but still using a passive tengu (cyna/vaga/etc) where u can laugh at your target and just orbiting it (yea webbed tengu dead tengu but its just a matter of your class), so yea im choosing tengu...

im also wanna try out Hypperion its promiss to be a wherry kind BS, but hey? try compare this one with Maelstrom which is now using ASB where even 2-3 monthly noob can easy tank u and lauch than just dock.


P.S. sure if u good enough u can kill **** even in t1 frig but its so clearly that armor is need to be boosted.

P.P.S. +1 for hull boost also , there only 1-2 ships in eve that actualy can afford to troll with hull tank, but its still a trolling nothing more.
Previous page123Next page