These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Humongous inconsistencies in deadspace tanking mods - shield boosters made extreme
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zyella Stormborn
Green Seekers
#61 - 2012-09-17 01:51:39 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Conclusion of this nonsense debate finishing as always in a soup of intelectual insults and trolling lets just say in the game of rock scisors paper, it's up to you to pick the better one for the job you're supposed to do with withing the group you are working with.

Nothing solved because there's no problem to solve, everything is balanced and perfect, there are only smarter players than others. Roll

@Op: edited because couldn't leave without giving you the last advice, fly shields, use capless guns, double XL-ASB and abuse the crap out of it. Just leave things as they are and stop wasting time and energy to discuss about this. Let the uber balance team take care of it, they actually really know armor is really OP and shields re still in need of a little boost.

Next shield item to improve shield tanking is a XXXl- ASB using cap booster charges 25 that increases combat boosters and implants effects for 100%, reps for 1500 per cycle but gets 60sec recharge time. You can fit as many as you want also, just in case.



*chuckle* I salute you Lin Big smile

There is a special Hell for people like that, Right next to child molestors, and people that talk in the theater. ~Firefly
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
#62 - 2012-09-17 12:24:20 UTC
Lets try a little bigger picture then :

Those mods are most likely to be used on expensive ships like T3s so let's see how are they influencing the balance here.

[Proteus, Droneus]
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corpum A-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II

Corelum C-Type 10MN MicroWarpdrive
Drone Navigation Computer II
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link

Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Improved Cloaking Device II
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher, Sisters Deep Space Scanner Probe I
Small Tractor Beam I

Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I

Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
Proteus Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer
Proteus Offensive - Drone Synthesis Projector
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors
Proteus Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir



[Tengu, Plexer 1]
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Power Diagnostic System II

Corelum C-Type 10MN Afterburner
Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Pithum A-Type EM Ward Amplifier

Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Improved Cloaking Device II

Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I
Medium Warhead Rigor Catalyst II

Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding
Tengu Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer
Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay
Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst



[Tengu, Plexer 2]
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Power Diagnostic System II

Pithum A-Type Medium Shield Booster
Dread Guristas Shield Boost Amplifier
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pithum A-Type EM Ward Amplifier
Corelum C-Type 10MN Afterburner

Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile

Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I
Medium Warhead Rigor Catalyst II

Tengu Defensive - Amplification Node
Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay
Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst
Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Tengu Electronics - Dissolution Sequencer







Comparison :
......................................Proteus.........Tengu 1...........................Tengu 2
EHP................................26400...........37500 ( 42100 OH )........40300( 48600 OH )
Resists sum....................303,7...........341,2...............................339,9
Defence (sustained).......297.............419...................................1115
Defence (reinforced)......324..............419..................................1115
Capacitor.........................6min...........stable 40%.......................stable 38%

If we switch nano for a-type explosive plate on that first Proteus we get :
EHP.................................32300
Resists sum....................325,4
Defence (sustained).......383
Defence (reinforced)......418
Capacitor.........................6min

Things worth noting :
- Tengu uses T2 AIFs while Proteus is using C-EANMs
- First Tengu is using weakest medium booster while Proteus is using the strongest medium repper
- Tengu has much higher sig/speed/range tank
- DPS is similar ( Tengu is just much more effective in applying this dps just like any other shield/missile boat )
- Tengu can project damage to 100km while Proteus can't ( hence it can't tank by range/sig/speed as effectively as Tengu )
- Proteus is much faster but it needs to get very close to apply damage similar to Tengu ( without speed it would deal ~25% damage less than Tengu )

To sum up :
Tengu gets it all - sig/speed/range/burst/sustained/cap-efficient tank while respective armour boat gets nothing better in tanking department.
stup idity
#63 - 2012-09-17 12:26:18 UTC  |  Edited by: stup idity
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote:

But lets leave armour vs shields out of it. The thread is only about deadspace boosters/reppers.


Armor repairers and shield boosters do exactly the same when looked at out of context: nothing, but lying around in your inventory.

You have to fit them on ships and since only fitting rep-modules would be stupid, you also have to put on more stuff - preferably in a more or less useful and used fitting.
You can now start looking at actual tank abilities in various situations and setting them in relation to their costs - not isk, but fitting-, cap-, skillpoint- and whatever costs and overall ship performance that may or may not has been gimped by fitting the according modules. And only after having gone the whole way, it can be tried to draw back conclusions to the repping modules.

Balancing isn't about making things equal, it's about presenting different options that are all equally viable in different, similar and only sometimes the same situations.
Ideally there would be 50% 'armor tanking preferred' and 50% shield tanking preferred situations, just because most ships are also either good at one or the other. Also it would be nice if they were more or less equally useful from 'noob frigate' to 'end game'.

Figuring this out is a rather complex thing. That's probably the reason why so called professional game designers screw this up regularly..

There is one point from the OP that I actually agree on: questioning the performance increases from T2 to ded-space modules of the same kind. Although this might have some justification I can't see.

I am the Herald of all beings that are me.
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
#64 - 2012-09-17 12:27:47 UTC
And the last fit. Full active tank on Proteus.

[Proteus, FullActiveTank]
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corelum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Corpum A-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Corpum A-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Corpum A-Type Energized Explosive Membrane
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II

Corelum C-Type 10MN MicroWarpdrive
Medium Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 800
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link

Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Improved Cloaking Device II
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher, Sisters Deep Space Scanner Probe I
Small Tractor Beam I

Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump I
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II

Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
Proteus Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer
Proteus Offensive - Drone Synthesis Projector
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors
Proteus Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir

EHP.................................32300
Resists sum....................325,4
Defence (sustained).......1279
Defence (reinforced)......1279
Capacitor.........................46sec ( 53% stable with 800 cap charges )

- requires two high-end reppers
- uses six slots for tanking ( cap booster )
- all three rigs used for tanking
- reduced mobility
- reduced damage output
- needs cap charges
stup idity
#65 - 2012-09-17 12:55:11 UTC
Let's see: cap stable, up to 50k gun range (500dps in optimal), 590 dps omni tank.
Not as good as a Tengu and probably a fail fit in one way or another, but still ... Also I have to say that the Tengu/Proteus comparison is a little bit off topic, because one ship doesn't show the big picture and long range pve is also only a small part.


[Proteus, prot]
Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
Proteus Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer
Proteus Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Proteus Offensive - Dissonic Encoding Platform
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors

5x 250mm Railgun II (Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M)
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher

Gistum A-Type 10MN Afterburner
Imperial Navy Cap Recharger
Shadow Serpentis Tracking Computer (Optimal Range Script)

2x Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Corpum A-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Centus X-Type Armor Explosive Hardener
True Sansha Capacitor Power Relay
2x Centii A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating

Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump I
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II

5x Hobgoblin II

I am the Herald of all beings that are me.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#66 - 2012-09-17 13:27:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote:
Things worth noting :
- Tengu uses T2 AIFs while Proteus is using C-EANMs
- First Tengu is using weakest medium booster while Proteus is using the strongest medium repper
- Tengu has much higher sig/speed/range tank
- DPS is similar ( Tengu is just much more effective in applying this dps just like any other shield/missile boat )
- Tengu can project damage to 100km while Proteus can't ( hence it can't tank by range/sig/speed as effectively as Tengu )
- Proteus is much faster but it needs to get very close to apply damage similar to Tengu ( without speed it would deal ~25% damage less than Tengu )
Let's also note that you've built two completely different ships there. One is an exploration ship, the other is not; one is very badly put together, the other is only half-bad; both of them are vastly overtanked…

Quote:
To sum up :
Tengu gets it all - sig/speed/range/burst/sustained/cap-efficient tank while respective armour boat gets nothing better in tanking department.
In other words, nerf Tengu.

This is no surprise and is more than anything else due to the massive damage projection you can get out of missiles. In terms of tanking, there is no particular imbalance: both can put up more than enough tank for anything you'd get yourself into (except maybe L5s and 10/10s, but that's mainly due to the neuting and alpha going on in them than because of the DPS, so for those you need an Ishtar or a Slepinr…).

Oh, and you're quite wrong about what the armour boat, by the way, largely because you didn't compare two similar ships. The Proteus gets the ability to do exploration, the Tengu does not. The Proteus is impervious to ECM, the Tengu is not. If you build them properly, they'll have the same speed and the Proteus will have a much smaller sig radius.

…and as pointed out above, two ship does not make a “bigger picture”. All you've shown is that, to no-one's surprise, the Tengu needs to be scaled back. We'll get to that one soon enough, so don't worry.
stup idity
#67 - 2012-09-17 13:45:04 UTC
There is of course also the option to use a ship where it has its best performance:
Same (fail-) fit as above, just geared towards sepentis resists: over 1k dps tank - cap stable with a small repairer.

[Proteus, prot]
Proteus Defensive - Nanobot Injector
Proteus Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer
Proteus Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Proteus Offensive - Dissonic Encoding Platform
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors

5x 250mm Railgun II (Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M)
Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher

Gistum A-Type 10MN Afterburner
Imperial Navy Cap Recharger
Shadow Serpentis Tracking Computer (Optimal Range Script)

2x Federation Navy Magnetic Field Stabilizer
Corpii A-Type Small Armor Repairer
True Sansha Capacitor Power Relay
2x Centus X-Type Armor Thermic Hardener
Centus X-Type Armor Kinetic Hardener

2x Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump II
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I

5x Hobgoblin II

I am the Herald of all beings that are me.
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
#68 - 2012-09-17 14:01:37 UTC
Tippia wrote:

Let's also note that you've built two completely different ships there.


Completely?
No.
I used drone proteus as an example for a reason.
Drones and missiles have more in common than missiles and turrets.
- travel time
- destructibility ( not that important in pve of course )
- no speed/range-tracking relation for the ship itself
- both are practically immune to ecm ( you forgot about fof missiles and the fact that Tengu uses DisSeq subsystem, which makes the ship itself nearly immune to pve ECM )

Their practical application is very similar. Unless you want to apply blaster damage on that proteus it will be used exactly like missile tengu. So no they are not completely different. Actually they are quite comparable.

Tippia wrote:

One is an exploration ship, the other is not;


Then just remove probe launcher and tractor beam and fit Dissolution Seq subsystem.
There, it's no longer an exploration ship. Nothing has changed in tanking department.
You might want to use nos in those free slots and it will lead to slightly stronger cap but it will not help much.

Tippia wrote:

one is very badly put together, the other is only half-bad;


Care to elaborate?

Tippia wrote:

both of them are vastly overtanked…


Speaking about the first two.
Proteus with that tank can easily die in DED5 unless you only use drones but that means much weaker damage output.
Tengu could use without second AIF but that would leave it with another free slot, which could be used for something else.

The thing is that because of the deadspace shield booster it can tank so much without really using many tanking mods and that combined with the fact that it is a missile boat makes it too good.
Most shield ships are either missiles boats with great range and no speed-tracking issues or projectile boats.
Both can tank through range and missile boats can additionally tank through speed.
Ships that use active armour reppers are mostly blaster boats, which needs to get close to apply their damage.
They cant tank by range/sig/speed.
The question is - should those mid-long range boats be equipped with much stronger tanking capabilities when compared to close range boats?
That's what is basically happening ( deadspace boosters and ASBs ).
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#69 - 2012-09-17 15:35:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote:
Completely?
No.
Yes. One is an exploration ship, the other is a ratting ship. This means you're loading them up with completely different stuff and have completely different headroom to add useful stuff to them.

In addition, you're using a drone ship and a missile ship, where missiles have travel times and drones do not (you use sentries for PvE). Oh, and FoFs are horribly useless for actually applying concentrated damage, unlike drones. In fact, the main problem is that you're comparing a Tengu to a Proteus, when the former is a good PvE ship and the latter is awful (and not because of its tanking ability…). For PvE, the Proteus always takes a back-seat to the Ishtar, which does the same thing but with far better damage output.

Quote:
Care to elaborate?
You're using blasters and an MWD; you're using the aforementioned exploration subsystem; and you're wasting slots on modules that serve little to no purpose.

Quote:
Speaking about the first two.
Proteus with that tank can easily die in DED5 unless you only use drones but that means much weaker damage output.
Not really. Using only drones and rails means you get the same damage output as the Tengu, and it means it's instantly applicable across the entire engagement range. The paper DPS of your fit looks higher but is in reality hugely inefficient. With that in mind; with better use of the wasted slots; and with the better speed/sig tanking you can achieve by dropping the MWD, it will tank them easily.

…and that's the whole point: the supposed imbalance might exist if shield ships using the high-meta boosters were uniquely able to tank things that armour ships weren't. But that's just not the case. The imbalance simply isn't there.

Quote:
Ships that use active armour reppers are mostly blaster boats, which needs to get close to apply their damage.
Eh. No. The ships that use active armour reppers are mostly hybrid, laser, drone and projectile boats, all of which can get decent enough nice range and they can tank by range sig and speed just fine. Either way, the problem, if any, isn't the tank but the damage projection. So the blame would lay on the missiles, not the boosters.

Close range boats don't use active tanking at all except maybe in solo PvP (and in that case, they're not using deadspace boosters), but rather use buffers.
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#70 - 2012-09-17 15:55:44 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…and that's the whole point: the supposed imbalance might exist if shield ships using the high-meta boosters were uniquely able to tank things that armour ships weren't. But that's just not the case. The imbalance simply isn't there.


Shield and armor ships can both tank the same stuff? You mean, almost like they're balanced or something? Like they do the same thing, but different?
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
#71 - 2012-09-17 16:25:23 UTC
Maybe I should be more specific.

They are both used to do the same stuff, which is lowsec exploration. The only difference is that Tengu needs scanning alt or fitting switches.
I don't use sentry drones on Proteus. Used them on Ishtar ( combined with rails ) but the efficiency is noticeably better with that Proteus ( in Serp/Guristas/Sansha space, haven't tried in other spaces ). I spend less time in sites when using that Proteus when compared to sentry+rail Ishtar.
I suppose it has to do with the bigger picture.Blink
Ishtar is theoretically better but in practice it is not.

Tippia wrote:

Oh, and FoFs are horribly useless for actually applying concentrated damage, unlike drones.


Actually drones also have this issue when you are not focusing fire yourself.
It's not really important however.
With dissolution sequencer subsystem you are very unlikely to be jammed in pve ( and that is limited to several sites in the whole game, not talking about missions here ). I can hardly remember when was the last time I have been jammed by rats when using that Tengu.

Tippia wrote:

In fact, the main problem is that you're comparing a Tengu to a Proteus, when the former is a good PvE ship and the latter is awful (and not because of its tanking ability…). For PvE, the Proteus always takes a back-seat to the Ishtar, which does the same thing but with far better damage output.


No.
You are just repeating the same old meme.
In practical applications it is better than Ishtar in pve ( at least in exploration complexes and wormholes ). It doesn't mean that it is outclassing the Ishtar, which has it's uses and is a good drone ship overall. It's just better in terms of efficiency. One drawback it has when compared to Ishtar is that it requires much more effort and some tactics to make it better ( it is mostly about proper rat management ).
That's coming from someone, who uses this Proteus almost all the time in pve ( I used sentry Ishtar for a long time, before introduction of DDAs ).

Tippia wrote:
Eh. No. The ships that use active armour reppers are mostly hybrid, laser, drone and projectile boats,


Gallente blaster boats are the ones with active armour bonuses.
That tells us something about devs intentions.
Of course you can use them on some projectile boats but they are not that common. Shield is still much more popular here. Hurricane can be solid armour 'bait' tanker but it will be usually shield fitted ( for fleets and nano ).
Laser boats are mainly about buffer and resistances. Active tank lacks synergy with lasers. That doesn't mean you cant active tank them of course. Legion is an example of solid laser active tanker.

Tippia wrote:

all of which can get decent enough nice range and they can tank by range sig and speed just fine.


Blaster boats with nice range and speed/sig tank?