These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Ship balancing] Why active tank bonuses are plain worse than resist bonuses

Author
Quesa
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#21 - 2012-11-07 12:42:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Quesa
I didn't read all the replies so forgive me if I missed something.

There are stark differences between the ships you link such as sig radius, speed and other things. If the Ferox is just slightly lower in active tankability then why don't we see more of them? Well, the mobility is probably a large factor there.

You're also completely ignoring the actual combat style of the races. Amarr is supposed to be the brick tank, which is reflected in your analysis by having a huge EHP buffer but that ship also moves at a snails pace. Mini ships are guerrilla warfare and skirmish ships, they get in, shoot and get out - they aren't meant or designed for heavy sustained combat, which is why you see the big differences.

It's all well and good when you correlate these, seemingly meaningful stats, but in practice it's a whole different story by evidence of what people fly and for what they fly them for, not what static EFT numbers are telling you.
Gangname Style
Doomheim
#22 - 2012-11-07 13:28:16 UTC
HAH.

Half the people in this thread didn't even read or come close to understanding such a simple concept put forward by the OP.

Just shows how dumb these forums are.

wtb IQ test required to gain forum membership.
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#23 - 2012-11-07 15:33:35 UTC
Quesa wrote:
I didn't read all the replies so forgive me if I missed something.

There are stark differences between the ships you link such as sig radius, speed and other things. If the Ferox is just slightly lower in active tankability then why don't we see more of them? Well, the mobility is probably a large factor there.

You're also completely ignoring the actual combat style of the races. Amarr is supposed to be the brick tank, which is reflected in your analysis by having a huge EHP buffer but that ship also moves at a snails pace. Mini ships are guerrilla warfare and skirmish ships, they get in, shoot and get out - they aren't meant or designed for heavy sustained combat, which is why you see the big differences.

It's all well and good when you correlate these, seemingly meaningful stats, but in practice it's a whole different story by evidence of what people fly and for what they fly them for, not what static EFT numbers are telling you.


Just like Gangname Style said, you completely miss the point of my post.

But ok, so let's have a look at relevant ship usage in medium to large fleets.

Cyclone, Brutix, Myrmidon: Not used, because Hurricane and Harbinger have comparable buffer wither better damage projection, Drake has more buffer and damage projection.
Prophecy: Not used because not enough damage projection and speed.
Ferox: Not used because completely outclassed by Drake (and rails are bad).

Hyperion: Not used because Megathron and Apoc have similar buffer but better damage projection. Abaddon has more buffer and similar damage projection.
Rokh: Not used that much because rails are bad.
Maelstroem: Used because a full rack of arty is just too good. If the tempest had 8 turret slots, the Mael would be just as unloved as the Hyperion.

I know that active tank bonused ships are used in smaller engagements, but the resist bonuses ships can do that just as well, so there is a big imbalance caused by the buffer issue. I know that other factors have an influence on that too (like for the Ferox, Prophecy and Rokh), but that's not the point.

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2012-11-07 16:21:21 UTC
Amarr/Caldari = best in fleet
Gallente/Minmatar = best in small gang/solo

Active tanking does have some problems but that doesn't mean one should throw away racial differences.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2012-11-07 16:44:07 UTC
PVP tanks are buffer not because regen tanks don't regen fast enough, but because more and more people will shoot at you until you die faster than your regen. PVP is quick and dirty, and usually involves massively out of scale engagements. Regen tanks are only good in PVE because there you can know about how much DPS to expect, or at least know that it's not going to fluctuate based on their tactics and/or reinforcements. Because of this, regen tanks are fine. There are a handful of cases in which people use them in PVP, but for the most part PVP regen is done by the ships that do it best--remote repairers.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#26 - 2012-11-07 17:01:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Iris Bravemount
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Amarr/Caldari = best in fleet
Gallente/Minmatar = best in small gang/solo

Active tanking does have some problems but that doesn't mean one should throw away racial differences.

Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
PVP tanks are buffer not because regen tanks don't regen fast enough, but because more and more people will shoot at you until you die faster than your regen. PVP is quick and dirty, and usually involves massively out of scale engagements. Regen tanks are only good in PVE because there you can know about how much DPS to expect, or at least know that it's not going to fluctuate based on their tactics and/or reinforcements. Because of this, regen tanks are fine. There are a handful of cases in which people use them in PVP, but for the most part PVP regen is done by the ships that do it best--remote repairers.


Why do you talk about active tank vs buffer tank? This is not what this is about! Roll

To keep it short and simple, the problem is:

Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank.
Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank.

So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse.

What is so hard to understand here?Shocked

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#27 - 2012-11-07 17:10:02 UTC
I really think it's a shame that Buffer-Tanking is so much more effective than Active-Tanking, and the boni on Active hardly make a difference on those ships.

Ships like the Hyperion really deserve some love imho.

How much do you think active rep boni have to be improved to be at least kind of competitive, even though not in big fleet fights, I don't think active tanking in big fleets should be an option.

My Condor costs less than that module!

Gangname Style
Doomheim
#28 - 2012-11-07 17:13:43 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Amarr/Caldari = best in fleet
Gallente/Minmatar = best in small gang/solo

Active tanking does have some problems but that doesn't mean one should throw away racial differences.


Then buff the active tanking bonus so it doesn't get the short end of the stick compared to the 25% resist bonus.
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#29 - 2012-11-07 17:14:34 UTC
TehCloud wrote:
I really think it's a shame that Buffer-Tanking is so much more effective than Active-Tanking, and the boni on Active hardly make a difference on those ships.

Ships like the Hyperion really deserve some love imho.

How much do you think active rep boni have to be improved to be at least kind of competitive, even though not in big fleet fights, I don't think active tanking in big fleets should be an option.


A half-ok solution would be to make active tank bonuses also affect received remote reps, but that wouldn't fix the imbalance about resistance to alpha strikes.

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

Gangname Style
Doomheim
#30 - 2012-11-07 17:16:31 UTC
Iris Bravemount wrote:
TehCloud wrote:
I really think it's a shame that Buffer-Tanking is so much more effective than Active-Tanking, and the boni on Active hardly make a difference on those ships.

Ships like the Hyperion really deserve some love imho.

How much do you think active rep boni have to be improved to be at least kind of competitive, even though not in big fleet fights, I don't think active tanking in big fleets should be an option.


A half-ok solution would be to make active tank bonuses also affect received remote reps, but that wouldn't fix the imbalance about resistance to alpha strikes.


The true of the matter is...

The bonused resist bonus is vastly superior to the active tank bonus in almost all ways.

Buff active tank bonus to like 10-12% per level.
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#31 - 2012-11-07 17:17:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Iris Bravemount
Gangname Style wrote:

The true of the matter is...

The bonused resist bonus is vastly superior to the active tank bonus in almost all ways.

Buff active tank bonus to like 10-12% per level.

Gangname Style wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Amarr/Caldari = best in fleet
Gallente/Minmatar = best in small gang/solo

Active tanking does have some problems but that doesn't mean one should throw away racial differences.


Then buff the active tanking bonus so it doesn't get the short end of the stick compared to the 25% resist bonus.


It doesn't matter how much you rep (see XLASB on Maelstroem, which gives insane EHP/s), because in fleet fights the only things that matter is how much buffer you have (against alpha) and how effective remote reps you get (because you need the logis to survive).

Plus, if you fit an active tank, you won't have slots left for some buffer.

The resist bonuses just adress all three tanking issues at the same time, which is why they are so much better.

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

Gangname Style
Doomheim
#32 - 2012-11-07 17:22:08 UTC
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Gangname Style wrote:

The true of the matter is...

The bonused resist bonus is vastly superior to the active tank bonus in almost all ways.

Buff active tank bonus to like 10-12% per level.

Gangname Style wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Amarr/Caldari = best in fleet
Gallente/Minmatar = best in small gang/solo

Active tanking does have some problems but that doesn't mean one should throw away racial differences.


Then buff the active tanking bonus so it doesn't get the short end of the stick compared to the 25% resist bonus.


It doesn't matter how much you rep (see XLASB on Maelstroem, which gives insane EHP/s), because in fleet fights the only things that matter is how much buffer you have (against alpha) and how effective remote reps you get (because you need the logis to survive).

Plus, if you fit an active tank, you won't have slots left for some buffer.


True, but thats where the different playstyles comes into the equation.

I agree with the assertion that min and gal are more suited to small gang warfare (active > buffer), the only thing I'm worried about it the fact that the shield boost bonus is downright worthless compared to a 25% resist bonus.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2012-11-07 17:22:26 UTC
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank.
Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank.

So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse.

What is so hard to understand here?Shocked
I think I understand what you're saying. You're saying that the Gallente and Minmatar ships with the +7.5% repair/boost rate aren't as good as the Amarr and Caldari ships with +5% resists?

Actually come to think of it, I do sort of agree with you there. While missioning, it does feel like the repair bonuses only barely match the resist bonuses in value to just a regen tank. I think it might make more sense to change the Amarr and Caldari bonuses to HP bonuses, so that they have a racial purpose and individuality, and give all races some ships with resist bonuses.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#34 - 2012-11-07 17:30:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Iris Bravemount
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank.
Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank.

So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse.

What is so hard to understand here?Shocked
I think I understand what you're saying. You're saying that the Gallente and Minmatar ships with the +7.5% repair/boost rate aren't as good as the Amarr and Caldari ships with +5% resists?

Actually come to think of it, I do sort of agree with you there. While missioning, it does feel like the repair bonuses only barely match the resist bonuses in value to just a regen tank. I think it might make more sense to change the Amarr and Caldari bonuses to HP bonuses, so that they have a racial purpose and individuality, and give all races some ships with resist bonuses.


Yeah, but then incoming remote reps would suffer from that. This would be a huge nerf.

Just give all ships with tanking bonuses resist bonuses and everyone is happy. It's a prooven concept on HICs.

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2012-11-07 18:42:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Iris Bravemount wrote:


Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank.
Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank.

So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse.

What is so hard to understand here?Shocked

Why do you post if you have no intention of having a discussion? My point is perfectly valid. The ships with an active tanking bonus aren't meant to be good at buffer tanking and are in fact not. It's common knowledge, no case studies needed. It's a design choice.
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#36 - 2012-11-07 18:52:53 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Iris Bravemount wrote:


Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank.
Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank.

So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse.

What is so hard to understand here?Shocked

Why do you post if you have no intention of having a discussion? My point is perfectly valid. The ships with an active tanking bonus aren't meant to be good at buffer tanking and are in fact not. It's common knowledge, no case studies needed. It's a design choice.


I am not closed to discussion, but you keep missing the point.

The resist ships can do everything the active ships can do, but not the other way around. That's the problem. It's a poor design decision. There is no downside to the resist bonus, but there are two downsides to the active bonus.

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#37 - 2012-11-07 18:54:07 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Iris Bravemount wrote:


Resist bonuses = help with active tank, help with buffer tank and with remote tank.
Active tank bonuses = help with active tank but not with buffer tank or remote tank.

So please just give all ships with tank bonuses resist bonuses, because active tank bonuses are just worse.

What is so hard to understand here?Shocked

Why do you post if you have no intention of having a discussion? My point is perfectly valid. The ships with an active tanking bonus aren't meant to be good at buffer tanking and are in fact not. It's common knowledge, no case studies needed. It's a design choice.

Except the issue is that resist bonuses give almost the same benefit to active tanking as the active tanking bonuses, while causing the buffer to be even stronger, and remote reps to be far more potent.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2012-11-07 19:02:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Yeah, but then incoming remote reps would suffer from that. This would be a huge nerf.

Just give all ships with tanking bonuses resist bonuses and everyone is happy. It's a prooven concept on HICs.

I just meant that some of the ships should have those racial tank bonuses. If balanced correctly, they could be more powerful than the resist bonuses in the right situations. Ships that do best in fleet combat should have resist bonuses, but small gang and solo ships as well as ratting ships could do well to have repair or buffer bonuses. In fact, mission ships will do best with repair bonuses (if the bonus is effectively higher than the resist bonus), and light-roam and strike craft do great with buffer tanks. It leaves more options that way and keeps things interesting. And if all races have some ships with the resist bonus, then all races have a place in large fleets.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2012-11-07 19:05:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Goldensaver wrote:
Except the issue is that resist bonuses give almost the same benefit to active tanking as the active tanking bonuses, while causing the buffer to be even stronger, and remote reps to be far more potent.


I'm aware of that. It doesn't mean that you should hand out resist bonuses to ships that previously had active tanking bonuses.

By the way, the best buffer tanks are mediocre at best at active tanking in practice even if in theory the 5% resist bonus is just as good as a 7.5% rep amount bonus. Why? Because they're cap hungry laser ships.

Caldari isn't quite as good at buffer tanking and has ASBs, but ASBs make everything oveprowered.
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#40 - 2012-11-07 19:20:56 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

I just meant that some of the ships should have those racial tank bonuses. If balanced correctly, they could be more powerful than the resist bonuses in the right situations. Ships that do best in fleet combat should have resist bonuses, but small gang and solo ships as well as ratting ships could do well to have repair or buffer bonuses. In fact, mission ships will do best with repair bonuses (if the bonus is effectively higher than the resist bonus), and light-roam and strike craft do great with buffer tanks. It leaves more options that way and keeps things interesting. And if all races have some ships with the resist bonus, then all races have a place in large fleets.


This is part of the problem. ATM it seems like the lineups of the three races make you wonder how Amarr and Caldari aren't completely dominating the universe, because they are the only ones to have true ships of the line.

I'm absolutely in favor of some ships performing better in one area or another, but all races should have an option for every situation, which just isn't the case right now.

BUT this is a bit off-topic.

There are three types of tanking:

Local Tanking (increase the recharge rate of ones EHP pool; works against sustained dps, does not scale)
Buffer Tanking (increase the size of ones EHP pool, works against alpha strikes, does not scale)
Remote Tanking (rely on others to resplenish ones EHP pool, works against sustained dps, does scale)

There are four types of bonuses I can think of:

Bonus to locally generated HP (such as on the Myrmidon): Helps with Local Tanking only.
Bonus to HP pool (such as on the Auguror): Helps with Buffer Tanking only.
Bonus to remotely generated HP (no ship has this ATM): Helps with Remote Tanking only.
Bonus to HP to EHP rate (AKA resists): Helps with all tanking types.

Does this make it any clearer?

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed