These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#181 - 2013-01-17 18:32:58 UTC
Roime wrote:


Nope, we are arguing that in a case in which both ships repair damage at the same speed, but the other repairs much more than the other, the EHP difference doesn't matter, especially as it is only a 5% resist difference compared to 7.5% rep amount difference. It's simple really - rep bonused ship reps more than the received damage difference, and this advantage cumulates when you start piling on drugs and links.

And Iris Bravemount's point is not even which is better in active tanking, her post is about the fact that resist bonus is more universally viable, and rep bonus is only usable in active armor tanking- which again is only viable in solo and small gang context. This is true and imbalanced and nobody argues that.

My point is that any rebalancing aiming to fix this should not make the active armor tankers worse in their traditional niche, and changing rep bonus to resist bonus would indeed cause this. I'd even argue that in the current meta the repping capability of active armor tankers should be buffed, there is more dps on the field. A non-linked, drug-free BC IV pilot simply dies in flames in a dual rep Myrm.


I think you need to actually run the numbers... at BC 5, active tank bonus has about a 3% advantage in the dps of their thank compared to ships with a resistance bonus... Factor in that the ship with the resistance bonus gets a significant ehp advantage in comparison, and you will see it takes many minutes of non stop repping for the ship with an active tank bonus to "break even" with a ship that has a resistance bonus.

The reality is that the resistance bonus is not only better for ehp, and RR, but is better for active tanking outside of the most overly hypothetical eft situations.

Compared to 7.5% rep bonus, 5% resistance is extremely overpowered. If you're unable to understand this then this discussion is lost on you as this is not opinion, it's cold hard facts. None of which you will be able to disprove.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#182 - 2013-01-17 19:45:18 UTC
Roime wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
You guys are arguing that in a case in which both ships repair damage at the same speed (relative to incoming damage) and one has less EHP, that the ship with less EHP somehow wins out over the other one ever.


Nope, we are arguing that in a case in which both ships repair damage at the same speed, but the other repairs much more than the other, the EHP difference doesn't matter, especially as it is only a 5% resist difference compared to 7.5% rep amount difference..
You're doing your math wrong. It's 7.5% vs. the reciprocal of 5%. The 7.5% is an increase, while the 5% is a reduction (in incoming damage). At skill 5, they are +37.5% and +33.3%, or -27.2% and -25%. Don't mix terms and you won't get confused.

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."
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#183 - 2013-01-17 20:44:53 UTC
I'm sorry if I've missed it bu has some one done a work up on the active rep myrm with its natural rep bonus (as it is now) vs a myrm with a resist % bonus? (as it is proposed)

from the few pages i read most of the arguing seems to be about different ships of different races meant to be doing different things.

arguing about the same ship doing the same thing with different bonus structure would be a little more insightful no?

has anyone proposed changing the rep amount bonus to a shorter rep cycle bonus?

one of these days ill learn how to change eft stats but not today.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2013-01-17 22:43:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Kusum Fawn wrote:
I'm sorry if I've missed it bu has some one done a work up on the active rep myrm with its natural rep bonus (as it is now) vs a myrm with a resist % bonus? (as it is proposed)
I don't know if anyone has, but it's pretty easy to do.

Here's what I get on EFT with a myrmidon with max skills and tech 2 armor repairer, 2x each thermal and kinetic armor hardeners, a damage control, and 3 tech 1 trimark rigs (vs. mixed thermal and kinetic damage):
Effective Hit Points: 90,073
Defense (EHP/s): 377
And if we remove the repair bonus and add a resist bonus:
Effective Hit Points: 112,924
Defense (EHP/s): 366

It would cause the total EHP to be increased by 25.4% (the armor EHP would be increased by 33.3%), and the maximum defense per second would be decreased by 2.9%.

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."
General Foom
Foomonopoly
#185 - 2013-01-17 23:19:33 UTC  |  Edited by: General Foom
Question:

what would be an Ideal time frame for an active tank to make the up difference in
EHP over a resist tank?

obviously the resist tank is meant to have the advantage in EHP
and obviously the Active tank is supposed to able to rep more than the Difference in EHP
over time

it seems like 3 minutes to make up the difference in most cases is to long?
so 2 mins? 1 min?

I understand that a resist bonus provides a better result for buffer/remote tanking
However active bonus ships are for different uses and need to stay to provide alternative play styles.

if you gave the Brutix for example a resist bonus instead of a rep one...no one would ever fit a rep module on it ever.
and that make me sad =(
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#186 - 2013-01-17 23:50:55 UTC
General Foom wrote:
Question:

what would be an Ideal time frame for an active tank to make the up difference in
EHP over a resist tank? ..

The three minutes only apply when you are oversizing buffer modules. With a MARII you get the equivalent of an 800 plate (2625 armour) in 74 seconds which is a reasonable amount of time .. or rather it was as applied DPS has increased over the years which is why oversizing is the norm today.

Another 'problem' is population. Solo/Duo is all but dead today simply due to more people being around .. in the old days 74s was perfectly adequate as the good fights could last 5-10 minutes .. nowadays you are lucky if you find that type as one side usually overpowers the other.

That is why I advocate a more bursty nature of armour repair, to give them the opportunity to make a difference in todays high dps environment. Quintupling overload bonus (increasing heat damage some as well of course) and doubling the bonus on the skill "Repair Systems" should suffice.
Trick is to balance it so that buffer/rep are essentially equal up unto the point where the EHP difference is met at which point the rep is almost burned out .. I'd suggest using Thermodynamics lvl 3 as the point where they redline when EHP is acquired, giving us a couple extra levels to allow specialized active tankers an actual advantage over buffers.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#187 - 2013-01-17 23:56:47 UTC
General Foom wrote:
if you gave the Brutix for example a resist bonus instead of a rep one...no one would ever fit a rep module on it ever.
and that make me sad =(
People typically only fit reppers in PVE anyway. That being said, the Brutix is more likely to have reppers fit to it with a resist bonus simply because it's more likely to get flown at all. I like a lot of things about the Brutix, but I can't see myself ever using one in PVE because its weak tank is beat hands down by all other battlecruisers, even the ****** Ferox.

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."
Miguel Duran
Silver Lining Project
#188 - 2013-01-18 00:59:42 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
General Foom wrote:
Question:

what would be an Ideal time frame for an active tank to make the up difference in
EHP over a resist tank? ..

The three minutes only apply when you are oversizing buffer modules. With a MARII you get the equivalent of an 800 plate (2625 armour) in 74 seconds which is a reasonable amount of time .. or rather it was as applied DPS has increased over the years which is why oversizing is the norm today.


This is not about buffer tank vs rep, its about the resist bonus vs rep bonus. The buffer mentioned is the extra buffer the resist bonus provides over the rep bonus, which takes something like 7 minutes to overcome.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#189 - 2013-01-18 09:38:03 UTC
Miguel Duran wrote:
This is not about buffer tank vs rep, its about the resist bonus vs rep bonus. The buffer mentioned is the extra buffer the resist bonus provides over the rep bonus, which takes something like 7 minutes to overcome.

So the claim is that it takes seven (7) minutes for a +7.5%/level repairer to catch up with a +5%/level bonus?

Would love to see the scenario where that is true as all the numbers I have says they are pretty much equal with a slight advantage to repair bonus. It is actually a pretty good solution to the diversity problem that CCP probably had back in the day, but as said it is showing its age now that larger gangs/fleets are the norm.

Main problem I have with the current system is that active repair is less alpha resistant, heavily cap dependant and makes the armour bar bounce around like a Blonde coming out from a plastic surgeons office .. if just one of those could be 'fixed' I'd be more than happy to fly rep bonus ships
Miguel Duran
Silver Lining Project
#190 - 2013-01-18 10:19:23 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Miguel Duran wrote:
This is not about buffer tank vs rep, its about the resist bonus vs rep bonus. The buffer mentioned is the extra buffer the resist bonus provides over the rep bonus, which takes something like 7 minutes to overcome.

So the claim is that it takes seven (7) minutes for a +7.5%/level repairer to catch up with a +5%/level bonus?

Would love to see the scenario where that is true as all the numbers I have says they are pretty much equal with a slight advantage to repair bonus. It is actually a pretty good solution to the diversity problem that CCP probably had back in the day, but as said it is showing its age now that larger gangs/fleets are the norm.

Main problem I have with the current system is that active repair is less alpha resistant, heavily cap dependant and makes the armour bar bounce around like a Blonde coming out from a plastic surgeons office .. if just one of those could be 'fixed' I'd be more than happy to fly rep bonus ships


I did this a few pages back.

Miguel Duran wrote:
The amount of reading comprehension and critical thinking fail in this thread is amazing.

First of all, what the hell is up with people coming in talking about Amarr battleships firing colorful lasers being buffer tanked and Gallente ships repping drones while Caldari missiles are still traveling towards the Minmatar ship that died 5 minutes ago from rust because armor vs shields and buffer vs rep...

The OP was talking about the tanking SHIP BONUSES, not whether ship A tanks better than ship B with an active tank or any of the other 50 arguments that have been pulled out of thin air.

The point is the 5% resist bonus is an all around better bonus than the 7.5% per level repair bonus. Here is why:

We are going to look at the Cyclone vs the Cyclone.

The first Cyclone:
All level 5 skills.
XL ASB

Second Cyclone:
All level 5 skills except Battlecruiser, which will be at 0.
XL ASB
T1 Invuln

The point is to illustrate what would happen if the repair bonus was switched for a resist bonus.

ESHP = effective shield hit points, armor and hull remain the same obviously
Against uniform damage:
Cyclone 1: 390 EHP/s rep, 7578 shield ESHP
Cyclone 2: 385 EHP/s rep, 10103 shield ESHP

Difference in EHP: 2525
Difference in reps: 5
Time until amount repped equals the difference in buffer: 505 seconds


"But EFT warrior vs real world and nobody does uniform damage and blah blah blah"

VS EM damage:
Cyclone 1: 283 ESHP/s rep, 5294 ESHP
Cyclone 2: 279 ESHP/s rep, 7325 ESHP

EHP difference: 2031
Difference in rep: 4
Time until rep equals buffer gap: 507.75 seconds

VS Thermal:
Cyclone 1: 353 ESHP/s rep, 6867 ESHP
Cyclone 2: 348 ESHP/s rep, 9156 ESHP

EHP difference: 2289
Difference in rep: 5
Time until rep equals buffer gap: 457.8 seconds

EHP difference:

VS Kinetic:
Cyclone 1: 471 ESHP/s rep, 9156 ESHP
Cyclone 2: 465 ESHP/s rep, 12208 ESHP

EHP difference: 3052
Difference in rep: 6
Time until rep equals buffer gap: 508.6 seconds


VS Explosive:
Cyclone 1: 565 ESHP/s rep, 10988 ESHP
Cyclone 2: 558 ESHP/s rep, 14650 ESHP

EHP difference: 3662
Difference in rep: 7
Time until rep equals buffer gap: 523 seconds

The variation is due to rounding in the rep/s, but even in the best case scenario for the rep bonused Cyclone its 457.8 seconds. Keep in mind that is with rounding errors in its favor. The time would the be the same regardless of damage type if you did the math by hand, but its 3AM here so someone else can do it if they want.

So, the repair bonus would be superior in an engagement where your shields were less than 100% for more than that amount of time. Pretty much the only place you'll even be able to find that is PVE, and even then the difference is tiny, close to ~1.5% in this example. For EVERY SINGLE OTHER SITUATION IN THE GAME, the 5% resist bonus would be superior. Night and day difference, as far as bonuses go, in situations where rep bonuses are obsolete. Would you not trade 1.5% better rep in fights that last more than 450s+ for that?


Well lets just say someone still doesn't agree, "take into consideration ship role" and all that.
Why do both Gallente Battlecruisers that are not sniper get a rep bonus?

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#191 - 2013-01-18 12:28:50 UTC
Yes, but the Cyclone comparison pits one bonus (rep) against two bonuses (rep+resist), so does not actually show much of anything, at least nothing relevant to the discussion.

If you wanted to compare the bonuses then have a Cyclone with an ASB and a Hurricane using ASB+Invuln .. otherwise you are just showing that active tanking benefits from having better resists which is kind of redundant.
Miguel Duran
Silver Lining Project
#192 - 2013-01-18 22:26:19 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Yes, but the Cyclone comparison pits one bonus (rep) against two bonuses (rep+resist), so does not actually show much of anything, at least nothing relevant to the discussion.

If you wanted to compare the bonuses then have a Cyclone with an ASB and a Hurricane using ASB+Invuln .. otherwise you are just showing that active tanking benefits from having better resists which is kind of redundant.

I compared a Cyclone with lvl 5 BC vs a Cyclone with lvl 0 BC and +25% resist from an invuln.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#193 - 2013-01-19 11:56:21 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:

I think you need to actually run the numbers... at BC 5, active tank bonus has about a 3% advantage in the dps of their thank compared to ships with a resistance bonus... Factor in that the ship with the resistance bonus gets a significant ehp advantage in comparison, and you will see it takes many minutes of non stop repping for the ship with an active tank bonus to "break even" with a ship that has a resistance bonus.


3% is still more, and like mentioned million times before, the rep bonus should be buffed to 10%, like on the Incursus. No, I don't factor in the armor EHP, an active fit does not rely on it's buffer for survival, but on the ability to repair. Active tanks die in flames when the damage > reps, even a resist-bonused buffer of active fit is insignificant. If you start bleeding your buffer right away, you would have been better off with a plate instead of reppers.

Quote:
The reality is that the resistance bonus is not only better for ehp, and RR, but is better for active tanking outside of the most overly hypothetical eft situations.

Compared to 7.5% rep bonus, 5% resistance is extremely overpowered. If you're unable to understand this then this discussion is lost on you as this is not opinion, it's cold hard facts. None of which you will be able to disprove.


Like I already mentioned, resists are overall better for their versatility, but like even you yourself write, 7.5% rep bonus > 5% resist bonus when talking about pure active tanking. 10% rep bonus would be better, and certainly when it seems that Proph gets 7 lows and Myrm only 6, 7.5% is simply underpowered.



.
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#194 - 2013-01-21 22:16:03 UTC
Roime wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:

I think you need to actually run the numbers... at BC 5, active tank bonus has about a 3% advantage in the dps of their thank compared to ships with a resistance bonus... Factor in that the ship with the resistance bonus gets a significant ehp advantage in comparison, and you will see it takes many minutes of non stop repping for the ship with an active tank bonus to "break even" with a ship that has a resistance bonus.


3% is still more, and like mentioned million times before, the rep bonus should be buffed to 10%, like on the Incursus. No, I don't factor in the armor EHP, an active fit does not rely on it's buffer for survival, but on the ability to repair. Active tanks die in flames when the damage > reps, even a resist-bonused buffer of active fit is insignificant. If you start bleeding your buffer right away, you would have been better off with a plate instead of reppers.

Quote:
The reality is that the resistance bonus is not only better for ehp, and RR, but is better for active tanking outside of the most overly hypothetical eft situations.

Compared to 7.5% rep bonus, 5% resistance is extremely overpowered. If you're unable to understand this then this discussion is lost on you as this is not opinion, it's cold hard facts. None of which you will be able to disprove.


Like I already mentioned, resists are overall better for their versatility, but like even you yourself write, 7.5% rep bonus > 5% resist bonus when talking about pure active tanking. 10% rep bonus would be better, and certainly when it seems that Proph gets 7 lows and Myrm only 6, 7.5% is simply underpowered.


You are just repeating arguments that have been proven moot in this thread before.

"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
General Foom
Foomonopoly
#195 - 2013-01-21 23:51:03 UTC  |  Edited by: General Foom
One thing to add about active tanking ship bonuses

to take advantage of the active bonus requires the fitting of,
in most cases, 2 (or more) reppers for it to be anywhere near effective

(specifically talking about armor ships btw)

1 bonused repper is pretty much uselss afaik

this has a massive impact on the tier of guns that you can fit on the ships in question
in some cases reducing you to the lowest tier guns to fit everything....and that sucks tbh

perhaps buffing the rep bonus to include grid reduction?

"7.5% repair amount & 5% reduction in power-grid requirements per lever for active armor repairs"

not sure on the numbers but hows the idea?

would allow multi repper fits with higher teir guns.... OP?
Miguel Duran
Silver Lining Project
#196 - 2013-01-22 04:28:42 UTC
General Foom wrote:
One thing to add about active tanking ship bonuses

to take advantage of the active bonus requires the fitting of,
in most cases, 2 (or more) reppers for it to be anywhere near effective

(specifically talking about armor ships btw)

1 bonused repper is pretty much uselss afaik

this has a massive impact on the tier of guns that you can fit on the ships in question
in some cases reducing you to the lowest tier guns to fit everything....and that sucks tbh

perhaps buffing the rep bonus to include grid reduction?

"7.5% repair amount & 5% reduction in power-grid requirements per lever for active armor repairs"

not sure on the numbers but hows the idea?

would allow multi repper fits with higher teir guns.... OP?

The discussion is not about rep vs buffer tank or balancing of said tanks, its about the resist bonus vs rep bonus. CCP has stated they are looking at armor/shield tanking balance, but again that is not the topic of this discussion.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#197 - 2013-01-22 21:25:33 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Yes, but the Cyclone comparison pits one bonus (rep) against two bonuses (rep+resist), so does not actually show much of anything, at least nothing relevant to the discussion.

If you wanted to compare the bonuses then have a Cyclone with an ASB and a Hurricane using ASB+Invuln .. otherwise you are just showing that active tanking benefits from having better resists which is kind of redundant.
You didn't read very carefully. He was very clear that the Cyclone with the resist bonus had its rep bonus removed.

Think about that for a moment.

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
#198 - 2013-03-29 14:46:28 UTC
Still no dev input for this?

"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
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#199 - 2013-03-29 17:28:39 UTC
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Still no dev input for this?


What kind of input are you expecting? The maths behind it isn't exactly rocket science. They already know this.
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#200 - 2013-03-30 20:47:52 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Still no dev input for this?


What kind of input are you expecting? The maths behind it isn't exactly rocket science. They already know this.


Hmm, maybe an explanation as to why they keep it that way?

"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