These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Active tanking - absorbing energy.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#1 - 2012-02-20 17:52:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Okay, I am a bit sleep deprived, so this post might be a little more incoherent than I usually am. P

The problem

When you are being zerged you are far more likely to be blown up before logistics ships can repair you. In small engagement and PVE it can be a useful way of tanking but in large fights you probably have the weakest tank in the system.

Story description blarrgh

Energy can not be created or destroyed - it can only be converted. The more abundant the energy, the easier it is to get the perfect type and to capture it for your own use.

The solution

(Shield tanking)

  • Shield boost amplifier becomes an active module.
  • When it is on then its absorb function kicks in (boosting your repair by how many are firing and turning damage into shields.)
  • More ships shooting at you, which are not in your fleet, exponentially more efficiently you absorb energy to convert.
  • You only convert the energy type damage which your resists block - low resists, low absorption.
  • Can repair damage as it comes in and respond in an adaptable, corresponding way to the fight you are in.
  • When you jump through a gate and your hardeners are on, they automatically come on when you de-cloak in the next system.

(Draw backs)

  • Every cycle of your booster when it is on does overheating damage to the amplifier.
  • The absorb ability only works when you are boosting.
  • You can run out of capacitor and be dead in the water.
  • Active will probably still have a lower breaking point than buffer tanking due to volleys being able to cut right through your entire eHP easier, before you can repair.
  • Absorb and convert does not stack, so a second booster will only give you the basic booster effect.

(Armour and hull tanking.)

Meh. Who cares? P

  • Stick the absorb function on the damage control, it is worse than an Energised Adaptive Nano Membrane in terms of resistance.
  • Turning the Damage Control on and active hull or armour tanking means more resistance but you also start burning it out even when you don't want to. Twisted
  • Nearly everyone loves and uses a DC anyway and it is less demanding to fit than the amplifier.
  • The armour amplifier is a rig (and there are no active rigs)
  • Hull has no amplifiers.

Further, choosing between a booster and another invulnerability or one in the first place is pretty even. This would force more active ships to have less resistance. Less resists, less converted energy, so you replace that extender or those rigs to get more resists and therefore more absorb which damages your buffer.

The probable result will be shield levels that fluctuate wildly until:

  • capacitor runs out to power the booster (or is drained).
  • they break right through the eHP tank before reps can kick in.
  • they have consistent high damage ships doing more damage than booster and amplifier can cope with
  • the amplifier burns out.

Maybe, additionally, the absorb and convert effectiveness should be connected to which booster they are running? Small, medium, large or X-large.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#2 - 2012-02-20 17:57:21 UTC
tl;dr: zero skill carebear wants some kind of uber thing..

response from people who have taken the time to actually train skillz and learn how to play eveonline...


'nuf said

Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3 - 2012-02-20 18:06:14 UTC
or you could like... overheat your hardeners?



Jenshae Chiroptera
#4 - 2012-02-20 18:17:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Yeah, stupid care-bear n00bs, they are almost as bad as developers. Bear

From here

CCP Greyscale wrote:

I'm going to disagree and say that the real problem with active tanking is its lack of scalability.

With buffer tanking, your survivability against an arbitrary amount of DPS is always directly proportional to your EHP. No matter what situation you're in, adding 50 percent EHP keeps you alive 50 percent longer.

With active tanking, there's a range of DPS where you survive indefinitely (effective rep amount > incoming DPS), a fairly thin range DPS where it's "balanced" (effective rep amount ~= incoming DPS), and then a huge range of DPS above that where your tank is effectively pointless (effective rep amount << incoming DPS) and has no impact whatsoever on your survivability.

This is I think also a major issue with "blasters" - a lot of the blaster platforms have to choose between fitting an active tank which isn't going to help at all half the time, and fitting a passive tank which discards one of their major hull bonuses and slows the ship down to boot.

The tricky bit in resolving this is finding a way to let active tanking scale effectively at higher DPS ranges without making it totally overpowered for smaller engagements. The most obvious fix I can see is some method of boosting active tanking's burst repair potential without making it sustainable at those levels. Adding permanent resistance bonuses to reps makes the modules somewhat more useful but also serves to homogenize fittings towards primarily relying on EHP.


CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#5 - 2012-02-22 23:49:42 UTC
Yes, I think this thread is a good example of this theory. Pity that the people it most applies to won't be able to concentrate long enough to watch it. Twisted

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.