Ships & Modules

Couldn't agree more. They just need to be "different" at the same time.

Right, but quite often it's forgotten that armour repairers boost HP at the end of the cycle, or that reppers are intensive PG-wise rather than CPU-wise. There already are some differences and they are sufficient. That, combined with different slot layots on ships, pretty much guarantees armor will never be equal to shield, despite of the repping values themselves.

No, you can't fit a LAR onto a BC, but you CAN fit a 1600mm plate, actually you can fit 2 of them. Once again, giving the Armour tank a bigger buffer.

So you basically agree that NH should not be looked at because Drake is fine as is?

lolwhat?

Say, someone's going to fit an active tanked ship. So he checks it out: "I can go for either A with armor or B with shield, both active, both fine, BUT since A might as well be buffer tanked i won't pick B" Fking hillarious.

As for your level,
Paikis's combat record - Ranked #46,113

You even forgot to speak about the speed ! The armor cane is around 200m/s slower than the shield one ! And that's even before rigs !!!
Do 8% ehp deserve 20% speed penalty ?

Your fit sucks. Propulsion mod and full rack of turrets is not optional.

So you guys are allowed to use ****-fits to make your point, but I can't counter with my own? Interesting.

If you look carefully, you'll find most Cane shield fits are only 3 slots, not 4. You have LSE, Invul, DC. This gives 40,686 hit points.

You're using ALL of the available mid slots to fit a tank, what happens when you do the same with the lows?

The reason I used the Cane was because there is no tier 2 BC with a 25% armor resist bonus that could be compared to the Drake, and comparing a tier 1 BC (Prophecy) to a tier 2 BC (Drake) would be unfair (or so I thought). So whether or not the fit is **** is irrelevant. What's not irrelevant are fitting restraints and keeping things realistic (your 2x 1600mm plate fit isn't realistic).

By the way, a Drake/Prophecy comparison with the same fits posted earlier shows pretty much the same results. Prophecy with a 7% EHP advantage, Drake with 96 shield/sec peak regen.

Please avoid personal insults. It does nobody any good.

I think the ASB are fine (I support changing the boost amount based on cap booster used). The problem is in reactive armor hardener which is kind of meh.

Some numbers: (using T1 rigs, no implants, no boosters, T2 damage drones, T2 short range ammo, running single ASB on shield ship but fitting 2)

Astarte with double MAR: 680 HP/s (657 armor + 24 shield regen), 758 DPS, 1081m/s, 52k EHP, stable at 15%
tank uses all rigs, 6 low slots + 2 medium slots = 10 slot total for tank

Sleipnit with double XL ASB: 1157 HP/s (1114 boost + 43 regen), 807 DPS, 1311m/s, 39k EHP, stable at 35%
tank uses all rigs, 3 low slots, 3 medium slots and 1 high (nos) = 9 slot total tank


So lets sum it up. We have 2 high damage dealing command ships with active tank bonuses. Sleipnir does the same dps (taking fallof into account), is faster, tanks nearly twice as much and needs one less module (maybe two because counting nos as tank is questionable). Also is practically immune to neutralization. The only drawback it has is 13k less EHP.

I think CCP wanted to compensate with reactive armor hardener. Unfortunately the statistics on this module are horrible. I would suggest boosting this module (reduce its cap usage, slightly accelerate the adaptation speed, give it base resistance bonus above EANM) would help active armor tanking a lot.