These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Active Armor tanking sucks
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fer DeLance
Nano Rhinos
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#61 - 2012-12-13 00:16:28 UTC
No need to argue about the superiority of shield tanking over the armor tanking, active or passive (well there isn't real passive armor tank anyway, armor doesn't regenerate passivly).

Just ask your selves this question, and try to answer honestly: "Why do i have a large smile on my face when i see a blinking red Gallente ship?"
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#62 - 2012-12-13 00:19:30 UTC
I actually thought shields were weaker before the ASB came out, and those Awesome Shield Boosters™ balanced things out nicely. Shields are better for bursts of extra defence, armour is a lesser amount, but can be run permanently if need be. Seems to work fine Big smile

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
Tesal
#63 - 2012-12-13 02:07:05 UTC
armor tanking myrmidon.
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2012-12-13 02:41:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Nyancat Audeles
I agree with OP. Active armor tanking sucks.

The argument that armor tanking allows for more EWAR is invalid; because shield boats almost always have enough mids so they can maintain a superb shield tank (better than a comparable armor tank) and still have slots left over for EWAR.
Additionally, shield tankers put out significantly more DPS.

Why not just remove armor tanking from the game if you don't plan on improving it, CCP? We have less tank and less gank than shield tanks.

Edit: Stop posting Myrmidons and Incursus to say how active armor tanking is fine. If you can only find 2-3 ships that active armor tanking actually works on, then that in itself highlights the problem I have with active armor tanking.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#65 - 2012-12-13 02:44:44 UTC
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
I agree with OP. Active armor tanking sucks.

The argument that armor tanking allows for more EWAR is invalid; because shield boats almost always have enough mids so they can maintain a superb shield tank (better than a comparable armor tank) and still have slots left over for EWAR.
Additionally, shield tankers put out significantly more DPS.

Why not just remove armor tanking from the game if you don't plan on improving it, CCP? We have less tank and less gank than shield tanks.

Edit: Stop posting Myrmidons and Incursus to say how active armor tanking is fine. If you can only find 2-3 ships that active armor tanking actually works on, then that in itself highlights the problem I have with active armor tanking.


Go fit a cyclone and tell me you have plenty of mids for ewar.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2012-12-13 02:44:48 UTC
Galphii wrote:
I actually thought shields were weaker before the ASB came out, and those Awesome Shield Boosters™ balanced things out nicely. Shields are better for bursts of extra defence, armour is a lesser amount, but can be run permanently if need be. Seems to work fine Big smile

Have you compared the tank of, say, a Tengu to a Legion? Tengu can tank far more DPS and be capstable (while dealing more DPS) than a Legion. because it uses a Large Shield Booster (not ancillary).

Either nerf the Tengu and/or shield tanking, or buff the Legion and/or armor tanking. I'm all for buffs instead of nerfs.
Perihelion Olenard
#67 - 2012-12-13 13:00:15 UTC
Tesal wrote:
armor tanking myrmidon.

Just because one ship using a triple armor repairer setup can take decently does not mean active armor tanking is fine in general. It's like picking one guy out in a city, seeing he's wearing women's underwear, and saying that all guys in that city wear women's underwear and that's it's normal to do so.

Try a dual rep cruiser. Try a dual rep or even triple rep brutix. They will be terrible.
Jackson Steely
Doomheim
#68 - 2012-12-13 13:14:04 UTC
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Tesal wrote:
armor tanking myrmidon.

Just because one ship using a triple armor repairer setup can take decently does not mean active armor tanking is fine in general. It's like picking one guy out in a city, seeing he's wearing women's underwear, and saying that all guys in that city wear women's underwear and that's it's normal to do so.

Try a dual rep cruiser. Try a dual rep or even triple rep brutix. They will be terrible.



Maybe CCP can change MAR's to Myrmidon armor repairer. Smalls can be changed to Incursus armor repairer, and larges can be recycled back into minerals, Deadspace/Officer LAR's can be given for free with every purchase of a Vindi as long as they promise to post Youtube videos about how awesome they are.
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#69 - 2012-12-13 13:19:45 UTC
Ocih wrote:
Jackson Steely wrote:
Transmaritanus wrote:
Ever heard of a Triple rep Myrm?



So in order to effectively active armor tank I need three repairers on a ship with a repair bonus?

Thank you for confirming my OP.


To make this a little closer to relevant in EVE Online, you could change the title as well.

Active Armor Ganking Sucks.

Gank beats tank. EVE is EVE. It will never change.


Little bold statement about the 'never change'. It's true ganking was the way to go early on, and in some sense is now. But the nos/LAR/no bandwidth days would like to have a word with you.. P

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#70 - 2012-12-13 16:25:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Katran Luftschreck
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
Edit: Stop posting Myrmidons and Incursus to say how active armor tanking is fine. If you can only find 2-3 ships that active armor tanking actually works on, then that in itself highlights the problem I have with active armor tanking.


You make an excellent point. This is especially true for Amarr ships, which CCP has clearly said are meant for armor tanking. Yet in reality they fail in being actually designed for that job.

Consider that in T1 there are:

7 types of Amarr frigates, yet only 1 even gets a bonus to armor resist. None get a bonus to armor self-repair.

2 types of destroyer and neither gets any kind of armor bonus.

4 types of cruiser, only 1 gets a bonus to armor resist - none get a self-repair bonus.

3 types of battlecruiser, again only 1 gets an armor resist bonus and none get a self-repair bonus.

3 types of battleship, and yet again, 1 armor resist and zero self-repair bonus.


Does that look like a winning line-up for armor tanking? Out of 19 ships only 4 even get an armor resist bonus and NONE of them get a self-repair bonus.

And the real irony of the Myrmidon not only does it get the armor repair bonus that zero Amarr ships do, but it's also (IMHO) one of the best T1 shield tank ships out there. And it's a Gallente ship. You know what other ships get self-repair bonus? The Incursus & Hyperion - both are also Gallente ships. Meaning that all three of the best active-armor tank ships in the game are Gallente exclusive.

Biased much, CCP?

http://youtu.be/t0q2F8NsYQ0
Ginger Barbarella
#71 - 2012-12-13 16:30:32 UTC
Tesal wrote:
armor tanking myrmidon.


And anyone filling up the lows on any missile boat can brag about their DPS. You see the point here?

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#72 - 2012-12-13 17:01:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
Ginger Barbarella wrote:
Tesal wrote:
armor tanking myrmidon.


And anyone filling up the lows on any missile boat can brag about their DPS. You see the point here?


Umm... You can't fit three armor repairers to Tengu?

Btw, Tengu has more midslots for cap boosters so running three armor repairers should be easier than in Myrm.
Perihelion Olenard
#73 - 2012-12-13 17:41:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
Katran Luftschreck wrote:
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
Edit: Stop posting Myrmidons and Incursus to say how active armor tanking is fine. If you can only find 2-3 ships that active armor tanking actually works on, then that in itself highlights the problem I have with active armor tanking.


You make an excellent point. This is especially true for Amarr ships, which CCP has clearly said are meant for armor tanking. Yet in reality they fail in being actually designed for that job.

Consider that in T1 there are:

7 types of Amarr frigates, yet only 1 even gets a bonus to armor resist. None get a bonus to armor self-repair.

2 types of destroyer and neither gets any kind of armor bonus.

4 types of cruiser, only 1 gets a bonus to armor resist - none get a self-repair bonus.

3 types of battlecruiser, again only 1 gets an armor resist bonus and none get a self-repair bonus.

3 types of battleship, and yet again, 1 armor resist and zero self-repair bonus.


Does that look like a winning line-up for armor tanking? Out of 19 ships only 4 even get an armor resist bonus and NONE of them get a self-repair bonus.

And the real irony of the Myrmidon not only does it get the armor repair bonus that zero Amarr ships do, but it's also (IMHO) one of the best T1 shield tank ships out there. And it's a Gallente ship. You know what other ships get self-repair bonus? The Incursus & Hyperion - both are also Gallente ships. Meaning that all three of the best active-armor tank ships in the game are Gallente exclusive.

Biased much, CCP?

Defensive armor-tanking ship bonuses were once just a bonus and not a requirement to armor tank. I remember when active armor-tanked hurricanes were good. Now a dual armor rep hurricane is laughed at.