These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Tactical Shield Manipulation, shield uniformity, and why it can be bad

Author
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-07-25 02:15:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
For those of you who don't know the specifics, and I'd assume that's the majority of you, here is a brief overview: Shield Uniformity is a function in which shields naturally begin to allow partial damage penetration to armor once they go to 25% HP or below. The skill Tactical Shield Manipulation (TSM) acts to increase the uniformity of shields--that's how much of the shield HP does not allow damage to get through--by 5% per level. So at level 5 it's supposed to provide complete uniformity, meaning damage will never penetrate shields and hit armor until the shields have been fully depleted.


In short, uniformity is good for active shield tanks, and bad for passive shield tanks. With an active shield tank, it makes sense to want uniformity. You want all of the damage you receive to hit your shields where you (presumably) have the best resistances, and thus will take less net damage from those attacks. But a passive shield tank that is based around a fast natural shield regeneration will actually prefer letting some damage through when the shield is close to collapsing. The shield reaches peak recharge rate at 25% HP remaining, and as it gets lower, the rate of recharge falls quickly. If some of the received damage penetrates past the shield and into armor, it lightens the load on the remaining shield, allowing it to continue regenerating quickly for longer.

The easiest example to produce is with a Drake or similar shield-tanker fit with a strong passive-regen setup, in a PVE mission having its shields worn down just slightly faster than they can compensate for. With no bonus to shield uniformity (uniformity 75%), the Drake's armor will gradually be eaten away while its shields will hold, gradually losing their ground. This can buy time for the Drake to finish off some enemies and reduce the incoming damage, potentially allowing shields to recover. But with 100% uniformity the difference is very large: the Drake's shields plummet faster the lower they get, very quickly reaching 0% and causing the shields to completely stop regenerating while the Drake's weak armor is torn to shreds in seconds.

=============================================================

I want to see something done about this discrepancy with shield uniformity, something that allows both active tankers and passive tankers to be satisfied. As it stands, the TSM skill is counter-productive to passive shield tankers, which is made particularly lousy by the fact that it is the major prerequisite for tech 2 shield hardeners.




I have a proposal: modules that increase shield regeneration rate are generally used only by those who are passive shield tanking, thus perhaps those modules should decrease shield uniformity as a bonus to their regular effects. In particular, the Shield Recharger (mid slot module) needs a boost if we are expected to ever use one because even a ship devoting 8 slots to a passive shield tank will still fail to layer resistances enough times to make the Shield Recharger better in any case than a shield hardener.

So I propose that fitting one of these modules to your ship reduces your uniformity by a set amount, with the total uniformity reduction simply being the largest value of any module you have fitted, meaning it doesn't stack:

Shield Rechargers: -25% uniformity
Shield Flux Coils: -20% uniformity
Shield Power Relays: -15% uniformity
Core Defense Field Purger rigs: -10% uniformity

This would also make the TSM skill potentially useful even to passive tankers as it will increase uniformity and prevent it from going too low with these modules. Ideally, 70-80% uniformity is probably best, but with TSM untrained and a Shield Recharger fit, one could get as low as 50% uniformity which you don't want, thus giving you a reason to train TSM.

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."

Thron Legacy
White Zulu
Scorpion Federation
#2 - 2015-07-25 02:24:02 UTC
uh.. shield regen does not decrease under 30% shield hp as i know
(spreadsheet would be nice)
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#3 - 2015-07-25 02:31:48 UTC
while i have no specific proposal id rather see the issue addressed with a change to the mechanic.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2015-07-25 02:41:11 UTC
Thron Legacy wrote:
uh.. shield regen does not decrease under 30% shield hp as i know
(spreadsheet would be nice)

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Passive_shield_tanking#Formulas_Simple

According to this, the peak regen occurs at 25%, which concurs with the data I have collected through my own experimentation and disagrees with what the majority of the playerbase have told me (most have said 33-35%).

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."

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#5 - 2015-07-25 06:46:51 UTC
Solution searching for a problem.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#6 - 2015-07-25 07:00:35 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Thron Legacy wrote:
uh.. shield regen does not decrease under 30% shield hp as i know
(spreadsheet would be nice)

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Passive_shield_tanking#Formulas_Simple

According to this, the peak regen occurs at 25%, which concurs with the data I have collected through my own experimentation and disagrees with what the majority of the playerbase have told me (most have said 33-35%).


Yup. When I was new my tutors would say something closer to 30-33% or so (varies from one to another) because they don't want you to wait until you hit peak, by then you're already in trouble, depending on how fast you went from full shields to that level. If you're dropping shields faster, look to make preperations to bail sooner to avoid hitting armor and structure when you're not ready, especially in Caldari boats since they have little of either. If your shields are falling slowly, you can afford to milk it a little, but know that if you hit 1/4 shields, they HAVE BEGUN to fail, so be careful if you stick around. That's the reason I was told, though I can imagine some others will have a different reason. There has, to my knowledge, never been a true Dev backed confirmation as to what the peak is for every ship exactly, and it maybe different for each ship.

Margin of error here and the general lack of a widely accepted exact percentage is more so because of comfort zones. Some people would rather play it safe while others are more willing to tempt fate a little to make one last kill before spamming warp.

To the OP, what then happens to TSM? Does it simply retain it's now sole job of unlocking hardeners, or is it removed and the prereqs rolled into a different shield skill? If it stays, what then becomes the reason to train it the V, since Tech 2 hardeners unlock at 4?

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Lugh Crow-Slave
#7 - 2015-07-25 07:53:47 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
Solution searching for a problem.


you probably don't passive shield tank?

there is a problem with TSM where leveling it hurts your combat performance with some fits

the OPs idea is not perfect but its better than a lot of the ones out there



to be honest something needs to be done about passive shield tanking right now you can count on one had the number of ships able to pull it off in PvP and they generally have to give up most if not all of their DPS to do so
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#8 - 2015-07-25 15:24:57 UTC
Not seeing how the TSM skill hurts passive tanks vs active tanks, I have never experienced this. In fact since the max regen rate of most passive tanks is in the 20% to 30% range one could easily say that the TSM skill is far more useful to a passive tank than an active since most active tanks are never that low anyway.

Besides this your whole concept hinges on the assumption that at low shield levels on a passive tank it is better to allow some of the damage to penetrate the shields to be absorbed by the armor and that is a concept that is not proven in your arguments.

Overall I would give this a -1 as you have not put forth a compelling argument as to why it would be better to allow damage to penetrate shields before they were depleted.
Iain Cariaba
#9 - 2015-07-25 15:38:26 UTC
AFAIK, the entire purpose of a shield tank is to prevent damage from getting at the thin armor and soft structure beneath. So, why would anyone want to allow damage through the shields in the first place? Additionally, if you're in the situation where you're taking enough damage that your passive shield tank is dropping down to near or below 25%, you need to be focusing on your GTFO.

This is being said by someone who solo'd lvl 4 missions in a Drake for years.
Enya Sparhawk
Black Tea and Talons
#10 - 2015-07-25 19:21:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Enya Sparhawk
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Thron Legacy wrote:
uh.. shield regen does not decrease under 30% shield hp as i know
(spreadsheet would be nice)

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Passive_shield_tanking#Formulas_Simple

According to this, the peak regen occurs at 25%, which concurs with the data I have collected through my own experimentation and disagrees with what the majority of the playerbase have told me (most have said 33-35%).

So why not just add to the TSM skill itself (a uniformity across the entire shield spectrum; above and below), say a 1-2%/skill level added to when the base 25% peak regen occurs...

Gives that 5-10% increase to the base 25% with an 8-10% buffer zone as previously mentioned...
(30-35% peak regen with a 38-40% buffer range)

Uniformity of your shields should be a good thing, not something you need to detract from...

EveWiki wrote:
Tactical Shield Manipulation - Skill at preventing damage from penetrating the shield, including the use of shield hardeners and other advanced shield modules. Reduces the chance of damage penetrating the shield when it falls below 25% by 5% per skill level, with 0% chance at level 5; Also adds a 1-2% increase in when base peak recharge rate occurs per level (Hmm, sort of need to word that better but for now I think I'm getting my point across)




I'm totally with you on this, Passive shielding should be a very viable PVP option for the capsuleer...

Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne

Maireann croí éadrom i bhfad.

Bíonn súil le muir ach ní bhíonn súil le tír.

Is maith an scéalaí an aimsir.

When the lost ships of Greece finally return home...

Enya Sparhawk
Black Tea and Talons
#11 - 2015-07-25 20:06:10 UTC
wiki/Passive_shield_tanking wrote:
In short, the smaller your shields, the faster they regenerate - until you hit 25%, then the speed drops. X is your hit-point regeneration at peak regeneration which is at 25% shield strength, 8 to 52% shield strength are strong areas, 0 to 8% and 90%+ are very slow.

You are between 2.0 and 2.5 regen at 8% to about 52% You are between 2.3 and 2.5 regen at 13% to about 41%
To work out peak regeneration

•Peak regeneration (shield cap / shield recharge rate)*2.5=x
•Average region medium to long battle (shield cap / shield recharge rate)*2.2=x
•Average region short to medium battle(shield cap / shield recharge rate)*2.0=x



1.The multiplier is to represent average regeneration in shorter and longer fights. You don't sit in the whole fight at peak regen so the multiplier is a rough estimate of your average regeneration over a fight. If your tank holds don't use the lower numbers stick to 2.5. In PvP I find working out regeneration with a 2.0 multiplier is far more realistic of what you will see in a fight.
1.Some people use 2.4 to be extra safe. The real number is between 2.4 and 2.5 but closer to 2.5. If the enemy cannot break your tank for a long battle use 2.5 instead of 2.0.
So essentially a passive fitting would want a bigger average region of strong hp regen to work with correct, relative to the size of the shield?
So you are basically looking to get out of the "0-8% or 0-13%" range of very slow regen by allowing damage to penetrate the shields before the shields are utterly made useless? Is this the argument that you are trying to make here?
I just want to better understand 'what exactly' you are looking for with your suggestions to the module's uniformity...

Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne

Maireann croí éadrom i bhfad.

Bíonn súil le muir ach ní bhíonn súil le tír.

Is maith an scéalaí an aimsir.

When the lost ships of Greece finally return home...

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#12 - 2015-07-26 00:14:50 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:
Solution searching for a problem.


you probably don't passive shield tank?

there is a problem with TSM where leveling it hurts your combat performance with some fits

the OPs idea is not perfect but its better than a lot of the ones out there



to be honest something needs to be done about passive shield tanking right now you can count on one had the number of ships able to pull it off in PvP and they generally have to give up most if not all of their DPS to do so


I do passive shield tank. I was so infamous for bait Nereus people were accusing my corp mates of being my alts when they started emulating me. I know what the mechanism is, how to use it and what its drawbacks are.

The OP's idea is predicated upon the idea of having more uniformity when your passive tank is already basically cracked. That is the real issue, not a skill preventing structure bleed which, if the modules had a new attribute plucked from the stanky depths of OP's rectum, they wouldn't have and would tank more efficiently.

Basically, your passive rattler under peak DPS and at low shield would just blow up from bleed-through with a perfectly intact shield holding at 23%. Whooptedo.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-07-26 02:28:43 UTC
Enya Sparhawk wrote:
So you are basically looking to get out of the "0-8% or 0-13%" range of very slow regen by allowing damage to penetrate the shields before the shields are utterly made useless? Is this the argument that you are trying to make here?
I just want to better understand 'what exactly' you are looking for with your suggestions to the module's uniformity...[/i]

That is correct. Basically, lacking shield uniformity makes it so that as shield regen rate goes down, DPS dealt to shields also goes down as some of it bleeds through. That armor has little other use to your ship, one of the best things it can do for you is buy you time to let your shield tank recover.



Trinkets friend wrote:
Basically, your passive rattler under peak DPS and at low shield would just blow up from bleed-through with a perfectly intact shield holding at 23%. Whooptedo.

That's not what happens at all. Even with lots of bonus resists, a passive-regen ship will have less EHP within the broad range of decent regen rate on shields than it has in both armor and hull packed together. The bleed-through will only very slowly whittle down your armor and it really can make a tremendous difference. And yes, I have actually experienced this on the battlefield. Way back before I had trained TSM 4, I flew a Drake with tech 1 hardeners into combat missions and would often find my shields drifting a bit below 30%, and I would not become alarmed if I was about to kill off a few rats in the next minute or so because I knew I had plenty of extra buffer to recover with. Now I actually lost a Drake in a mission after I trained TSM to 4, I saw my shields going down and I'd not thought about shield uniformity but was used to having over a minute to fix the situation. Well I saw my shields at 25%, then I looked away from my shields for less than ten seconds before I heard that 40% armor alarm. There was not enough time to align out before my Drake was destroyed.

The difference isn't negligible, it isn't minor, it's tremendous in the right circumstance.

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."

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#14 - 2015-07-26 13:18:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Donnachadh
Still not seeing how this is better and I have flown passive tanked ships for a long time.

By time your shields hit max regen rate any passive shield tank pilot that has at least 2 brain cells will know if his tank is going to hold and will have initiated appropriate actions giving you more than sufficient time to warp out if possible.

If warp out is not possible then your idea will have no effect on the end result since it does nothing to change the max EHP of your ship / fit. The only thing your idea does is shorten the time between shield failure and ship exploding because you have already taken armor damage so there is less to protect you.
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2015-07-26 16:40:55 UTC
The different resists of armor have saved me a few times in just this way, but it should be adjustable in the fitting window.

Now as one of biggest contributes to the bad idea thread, I would go further so that the passive sheid users aren't the only ones reaping this benefit. Adjustable shields with the option of up to 50% bleedover into armor. I dual rep on occasion, so the option of having split armor/sheilds appeals.

Armor taking 50% of each hit's raw damage with the high resists in the sheilds weaknesses would be fun to play with.

Just to be clear, separate from my own "wouldn't it be nice" digression, supported +1

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#16 - 2015-07-26 17:57:57 UTC
regardless of opinion (as they vary in this topic) the skill does need some work. It should always be an advantage to have the skill at 5 and that is clearly not the case. I think the same goes for shield compensation skills they are fairly useless as is tactical shield manipulation.

what would be a good way to balance them back is give tactical shield manipulation an shield regen on top of the stop on shield bleeding below 25%. so when it comes to 25% you gain an bonus on shield regen and as soon as you above 25% you lose it again (this way it is not OP)

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2015-07-26 21:37:32 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
If warp out is not possible then your idea will have no effect on the end result since it does nothing to change the max EHP of your ship / fit. The only thing your idea does is shorten the time between shield failure and ship exploding because you have already taken armor damage so there is less to protect you.

False, in many cases it buys you a LOT of time. This is why it is extra important in PVP. It is difficult to test in PVP which is why my numbers come from PVE, but it is in PVP where you are much more likely to be forced to stand your ground. Passive regen tanks could be a lot better (and perhaps actually useful) in PVP if the pilots actually lacked that shield uniformity that TSM provides.

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."

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2015-07-26 21:49:08 UTC
Zimmer Jones wrote:
The different resists of armor have saved me a few times in just this way, but it should be adjustable in the fitting window.

Now as one of biggest contributes to the bad idea thread, I would go further so that the passive sheid users aren't the only ones reaping this benefit. Adjustable shields with the option of up to 50% bleedover into armor. I dual rep on occasion, so the option of having split armor/sheilds appeals.

I really like the idea of just leaving shield uniformity as an adjustable trait. It should not, however, be adjustable while in flight. The only way I have seen a dual tank to be useful is to jack up a ship's total EHP against any one type of weapon through hardening your better resist facings. It primarily only works to thwart one attack (such as a suicide gank or stealth bomber ambush) but I don't like the idea of a person being able to see a laser ship coming at them and switch uniformity real low to preserve shields for the next attack.

I'm not saying that's what you meant, I wasn't sure and wanted to be clear on that point.



Ellendras Silver wrote:
what would be a good way to balance them back is give tactical shield manipulation an shield regen on top of the stop on shield bleeding below 25%. so when it comes to 25% you gain an bonus on shield regen and as soon as you above 25% you lose it again (this way it is not OP)

Shield regen tanking isn't particularly well balanced (that's an understatement!) but if it ever were balanced, that's the kind of thing that could throw it off. It would increase the skill barrier to shield regen tanking, which is one of the earliest styles of play for many pilots. I don't want to take that away from them.

I'd rather have TSM give you the possibility of having shield uniformity above 75%, something you can opt out of on the ship fitting screen.

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."

Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2015-07-26 22:03:17 UTC
You got the gist of it, and it should be limited to station fitting window, but I'm not sure if the fitting windows in space or station can have options the other doesn't. Not saying it can't happen, I just don't know.

Having options only available in station would be a great feature, like fine tuning your ship in proper facilities. Keeping this from supercaps might also be for the best.

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-07-26 22:14:25 UTC
Zimmer Jones wrote:
but I'm not sure if the fitting windows in space or station can have options the other doesn't.

They can. The in-space fitting window shows everything but disables most of the options. It would just work like that. Alternatively, you could change the uniformity in a fitting service, so you actually could do it on the fly with the deployable fitting service.

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."

12Next page