These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Newb question, Armor vs Shield tanking.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ireland VonVicious
Vicious Trading Company
#21 - 2012-02-19 06:11:49 UTC
Train them both a little and see what you prefer.
Make sure you try both passive and active styles of both.
Then train your pick.

Even if you think it might be a waste of sp you will have more knowledge about what you'll be facing when you pvp.
Well worth giving up 1 day of sp you won't use for awhile for that kind of knowledge.
Darthewok
Perkone
Caldari State
#22 - 2012-02-19 08:00:13 UTC
Armarr Repair. See whut i did thar...

CAVEAT RICHARDUS VOLVERE - YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
Saul Shardani
People of the Saiya
Silent Company
#23 - 2012-02-19 22:46:20 UTC
Gotta be honest, Ive been playing Amarr since I started, and after running a few Incursions with my Corp and using a shield setup on my Navy Geddon, I have seen the light! Shield tanking frees up your low slots for damage modules, and contains so much win, and insta-recharges upon docking. I still love my Amarr ships, but I recently started cross training into Minmitar (for a shield Maelstrom) and a little Caldari (I want a Naga so bad).
Katalci
Kismesis
#24 - 2012-02-20 07:20:52 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Armor gets a +% raw amount module; shields do not

Power Diagnostic System
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#25 - 2012-02-20 07:32:13 UTC
Katalci wrote:
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Armor gets a +% raw amount module; shields do not

Power Diagnostic System


Technically correct; I'll take it. I still tend to consider it a fitting mod though.
Katalci
Kismesis
#26 - 2012-02-20 07:52:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Katalci
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Katalci wrote:
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Armor gets a +% raw amount module; shields do not

Power Diagnostic System


Technically correct; I'll take it. I still tend to consider it a fitting mod though.

The shield supercapitals definitely need more powergrid; just look at all the fitting mods they use.
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-02-20 07:59:06 UTC
Stetson Eagle wrote:
Excellent compilation by darkaegix there. I'd add that it's reasonable to train a bit in both:

shield operation IV
shield management IV
shield upgrades IV
tactical shield manipulation IV
shield rigging I

hull upgrades V
the four armor compensation skills III
mechanic IV
armor rigging I

After this core set is done, you can choose your active tanking and specialize further in it. For shields it's shield compensation, for armor it's repair systems. Training it like this will allow for overall high hitpoints with a relatively fast training.



I'd put tactical shield manipulation at V, even more when you're a armor tanken than when you're a shield tanker.

Damage leaking through should always be brough to 0.

If you go towards PvP you should have the 4 shield compensations as well (usefull against cap drain)
Exploited Engineer
Creatively Applied Violence Inc.
#28 - 2012-02-20 12:18:46 UTC
Mike Whiite wrote:
I'd put tactical shield manipulation at V, even more when you're a armor tanken than when you're a shield tanker.


If you shield buffer tank, it doesn't matter.
If you passive shield tank and your shield falls below 20%, you're screwed anyway.
If you active shield tank and your shield falls below 20%, you're doing it wrong.

TSM 5 is useless.
Kazzlin Freedomsbane
Raistlin Majere's Last Magic Missile
#29 - 2012-02-24 09:45:44 UTC
Thanks for all the replies, just learning about shield vs armor has taught me about tracking and sig radius' also. While I expect to be ganked without remorse ingame, I appreciate the quick help on the forums.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#30 - 2012-02-24 12:44:05 UTC
Exploited Engineer wrote:
Mike Whiite wrote:
I'd put tactical shield manipulation at V, even more when you're a armor tanken than when you're a shield tanker.


If you shield buffer tank, it doesn't matter.
If you passive shield tank and your shield falls below 20%, you're screwed anyway.
If you active shield tank and your shield falls below 20%, you're doing it wrong.

TSM 5 is useless.


It might be more accurate to say that the very slight benefit you get isn't worth spending an extra million SP on.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2012-02-24 12:48:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Mfume Apocal
I used to think the same thing, but running around in paper-thin shield boats the last 9 months, I've seen literally dozens of ships lost due to armor-bleed even though reps were holding them in low shields. Obviously, it's a question of playstyle, and running around in paper-thin shield boats is fairly rare in today's metagame...
Alaric Faelen
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2012-02-25 19:29:48 UTC
I agree with those saying it's pretty much BOTH. There are good ships that use one or the other and you'll want to be able to fly them all. Also, some ships can go either way with their tank and being able to use both is seriously a benefit to any pilot.
It'll also depend on what you personally like to use. If you like EWAR for example armor tanking is a better route so you have free mids. Speed demons prefer shields and damage/tracking mods in the lows.

You'll find that many ships aren't defined as much by tanking type, but rather the type of tank you choose is part of the overall design of any build. For example I have both shield and armor tanked Rifters in my hangar. I wouldn't say either is markedly better than the other and the differences between them come from what the choice of tank allows- mids or lows to design a build around.

I will say that at my limited SP and exp level, fights don't often last long enough to pull many armor rep cycles in small ships like frigates, so I've been leaning toward passive tanks for the small hulls. Once into larger hulls with more staying power, armor repping becomes more useful for staying in the fight. That's just what I've been seeing, YMMV.
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
#33 - 2012-02-25 19:58:27 UTC
A key feature of armour-tanked ships that seems to be missing here is tackle. Typically shields being faster and with good ranged weapons want to be far out using a long point to hold their targets, and speed to keep out of danger. While this tactic can scale well against many situations, they rightly fear closing in to an armour-tanked ship (or jumping a gate/wormhole and starting near one) as scramblers and webs help kill buffer/passive shield-tanked ships fast.

When you factor in certain Assault ships (AF, HACs) and pirate ships which are crossed with Minmatar & packing web bonuses, you can still be fast, armour-tanked, and sensibly packing hard tackle to run people down with.

Also kiting setups tend to need to manage their mwd & cap well, armour-tanked ships often consider a cap injector which will let them pursue for longer, under neuting pressure, and/or use their own neuts to cripple the enemy's ability to flee.

There's a choice to make whether you want to dance around just outside fatal close range while doing ok damage and be able to escape if you pilot well, or being that fatal close range ship they all fear but which depends on many enemies making that mistake of straying too close to.
Previous page12