# \[Proposal\]How to roll back Surgical Strike Resistance Nerfs and deal with Supercap Proliferation **URL:** \ **Category:** Assembly Hall\ **Created:** [April 13, 2020, 12:15am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076 "2020-04-13T00:15:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DragoFire](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dragofire/32/257926_2.png) [@DragoFire](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/DragoFire)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2020, 9:56pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/21 "2020-04-25T21:56:18Z")
> [@Saladinae](#): > > fit reactive armor hardener instead of 3rd mag stab. Well how much damage do you loose from dropping the 3rd mag stab, in most cases you’re only loosing a little as the stacking penalty on third module cuts its benefits alot, and adding tank var DC, RA or passive shield regen increases survivability. But it tank isn’t your concern than go damage fit. As many say its a personal choice how you fit your ships . ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2020, 2:11am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/22 "2020-04-26T02:11:37Z")
Pre nerf, the brutix was already fit for sufficient survivability. An extra mag stab from 30-40 rail brutix usually means 800 more damage per volley (combined). ---
**Author:** ![Solomon\_Iskander](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solomon_iskander/32/496328_2.png) [@Solomon\_Iskander](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solomon_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2020, 6:42pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/23 "2020-04-28T18:42:38Z")
If going from 25% to 20% ‘wrecks’ your fit and results in getting blapped … then you were getting blapped before the change ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2020, 6:47pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/24 "2020-04-28T18:47:51Z")
Having sufficient buffer to take an alpha blast (specifically vs arty) to receive reps can often be decided by 25% to 20%. ---
**Author:** ![Solomon\_Iskander](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solomon_iskander/32/496328_2.png) [@Solomon\_Iskander](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solomon_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2020, 7:17pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/25 "2020-04-28T19:17:45Z")
Any evidence to support this? Because my experience is the opposite. My armour fits can do the same encounters that they could do before. ---
**Author:** ![Haulie\_Berry](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/haulie_berry/32/388021_2.png) [@Haulie\_Berry](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Haulie_Berry)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2020, 7:28pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/26 "2020-04-28T19:28:33Z")
You seem to be missing the fact that an overall reduction of tank was intended, and is not merely an accidental side effect that nobody considered. And doctrine meta is not supposed to be eternal, either, so there is nothing inherently problematic about “entire subcap doctrines” having been “rekt”. Build new doctrines. ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 1:08am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/27 "2020-04-29T01:08:38Z")
The resistance nerf only made the nano/shield + kite doctrines stronger, and they were already the meta. ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 1:09am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/28 "2020-04-29T01:09:44Z")
Yes. It’s called math. Brutix Navy Issue now fits an extra resist mod and drops a mag stab for same tank. You prove math with math. Same applies to all other armor fits. * * * This would be a non mathematical statement: “Active armor fits got hit worse than buffer ( in general practice).” We know that it’s most likely true, but hard to prove, since raw math on PYFA can’t simulate the moment to moment nuance of an armor brawler. As far a standard fleet fit, armor boats fit one less damage mod and fit one more resist mod. Therefore, armor has been nerfed. The shield kite doctrines don’t rely on raw buffer/incomming reps, more so than controlling range and avoiding a portion of the incoming damage. Armor is slow. Armor takes more damage in general, therefore armor suffers the most, and armor tanks use low slots. If you can’t understand this, you’re new to EvE. ---
**Author:** ![Solomon\_Iskander](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solomon_iskander/32/496328_2.png) [@Solomon\_Iskander](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solomon_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 1:38am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/29 "2020-04-29T01:38:20Z")
And in math 20% of 25% is called 5% and if you were 5% away from getting blapped out of the gate then you were doing something wrong ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 1:40am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/30 "2020-04-29T01:40:38Z")
You take 100 damage raw. You take 80 at 20%. You take 75 at 25%. That’s a 6.25% change in damage taken, not 5. Learn how EvE works…in fact…learn how math works. 6.25%, especially in a fleet fight. Turn off your armor/shield boosts if you don’t think 6.25% matters. ## By the way…that 6.25% stacks. Suppose 100 damage raw. 80 taken at 20%; 64 taken at double 20%. 75 taken at 25%; 56 taken at double 25%. _Now it’s a 12.5% difference._ * * * Since the worst resist hole if usually covered thrice in a serious armor build: 80 taken at 20%; 64 taken at double 20%; 51 at triple 20%. 75 taken at 25%; 56 taken at double 25%. 42 at triple 25. _Now it’s 17.6% damage difference_ That’s an entire chunk of the buffer. Now that hole MUST be filled in an armor doctrine, so - 1 damage mod. * * * You need to learn basic math before you start theory crafting or trying to criticize theory crafting. Depending on the armor fit, damage taken has been increased from between 8-17%. Kitey shield fleets still rely on avoidance, so not much changes for them in actual practice. ---
**Author:** ![Solomon\_Iskander](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solomon_iskander/32/496328_2.png) [@Solomon\_Iskander](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solomon_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 1:48am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/31 "2020-04-29T01:48:52Z")
You keep changing the goal here. My original statement is that my armor tank fits do not die any more often than before the patch. If you are so unbalanced in doctrine that 5% (6.25%, 4% on stacked, who cares) is causing you to have useless fits (quoted from your original post and follow ups) then you were relying on luck before the change. Dying all the time (or even most of the time per your posts) on that kind of difference is a matter of luck. > [@Saladinae](#): > > There are many frigate/cruiser fits that I myself use that go from _strong_ to _useless_ with these resistance changes. > [@Saladinae](#): > > A tank base don speed/sig/active rep will now suddenly explode against certain blap arty fits. > [@Saladinae](#): > > Having sufficient buffer to take an alpha blast (specifically vs arty) to receive reps can often be decided by 25% to 20%. ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 1:50am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/32 "2020-04-29T01:50:19Z")
The goal didn’t’ change. You just demonstrated that you don’t understand the basic compounding of resist-stacking. That disqualifies you entirely from the argument. There is no goal except for you to learn math (which has nothing to do with EvE itself). 17% more damage taken against arty is difference between suriving for reps and being blapped. You can ship down to tier 1 brutix vs smaller arty fleet. You ship up to a BNI when the enemy fleet is slightly larger…so you can survive the alpha. The threshold for engagement has changed. Also the threshold where the BNI itself can’t survive an alpha has also decreased by 17%. ## Now what? Rail Diemos? Rail Megas? That’s a helluva SHIP UP. Also remember that this argument applies to any armor doctrine, not just Rail Brutix and BNIs. ---
**Author:** ![Solomon\_Iskander](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solomon_iskander/32/496328_2.png) [@Solomon\_Iskander](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solomon_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 1:56am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/33 "2020-04-29T01:56:39Z")
Not sure how we got from 5% to 17% but I repeat my observation, which is shown by my (lack) of zkillboard lately, my armor fits are not blowing up, and that is in deep null space, solo or with one or two other battleship or less wingmen. Is your zkillboard all of a sudden covered in red? Or did you just whinge and sit in station spinning and complaining? ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 2:27am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/34 "2020-04-29T02:27:37Z")
If you apply 25% resist three times… If you apply 20% resist three times… You get an overall 17% difference. It’s compounded. 100 damage taken: At 25% resist, you TAKE 75% damage. 75% = 3/4; (3/4)^3 = 27/64; 27/64 = 42% damage TAKEN. So 100 damage turns in 42 damage if you stack 25% resist modules three times. * * * Now for 20% resists: At 20% resist you TAKE 80% damage. 80% = 4/5; (4/5)^3 = 64/125; 64/125 = 51% damage TAKEN. So 100 damage turns in 51 damage if you stack 20% resist modules three times. * * * Now difference between triple stacked 25’s vs 20’s. 42 vs 51: 42/51 = 82.5%. 100-82.5% = 17.5% The armor tanker now takes 17.5% more damage in his weakest hole. I can’t make the math any more clear. In general a resist mod that does (x/y) resistance results in (y-x)/y damage taken. * * * _The difference between two mods goes according the formula (where s = number of stacks):_ _((y1-x1)/y1)^s vs. ((y2-x2)/y2)^s_ _Thence:_ - 1 - [((y2-x2)/y2)^s)/ ((y1-x1)/y1)^s]\* _Is the difference. That’s the calculation we performed for s = 3, x1 =3, y1 =4, x2 =4, y2=5._ @Scoots_Choco I saw you liked the above post , you like incorrect math? ---
**Author:** ![Scoots\_Choco](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/scoots_choco/32/262262_2.png) [@Scoots\_Choco](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Scoots_Choco)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 6:32am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/35 "2020-04-29T06:32:02Z")
> [@Saladinae](#): > > I saw you liked the above post I’m just having a blast watching you try to justify you fake outrage. 🍿 Like many kids on the internet today, you’re nothing but just hot air and fake outrage. The fact of the matter is that this Surgical Strike change has had almost no noticeable impact on the game outside of very specific scenarios (for example, Nullsec fleet Muninns losing around 4% of their total ehp). And from what I’ve been seeing, people are already adjusting to that without a problem. Yet here you are, two weeks after the change when the overwhelming majority of players have realized, “Hey, it’s actually not as bad as I thought it was gonna be” (fyi, just like I said), you’re still trying to carry on this misguided crusade of your’s. So I’m just here to watch you continue to fail. I really don’t care about your math, because ultimately, _it doesn’t matter_. People are still able to PvE just fine. People are still able to PvP just fine. The game is fine. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 6:53am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/36 "2020-04-29T06:53:54Z")
There’s no such thing as “your math,” or “my math,” or “his math.” There is only one mathematically correct solution, and it has no allegience. 17% ehp drop (in the weakest hole) affects armor doctrines quite a bit. The amount of Muninn’s now needed to volley a Brutix is now 17% less. Now BNI’s have to come out earlier. And now they have less damage because -1 magstab, while the Muninn retains all of it’s gyros and pops it’s ADCU. The AF and HAC lines were only made stronger from the resist changes, and moreso for the Shield/kite/alpha HAC (the Muninn!) Meanwhile in CSM 14 minutes they’re discussing how they want to disrupt the “Muninn Online meta” and they they introduce a resist change that only favours the Muninn in the subcap meta. lol Straight from CSM minutes by CPP Rise: > **[CSM14SecondSummitMinutes.pdf](https://web.ccpgamescdn.com/aws/community/CSM14SecondSummitMinutes.pdf)** > > 1137.29 KB “Muninns could see more changes as people are tired of flying them. • People want more room to fly BCs, and BS – the team will look at bombs.” Ok, so the Muninn has ADCU, so resist changes virtually have no affect on it. Ok, so the Muninn doctrine is a shield kite meta, that mostly rely on avoidance and range…so ehp matters least to this particular HAC. Ok, the only BC hulls that can stand up to a Muninn fleet in a extended fight now have less EHP and no ADCU…or the same EHP at the expense of a damage and/or application mod. So, Muninns got stronger in Surgical Strike. ---
**Author:** ![Solomon\_Iskander](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solomon_iskander/32/496328_2.png) [@Solomon\_Iskander](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solomon_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 3:42pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/37 "2020-04-29T15:42:43Z")
You still keep changing the goal posts. This is not about the math. My armour fits are not dying as shown by zkillboard. Where is your evidence that your fits are dying all over the place? ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 5:07pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/38 "2020-04-29T17:07:15Z")
The goalposts aren’t changing. I’m talking apples (Armor Fleet vs Arty Fleet) You’re talking oranges (Solo/small gang PvP). Also from CSM 14 minutes; "• Heavy bombers will the last component of the capital/supcapital adjustments.\* ---
**Author:** ![Solomon\_Iskander](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/solomon_iskander/32/496328_2.png) [@Solomon\_Iskander](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Solomon_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 9:01pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/39 "2020-04-29T21:01:48Z")
> [@Solomon\_Iskander](#): > > You keep changing the goal here. My original statement is that my armor tank fits do not die any more often than before the patch. If you are so unbalanced in doctrine that 5% (6.25%, 4% on stacked, who cares) is causing you to have useless fits (quoted from your original post and follow ups) then you were relying on luck before the change. Dying all the time (or even most of the time per your posts) on that kind of difference is a matter of luck. > > > [@Saladinae](#): > > > > There are many frigate/cruiser fits that I myself use that go from _strong_ to _useless_ with these resistance changes. > > > [@Saladinae](#): > > > > A tank base don speed/sig/active rep will now suddenly explode against certain blap arty fits. > > > [@Saladinae](#): > > > > Having sufficient buffer to take an alpha blast (specifically vs arty) to receive reps can often be decided by 25% to 20%. > [@Solomon\_Iskander](#): > > strangely all of my frigate, destroyer, cruiser and battleship armor/resist fits failed to spontaneously explode when this patch was release, something is obviously horribly wrong here That was my initial reply. My evidence (no change in zkillboard) says no major change. Where is your evidence? ---
**Author:** ![Saladinae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/saladinae/32/415712_2.png) [@Saladinae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Saladinae)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2020, 9:56pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076/40 "2020-04-29T21:56:24Z")
**The evidence is math.** **It’s takes 17% less ships to alpha an armor tanked ship in its weakest resist hole. This means shield+arty fits only need 5/6 of the previous count in fleet. Thus the Muninn meta has been buffed by 6/5 (120%, the reciprocal of 5/6, aka 83%**, 83% = 100% - 17%) Now an extra resist mod must be fitted at the expense of a damage mod. Thus, armor ships die at same rate as before, but do less damage (-1heat sink/magstab). So the killboard will show the same rate. Also less armor ships will now used, further reducing the killboard. The most common switch is a damage mod for a reactive armor hardener post patch. EDIT: @Loroseco_Kross Just watched your interview with Jin’taan. Everything you said about the resists changes hurting armor and favoring arty boats mathces this thread! [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076.md?page=1) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/proposal-how-to-roll-back-surgical-strike-resistance-nerfs-and-deal-with-supercap-proliferation/232076.md?page=3)