Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
667
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 09:25:00 -
[31] - Quote
culo duro wrote:If you fly a drake, you use PG Implants. Also since i actually use implants you reach past the 100k EHP point. with 200-300 Passive regen.
But the part you seem to forget is that if you made the Large Shield Extender have 4k HP instead of the current 2625 HP. it'll be way too op. The Drake is great as it is.
Hey, if we're going to use implants, then I have a 200k eHP prophecy that would like to have a word, and all that took was a set of slaves and a couple 'noble' implants. How long does it take to regenerate 90,000 eHP at 300/sec? About 5 minutes.
Please note the increase in fittings for the 4k HP LSE. Sure its nice to have a larger shield extender, but your current DRAEK is already over on fitting, and still only barely breaks HALF the eHP of a prophecy. This new XLSE has increased fitting requirements. It's not like I'm trying to just hand out an extra couple thousand eHP to shield ships. You can't even remove 2 LSEs and add one XLSE, because the CPU cost of one XLSE is more than double two LSEs. |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 10:11:00 -
[32] - Quote
Paikis wrote:culo duro wrote:If you fly a drake, you use PG Implants. Also since i actually use implants you reach past the 100k EHP point. with 200-300 Passive regen.
But the part you seem to forget is that if you made the Large Shield Extender have 4k HP instead of the current 2625 HP. it'll be way too op. The Drake is great as it is. Hey, if we're going to use implants, then I have a 200k eHP prophecy that would like to have a word, and all that took was a set of slaves and a couple 'noble' implants. How long does it take to regenerate 90,000 eHP at 300/sec? About 5 minutes. Please note the increase in fittings for the 4k HP LSE. Sure its nice to have a larger shield extender, but your current DRAEK is already over on fitting, and still only barely breaks HALF the eHP of a prophecy. This new XLSE has increased fitting requirements. It's not like I'm trying to just hand out an extra couple thousand eHP to shield ships. You can't even remove 2 LSEs and add one XLSE, because the CPU cost of one XLSE is more than double two LSEs.
I'd love to see that fit, because the only way i can get a 200k EHP on a prophecy is by having no neuts on the high slots. 140k EHP with 3 med neuts and 2 small neuts.
If you can't see that if you gave the drake a total of 4K more Shield it would be insane. Shield tanking is already more agile than Armor buffer tanking, and you want it to be buffed more? |
Ohishi
Apocalypse Reign
32
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 10:13:00 -
[33] - Quote
culo duro wrote:Paikis wrote:a. 2% over on CPU b. 3% over on PG c. 99,875 eHP d. 193 eHP/sec passive regen
You're over on fittings, requiring at least 2 fittings implants (I assume the 2 Genolution implants), and you're short by a looong way on your claims of 300/sec passive regen. If you fly a drake, you use PG Implants. Also since i actually use implants you reach past the 100k EHP point. with 200-300 Passive regen. But the part you seem to forget is that if you made the Large Shield Extender have 4k HP instead of the current 2625 HP. it'll be way too op. The Drake is great as it is. That's funny, I flew drakes and have snake and HML implants. Never once did I need a power grid implant. |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 14:48:00 -
[34] - Quote
You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
|
AGSeeker
Crytek Network
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 15:18:00 -
[35] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same.
If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? |
Lili Lu
701
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 15:19:00 -
[36] - Quote
Paikis wrote: I think that with the current buffs to active armour tanking, and presumably more on the way, that it is time that shield tankers had an answer to the 1600mm plate, and I'd also like to propose that the lower sized shield extenders be buffed so they might actually be used. Shield buffer is fine. The top 20 of EVE-kill is full of shield buffer. There simply is no problem calling out for an answer. Your suggestion that there should be a larger shield extender is bad and you should feel bad.
As for micro and small extenders, take a look at 50mm and 100mm plates. That basically only noobs actually fit these modules is no big deal. Or did you make the mistake of buying a tech II small shield extender BPO or some such? |
Steel Roamer
Pandemic Legion Academy
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 19:42:00 -
[37] - Quote
AGSeeker wrote:Paikis wrote:Nobody uses the Micro or Small shield extenders. Frigates get a medium, and anything cruiser and above uses large.
I think that with the current buffs to active armour tanking, and presumably more on the way, that it is time that shield tankers had an answer to the 1600mm plate, and I'd also like to propose that the lower sized shield extenders be buffed so they might actually be used. The idea is that Frigates use the micro and smalls, cruisers and BCs use the medium, and BS use the large. Here's my suggestions:
Micro Shield Extender II (slightly worse than 200mm plate) PG/CPU: 1/17 Shield: +550 Sig Radius: +3
Small Shield Extender II (carbon copy of current MSE II, slightly worse than 400mm plate) PG/CPU: 31/34 Shield: +1050 Sig Radius: +7
Medium Shield Extender II (slight nerf on current LSE II, slightly worse than 800mm plate) PG/CPU: 160/46 Shield: +2350 Sig Radius: +23
Large Shield Extender II (slightly worse than the 1600mm plate) PG/CPU: 180/100 Shield: +4700 Sig Radius: +50 Well..no. Active Shield tanking is better than active armor tanking (Ancillary shield booster). So its fair enough that armor buffer tanking is supirior to shield buffer tanking. Also shields have a passive regen, where armor has higher overall resists.
Active shield was only popular when it worked pre-ASB nerf. Active tanking nowadays only works with off-grid links.
CCP will just add some more ancillary modules and pretend there isn't an imbalance. |
Diesel47
Bad Men Ltd.
501
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 01:15:00 -
[38] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:sabre906 wrote:Add speed penalty to shield extenders. There, balanced. I'd actually be open to this idea if it replace sig radius going to crap. Its not like most of the caldari ships I fly will bring home 1st place finishes from quartermile runs on trackday now anyway.
Yeah because the entire game balance should revolve around what YOU personally do.
This is the mindset thats the cause for all the whine and nerf threads that plague these forums. |
Tsukino Stareine
EVE University Ivy League
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:04:00 -
[39] - Quote
the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
797
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:05:00 -
[40] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size
Yes, because it matters. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
|
Inkarr Hashur
Sine Nobilitatis
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:19:00 -
[41] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters.
It should usually make up between 5 and 10% of your final active tank. You want to give that up?
edit: Oh whoops we're talking extenders not actual tanking. Yeah my bad.
No, talking pure buffer, it doesn't really end up being significant unless you build the tank around it, which has its own drawbacks. I'll bow out of this. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
671
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:46:00 -
[42] - Quote
Inkarr Hashur wrote:sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters. It should usually make up between 5 and 10% of your final active tank. You want to give that up? edit: Oh whoops we're talking extenders not actual tanking. Yeah my bad. No, talking pure buffer, it doesn't really end up being significant unless you build the tank around it, which has its own drawbacks. I'll bow out of this.
It's also pretty useless on anything that isn't a Drake (or a Rattlesnake) |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 07:43:00 -
[43] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Inkarr Hashur wrote:sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters. It should usually make up between 5 and 10% of your final active tank. You want to give that up? edit: Oh whoops we're talking extenders not actual tanking. Yeah my bad. No, talking pure buffer, it doesn't really end up being significant unless you build the tank around it, which has its own drawbacks. I'll bow out of this. It's also pretty useless on anything that isn't a Drake (or a Rattlesnake)
You've never flown nano ships have you?
LSE II are fine. You know when you fly shield tanked ships, you can tank omni way better than armor, which is why most mission ships are shield tanked (Not taking into account Extra DPS etc), and you get a passive recharge on your shield. No matter how many LSEs you add, you will only increase the shield recharge.
Let's take the Rokh as an example. Shield 10625 (Nothing) recharge time 1825 Sec. and it peaks at 14,7 HP/s. You add a LSE, Total Shield goes up, recharge rate stays the same. we do now have 13906k Shield with the same recharge time. You add a few Hardeners for more resistance, we now got 50k EHP in Shields with a recharge time of 1825 Seconds.
anyway back to my point. Our standard Rokh got 20k EHP in it's shields, that recharges over 1825 seconds. Which is why shields are awesome, i fly armor myself, but damn, we'd need a plate buff to make up for the passive recharge rate on a drake.
Shield Extenders don't need a change. It's the same thing with everyone that flew a ship that got nerfed, "OMG YOU RUINED MY SHIP" it's stupid. |
Danny John-Peter
New Eden Renegades Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
199
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 10:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
culo duro wrote: Our standard Rokh got 20k EHP in it's shields
Wow, you must have a really **** standard Rokh fit. |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 10:15:00 -
[45] - Quote
Danny John-Peter wrote:culo duro wrote: Our standard Rokh got 20k EHP in it's shields
Wow, you must have a really **** standard Rokh fit.
When i say standard i mean no fit All V. |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 13:34:00 -
[46] - Quote
AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask?
No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems.
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2095
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 14:14:00 -
[47] - Quote
300%
Sure it wasn't over 9000%?
(AAR is 68% better than a T2 repper for 8 cycles, after that it's less than T1 repper.)
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
41
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 16:01:00 -
[48] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems.
Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite
|
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 17:28:00 -
[49] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite
Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron. |
AGSeeker
Crytek Network
2
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 17:32:00 -
[50] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron.
Stop trolling. U dont know what u are talking about.
The AAR reps 68% (if u dont belive that, just read the dev blogs or look at the numbers) more than a T2 repper for 8 cycles. And the cycle-time is much longer than the ASB one.
Edit: And the AAR uses cap, regardless of the nanite paste and without paste it reps only 66% of a T1 Repper. |
|
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
41
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 17:38:00 -
[51] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 19:21:00 -
[52] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron.
You talking about that Anci armor repper which really only works if you got 2 reppers, and then it turns off fast? |
Tsukino Stareine
EVE University Ivy League
20
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 23:31:00 -
[53] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters.
why wouldn't it matter? You could make some quite ridiculous passive tanking fits on battlecruiser and above fits like on drakes, feroxes etc. Passive shield tanking could quite possibly become viable in pvp if that happened. |
Dibblerette
The Phantom Regiment THE ROYAL NAVY
143
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 07:04:00 -
[54] - Quote
Just wanted to say that I do infact use 200mm plates on the Punisher, along with a small rep and a nos. Bleeder punisher ftw! |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
675
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 08:27:00 -
[55] - Quote
Dibblerette wrote:Just wanted to say that I do infact use 200mm plates on the Punisher, along with a small rep and a nos. Bleeder punisher ftw!
Aye, I use a similar fit on Rifters as well. 800mm plates do get used on some of my cruisers also. The ones that aren't bait tanked anyway.
I checked my Maelstrom fit eariler... 14 hp/sec passive tank. I figured with a passive tank that high, I could take the repper off. |
culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 09:21:00 -
[56] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Dibblerette wrote:Just wanted to say that I do infact use 200mm plates on the Punisher, along with a small rep and a nos. Bleeder punisher ftw! Aye, I use a similar fit on Rifters as well. 800mm plates do get used on some of my cruisers also. The ones that aren't bait tanked anyway. I checked my Maelstrom fit eariler... 14 hp/sec passive tank. I figured with a passive tank that high, I could take the repper off.
You really don't know how Shield recharge work do you? Every ship got a normal recharge time. Maelstroms being 1875 seconds. To decrease that you need Shield Rechargers or Power Relays, to decrease that time. Or you can use Shield Extenders to make your total shield higher. You get some more sig radius but armor tank lose agility.
God dammit. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
675
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 09:44:00 -
[57] - Quote
culo duro wrote:You really don't know how Shield recharge work do you? Every ship got a normal recharge time. Maelstroms being 1875 seconds. To decrease that you need Shield Rechargers or Power Relays, to decrease that time. Or you can use Shield Extenders to make your total shield higher. You get some more sig radius but armor tank lose agility.
God dammit.
I am well aware how passive shield tanking works. Just as I am well aware how completely useless it is if you don't fit for it. Most fights take several minutes for that passive recharge to amount to anywhere close to the extra hit points that an armour tanker would have just had the whole time.
A Drake (with fititng implants) gets about 100,000 EHP and 193/sec passive recharge. To do this it gets only a long point, with 8 slots dedicated to tank and 3 damage mods (standard)
A Prophecy with no implants, can get 132,000 EHP. It has an 8 slot tank, MWD, scram, web, and 3 damage mods. It will take 2 minutes and 45 seconds for the Drake to passively regenerate enough HP to cover the 32k extra hp that the Prophecy has had since the start of the engagement. Oh, that's assuming that the Drake gets peak recharge the whole time. It doesn't.
Oh, and 5 neuts. Did I mention the Prophecy can fit 5 neuts with all that tank? Enough neuting power to drain that Drake's cap dry in under 30 seconds, at which point the Drake has 47,417 EHP and only 87/sec passive recharge. Which leads to the Prophecy killing the Drake every time.
The current Drake can NEVER regenerate enough hp from passive recharge to offset the raw buffer deficit it starts with. |
culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 09:53:00 -
[58] - Quote
Paikis wrote:culo duro wrote:You really don't know how Shield recharge work do you? Every ship got a normal recharge time. Maelstroms being 1875 seconds. To decrease that you need Shield Rechargers or Power Relays, to decrease that time. Or you can use Shield Extenders to make your total shield higher. You get some more sig radius but armor tank lose agility.
God dammit. I am well aware how passive shield tanking works. Just as I am well aware how completely useless it is if you don't fit for it. Most fights take several minutes for that passive recharge to amount to anywhere close to the extra hit points that an armour tanker would have just had the whole time. A Drake (with fititng implants) gets about 100,000 EHP and 193/sec passive recharge. To do this it gets only a long point, with 8 slots dedicated to tank and 3 damage mods (standard) A Prophecy with no implants, can get 132,000 EHP. It has an 8 slot tank, MWD, scram, web, and 3 damage mods. It will take 2 minutes and 45 seconds for the Drake to passively regenerate enough HP to cover the 32k extra hp that the Prophecy has had since the start of the engagement. Oh, that's assuming that the Drake gets peak recharge the whole time. It doesn't. Oh, and 5 neuts. Did I mention the Prophecy can fit 5 neuts with all that tank? Enough neuting power to drain that Drake's cap dry in under 30 seconds, at which point the Drake has 47,417 EHP and only 87/sec passive recharge. Which leads to the Prophecy killing the Drake every time. The current Drake can NEVER regenerate enough hp from passive recharge to offset the raw buffer deficit it starts with.
Actually there is. Stay out of 12,6KM (Med neut range) since it's only got 1 web you fit one or fly away. |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:00:00 -
[59] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote: Stuff.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot
Calculate the amount of cap used by a small anc repper ( with chanrges loaded ) to rep 1000hp Now calculate the amount of cap used by a standard repper to do the same.
Realise you are thick and need to have things explained to you.
|
culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:05:00 -
[60] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote: Stuff.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot
Calculate the amount of cap used by a small anc repper ( with chanrges loaded ) to rep 1000hp Now calculate the amount of cap used by a standard repper to do the same. Realise you are thick and need to have things explained to you.
Now add all that up to that you buy **** expensive charges and end up with only being able to fit one, so you need a normal repper anyway, because it's reload time is 60 seconds.... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |