Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jean deVallette
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 14:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
Given how uselss my Charon is vs my Providence with the new Kronos changes, can CCP please comment on when they are releasing an equivalent to 'Adaptive Nano Plating' for my shield tanked Charon?
I can use a slave set and 3x deadspace ANPs to tank my Provi, with links, to something useful. My Charon sits useless with no tanking option I can apply.
Come one CCP, please comment or add some 'ASA' ... adaptive shield amplifiers |
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar E.A.R.T.H. Federation
533
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 14:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
Haven't you heard? You aren't supposed to be taking advantage of the changes Spacetruckers wanted and instead fit for maximum greed.
|
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar E.A.R.T.H. Federation
533
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 14:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
... Double postage.
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6951
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 14:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
As soon as armor hitpoints start natively regenerating, sure. Oh, and capless ancillary reppers.
Until then, different tank types are different. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
6
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 15:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jean deVallette wrote: Given how uselss my Charon is vs my Providence with the new Kronos changes, can CCP please comment on when they are releasing an equivalent to 'Adaptive Nano Plating' for my shield tanked Charon?
I can use a slave set and 3x deadspace ANPs to tank my Provi, with links, to something useful. My Charon sits useless with no tanking option I can apply.
Come one CCP, please comment or add some 'ASA' ... adaptive shield amplifiers
the fact that you believe that the provi is only useful with a full tank implant set and links makes me think that no matter what you get it wont be enough. How did you use the ships before the change?
|
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
425
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 16:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:As soon as armor hitpoints start natively regenerating, sure. Oh, and capless ancillary reppers.
Until then, different tank types are different. While this is true there is a noticeable disparity in the tanking ability of armor vs shield freighters. I think that simply moving shield HP to armor HP would fix the issue but would remove diversity.
However a midslot version of "Layered Plating" for shields might help address the issue. These modules don't see much use since they are generally considered inferior to EANM's and standard armor plates and I doubt that a "layered shielding" module would see much use outside of freighters for the same reason.
But it might help address the issue by allowing shield freighters to simply add more raw HP than armor freighters can if the percentage bonus to shield HP was high enough. |
Goldensaver
Lom Corporation Brothers of Tangra
401
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 20:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:As soon as armor hitpoints start natively regenerating, sure. Oh, and capless ancillary reppers.
Until then, different tank types are different. I agree that for general tanking goodness, this shouldn't be a thing. But a freighter only module as the OP seems to want (or at least should be freighter only) would kinda make sense due to the imbalance between tanking Armour freighters and Shield freighters.
I mean, seriously. Have you seen the tank an Ark can manage without giving up any cargo space (577831 EHP w/ 168750 cargo)? Have you compared it to a bulkheaded Rhea (548460 EHP w/ 135790 cargo)? How about with Slaves and links? Perhaps with faction or even deadspace ANPs (goes to 1.119m EHP vs 646k EHP)? And it's not like the Rhea's going to be regenerating that much shield HP anyways.
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:As soon as armor hitpoints start natively regenerating, sure. Oh, and capless ancillary reppers.
Until then, different tank types are different. While this is true there is a noticeable disparity in the tanking ability of armor vs shield freighters. I think that simply moving shield HP to armor HP would fix the issue but would remove diversity. However a midslot version of "Layered Plating" for shields might help address the issue. These modules don't see much use since they are generally considered inferior to EANM's and standard armor plates and I doubt that a "layered shielding" module would see much use outside of freighters for the same reason. But it might help address the issue by allowing shield freighters to simply add more raw HP than armor freighters can if the percentage bonus to shield HP was high enough. Would have to be a low slot CPU-less module for freighter use. Preferably a freighter only module much like a Cov-ops cloak is for Recons/Cov-ops. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6957
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 20:44:00 -
[8] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:As soon as armor hitpoints start natively regenerating, sure. Oh, and capless ancillary reppers.
Until then, different tank types are different. I agree that for general tanking goodness, this shouldn't be a thing. But a freighter only module as the OP seems to want (or at least should be freighter only) would kinda make sense due to the imbalance between tanking Armour freighters and Shield freighters.
He's not suggesting a freighter only module. He's suggesting giving away a native advantage from armor tanks "because my Charon".
Nevermind that freighters aren't balanced against their respective abilities exactly matched against one another. Yes, the Charon has less tank than the Providence and the Obelisk have. That's because tank is their shtick, if you want tank, you fly them.
The Charon on the other hand, can reach a fair bit higher maximum cargo than they can. I don't recall the exact numbers because I'm at work and I don't intend to dig through that septic tank of a thread to find them. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
426
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 21:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Nevermind that freighters aren't balanced against their respective abilities exactly matched against one another. Yes, the Charon has less tank than the Providence and the Obelisk have. That's because tank is their shtick, if you want tank, you fly them.
The Charon on the other hand, can reach a fair bit higher maximum cargo than they can. I don't recall the exact numbers because I'm at work and I don't intend to dig through that septic tank of a thread to find them. You make a very good point. However I have to ask, where does this leave the Fenrir? It is tied with the Providence for the smallest cargo hold among freighters but it is also a shield based tank like the Charon. So it has both of the disadvantages and none of the advantages.
In fact if you assume a CODE style gank squad using void ammo and fit T2 nano plantings (1x thermal, 1x kinetic, 1x adaptive) the Obelisk is the clear winner due to its Gallente native armor resist profile (300k EHP) and second largest cargo hold. The Providence comes in second with almost as much cargo and 10k less EHP, the Charon is kinda third with largest cargo hold and 62K less EHP, and the Fenrir is dead last with the the same small cargo as the Providence and 63k less EHP than the Obelisk. Sure the Fenrir may enter warp a bit faster but I wouldn't call a 36 second align time much of an advantage.
Basically the armor freighters can use nano plantings to achieve a "middle ground" between tank and cargo space while shield freighters do not get this option. They must pick one or the other with bulkheads vs cargo expanders. Even mixing the two modules leaves them with far less cargo and less EHP at the same time.
With the freighter skills being rank 10 cross training from freighter V in one race to freighter V in another is not fast. |
Goldensaver
Lom Corporation Brothers of Tangra
401
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 21:49:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Goldensaver wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:As soon as armor hitpoints start natively regenerating, sure. Oh, and capless ancillary reppers.
Until then, different tank types are different. I agree that for general tanking goodness, this shouldn't be a thing. But a freighter only module as the OP seems to want (or at least should be freighter only) would kinda make sense due to the imbalance between tanking Armour freighters and Shield freighters. He's not suggesting a freighter only module. He's suggesting giving away a native advantage from armor tanks "because my Charon". Nevermind that freighters aren't balanced against their respective abilities exactly matched against one another. Yes, the Charon has less tank than the Providence and the Obelisk have. That's because tank is their shtick, if you want tank, you fly them. The Charon on the other hand, can reach a fair bit higher maximum cargo than they can. I don't recall the exact numbers because I'm at work and I don't intend to dig through that septic tank of a thread to find them. I realize that and that's why I'm suggesting that in the event it's added, CCP does apply the "freighter module only" type to it.
However, now that I've gone and dipped my hand in this topic I'm actually doing some heavy comparisons, and it appears that a completely unfitted Charon gets 75% of the EHP of a triple TII ANP Providence. In all fairness, a Providence has 93.5% of the Charon's cargo capacity which does really step on the toes of the Charon's "shtick". Maybe if it could get up about 5-10% more EHP with a basic module investment while also not giving up its 7% more cargohold, it would be alright. A shield resist module would definitely imbalance that, unlesss it used 1 CPU. Then you could fit one, and assuming the resists granted weren't too high, it could bridge the gap without vastly imbalancing things.
Sure, a heavily pimped Providence or Obelisk will vastly out-tank the Charon still, but it'll also cost a lot more, and there's not much that can be done about the difference granted by slaves without introducing a shield version of slaves which would be stupid and utterly break the supercap meta. |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6963
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 22:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote: You make a very good point. However I have to ask, where does this leave the Fenrir? It is tied with the Providence for the smallest cargo hold among freighters but it is also a shield based tank like the Charon. So it has both of the disadvantages and none of the advantages.
*snip*
. Sure the Fenrir may enter warp a bit faster but I wouldn't call a 36 second align time much of an advantage.
I sure would. Faster speed literally translates to faster (more) profits. It has the best possible advantage, which is why it pays for it in cargo and tank.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6963
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 22:21:00 -
[12] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote: Sure, a heavily pimped Providence or Obelisk will vastly out-tank the Charon still, but it'll also cost a lot more, and there's not much that can be done about the difference granted by slaves without introducing a shield version of slaves which would be stupid and utterly break the supercap meta.
See, and that's really the problem. It just comes down to how shield tanks are balanced against armor tanks.
In this case, the armor tank pretty well wins out in terms of overall stats. But that tells me one thing in particular. That CCP places a higher value on cargohold than on tank. They were clearly very reluctant to even offer up rigs, and to do so they had to nerf the size of packaged capitals to justify it. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Antillie Sa'Kan
Forging Industries Silent Infinity
427
|
Posted - 2014.06.11 22:39:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:I sure would. Faster speed literally translates to faster (more) profits. It has the best possible advantage, which is why it pays for it in cargo and tank. The less tank you have the smaller your cargo hold really is. This makes align time pointless unless you are hauling very low value stuff. Which of course also kills your profits.
Unless it can align fast enough to avoid a gank there is no point in considering align time when taking all the risks of hauling in hi sec into account.
Especially since the warp speed changes with align time counting for so little of the total time needed for warp from A to B in a system. |
Liam Inkuras
Mafia Redux
1133
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 00:07:00 -
[14] - Quote
Cargo Expander II's only way to fit freighters though I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Cruis3r's Cr3w Inc.
115
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 01:08:00 -
[15] - Quote
just my 2 cents.
charon with 3 cargohold expanders gets 100k cargospace more than a obelisk with 3. max tank charon which is 3 bulkheads gets 40k less cargo than the obelisk which comes close in tank with bulkhead adaptive nano plate and explosive plate. Fenrir is only good if u afk transport it compared to the other freighters else the faster align is rly only marginal. charon doesnt have a middleground of cargohold and tank compared to obelisk or providence.
Thats the reason i sold my charon and chose the obelisk on my alt.
PS.: Dont nail me on my numbers its late and i did them from memory |
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
349
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 02:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Warp speed mods and implants are the only thing worth fitting to a high sec freighter. That awkward moment at the Gentlemen's Club when you see your sister on the stage....and you're not sure where to put the money.... |
Jean deVallette
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 09:52:00 -
[17] - Quote
This isn't an attempt to get 'shield plating' for all, just a desire to get some balance with freighters.
The two shield freighters cannot match the armour ones for tank because ANP (deadspace especially) distorts the issue.
3x ANP is more tank, is boostable tank, and slaveable tank. It has no drawbacks for a freighter (bulkheads have penalties). but major benefits for armour oriented ones.
The is absolutely no point flying a shield tanked freigher at the moment. Significant changes, maybe to align time, or speed would be nice .. or even a simple ANPs have a cargo penalty.
Any reason why you would use a shield tanked one? AFK in any Freighter with moderate value cargo is .... |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
6974
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 10:23:00 -
[18] - Quote
Jean deVallette wrote: The is absolutely no point flying a shield tanked freigher at the moment. Significant changes, maybe to align time, or speed would be nice .. or even a simple ANPs have a cargo penalty.
Well, congrats, you have just broken armor ships in general, all in trying to fix a perceived issue with freighters.
Quote: Any reason why you would use a shield tanked one? AFK in any Freighter with moderate value cargo is ....
The higher max cargo number, or for the Fenrir the higher speed of travel. And don't afk, period, in this game. It's just not a good idea. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Psychotic Monk for CSM9. |
Camper101
Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory.
1002
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 10:46:00 -
[19] - Quote
Why would you shield or armor tank a ship that has most hitpoints in structure? 2013.03.01 13:30:58 notify For participating in the General Discussion Forum Section your trustworthiness has been adjusted by -2.5000.
My name is Hans. The "L" stands for danger. |
Jean deVallette
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 12:22:00 -
[20] - Quote
Camper101 wrote:Why would you shield or armor tank a ship that has most hitpoints in structure?
You can only add bulkheads to freighter, no DC. Using Pyfa 1.2.1
For the Providence, max EHP: 3x Coreli ANP, Slave Set, Boosted all V Armour Passive EHP: 500k Cargo: 544k Aligns: 35.5s
For Charon, max EHP: 3x Bulkhead, No shield set equivalent, Boosted All V Shield Passive EHP: 348K Cargo: 410k Aligns: 38.8s
Provi vs Charon (tank fit): 43% more EHP 32% more cargo 9% better align
There is not way to boost hull. The Provi above suffers none of the penalties of bulkheads, gets more EHP by a long margin over bulkheads. Its more agile, and has a lot more cargo.
I dont necessarily want homgenized freighters. Not tank for all, but make the Charon align in 25 secs with bulkheads would make it worthwhile? Thats only one possible idea, at the moment its just crap compared to the armour variants. The jump freighters reflect the same issue.
How can the devs be blind to this? |
|
Camper101
Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory.
1002
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 12:44:00 -
[21] - Quote
Jean deVallette wrote:Camper101 wrote:Why would you shield or armor tank a ship that has most hitpoints in structure? You can only add bulkheads to freighter, no DC. Using Pyfa 1.2.1 For the Providence, max EHP: 3x Coreli ANP, Slave Set, Boosted all V Armour Passive EHP: 500k Cargo: 544k Aligns: 35.5s For Charon, max EHP: 3x Bulkhead, No shield set equivalent, Boosted All V Shield Passive EHP: 348K Cargo: 410k Aligns: 38.8s Provi vs Charon (tank fit): 43% more EHP 32% more cargo 9% better align There is not way to boost hull. The Provi above suffers none of the penalties of bulkheads, gets more EHP by a long margin over bulkheads. Its more agile, and has a lot more cargo. I dont necessarily want homgenized freighters. Not tank for all, but make the Charon align in 25 secs with bulkheads would make it worthwhile? Thats only one possible idea, at the moment its just crap compared to the armour variants. The jump freighters reflect the same issue. How can the devs be blind to this?
Buy a Provi then, if that's too much effort ask other people that retrained 1-5 toons for shield supers/caps and had to buy the ships as well - and train for them all over again.
Tho the point is good, make the ones that can't get really high hitpoints at least more agile or something like that. (on the other hand, it does not really matter if you have 300 or 600k EHP, if your cargo is worth more than the needed gankfleet, you are dead ;) )
2013.03.01 13:30:58 notify For participating in the General Discussion Forum Section your trustworthiness has been adjusted by -2.5000.
My name is Hans. The "L" stands for danger. |
Jean deVallette
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 12:50:00 -
[22] - Quote
Camper101 wrote:
.. my stuf ..
Buy a Provi then, if that's too much effort ask other people that retrained 1-5 toons for shield supers/caps and had to buy the ships as well - and train for them all over again.
Tho the point is good, make the ones that can't get really high hitpoints at least more agile or something like that. (on the other hand, it does not really matter if you have 300 or 600k EHP, if your cargo is worth more than the needed gankfleet, you are dead ;) )
Yes - am now training my Provi, sadly, and watching Eve Devs make the same stupid mistake over and over with armour vs shield proliferation. Only in WHs can you use any shield capitals effectively, looks like this is now the case for hauling. |
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 13:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
Jean deVallette wrote:Camper101 wrote:Why would you shield or armor tank a ship that has most hitpoints in structure? You can only add bulkheads to freighter, no DC. Using Pyfa 1.2.1 For the Providence, max EHP: 3x Coreli ANP, Slave Set, Boosted all V Armour Passive EHP: 500k Cargo: 544k Aligns: 35.5s For Charon, max EHP: 3x Bulkhead, No shield set equivalent, Boosted All V Shield Passive EHP: 348K Cargo: 410k Aligns: 38.8s Provi vs Charon (tank fit): 43% more EHP 32% more cargo 9% better align There is not way to boost hull. The Provi above suffers none of the penalties of bulkheads, gets more EHP by a long margin over bulkheads. Its more agile, and has a lot more cargo. I dont necessarily want homgenized freighters. Not tank for all, but make the Charon align in 25 secs with bulkheads would make it worthwhile? Thats only one possible idea, at the moment its just crap compared to the armour variants. The jump freighters reflect the same issue. How can the devs be blind to this? Please remove the slaves and then compare.
|
Jean deVallette
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 13:28:00 -
[24] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Jean deVallette wrote:Camper101 wrote:Why would you shield or armor tank a ship that has most hitpoints in structure? You can only add bulkheads to freighter, no DC. Using Pyfa 1.2.1 For the Providence, max EHP: 3x Coreli ANP, Slave Set, Boosted all V Armour Passive EHP: 500k Cargo: 544k Aligns: 35.5s For Charon, max EHP: 3x Bulkhead, No shield set equivalent, Boosted All V Shield Passive EHP: 348K Cargo: 410k Aligns: 38.8s Provi vs Charon (tank fit): 43% more EHP 32% more cargo 9% better align There is not way to boost hull. The Provi above suffers none of the penalties of bulkheads, gets more EHP by a long margin over bulkheads. Its more agile, and has a lot more cargo. I dont necessarily want homgenized freighters. Not tank for all, but make the Charon align in 25 secs with bulkheads would make it worthwhile? Thats only one possible idea, at the moment its just crap compared to the armour variants. The jump freighters reflect the same issue. How can the devs be blind to this? Please remove the slaves and then compare.
No Implants Provi: 377k ANP 385k Bulkhead Cheaper implants: 455k Mid grade slaves
|
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Cruis3r's Cr3w Inc.
115
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 13:37:00 -
[25] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Jean deVallette wrote:Camper101 wrote:Why would you shield or armor tank a ship that has most hitpoints in structure? You can only add bulkheads to freighter, no DC. Using Pyfa 1.2.1 For the Providence, max EHP: 3x Coreli ANP, Slave Set, Boosted all V Armour Passive EHP: 500k Cargo: 544k Aligns: 35.5s For Charon, max EHP: 3x Bulkhead, No shield set equivalent, Boosted All V Shield Passive EHP: 348K Cargo: 410k Aligns: 38.8s Provi vs Charon (tank fit): 43% more EHP 32% more cargo 9% better align There is not way to boost hull. The Provi above suffers none of the penalties of bulkheads, gets more EHP by a long margin over bulkheads. Its more agile, and has a lot more cargo. I dont necessarily want homgenized freighters. Not tank for all, but make the Charon align in 25 secs with bulkheads would make it worthwhile? Thats only one possible idea, at the moment its just crap compared to the armour variants. The jump freighters reflect the same issue. How can the devs be blind to this? Please remove the slaves and then compare.
the issue is that u can use slaves in armor freighters. and small stat on all l5 no implants. charon with 3 bulkheads 272k eve ehp (lowest resist per tank group) or 303k omni ehp and 410k cargo Providence with 3 anpII 257k eve ehp or 284 omni ehp and 544k cargo Obelisk with 3 anp II 248264 eve ehp or 285 omni ehp and 550k cargo
the last 2 can effectively use slave set to get better stats charon cant
Jean deVallette wrote:
No Implants Provi: 377k ANP 385k Bulkhead Cheaper implants: 455k Mid grade slaves
why do i have different pyfa stats then u |
Jean deVallette
The Scope Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 14:05:00 -
[26] - Quote
the issue is that u can use slaves in armor freighters. and small stat on all l5 no implants. charon with 3 bulkheads 272k eve ehp (lowest resist per tank group) or 303k omni ehp and 410k cargo Providence with 3 anpII 257k eve ehp or 284 omni ehp and 544k cargo Obelisk with 3 anp II 248264 eve ehp or 285 omni ehp and 550k cargo
the last 2 can effectively use slave set to get better stats charon cant
Jean deVallette wrote:
No Implants Provi: 377k ANP 385k Bulkhead Cheaper implants: 455k Mid grade slaves
why do i have different pyfa stats then u[/quote]
A nice webbing booster perhaps? Pick CS of choice. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2271
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 15:34:00 -
[27] - Quote
Your biggest mistake is in thinking tank matters. Gankers gonna gank. If they need a couple extra ships or less will not matter significantly. |
unidenify
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
88
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 16:17:00 -
[28] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Your biggest mistake is in thinking tank matters. Gankers gonna gank. If they need a couple extra ships or less will not matter significantly.
which you think get ganked more often, Skiff or Hulk?
same idea for Freighter. as long as there are lazy afk pilot who put 3 cargo, I am sure ganker would ignore those Freighter with tank mods.
Providence get 166k EHP if go with triple Cargo expand mod. (since they are lazy, I doubt they would bother to pick up Slave implant as well)
Providence with Mid-grade Slave set, 5% Hull/armour implant and Corpii A ANP get around 426k EHP, aka more than twice of triple cargo mod EHP.
So, Ganker would have to bring about 2.6 time more ships than if they go for triple Cargo. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2271
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 16:22:00 -
[29] - Quote
unidenify wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:Your biggest mistake is in thinking tank matters. Gankers gonna gank. If they need a couple extra ships or less will not matter significantly. which you think get ganked more often, Skiff or Hulk? same idea for Freighter. as long as there are lazy afk pilot who put 3 cargo, I am sure ganker would ignore those Freighter with tank mods.
Within reason. When the difference becomes do I need 15 catalysts vs 12, no they won't care so much. The point being (unlike your example) is that all of the freighters are close enough in EHP the small differences won't make that much difference if you get targetted for a gank. |
unidenify
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
88
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 16:24:00 -
[30] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:unidenify wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:Your biggest mistake is in thinking tank matters. Gankers gonna gank. If they need a couple extra ships or less will not matter significantly. which you think get ganked more often, Skiff or Hulk? same idea for Freighter. as long as there are lazy afk pilot who put 3 cargo, I am sure ganker would ignore those Freighter with tank mods. Within reason. When the difference becomes do I need 15 catalysts vs 12, no they won't care so much. The point being (unlike your example) is that all of the freighters are close enough in EHP the small differences won't make that much difference if you get targetted for a gank.
except as other explain, armour Freighter get benefit of EHP plus Cargo/Agility, where Shield Freighter get have to sacrifice Cargo/Agility to get EHP (even do, won't be close to what Armour will have). |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |