Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Anasur
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 06:21:00 -
[1]
Even giving active hardeners and EANMII the same cpu, the EANMII are still better, won't help Amarr or anyone else. I mean 2 EANMII gives you about a 40% reduction in damage to all resists(With Maxed Skills). 2 Active Hardener IIs gives you 55% to 2. A total of 110 vs 160. And the active hardeners use cap. Reduce the Active hardeners down to 30, where EANMII used to be, and up the tech 2 ones to 60 resistance. (going from 15 to 20 resists for EANM is a boost of 33%, while going from 50 to 55% for active is only 10% after all)
This would encourage the use of actives, while leaving EANMII a somewhat more cpu intense option. It would also give active hardeners an appropriate T2 boost, comparable to what the omni hardeners recieved.
|
Kianwan
Caldari The Patriot Society
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 06:40:00 -
[2]
Except that when you raise 2 resists by 55% instead of 40% those to still gets a much better tank than before, for those resists. That coupled with the fact that most use kinetic/thermal damage in PvP anyway, plus being able to balance out specifik resist "holes" in your tank setup with the actives makes them pretty balanced overall.
|
Anasur
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 06:48:00 -
[3]
Most of the people I have talked to plan to continue EANMII use as it stands now. Even though you can plug resist holes, the overall advantages to greater resists with the EANMII is powerful. And no ship likes losing cap, even if its a relatively trivial amount. Sides, that cap usage can add up quickly when used on cruisers and such.
|
Lishan Kamatar
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 09:46:00 -
[4]
i feel that the EAMN tank is good for a gank set up but for tanking i will alwasy go for a 5 slot 3x active hardners EAMN II DCU II
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 10:35:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Kianwan Except that when you raise 2 resists by 55% instead of 40% those to still gets a much better tank than before, for those resists. That coupled with the fact that most use kinetic/thermal damage in PvP anyway, plus being able to balance out specifik resist "holes" in your tank setup with the actives makes them pretty balanced overall.
Its not 2x eanm, it 2x eanm, 1x DC.
Puts you at 50% resist all instead of 55% resist 3, and you get 60% hull resists as a bonus. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Mysterlee
Gallente 5punkorp Betrayal Under Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 10:48:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Mysterlee on 09/06/2007 10:49:09 Edited by: Mysterlee on 09/06/2007 10:48:53 Edited by: Mysterlee on 09/06/2007 10:47:49 This is exactly why I created this topic:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=533724&page=1
If actives used less cpu than EANMs they would definately get used more often, that doesnt mean EANMs should have their CPU increased further, actives should have theirs decreased .
|
Valandril
Caldari Resurrection R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 10:55:00 -
[7]
Ccp and theyr boosting by nerfing :| ---
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 14:35:00 -
[8]
Actives are identical to EANMs in CPU requirements now: 36 tf each for T2s. Now, we just need Damage Controls to be increased from 30 tf to at least 36 tf, even 40 tf, and all is fine _ New char creation guide | Module/Rig stacknerfing explained |
Valandril
Caldari Resurrection R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 14:52:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Akita T Actives are identical to EANMs in CPU requirements now: 36 tf each for T2s. Now, we just need Damage Controls to be increased from 30 tf to at least 36 tf, even 40 tf, and all is fine
Domg control more cpu ? No ******* way, gall already need -3% cpu implant.. ---
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 15:28:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Valandril
Originally by: Akita T Actives are identical to EANMs in CPU requirements now: 36 tf each for T2s. Now, we just need Damage Controls to be increased from 30 tf to at least 36 tf, even 40 tf, and all is fine
Domg control more cpu ? No ******* way, gall already need -3% cpu implant..
If you want to use Neutrons instead of Ions, sure.
But the "downgrade" to ions translates into less than -6% DPS, for +7% tracking and -8.2% CPU need.
The range difference is negligible for blasters, and the extra tracking more than makes up for it. Plus, you have loads of free grid and a lot more free CPU as before.
Not only that, but you can now plug in another implant in slot 10, like, I don't know, the turret damage one, the armor amount one, the AB/MWD speed increase one, or any of the mindlinks. _ New char creation guide | Module/Rig stacknerfing explained |
|
Elmicker
The Phoenix Rising Vigilance Infinitas
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 18:55:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Valandril Domg control more cpu ? No ******* way, gall already need -3% cpu implant..
Name me another ship that can fit a full rack of its highest damage guns and still fit an omni-tank, then come back and say its right that the gallente can do it with a single cheap implant.
|
Dread Phantom
Caldari Project-Chaos
|
Posted - 2007.06.10 01:00:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Valandril Domg control more cpu ? No ******* way, gall already need -3% cpu implant..
Name me another ship that can fit a full rack of its highest damage guns and still fit an omni-tank, then come back and say its right that the gallente can do it with a single cheap implant.
How about you start by naming some that cant
|
Brucette
|
Posted - 2007.06.10 01:35:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Dread Phantom
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Valandril Domg control more cpu ? No ******* way, gall already need -3% cpu implant..
Name me another ship that can fit a full rack of its highest damage guns and still fit an omni-tank, then come back and say its right that the gallente can do it with a single cheap implant.
How about you start by naming some that cant
Cormorant?
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |