Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
McDaddy Pimp
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 06:16:00 -
[331]
Originally by: Schmell
Originally by: McDaddy Pimp Edited by: McDaddy Pimp on 05/03/2009 versatile! versatile! versatile! versatile! versatile! versatile!
/me cries in emorage
hang in there man... Minmatar tears increase the Legion cap recharge 5% per deciliter
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 06:47:00 -
[332]
Originally by: Lilith Velkor Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 04/03/2009 23:57:01
Originally by: MotherMoon
currently there is no reason to shield tank over armor tank becuase of the CPU. maybe a new bonus with the shield boosting module?
I'm actually shield tanking it (cant stand armor tanks), although its a passive buffer. With the shield module I get >10k buffer with ok-ish resist while only using 2 slots for extenders, leaving one for MWD and 3 for tackle.
Its ok in my book, but I'm more into versatile setups than just mindlessly boosting one stat into the sky, as this doesnt help you in pvp at all.
Give me a tad bit extra CPU (+50 maybe) and I'll be able to mount a X-Large booster tank just fine, or stick some dmg mods into lows instead of nanos.
Then the shield tanking bonus should be changed to a shield hp bonus.
my point was more about the bonus not actually being usable.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 06:49:00 -
[333]
Originally by: Schmell <angry minmatar corner>
I dont understand why gallente got 7.5% bonus to fallof along with 5% damage and minmatar got only 5% (on "internal server")?
I dont understand, why amarr got 3 (!!!) bonuses with one offence subsystem (10% cap use, 5% damage, 5% optimal; there is another one subsystem with 3 bonuses but i dont remember exactly), and minmatar got 2 all the way?
W T F?
Oh...
Thank god, there is no subsystem with stupid useless bonus to target painters.
true we get 5% Rof/ 2.5%damage
ammar get 10% cap use/5%damage/5% optimal range.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar M. Corp
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 11:14:00 -
[334]
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: Lilith Velkor Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 04/03/2009 23:57:01
Originally by: MotherMoon
currently there is no reason to shield tank over armor tank becuase of the CPU. maybe a new bonus with the shield boosting module?
I'm actually shield tanking it (cant stand armor tanks), although its a passive buffer. With the shield module I get >10k buffer with ok-ish resist while only using 2 slots for extenders, leaving one for MWD and 3 for tackle.
Its ok in my book, but I'm more into versatile setups than just mindlessly boosting one stat into the sky, as this doesnt help you in pvp at all.
Give me a tad bit extra CPU (+50 maybe) and I'll be able to mount a X-Large booster tank just fine, or stick some dmg mods into lows instead of nanos.
Then the shield tanking bonus should be changed to a shield hp bonus.
my point was more about the bonus not actually being usable.
shield boost bonus is VERY VERY usable. And SUPERIOR to stick extenders if you know what you are doing. On ships on this price tag and that clearly wont be used on fleet warfare for a long time, using a crystal set is VERY doable. That sided with the new increaed importance of small signature radius sicne QR makes shield boosting ships work very well.
Shield boost bonus are OK and good on smaller ships. THey just suck at the maesltrom and vargur. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 11:19:00 -
[335]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: Lilith Velkor Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 04/03/2009 23:57:01
Originally by: MotherMoon
currently there is no reason to shield tank over armor tank becuase of the CPU. maybe a new bonus with the shield boosting module?
I'm actually shield tanking it (cant stand armor tanks), although its a passive buffer. With the shield module I get >10k buffer with ok-ish resist while only using 2 slots for extenders, leaving one for MWD and 3 for tackle.
Its ok in my book, but I'm more into versatile setups than just mindlessly boosting one stat into the sky, as this doesnt help you in pvp at all.
Give me a tad bit extra CPU (+50 maybe) and I'll be able to mount a X-Large booster tank just fine, or stick some dmg mods into lows instead of nanos.
Then the shield tanking bonus should be changed to a shield hp bonus.
my point was more about the bonus not actually being usable.
shield boost bonus is VERY VERY usable. And SUPERIOR to stick extenders if you know what you are doing. On ships on this price tag and that clearly wont be used on fleet warfare for a long time, using a crystal set is VERY doable. That sided with the new increaed importance of small signature radius sicne QR makes shield boosting ships work very well.
Shield boost bonus are OK and good on smaller ships. THey just suck at the maesltrom and vargur.
great, lets all shield tank with no cpu to fit guns!
|
Stitcher
Caldari ForgeTech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 13:18:00 -
[336]
Edited by: Stitcher on 05/03/2009 13:19:08
Originally by: MotherMoon great, lets all shield tank with no cpu to fit guns!
http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Weapon_Upgrades
I slapped together a Loki last night, and I'm not a Minmatar pilot. Worked perfectly fine:
Electronic: locking range/sig radius Defensive: 10% shield boost amount Offensive: ROF/Damage Engineering: more powergrid and weapon slots Propulsion: AB speed
Hi: 7x Meta4 425mm autocannon Mid: 10MN AB II, scram II, web II, meta4 tracking disruptor (tracking script), shield boost amp II, medium shield booster II Low: 2x gyrostabilizer II, 2x overdrive injector II. Rigs: 3x capacitor control circuit I.
powergrid used: 57% CPU used: 91%
Meta4 modules used because of skill shortcomings and for no other reason.
Runs the AB and all the EW indefinitely, stable at about 67% or so. Turning the shield booster on overbalanced the capacitor, but it still took about five minutes to pass peak recharge (by which point the fight's likely to be over anyway). With that much spare powergrid, I suspect that fitting weapon rigs might be better, and it reminded me once again that I really should learn a few more levels in rigging so I can fit tech 2 rigs.
one small caveat: I didn't get the chance to test it against another pilot, so if anybody could test it for me, I'd be grateful. It's very much a solo/small gang build, so please don't send it up against a blob and then tell me it's useless. - Verin "Stitcher" Hakatain. |
Delichon
The First Foundation SOLAR FLEET
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 15:47:00 -
[337]
Yeah, just discussed it with my corpmate. Legion with overheated AB (which would be working like forever and give you over 1.5 km/s speed with cruiser sized signature!), 7 bonused Autocannons, ability to fit mighty active shield tank and a bonused web(!) would be a face ripper like no other. ------------------------------------------ "Russian is an unusual language if you're not used to it. It is like speaking to angry aliens from the planet of Murder or something" Nick Breckon |
Stitcher
Caldari ForgeTech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 16:18:00 -
[338]
Originally by: Delichon Yeah, just discussed it with my corpmate. Legion with overheated AB (which would be working like forever and give you over 1.5 km/s speed with cruiser sized signature!), 7 bonused Autocannons, ability to fit mighty active shield tank and a bonused web(!) would be a face ripper like no other.
You mean "Loki" mate. - Verin "Stitcher" Hakatain. |
Phelan Votronski
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 20:46:00 -
[339]
Problems fitting a legion:
"Lets fit it for gank!"
Right, why not eh? All systems either have a single rof or damage bonus, so we take the one with the most turret slots: Laser repition cols.
Gankships needs lows for buffer and dmg mods so lets use the resistance bonused subsystem (Adaptive Augmenter) and then try to maximize lowslots:
Engineering Systems:
Capacitor Regeneration Matrix - adds a low but at the cost of 2 hislots which renders the offensive systems pointless as you end up with less hi-slots then turret slots - not an option
Augmented Capacitor Reservoir - doesn't add a low and removes a hi (again hi-slot < turret slots possible depending on electronic subsystem) - not an option
So we pretty much end up with a power core multiplier. Thats okay as it has a good bonus for a gank ship.
Electronics Systems:
Dissolution Sequencer: removes a low - not an option Energy Parasitic Complex: removes a low - not an option
So we take the Tactical Targeting Network.
You can then add whichever propulsion mod you fancy as it doesn't change the slot layout. We end up with a legion that has a maximum of 5 low slots. wtf? You cannot gank fit a ship with only 5 lows and 4 meds.
What does this mean? The only reason you would choose that particular offensive system is because it has another turret slot for a total of 7. (The other ones give +1-2 lowslots and a tertiary bonus!) But you always end up with 1-2 lows less than all other reasonable combinations. This means the system is wasted! All configurations derived from this offensive system are pointless.
You will always do better with a 6 turret or 6 turret + 1 launcher legion unless you really care about nothing but your peak dps (which you basically only do if you're eft warrioring). Two lowslots penalty for a gank ship is too much. It does not compute.
In the meanwhile my gallente friend puts out a proteus with 720dps and 70k+ buffertank. Needless to say it has 7 lows and 4 meds.
6 turret slot combinations look quite reasonable for the most part. Really problematic is the weird bonuses. Where did the hitpoint module go again? Lets not forget amarr ships aren't made for repair tanks and to have 2/3 of the subsystems base around an active tanked setting is kinda insulting if you're into amarr. Kinda like with the paladin but that was a carebear ship so i could understand that one.
Another thing: Drone Capacity. Seems to be 25m¦ in all cases for legion. Why is that? Even tengu can do 50m¦ if i am not mistaken. Did you forget that amarr are the only race with dedicated drone ships next to gallente? Did you forget that a neut bonus is only helpful if you can free the hislots for neuts which in turn requires supplemental damage in form of drones?
And another one: Whats up with the look of the legion? It doesn't look amarrian at all tbh. And its ugly too but thats the last thing i care about so meh.
I really like some of the supplemental bonuses on the electronics/engineering/propulsion so good job on that one in my opinion.
On a more general note: Its weird its really weird and imo something needs to be done about. Some combinations get supplemental slots without any clear disadvantages against slighly different combinations.
A big problem is the huge disparity in total slot number. Some combinations have only 9 med and lows in total and others have 12 yes 7 lows and 5 meds goddamit. That still has 6 turret slots a damage bonus and a free utility/launcher hi. How does it even live in the same ballpark as a 7 turret combination with 4 meds, 5 lows and no utility hi is a miracle to me.
Generally speaking the combinations also are too gallentean. At one point i had a 6 med slot legion with only 5 lows. At another point a ship with as few as 4 lowslots(its amarr!!!).
Also i don't seem to get a 8-low slot legion to work. There are 7 lowslot proteus and 8 midslot tengus so why aren't there 8-low legions? will post on loki later - post count is over
|
The Economist
Logically Consistent
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 22:05:00 -
[340]
Experience so far:
Tengu: Very nice but: passive shield tank is overpowered, ecm bonus is pretty weak, having difficulty creating a viable rail setup.
Legion: Nos/Neut bonus is pretty weak, overall the ship seems pretty nicely balanced, although I did come across a few configurations that could do with one or two more turret slots, also max range on beams when fit for max range could do with going up 20km or so.
Proteus: Pretty good, I like the slot layouts, only real quibble is that the drone hp component is pretty useless and doesn't make up for the lack of drone bay or bandwidth.
Loki: Not sure where to start tbh. I guess it's versatile () Feels like it's gonna have the same problems all the recently created minmatar ships suffer from, ****ing versatility (basically saying, cos it can sort of do a few things we're gonna make sure it does none of them well enough for there to actually be a point in flying the ship over one of the cheaper options that does the same thing better.). Dmg is mediocre, optimal/falloff with relevant components is pretty terrible, speed when fit for speed is not fast enough to be worth wasting slots on, shield boost bonus should be shield hp or resists. etc etc etc. To be expected really.
|
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 22:09:00 -
[341]
Originally by: Jack Jombardo
Flying a Hyena (all EW-ships) is a nice startup for new Player without 50 million SP and compareble cheap. Yes, you can bring Intis or other Frigs but still EW-Frigs are nice steps towards Recons.
Or did you had 100+ mil ISK left to throw away as you started EvE and less then 10 mil SP with just one account/toon?
Tbh I still dont get your issue. The Loki is definitely gonna cost more than a Huginn, so if the Huginn with its 40km webs doesnt obsolete the Hyena, the 22km webs on Loki wouldnt either.
And if you havent enough SP/isk to fly a Huginn, then you wont fly a Loki either, so there is no problem.
22km is pretty much perfect imho, enough to be not useless, and not too much to obsolete the Recons.
|
Cailais
Amarr Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 23:43:00 -
[342]
I think the Legion electronic subsystem II (energy parasitic complex) really needs a range modifier bonus.
vs the min recons / T3 cruiser (webifier) or the Gallente recons / T3 cruiser (scram) the Parasitic Legion stands next to no chance of getting to use the nos / neuts. The equivalent Amarr recon (pilgrim) can because it is able to sneak up and into range whilst cloaked, but a Parasite fitted Legion has no such luxury.
C.
Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
|
IceAero
Amarr Shadow Company
|
Posted - 2009.03.05 23:52:00 -
[343]
Originally by: Cailais I think the Legion electronic subsystem II (energy parasitic complex) really needs a range modifier bonus.
vs the min recons / T3 cruiser (webifier) or the Gallente recons / T3 cruiser (scram) the Parasitic Legion stands next to no chance of getting to use the nos / neuts. The equivalent Amarr recon (pilgrim) can because it is able to sneak up and into range whilst cloaked, but a Parasite fitted Legion has no such luxury.
C.
As it stands the only way to really use a neut on the legion and stay out of web range is to fit a faction neut and get 14km.
Overheated webs get you at like 13km, and a faction at 18km... so having to be at 12 to neut a BS right now spells instant death. I'd like to see a bonus that lets the neuts work outside of overheated T2 web's range but inside of an overheated faction web range. I think that's fair, don't you?
|
Cailais
Amarr Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 00:01:00 -
[344]
Originally by: IceAero
Originally by: Cailais I think the Legion electronic subsystem II (energy parasitic complex) really needs a range modifier bonus.
vs the min recons / T3 cruiser (webifier) or the Gallente recons / T3 cruiser (scram) the Parasitic Legion stands next to no chance of getting to use the nos / neuts. The equivalent Amarr recon (pilgrim) can because it is able to sneak up and into range whilst cloaked, but a Parasite fitted Legion has no such luxury.
C.
As it stands the only way to really use a neut on the legion and stay out of web range is to fit a faction neut and get 14km.
Overheated webs get you at like 13km, and a faction at 18km... so having to be at 12 to neut a BS right now spells instant death. I'd like to see a bonus that lets the neuts work outside of overheated T2 web's range but inside of an overheated faction web range. I think that's fair, don't you?
Yep I agree. It doesn't have to be a monstrous bonus, but it needs to be viable. Ultimately you're sacrificing dps when you fit neuts / nos because you're not fitting turrets. That's fine for the pilgrim, as it can close to range and pin down the target with a mix of scram / webs before the target can react. The Legion doesnt have that capability making the short ranged neut/nos redundant in the face of longer ranged propulsion jamming systems.
Equally the pilgrim can mitigate some of the incoming damage of turret based ships through its excellent TD ability - but again the Legion doesnt (currently) have an EW subsystem so has to rely upon a tank: probably an active one.
Im quite surprised CCP have not included any form of range bonus considering the extensive moans about the pilgrim pre-speed nerf.
C.
Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
|
Pattern Clarc
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 02:59:00 -
[345]
Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 06/03/2009 03:01:22 Suggestions...
Nerf the tengu's 10% shield hp pl to 5% (or add alot more mass to that particular subsystem)
Change turret bonus to either 7.5% or 10% optimal range pl.
Apply the same bonus to the loki replacing the active tanking version
Change tengu's ecm bonus to be either 10% strength + 10% range, or 15% strength +-10% cap use
Change the drone hit points on the proteus to 5% armour hit points OR keep as is with large increases to the drone bay and/or cargo bay and/or mass reduction. Or give more slots to compensate for the fact that it's just a poor sounding subsystem.
Hybrid turret bonus is unecessary with the drone offensive subsystem on the proteus... (if granted 125mb/200m3 drone bay)
Loki's web bonus changed from 30% pl to 20% bonus to range and 10% bonus to web strength effectiveness per level.
Loki CPU is appalling, proteus = 675, tengu +700 loki = 475 cpu, and with an active tanking bonus??
In general, it seems like you've assigned fittings, slots and bonuses in ways in which your probably accustomed to playing. You need to be more liberal with the number of complimentary bonuses applied to subsystems, (like the adaptive argumentator, but not as lame as the warp speed/cap propulsion subsystem) so that people are encouraged to pick subsystems more by flavour, rather than specific stats bonuses or slots.
Loki's 5% velocity doesn't quite have the the umpf required, perhaps the base hull is too heavy.
loki's 25mb drone bandwidth and general dps sucks, would recommend 50mb drone bay as standard, with the split weapons giving 75mb in bandwidth and 75m3 drone bay.
Some more suggestions... Battle hauler subsystem (poor lock time/low sensor strength, propulsion or defensive subsystems)
Cloaking recalibration bonuses (electronic, to go with sensor strength)
Drone navigation/optimal range/tracking subsystem
Heavy energy neutraliser, torpedo, drone control unit power grid/cpu reductions
Greater variations in mass between the subsystems, so that thought would be necessary to develop decent speed fits. ____
My Blog Is Awesome
|
KingCappo
Seigers of Doom
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 03:18:00 -
[346]
Originally by: Stitcher Edited by: Stitcher on 05/03/2009 14:36:28 Edited by: Stitcher on 05/03/2009 14:26:05
Originally by: MotherMoon great, lets all shield tank with no cpu to fit guns!
http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Weapon_Upgrades
I slapped together a Loki last night, and I'm not a Minmatar pilot. Worked perfectly fine:
Electronic: locking timee/sig radius Defensive: 10% shield boost amount Offensive: ROF/Damage Engineering: more powergrid and weapon slots Propulsion: AB speed
Hi: 7x Meta4 425mm autocannon Mid: 10MN AB II, scram II, web II, meta4 tracking disruptor (tracking script), shield boost amp II, medium shield booster II Low: 2x gyrostabilizer II, 2x overdrive injector II. Rigs: 3x capacitor control circuit I.
powergrid used: 57% CPU used: 91%
Meta4 modules used because of skill shortcomings and for no other reason.
Runs the AB and all the EW indefinitely, stable at about 67% or so. Turning the shield booster on overbalanced the capacitor, but it still took about five minutes to pass peak recharge (by which point the fight's likely to be over anyway). With that much spare powergrid, I suspect that fitting weapon rigs might be better, and it reminded me once again that I really should learn a few more levels in rigging so I can fit tech 2 rigs.
Weakness: resists, especially vs Kinetic. there's nothing on this ship that's improving it past the base shield resistances. Kinetic missiles are the biggest threat this build can face, followed closely by explosive missiles, then autocannons with a kin/exp ammo, then blasters. the sig radius bonus and high velocity do a lot to reduce the impact of missiles, and the tracking disruptor should, in theory, nullify the guns, but I still wouldn't rate this ship's chances of taking a HAM Drake very highly. ECM is also a weakness, but I rated the sig radius bonus as being more important for this ship than the sensor strenght bonus.
one small caveat: I didn't get the chance to test it against another pilot, so if anybody could test it for me, I'd be grateful. It's very much a solo/small gang build, so please don't send it up against a blob and then tell me it's useless.
Now try that fit with a large shield booster and a MWD.
|
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 05:58:00 -
[347]
I fear TankU's will become very popular...I fear the recharge rate may need to be gimped or SPRIIs have stacking penalties... This sheer tanking ability (when min/maxed for it) is just staggering. There is barely any risk in fitting it out like this. Only requires less than 700mil isk to t2 fit...
TankU
Originally by: CCP Nozh prices T3. goal around the price of tech 2 cruisers
|
Tuttomenui II
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 08:17:00 -
[348]
Edited by: Tuttomenui II on 06/03/2009 08:18:28 Maintenace Bays/pos modules?? I had a guy try to change a subsystem on his t3 cruiser using my orca, and he was told he was unable to change the fitting in space.
Is this intended? If so it will be quite inconvinient for those wishing to assemble these ships at a POS.
Edit* BTW, he was a member of a newly formed test corp we have for a future trip into wh space, so he should have had access. May need to test it again.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 11:08:00 -
[349]
Originally by: The Economist
Proteus: Pretty good, I like the slot layouts, only real quibble is that the drone hp component is pretty useless and doesn't make up for the lack of drone bay or bandwidth.
Yeah. The ship needs some component which would give it a large drone bay, to get some drone versatility. The bandwidth is fine imho. Upping the drone bay would not be much of a balance concern (since it just provides room for alternate drone types and not more dps), and would let people build proper drone cruisers from these things.
Just have the drone hp component also give some more drone bay, to make it worth fitting.
|
Snow Banshee
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 11:41:00 -
[350]
Originally by: KingCappo
Originally by: Stitcher Edited by: Stitcher on 05/03/2009 14:36:28 Edited by: Stitcher on 05/03/2009 14:26:05
Originally by: MotherMoon great, lets all shield tank with no cpu to fit guns!
http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Weapon_Upgrades
I slapped together a Loki last night, and I'm not a Minmatar pilot. Worked perfectly fine:
Electronic: locking timee/sig radius Defensive: 10% shield boost amount Offensive: ROF/Damage Engineering: more powergrid and weapon slots Propulsion: AB speed
Hi: 7x Meta4 425mm autocannon Mid: 10MN AB II, scram II, web II, meta4 tracking disruptor (tracking script), shield boost amp II, medium shield booster II Low: 2x gyrostabilizer II, 2x overdrive injector II. Rigs: 3x capacitor control circuit I.
powergrid used: 57% CPU used: 91%
Meta4 modules used because of skill shortcomings and for no other reason.
Runs the AB and all the EW indefinitely, stable at about 67% or so. Turning the shield booster on overbalanced the capacitor, but it still took about five minutes to pass peak recharge (by which point the fight's likely to be over anyway). With that much spare powergrid, I suspect that fitting weapon rigs might be better, and it reminded me once again that I really should learn a few more levels in rigging so I can fit tech 2 rigs.
Weakness: resists, especially vs Kinetic. there's nothing on this ship that's improving it past the base shield resistances. Kinetic missiles are the biggest threat this build can face, followed closely by explosive missiles, then autocannons with a kin/exp ammo, then blasters. the sig radius bonus and high velocity do a lot to reduce the impact of missiles, and the tracking disruptor should, in theory, nullify the guns, but I still wouldn't rate this ship's chances of taking a HAM Drake very highly. ECM is also a weakness, but I rated the sig radius bonus as being more important for this ship than the sensor strenght bonus.
one small caveat: I didn't get the chance to test it against another pilot, so if anybody could test it for me, I'd be grateful. It's very much a solo/small gang build, so please don't send it up against a blob and then tell me it's useless.
Now try that fit with a large shield booster and a MWD.
Large shield booster on a cruiser? ok .. but the i will be able to put a LAR on my proteus !!!
|
|
Pattern Clarc
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 14:17:00 -
[351]
Originally by: Snow Banshee
Large shield booster on a cruiser? ok .. but the i will be able to put a LAR on my proteus !!!
Large shield booster + shield boost amp = dual medium armour reps X-large shield booster + shied boost amp = dual large armour reps
In other words, large shield booster is the cruiser module. ____
My Blog Is Awesome
|
Stitcher
Caldari ForgeTech Industries
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 15:38:00 -
[352]
Edited by: Stitcher on 06/03/2009 15:38:10
Originally by: KingCappo Now try that fit with a large shield booster and a MWD.
No.
Reasons why this is a bad idea:
1: Short-range guns, meaning that you HAVE to close to inside warp scrambler range to do any damage. Inside those ranges, taking an MWD and coming up against a guy with a scrambler means that you have: a: nerfed your cap b: made yourself a bigger target c: Effectively slowed yourself down because your warp scrambled dumb ass isn't getting a speed boost.
In other words, if the other guy's fitting the right kind of warp jammer, then your ship is now MORE vulnerable. you don't get that potential weakness from an AB, and you preserve your good speed/size ratio, making missiles easier to tank.
2: nerfed cap from the MWD AND a large shield booster AND an active MWD? Unless you've got a couple of logistics cruisers feeding you cap, forget it: you'll run dry in seconds. the above build lasts for five minutes on my current skills, and I suspect would be stable if I was better skilled.
It's a mixed kiting/rep tank. You use the speed and reduced sig radius to reduce the amount of damage you take to the point where the smaller repper is up to the job of handling the remainder. And look at that thing: Battlecruiser firepower, cruiser speed and tank, Destroyer sig radius. there are a couple of alternative ways you could configure it - use an invulnerability field instead of a boost amp, for example - but an MWD and a large booster? You'll just kill your cap in seconds, come to a grinding halt, then get torn to pieces, and not necessarily in that order. - Verin "Stitcher" Hakatain. |
Seishi Maru
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 16:04:00 -
[353]
Originally by: MotherMoon
great, lets all shield tank with no cpu to fit guns!
there are wonderful modules called co-processors that solve that. Try it...
|
KingCappo
Seigers of Doom
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 16:21:00 -
[354]
Originally by: Stitcher Edited by: Stitcher on 06/03/2009 15:38:10
Originally by: KingCappo Now try that fit with a large shield booster and a MWD.
No.
Reasons why this is a bad idea:
1: Short-range guns, meaning that you HAVE to close to inside warp scrambler range to do any damage. Inside those ranges, taking an MWD and coming up against a guy with a scrambler means that you have: a: nerfed your cap b: made yourself a bigger target c: Effectively slowed yourself down because your warp scrambled dumb ass isn't getting a speed boost.
In other words, if the other guy's fitting the right kind of warp jammer, then your ship is now MORE vulnerable. you don't get that potential weakness from an AB, and you preserve your good speed/size ratio, making missiles easier to tank.
My dumb ass won't be getting warp scrambled, because barrage + falloff bonus means I will be engaging at 17km or larger. If you are going up against something that has a bonus to scram range, then you can push this out even farther at the expense of a bit lower DPS.
You really really need a MWD for general utility, like closing long distances, escaping bubbles, etc. The ability to disengage from combat in case things get hairy is just a bonus.
Originally by: Stitcher 2: nerfed cap from the MWD AND a large shield booster AND an active MWD? Unless you've got a couple of logistics cruisers feeding you cap, forget it: you'll run dry in seconds. the above build lasts for five minutes on my current skills, and I suspect would be stable if I was better skilled.
It's a mixed kiting/rep tank. You use the speed and reduced sig radius to reduce the amount of damage you take to the point where the smaller repper is up to the job of handling the remainder. And look at that thing: Battlecruiser firepower, cruiser speed and tank, Destroyer sig radius. there are a couple of alternative ways you could configure it - use an invulnerability field instead of a boost amp, for example - but an MWD and a large booster? You'll just kill your cap in seconds, come to a grinding halt, then get torn to pieces, and not necessarily in that order.
As stated above, large shield boosters are the cruiser-sized ones. Putting a medium booster + boost amp on a ship is like fitting two small armour reppers on an armour tank. You need the highest peak tanking ability possible when you get called primary by the other gang so that you can survive long enough to either 1) GTFO or 2) kill enough of their ships to reduce their DPS.
The fact is that shield tanks need CPU and armour tank need PG. The loki can have a bonus to both, but it doesnt have enough pg or cpu to fit either.
|
Jack Jombardo
Amarr Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 16:49:00 -
[355]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
Originally by: Snow Banshee
Large shield booster on a cruiser? ok .. but the i will be able to put a LAR on my proteus !!!
Large shield booster + shield boost amp = dual medium armour reps X-large shield booster + shied boost amp = dual large armour reps
In other words, large shield booster is the cruiser module.
and what are small shield booster for?
Small -> frig med -> cruiser/BC large -> BS x-large -> oversized ???
real question
Originally by: CCP Nozh Where do tech 3 ships fit in?The goal has always been to have them considerably cheap, around the price of tech 2 cruisers.
|
Schmell
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 17:12:00 -
[356]
Originally by: Jack Jombardo
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
Originally by: Snow Banshee
Large shield booster on a cruiser? ok .. but the i will be able to put a LAR on my proteus !!!
Large shield booster + shield boost amp = dual medium armour reps X-large shield booster + shied boost amp = dual large armour reps
In other words, large shield booster is the cruiser module.
and what are small shield booster for?
Small -> frig med -> cruiser/BC large -> BS x-large -> oversized ???
real question
My variant
small -> frigs/undersized med -> frigs large -> cruisers x-large -> bs
You simply can`t tank anything in a cruiser with medium shield booster.
|
Kytanos Termek
Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 19:42:00 -
[357]
So, How do you suppose the shield booster issue is fixed?
Should we nerf the cpu/powergrid again? back to what it was when everyone was complaining about only being able to fit like 2 modules?
Face it. they are fairly balanced now. and release is close. Lets not go back to the drawing board and do another radical rewrite.
Besides, tech 3 > tech 2 > tech 1.
Unless you would prefer tech 3 ships are less useful than 1 and 2. I thought 3 meant they were high tech and better. They used to be "before buffs" tech 1.5 with lego! Lets not go back to that dark time.
|
Jack Jombardo
Amarr Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 19:43:00 -
[358]
Originally by: Schmell
My variant
small -> frigs/undersized med -> frigs large -> cruisers x-large -> bs
You simply can`t tank anything in a cruiser with medium shield booster.
um, duno but I fit Mediums, get good results and gus what ... don't run in CPU/GRID problems ^^.
Same with 1600 plates ... they are BS size moduls, 800 are BC, 400 are Cruiser.
Heavy puls/beams are BC size, Focused are Cruiser size.
That's just how I use em (well, not just me. Many more too). But might be the reson, why I nearly never run into any fitting problems ;).
Originally by: CCP Nozh Where do tech 3 ships fit in?The goal has always been to have them considerably cheap, around the price of tech 2 cruisers.
|
Jack Jombardo
Amarr Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 19:56:00 -
[359]
Originally by: Kytanos Termek
Besides, tech 3 > tech 2 > tech 1.
Unless you would prefer tech 3 ships are less useful than 1 and 2. I thought 3 meant they were high tech and better. They used to be "before buffs" tech 1.5 with lego! Lets not go back to that dark time.
I have no problem with this 3 > 2 > 1 and it is right to be so.
But what we get now is 3 >>>>>>>>> anythink below Capitals. So much Grid/Cpu/slots to make creazy thinks like ubar-tanks, new nanos that are faster then Vegas and so on.
Do you realy belive T3 CRUISER > T2 BC & T1 BS ? That's just wrong. So dam wrong!
Originally by: CCP Nozh Where do tech 3 ships fit in?The goal has always been to have them considerably cheap, around the price of tech 2 cruisers.
|
Kytanos Termek
Caldari Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.03.06 20:01:00 -
[360]
Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 06/03/2009 20:02:21 Edited by: Kytanos Termek on 06/03/2009 20:01:37
Originally by: Jack Jombardo
Originally by: Kytanos Termek
Besides, tech 3 > tech 2 > tech 1.
Unless you would prefer tech 3 ships are less useful than 1 and 2. I thought 3 meant they were high tech and better. They used to be "before buffs" tech 1.5 with lego! Lets not go back to that dark time.
I have no problem with this 3 > 2 > 1 and it is right to be so.
But what we get now is 3 >>>>>>>>> anythink below Capitals. So much Grid/Cpu/slots to make creazy thinks like ubar-tanks, new nanos that are faster then Vegas and so on.
Do you realy belive T3 CRUISER > T2 BC & T1 BS ? That's just wrong. So dam wrong!
The price is the most likely way to offset it. From what ive seen in the production thread they are definatly more expensive for the base ship alone than tech 2.
The way i see tech 3 is thus. You get alot of power, but your risking alot of isk. I see that as balanced. if i pay 200-500 mil (Well in excess of the price of a T1 BS) I expect performance. Especially if i cannot insure it.
Besides, when tech 2 came out. They had uber tanks. Those vaga's are well in excess speed wise of any tech 1 ship. That onyx has an uber tank. It is a natural progression in both price and power.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |