EVE Search - Cap Relay's and Cap Recharger's!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Cap Relay's and Cap Recharger's!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
OmegaTron	Posted - 2004.08.16 11:51:00 - [1] Edited by: OmegaTron on 16/08/2004 11:54:30 Simple: take away the shield boosting peneltie's from Cap relay's and give them a Armor rep. boosting peneltie? and give the Cap recharger(s) a shield boosting peneltie? Problem solved right? or no? comments please. edit: not sure if i spelt peneltie right? ------------------------------------------------ A Plague is comming....
OmegaTron	Posted - 2004.08.16 11:51:00 - [2] Edited by: OmegaTron on 16/08/2004 11:54:30 Simple: take away the shield boosting peneltie's from Cap relay's and give them a Armor rep. boosting peneltie? and give the Cap recharger(s) a shield boosting peneltie? Problem solved right? or no? comments please. edit: not sure if i spelt peneltie right? ------------------------------------------------ A Plague is comming....
OmegaTron	Posted - 2004.08.16 11:54:00 - [3] or we can just remove the mods all together so no one feels left out? ------------------------------------------------ A Plague is comming....
OmegaTron	Posted - 2004.08.16 11:54:00 - [4] or we can just remove the mods all together so no one feels left out? ------------------------------------------------ A Plague is comming....
Siddy	Posted - 2004.08.16 12:02:00 - [5] Originally by: OmegaTron or we can just remove the mods all together so no one feels left out? lmao - i just dropped to that -------------------------------------------
Siddy	Posted - 2004.08.16 12:02:00 - [6] Originally by: OmegaTron or we can just remove the mods all together so no one feels left out? lmao - i just dropped to that -------------------------------------------
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.08.16 12:21:00 - [7] Alternatively we can all just play the game. Pain is meant to be felt
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.08.16 12:21:00 - [8] Alternatively we can all just play the game. Pain is meant to be felt
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.08.16 16:39:00 - [9] Originally by: OmegaTron Edited by: OmegaTron on 16/08/2004 11:54:30 Simple: take away the shield boosting peneltie's from Cap relay's and give them a Armor rep. boosting peneltie? and give the Cap recharger(s) a shield boosting peneltie? Problem solved right? or no? comments please. Why do you want the cap relay penalty removed? If you do that, we'll see setups with low slots stuffed full of cap relays coming back, and it's not a good idea. The very fact that too many ppl used every cap power relays they could use should be enough to prove that it was overpowered. Today we see some BS bringing as many cap rechargers as they can, but that issue is dampened by the fact that they can't take too many of them.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.08.16 16:39:00 - [10] Originally by: OmegaTron Edited by: OmegaTron on 16/08/2004 11:54:30 Simple: take away the shield boosting peneltie's from Cap relay's and give them a Armor rep. boosting peneltie? and give the Cap recharger(s) a shield boosting peneltie? Problem solved right? or no? comments please. Why do you want the cap relay penalty removed? If you do that, we'll see setups with low slots stuffed full of cap relays coming back, and it's not a good idea. The very fact that too many ppl used every cap power relays they could use should be enough to prove that it was overpowered. Today we see some BS bringing as many cap rechargers as they can, but that issue is dampened by the fact that they can't take too many of them.

Artharas	Posted - 2004.08.16 17:31:00 - [11] If shield boost penalty would be taken off the cap relays all would get very unbalanced... we would see apocs and prob blasterthrons shield tanking and ravens would become to nice shield tankers Artharas ------------------------- These are my views and don't necessarily represent my corp nor my alliance.
Artharas	Posted - 2004.08.16 17:31:00 - [12] If shield boost penalty would be taken off the cap relays all would get very unbalanced... we would see apocs and prob blasterthrons shield tanking and ravens would become to nice shield tankers Artharas ------------------------- These are my views and don't necessarily represent my corp nor my alliance.
Zu Lu	Posted - 2004.08.16 18:23:00 - [13] What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more...
Zu Lu	Posted - 2004.08.16 18:23:00 - [14] What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more...
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.08.16 19:00:00 - [15] Originally by: Zu Lu What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more... How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.08.16 19:00:00 - [16] Originally by: Zu Lu What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more... How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank.
Nafri	Posted - 2004.08.16 19:47:00 - [17] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Zu Lu What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more... How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank. think he wanted to say that we have to prevent seeing apocs with 7 cap relays and 2x XLBOOSTER ,-) Wanna fly with me?
Nafri	Posted - 2004.08.16 19:47:00 - [18] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Zu Lu What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more... How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank. think he wanted to say that we have to prevent seeing apocs with 7 cap relays and 2x XLBOOSTER ,-) Wanna fly with me?
Zu Lu	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:00:00 - [19] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Zu Lu What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more... How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank. If you remember one of the reasons cap relays were nerfed was ships with more low slots were generally the best shield tankers cos would load up with cap relays. What i meant by apoc, mega and typhoon etc exploiting is by them filling their lows with cap relays and using x-large shield booster and amp like they used too. Also as domi was not given grid for armor tanking it was sort of put in the shield tanking 'group', for long range anyway - as tomb said - Dominix has loads of cpu and has mid slots to shield tank....
Zu Lu	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:00:00 - [20] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Zu Lu What about something like - introduce a new low slot cap recharger with simular cap bonus to relays, no shield boosting penalty but high cpu to prevent armor tanking ships from exploiting then perhaps increase shield tankers (raven, scorp, domi and tempest) cpu accordingly but not enough so that they can fill all their lowslots with them. Or easier - remove shield boosting for a stacking penalty or a limit to 4 cap relays maximum per set up or something like that.... may help in some way to balance shield and armor tanking more... How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank. If you remember one of the reasons cap relays were nerfed was ships with more low slots were generally the best shield tankers cos would load up with cap relays. What i meant by apoc, mega and typhoon etc exploiting is by them filling their lows with cap relays and using x-large shield booster and amp like they used too. Also as domi was not given grid for armor tanking it was sort of put in the shield tanking 'group', for long range anyway - as tomb said - Dominix has loads of cpu and has mid slots to shield tank....

Cutter John	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:01:00 - [21] Originally by: Shadowsword How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank. domi is supposed to be a shield tank. thats why it never got a grid increase when they redid armor repairers. i personally say give pdu's a bonus to shield boosting instead of shield recharge... that might work. they already admitted shield recharge is useless with the cpr nerf. My Idea Thread Give Drones Love!
Cutter John	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:01:00 - [22] Originally by: Shadowsword How can armor tankers exploit a low slot module when 4-5 of their lows are already used for hardeners/repairers? Domi a shield tank? He can do it, but it's a natural armor tank. domi is supposed to be a shield tank. thats why it never got a grid increase when they redid armor repairers. i personally say give pdu's a bonus to shield boosting instead of shield recharge... that might work. they already admitted shield recharge is useless with the cpr nerf. My Idea Thread Give Drones Love!
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:12:00 - [23] Edited by: Shadowsword on 16/08/2004 20:14:12 Originally by: Nafri think he wanted to say that we have to prevent seeing apocs with 7 cap relays and 2x XLBOOSTER ,-) Even with good named XL shield booster, that would take what? 340 CPU? That more than half the Apoc CPU in two modules. If you take a shield booster+amp, you'll have 2 med slots for hardeners in Apoc/Megas --> Not a good tank. I won't even speak of the Arma.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:12:00 - [24] Edited by: Shadowsword on 16/08/2004 20:14:12 Originally by: Nafri think he wanted to say that we have to prevent seeing apocs with 7 cap relays and 2x XLBOOSTER ,-) Even with good named XL shield booster, that would take what? 340 CPU? That more than half the Apoc CPU in two modules. If you take a shield booster+amp, you'll have 2 med slots for hardeners in Apoc/Megas --> Not a good tank. I won't even speak of the Arma.
Minuz1	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:32:00 - [25] Ok, let's even things out.... Solution a) #1 Remove XL shield boosters and the shield booster amps, increase the L shield booster's and shield hardeners powergrid requirement to 10% of the least powergrided ship but reduce their cpu requirement. #2 Make the cap power relay's use 0 cpu and 5% pwr of the least powergrid ship remove the negative side effects. -Win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat!!!!!
Minuz1	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:32:00 - [26] Ok, let's even things out.... Solution a) #1 Remove XL shield boosters and the shield booster amps, increase the L shield booster's and shield hardeners powergrid requirement to 10% of the least powergrided ship but reduce their cpu requirement. #2 Make the cap power relay's use 0 cpu and 5% pwr of the least powergrid ship remove the negative side effects. -Win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat!!!!!
Constantina	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:54:00 - [27] Personaly I think that cap powerrelay could well change back the way they were (perhaps give them cpu increase + 10, this would mostlikly benefit ships like dom and temp and raven in some way (although raven could not fit his sige launcers and dom would ofcourse have grid problems as allways). Apoc is just better now than he was when people were complaining about him as a shield tank, has overall better resistance and can keep his 8 guns running (compared to megapuls) and armor tanking setup going forever. if he whent back to shield tanking he would mostlikly have less firepower due to the fact that he has most likly cpu problems and therefor less firepower + I¦m sure his defence would be slightly worse. To make sure that the ships that are intended to use caprelays would use them then just increase theyre cpu as I said before personaly I think that would do the trick. If powerdiag would get something extra for shieldtanks like perhaps much more shield recharge then that might be an option allso. (it would have to be much more shield recharge to make it worthwhile though, since all know shield recharge in pvp as it is is a useless factor)
Constantina	Posted - 2004.08.16 20:54:00 - [28] Personaly I think that cap powerrelay could well change back the way they were (perhaps give them cpu increase + 10, this would mostlikly benefit ships like dom and temp and raven in some way (although raven could not fit his sige launcers and dom would ofcourse have grid problems as allways). Apoc is just better now than he was when people were complaining about him as a shield tank, has overall better resistance and can keep his 8 guns running (compared to megapuls) and armor tanking setup going forever. if he whent back to shield tanking he would mostlikly have less firepower due to the fact that he has most likly cpu problems and therefor less firepower + I¦m sure his defence would be slightly worse. To make sure that the ships that are intended to use caprelays would use them then just increase theyre cpu as I said before personaly I think that would do the trick. If powerdiag would get something extra for shieldtanks like perhaps much more shield recharge then that might be an option allso. (it would have to be much more shield recharge to make it worthwhile though, since all know shield recharge in pvp as it is is a useless factor)
Artharas	Posted - 2004.08.17 05:40:00 - [29] Originally by: Minuz1 Ok, let's even things out.... Solution a) #1 Remove XL shield boosters and the shield booster amps, increase the L shield booster's and shield hardeners powergrid requirement to 10% of the least powergrided ship but reduce their cpu requirement. #2 Make the cap power relay's use 0 cpu and 5% pwr of the least powergrid ship remove the negative side effects. FYI: There are more ships out there then Battleships. Artharas ------------------------- These are my views and don't necessarily represent my corp nor my alliance.
Artharas	Posted - 2004.08.17 05:40:00 - [30] Originally by: Minuz1 Ok, let's even things out.... Solution a) #1 Remove XL shield boosters and the shield booster amps, increase the L shield booster's and shield hardeners powergrid requirement to 10% of the least powergrided ship but reduce their cpu requirement. #2 Make the cap power relay's use 0 cpu and 5% pwr of the least powergrid ship remove the negative side effects. FYI: There are more ships out there then Battleships. Artharas ------------------------- These are my views and don't necessarily represent my corp nor my alliance.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.