| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
   |
Posted - 2009.09.16 23:52:00 -
[1]
The problem is entirely the absurd and ridiculous fitting requirements of Shield Transporters.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 00:53:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Artemis Rose
Originally by: Gypsio III
The problem is entirely the absurd and ridiculous fitting requirements of Shield Transporters.
This. If RR shield modules had a more reasonable fitting, the FOTM would be RR ravens. Imagine that, a sphere of death within 45km 
FOTM? Hardly. It would be no more of a sphere of death than that projected by Scorch or Garde IIs on armour-RR BS.
The only advantage that shield RR has over armour RR is that the bonus is received at the start of the cycle. But since the cycle of a LRAR is just 4.5 seconds, this is not much of an advantage and doesn't justify the ridiculous fitting requirements.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 01:12:00 -
[3]
LST II and LRAR II on a Megathron:
LRAR II: 7% of CPU, 3.4% of PG.
LST II: 22.4% of CPU, 1.0% of PG.
Why?
Shield RR should be easier to fit on BS than armour RR, because as most BS armour-tank, fewer BS would benefit from it as much as armour RR.
I suggest cutting the CPU requirements of shield transporters by a factor of three.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 08:51:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Lili Lu
No I don't think so. Shield reppers do different things than armor reppers (rep at beginning of cycle, shorter cycle, amount repped). Would you trade any shield benefits for ridiculously easy fittings? Because, if they were much easier to fit than armor, i'd think they would have to lose a great deal of power in repping, i.e. below that of armor.
Eh?
LST II cycle time: 4.5 seconds, amount repped: 384, cap use: 210.
LRAR II cycle time: 4.5 seconds, amount repped: 384, cap use: 189.
Cycle time and amount repped are the same. The LRAR is easier on cap than the LST, which takes 11.1% more cap to do the same thing, but rep at the start of the cycle.
If the cycle was about 10 seconds as with local armour rep this might mean something, but with a cycle time of 4.5 seconds (and 3.8 s overheated), it's basically meaningless. There is no justification for fitting requirements that are substantially different to those of armour RR, based on CPU and PG % of the host ship.
Re: torps argument. Balancing RRs based on the weapon system of two BS (Raven, Typhoon; only one of which shield tanks) makes no sense. As you say, it's a "shield issue". It's also part of "the Minmatar problem". Even if shield RR was as easy to fit as armour RR, armour RR would still be favoured because most BS have great difficulty fitting a shield tank. After fitting MWD, cap booster and ECCM, the Geddon wouldn't have many slots left for a shield tank.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 11:32:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Lubomir Penev
Fit a Damn copro. You have lowslots left after fitting damage mods and damage control.
And try to fit a RR mega or gueddon someday. Mega can't have heavy cap booster and all neutrons, gueddon so in need of cpu you have to get down to ANP instead of EANM, meaning really crap resists, and I could go on...
RR means sacrifice, whether shield or armor.
What *******s. Are you saying these lowslots are intended to be used for fitting mods? Are you saying that these shield tankers deserve to effectively have fewer slots than their counterparts, because they have to use fitting mods? People used the same nonsense argument about the NH's PG, and it's just as *******s here. Lowslots on a shield tanker are for DC, damage mods and lowslot ECCM/sensor boosters, not for fitting mods.
Besides, this isn't just about shield tankers fitting LSTs, it's also about your precious Megas and Geddons. Are you happy to drop tank on those to fit the copros necessary to shoehorn a LST on? No, you don't even consider it.
There is no significant difference between the effectiveness of large shield and armour RR mods on BS, and it is absurd that the armour RR is not only so much easier to fit, but also so much preferable in a BS gang, given that most BS armour tank, and that armour-tanking RR BS have so many more slots to actually fit a tank. You are having your cake and eating it, and you don't even realise it.
How would you like a LRAR II that took 21% of the PG of a Mega? That took 4000 PG to fit? Ha, I should propose that in Assembly Hell and laugh at the reaction.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 12:56:00 -
[6]
Stocktons - now try putting a LST on the Mega instead of the LRAR and you might make a relevant comment.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 14:41:00 -
[7]
Sorry, this thread is now about LST fitting requirements. 
So, who supports my proposal to raise the PG requirement of LRAR to 4300 MW to balance it with LST CPU cost? 
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 21:25:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Gypsio III on 17/09/2009 21:29:30
Lili, can I count on your support for increase the fitting the PG requirements of LRAR IIs to 4300 MW? Since you're quite happy fitting a copro or two on your Megas and Typhoons, I can only assume you'd be happy to fit RCU IIs as well.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 01:53:00 -
[9]
I didn't read your post tbh, I just wanted to rant about shield RR CPU requirements.
|
| |
|