| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jo Shmo
Caldari
Semi-Ethical Munitions Inc.
   |
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:05:00 -
[1]
I was attempting to setup a remote shield repping Raven gang when I noticed that 2 reppers just would NOT fit on a Raven. Looking at the ship and the modules I realized something. There is a big discrepancy between remote shield reppers and remote armor reppers.
When using an unskilled Raven as a base (700 CPU, 9500 PG) you get the following numbers:
- Large Shield Transporter I: 140 CPU, 160 PG (20% CPU, 1.6% PG)
- Large Shield Transporter II: 154 CPU, 192 PG (22% CPU, 2% PG)
Compare that using the same unskilled Raven base, but with remote armor reppers:
- Large Remote Armor Repair System I: 40 CPU, 600 PG (5.7% CPU, 6.3% PG)
- Large Remote Armor Repair System II: 48 CPU, 660 PG (6.8% CPU, 6.9% PG)
Why are remote shield reppers using 20-22% of a ship's CPU, when a remote armor repper only uses >7% of that same ship's power grid?
As it stands now many ships cant fit a remote shield repper in their highs due to the immense usage of CPU. Even Caldari ships have problems fitting them in addition to whatever else they have, where as an Amarr/Gallente ship can fit armor reppers in their utility highs. This makes flying Caldari undesirable in close-range lowsec and nullsec PVP fights, as your fleet will most likely be fit for remote armor reps, and Caldari aren't exactly known for their stellar armor tanking reputation.
My solution to CCP: Cut the CPU need of remote shield reppers in half, bringing them to 70-76 CPU each (10-11%), but double their PG usage, 320-384 (3.3-4%) PG each, to bring them more in line with armor reps.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente
Democracy of Klingon Brothers
Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:37:00 -
[2]
No... they aren't supposed to be the same.
I agree though - they both need cut.
I propose cut CPU by 25% for shield transporters, cut PG need by 25% for remote armor reps. I mean, really... they're outrageous!
Also, we need large logistics ships... c'mon now :)
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:41:00 -
[3]
Agree! CPU use of some T2 shield mods is insane comapred to the ships intended to use them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 14:06:00 -
[4]
I have a better idea. Let's increase the PG cost of armour RR to be in line with the CPU cost of LSTs.
This means that a LRAR II will require about 4300 PG. Isn't balance awesome! 
|
Jo Shmo
Caldari
Semi-Ethical Munitions Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 14:20:00 -
[5]
@ Kittamaru: While I agree that they shouldn't be completely homogenous, the ability to fit the modules onto the correct race of ship is in question. If a Caldari ship (generally have the lowest PG but highest CPU) cant fit a remote shield repper, but can easily fit an remote armor repper, along with normal fittings, there is a problem.
Rather than nerfing remote armor reppers into the dirt so no one will want to use them, I propose we level the playing field a bit. A 70/320 (10/3.3%) spread for shield reppers isnt exactly the same as a 40/600 (5.7/6.3%) spread for armor. The shield reppers will still remain with a high CPU/PG ratio, but it will be closer to their armor repper cousins, yet still distinct.
@ Gypsio III: Yes, we need to make it so that no one can use remote reppers except hull reppers. That way the remote hull repping BS gang will reign king once more!
|
Jo Shmo
Caldari
Semi-Ethical Munitions Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 14:37:00 -
[6]
Bump for remote shield repper lovin'
|
Vespoi Filar
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 16:39:00 -
[7]
You are aware that the ships that use remote armor reps have weapons with 2 and 3 times the PG requirements of Missile launchers. Still in many fittings it isn't PG that is the issue it is the lack of CPU on Amarr and Gallente ships that limits RR use.
I would like to introduce you to... Co-Processor II. This wonderful module is to Caldari ships as Reactor Control II is to Amarr. Enjoy.
|
Arrador
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 18:20:00 -
[8]
 Originally by: Jo Shmo
Edited by: Jo Shmo on 17/09/2009 14:12:59
I was attempting to setup a remote shield repping Raven gang when I noticed that 2 reppers just would NOT fit on a Raven. Looking at the ship and the modules I realized something. There is a big discrepancy between remote shield reppers and remote armor reppers.
When using an unskilled Raven as a base (700 CPU, 9500 PG) you get the following numbers:
- Large Shield Transporter I: 140 CPU, 160 PG (20% CPU, 1.6% PG)
- Large Shield Transporter II: 154 CPU, 192 PG (22% CPU, 2% PG)
Compare that using the same unskilled Raven base, but with remote armor reppers:
- Large Remote Armor Repair System I: 40 CPU, 600 PG (5.7% CPU, 6.3% PG)
- Large Remote Armor Repair System II: 48 CPU, 660 PG (6.8% CPU, 6.9% PG)
Why are remote shield reppers using 20-22% of a ship's CPU, when a remote armor repper only uses <7% of that same ship's power grid?
As it stands now many ships cant fit a remote shield repper in their highs due to the immense usage of CPU. Even Caldari ships have problems fitting them in addition to whatever else they have, where as an Amarr/Gallente ship can fit armor reppers in their utility highs. This makes flying Caldari undesirable in close-range lowsec and nullsec PVP fights, as your fleet will most likely be fit for remote armor reps, and Caldari aren't exactly known for their stellar armor tanking reputation.
My solution to CCP: Cut the CPU need of remote shield reppers in half, bringing them to 70-76 CPU each (10-11%), but double their PG usage, 320-384 (3.3-4%) PG each, to bring them more in line with armor reps.
EDIT: Confused my Less Than (<) and Greater Than (>) symbols again.
bump - how does one sign/support a thread?
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 18:22:00 -
[9]
No armour-tanker BS needs fitting mods to fit a LRAR or two. They do to fit LSTs. Fix the bloody CPU.
|
Tom Peeping
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 21:09:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Tom Peeping on 18/09/2009 21:10:43
Ugg...
A... your premise isn't true... Lots of armor fits need PG help to get RR on.
B... While Armor is better at buffer tanks, shield rep, whether local or remote is so much more effective than armor rep, that honestly I'd have to go the other way and say it needs a slight nerf to bring it in line. The only thing that is arguably keeping it balanced is that the better buffer on armor gives a bit more time for RR to be applied. While it's true that most people don't fly RR shield, this is more because buffer is FOTM, and because more people on average seem to be armor tanked at the moment, so it's easier to make the smaller percentage of people change.
Honestly, no fix here is needed at all.
Quick edit... i just re-read your post... you're complaint is that you were having trouble fitting 2 RR's, as well as your local tank? That's just a bit off mate... armor ships have to sacrifice stuff to fit their tank, whether buffer or not (500 PG plates remember) if they also want to fit 2 RRs.
|
|
|
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 03:08:00 -
[11]
Yeah, that's what we need, lets make spider tank gangs easier to fit. How about we raise the power grid requirements on remote armor reps and call it good?
|
Jo Shmo
Caldari
Semi-Ethical Munitions Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.19 19:07:00 -
[12]
Works for me. If a Caldari ship cant fit remote shield reps in addition to a normal shield buffer tank, then I dont think Amarr/Gallente ships should be able to fit them with an armor buffer tank.
Changed my mind, increase PG on remote armor reps to be in line with the CPU need on remote shield reps. Should turn out thusly:
- Large Remote Armor Repair System I: 11 CPU, 1900 PG (1.6% CPU, 20% PG)
- Large Remote Armor Repair System II: 14 CPU, 2090 PG (2% CPU, 22% PG)
That way they are equal, and no one can use either of them except for Logistics ships, creating more need for the already uncommon Logistics pilot.
|
Max Essen
Gallente
Bison Industrial Inc
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 19:05:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Max Essen on 20/09/2009 19:06:19
Leave it as it.
No need to buff a shield tanker anyway ... the last thing we need is yet another boost to Caldari stuff. 
Oh, and no need to screw over armor tankers ...
|
Altus Morningstar
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 19:16:00 -
[14]
Am I the only one thinking that if you want a remote rep setup you shouldn't be able to fit all the other toys you want? You're in a combat ship, not a logistics ship. It's the price you have to pay in order to get the setup you want. It's sort of like putting battleship sized equipment on a cruiser. Sure, it may fit but it's going to suffer in several other areas.
The end is extremely f'ing nigh. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |