| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gabriel Ironfist
   |
Posted - 2009.09.26 20:05:00 -
[1]
Why is the hp boost of the meta 4 and meta 5 are the same for the 1600mm? they both give 4200 hp but the T2 cost more cpu (and y would armor plates need CPU anyways....)
|
Joe Starbreaker
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 20:09:00 -
[2]
And the T2 slow you down more, too.
Don't use the T2.
|
Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 20:55:00 -
[3]
1600mm rolled tungsten = common sense
------------------------------------------------
You either need a punch up the throat or a good shag.
Nobody round here is offering the second one therefore your choices are limited! |
zombiedeadhead
Minmatar
In Your Head
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 20:59:00 -
[4]
Oh God, dont raise this, because the response wont be to buff the T2, it will be to nerf the Tungsten. Don't touch the Tungsten !!
|
Serge Bastana
Gallente
GWA Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 21:01:00 -
[5]
I agree, keep it just as it is, no nerf or buff required really
------------------------------------------------
You either need a punch up the throat or a good shag.
Nobody round here is offering the second one therefore your choices are limited! |
ZigZag Joe
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 21:24:00 -
[6]
Actually, nerfing the meta plates might be a good idea. Along with the trimarks/extenders. Agree that using cpu is weird though.
Not that RL matters (lol this b futur internet spaceships game) 7.874 g/cc for iron while 19.3 g/cc for tungsten.
|
Kalia Masaer
Rosa Castellum
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 16:33:00 -
[7]
Well at the moment all T2 armor plates suck and there is no point except for a very slight ISK saving to fit them. One of 2 things has to happen to T2 armor plates, either drop their fitting requirement to that of their meta 4 counterparts or give them a 10-15% buff so they provide the typical benefit of going T2.
|
Gabriel Ironfist
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 14:03:00 -
[8]
I have not made a nerf or buff request. Just pointing out that while from meta 0 to 4 the HP increase makes sense, why doesnt the t2 gets increase as well. it looks like a typo on the stats more than anything. I agree upto meta 4 is fine and not to be tinkered with.
and second issue was why do you need cpU for an armor plate?
There is nothing wrong to restarts subjects to remind the developers of certain problems...
such as:
POS (oh god please fix it already)
Help the Vargur Powergrid fund
etc etc...
|
Jelana Windweaver
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 14:53:00 -
[9]
Making the T2 version have a much lower CPU/PG requirement but keep the weight disadvantage/HP bonus the same sounds like a nifty idea actually...
Would be nice to see more T2 modules which actually have a lower requirement rather than bigger attribute boosts.
|
Shikagi Sitami
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 11:43:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Shikagi Sitami on 29/09/2009 11:43:34
I feel really, really sorry for the poor slobs that got these T2 BPOs in the lottery... talk about an utter waste of SP. *lawl*
RP Teach me to respond while on my third joint... *wheeeew loopy*
|
|
|
Serpent Kamri
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 11:57:00 -
[11]
Please keep in mind that T2 isn't necessarily better, there are plenty of T1 meta 4 items that surpass T2. For example, ECM ( although the lower cap requirement barely make a difference ).
|
Kalia Masaer
Rosa Castellum
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 14:42:00 -
[12]
Yes indeed and that should probably be tweaked also, there should at least never be a significant penalty for fitting T2 over Meta 4.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Novus Auctorita
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 15:32:00 -
[13]
Check the price of T2 and tungsten; there lies the benefit of using T2.
|
Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 16:40:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Mag''s on 29/09/2009 16:41:38
 Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Check the price of T2 and tungsten; there lies the benefit of using T2.
The price difference, is of absolutely no benefit to me what so ever.
The negative effects of T2 totally over weight the price difference.
If you don't think that is the case, you're doing it wrong.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 17:21:00 -
[15]
The difference in price is a consequence of the bad attributes of the T2 not a motive for them. All T2 items that are inferior or equal to their meta 4 counterparts should be improved.
That includes:
- Plates
- ECMs/ECCMs
- Damps
- TDs
- Painters
- Webs
- Plates
- Neuts
- Nosfs
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Cygnet Lythanea
Shamrock Technical Solutions
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 18:02:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Cygnet Lythanea on 29/09/2009 18:02:48
I think that the T2 should be buffed somehow... they're just not viable compared to the T1 and faction equivs.
|
Dansel
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 18:23:00 -
[17]
I'd suggest keep fitting and bonuses but lower the mass added.
-----------------
Yay!! |
Kalia Masaer
Rosa Castellum
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 18:52:00 -
[18]
I can see the problem of following the standard method of boosting over Meta 4 with items like the armor plate. The quickest most balanced way to even them out is reduce the fitting an penalty requirments closer to that of their Meta 4 counter parts, meaning there are no worries about balancing game mechanics. This could even be used as a quick stop gap measure until more appropriate balancing was enacted.
If you look at volumes on the market in heimatar it is very obvious that the fact that 1600mm T2 plates trade on average about 20 units per day while 1600mm tungsten plates average over 200 units per day that the benefit in cost in no way compensates for the higher fitting requirements and increased mass of the T2 plate
|
Catherine Frasier
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 21:44:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Kalia Masaer
there should at least never be a significant penalty for fitting T2 over Meta 4.
This.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |