| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dathias
   |
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:12:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Dathias on 18/11/2004 13:14:55
Hi
Why CCP prefering armor tank as material defense and not shield as energy defense? Armor modules has better stats then eqv. shield modules, NPC uses armor tank too. Armor tanked ship is totally better then shield tanked ship (shield tanked ship is a little bit useless). Why armor as material based defense did not use materials for repair ? Why CCP hate shields ?
|
Dathias
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:12:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Dathias on 18/11/2004 13:14:55
Hi
Why CCP prefering armor tank as material defense and not shield as energy defense? Armor modules has better stats then eqv. shield modules, NPC uses armor tank too. Armor tanked ship is totally better then shield tanked ship (shield tanked ship is a little bit useless). Why armor as material based defense did not use materials for repair ? Why CCP hate shields ?
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:20:00 -
[3]
In defense of shield tanking, when your shield goes down you have a nice warm layer of armour to take the heat. If you armour tank, your a lot closer to death as a matter of course.
Further, if you meet a ship designed to take down your shields, they are not set up to take down your armour (lasers suck at killing armour) while its the same the other way round, as i said, armour ripping is more likely to lead to death than shield ripping.
It is argued that if a shield tank is as good in terms of numbers as an armour tank, then in effect a shield tank is better full stop. In the past week i have lost 2 heavily tanked armour setups, but id have been able to warp away ok if they had been shield tanked.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:20:00 -
[4]
In defense of shield tanking, when your shield goes down you have a nice warm layer of armour to take the heat. If you armour tank, your a lot closer to death as a matter of course.
Further, if you meet a ship designed to take down your shields, they are not set up to take down your armour (lasers suck at killing armour) while its the same the other way round, as i said, armour ripping is more likely to lead to death than shield ripping.
It is argued that if a shield tank is as good in terms of numbers as an armour tank, then in effect a shield tank is better full stop. In the past week i have lost 2 heavily tanked armour setups, but id have been able to warp away ok if they had been shield tanked.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:20:00 -
[5]
Shield tank used to be best; they played around to balance it; armour tank came out better.
They'll play with again soon enough for sure, but its not really so bad that its top priority (well, unless you like to shield tank that is  ).
|
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:20:00 -
[6]
Shield tank used to be best; they played around to balance it; armour tank came out better.
They'll play with again soon enough for sure, but its not really so bad that its top priority (well, unless you like to shield tank that is ).
|
Frank Horrigan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:53:00 -
[7]
Get rid of that -10 % sheild boost on cap relays and im good...
Was looking at the assult crusier biult on the carcal.. it has 850 cap in 268 seconds... onlything I could think of to use is fill all 4 low slots with 4x commander power diagnostic units.... would get more sheild and cap that way.... o and cap recharge...
 Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Bhaal
What has turned out better than expected?
Everything. Remember, we're from Iceland.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This i |
Frank Horrigan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:53:00 -
[8]
Get rid of that -10 % sheild boost on cap relays and im good...
Was looking at the assult crusier biult on the carcal.. it has 850 cap in 268 seconds... onlything I could think of to use is fill all 4 low slots with 4x commander power diagnostic units.... would get more sheild and cap that way.... o and cap recharge...
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Bhaal
What has turned out better than expected?
Everything. Remember, we're from Iceland.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This i |
redfield
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:58:00 -
[9]
tbh im fed up with all whining on modules/ships/armor vs shild, BUHU my ship aint teh uber!
|
redfield
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 13:58:00 -
[10]
tbh im fed up with all whining on modules/ships/armor vs shild, BUHU my ship aint teh uber!
|
Dathias
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 14:56:00 -
[11]
i am using armor tank too. Its for post above. But i dont understand why is prefered armor defense. Modules bonuses and penalties for armor/shield arent comparable. Isnt about "shield is best or armor is best". Its about "why isnt armor and shield comparable?" For ilustration: with armor tank you can tank much damage AND you have much more energy for other things. With shield you can tank much damage but you havent energy for nothing other. Some ships are projected be good in armor .. some in shields. With armor tank you have power relays with -10pct boost and 20pct energy. Its nice because if u use armor defense you dont need this "penalty". Where is eqv. for shield? Ships projected be good with shields (bonuses, resistances etc..) are crap from start?
|
Dathias
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 14:56:00 -
[12]
i am using armor tank too. Its for post above. But i dont understand why is prefered armor defense. Modules bonuses and penalties for armor/shield arent comparable. Isnt about "shield is best or armor is best". Its about "why isnt armor and shield comparable?" For ilustration: with armor tank you can tank much damage AND you have much more energy for other things. With shield you can tank much damage but you havent energy for nothing other. Some ships are projected be good in armor .. some in shields. With armor tank you have power relays with -10pct boost and 20pct energy. Its nice because if u use armor defense you dont need this "penalty". Where is eqv. for shield? Ships projected be good with shields (bonuses, resistances etc..) are crap from start?
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 14:59:00 -
[13]
Is there any circumstances in which the passive regeneration of shields becomes usefull? Im thinking here along the lines of shield extenders. I have always flown gallante so dont know much about shield tank, TBH.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 14:59:00 -
[14]
Is there any circumstances in which the passive regeneration of shields becomes usefull? Im thinking here along the lines of shield extenders. I have always flown gallante so dont know much about shield tank, TBH.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Eyeshadow
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 15:02:00 -
[15]
the reason the -10% to shield boost is there cos peeps ran around with shield tanked apocs and megas with insane cap recharge. The problem is, adding the penalty has basically hit shield tankers quite hard. a PDU II aint too bad thou, due to its 5% to capacity and 8.5% recharge.
Forums: Sharks - MC |
Eyeshadow
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 15:02:00 -
[16]
the reason the -10% to shield boost is there cos peeps ran around with shield tanked apocs and megas with insane cap recharge. The problem is, adding the penalty has basically hit shield tankers quite hard. a PDU II aint too bad thou, due to its 5% to capacity and 8.5% recharge.
Forums: Sharks - MC |
Noriath
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 15:09:00 -
[17]
Shield Tanking has clear advantages, it takes much less grid to shield boost then it takes to armor boost, also it takes less slots. Shield boosting can be increased by modules, while armor repairing can't, Shields also recharge on their own and it's possible to shield tank without even having a booster.
The disadvantages of shield tanking are that MWD eats your shield and a ship without an MWD is a dead ship these days, and also medslots are kinds important for other stuff...
|
Noriath
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 15:09:00 -
[18]
Shield Tanking has clear advantages, it takes much less grid to shield boost then it takes to armor boost, also it takes less slots. Shield boosting can be increased by modules, while armor repairing can't, Shields also recharge on their own and it's possible to shield tank without even having a booster.
The disadvantages of shield tanking are that MWD eats your shield and a ship without an MWD is a dead ship these days, and also medslots are kinds important for other stuff...
|
blahh
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 15:22:00 -
[19]
Shield boosting: takes less slots, fast cycles and boosts shield at the beginning (armor reps you haveto wait ~12seconds till it deactivates for the HP), shield has natural recharge as well. Disadvantage is obviously the amount of cap it uses.. but for Caldari ships that doesnt matter so much as your weapons use no Cap -> An armor tanking Apoc has lasers draining as much cap as another repairer, but a Raven has missiles that use no cap at all. Minmatar also has weapons with no cap-use (not that anyone really uses their ships.. :/).
The only thing i think should be changed is the MWD. It allready gives a sig-penalty and takes 25% of your cap, i dont see any reason for it to take shields as well.
|
blahh
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 15:22:00 -
[20]
Shield boosting: takes less slots, fast cycles and boosts shield at the beginning (armor reps you haveto wait ~12seconds till it deactivates for the HP), shield has natural recharge as well. Disadvantage is obviously the amount of cap it uses.. but for Caldari ships that doesnt matter so much as your weapons use no Cap -> An armor tanking Apoc has lasers draining as much cap as another repairer, but a Raven has missiles that use no cap at all. Minmatar also has weapons with no cap-use (not that anyone really uses their ships.. :/).
The only thing i think should be changed is the MWD. It allready gives a sig-penalty and takes 25% of your cap, i dont see any reason for it to take shields as well.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 16:00:00 -
[21]
I agree on the shield MWD panalty, and i say that as someone who will hardly benefit from its removal.
The other option is to incur a 25% armour penalty, but i shudder at that thought.
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 16:00:00 -
[22]
I agree on the shield MWD panalty, and i say that as someone who will hardly benefit from its removal.
The other option is to incur a 25% armour penalty, but i shudder at that thought.
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
LeMoose
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 16:59:00 -
[23]
change mwd/web/warpscrambler to low slot modules and let's see what the armor tankers have to say about that.
and the -25% shield penalty mwd's have is just plain unfair.
|
LeMoose
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 16:59:00 -
[24]
change mwd/web/warpscrambler to low slot modules and let's see what the armor tankers have to say about that.
and the -25% shield penalty mwd's have is just plain unfair.
|
Gunstar Zero
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 17:17:00 -
[25]
Originally by: 0seeker0
I agree on the shield MWD panalty, and i say that as someone who will hardly benefit from its removal.
The other option is to incur a 25% armour penalty, but i shudder at that thought.
san.
totally - the shield penalty should be gone.
|
Gunstar Zero
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 17:17:00 -
[26]
Originally by: 0seeker0
I agree on the shield MWD panalty, and i say that as someone who will hardly benefit from its removal.
The other option is to incur a 25% armour penalty, but i shudder at that thought.
san.
totally - the shield penalty should be gone.
|
Chowdown
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 17:34:00 -
[27]
Yes do that then I can get back in my tempest.
New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!! |
Chowdown
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 17:34:00 -
[28]
Yes do that then I can get back in my tempest.
New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!! |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 17:40:00 -
[29]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 18/11/2004 17:43:40
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 18/11/2004 17:43:20
Ok, i just had a thought. why are cap relays low slot, and rechargers med slot? cause if relays were med slot, that would inherently carry a shield penalty, and you wouldnt have to have a bost penalty (just a passive one like ages ago)
Again, that would be shooting myself in the foot, but i speak safe in the knowlege that it wont get implemented.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 17:40:00 -
[30]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 18/11/2004 17:43:40
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 18/11/2004 17:43:20
Ok, i just had a thought. why are cap relays low slot, and rechargers med slot? cause if relays were med slot, that would inherently carry a shield penalty, and you wouldnt have to have a bost penalty (just a passive one like ages ago)
Again, that would be shooting myself in the foot, but i speak safe in the knowlege that it wont get implemented.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:06:00 -
[31]
Plz stop saying armour tanking is better when it aint.
It might be more cap economic, but for speed of reapairs wich is often vital ( many times i have died in my armour tanked ship with plenty of cap left) the shiled boosting beats armour tanking easily.
So sometimes shileld boosting is better sometimes armour tanking.
For 1-1 and very small battles maybe armour tanking is better, but for sure its nearly useless for big battles , where shield boosting can buy you few more seconds to warp out if you are called target.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:06:00 -
[32]
Plz stop saying armour tanking is better when it aint.
It might be more cap economic, but for speed of reapairs wich is often vital ( many times i have died in my armour tanked ship with plenty of cap left) the shiled boosting beats armour tanking easily.
So sometimes shileld boosting is better sometimes armour tanking.
For 1-1 and very small battles maybe armour tanking is better, but for sure its nearly useless for big battles , where shield boosting can buy you few more seconds to warp out if you are called target.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Mongo Peck
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:17:00 -
[33]
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
Mongo speaks !!
|
Mongo Peck
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:17:00 -
[34]
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
Mongo speaks !!
|
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:20:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Mongo Peck
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
No its beacuase of power fo lasers and the capacity of ammar ships.
Cap isnt alwys life , you can die with plenty of cap.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:20:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Mongo Peck
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
No its beacuase of power fo lasers and the capacity of ammar ships.
Cap isnt alwys life , you can die with plenty of cap.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Mongo Peck
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:25:00 -
[37]
Wrong ........
With a sub 150 Secs Cap recharge on an Apoc / Geddon you can fire ALL weapons, use all Armour Hardeners and 2 Armour Repairers without even being Close to running out of cap.
On a Raven you have less than 20 Secs ...
If the removed the -10% of the Capacitor Power Relay then "I believe" the system would be balanced.
Mongo speaks !!
|
Mongo Peck
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:25:00 -
[38]
Wrong ........
With a sub 150 Secs Cap recharge on an Apoc / Geddon you can fire ALL weapons, use all Armour Hardeners and 2 Armour Repairers without even being Close to running out of cap.
On a Raven you have less than 20 Secs ...
If the removed the -10% of the Capacitor Power Relay then "I believe" the system would be balanced.
Mongo speaks !!
|
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:56:00 -
[39]
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:56:00 -
[40]
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:59:00 -
[41]
If my mega (or the mega i had before it died cause it ran out of cap) had more cap, id love it more than my dom... which i prefer cause its got an extra med slot..... which i put an extra cap recharger tech 2 in.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 18:59:00 -
[42]
If my mega (or the mega i had before it died cause it ran out of cap) had more cap, id love it more than my dom... which i prefer cause its got an extra med slot..... which i put an extra cap recharger tech 2 in.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
marioman
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 20:12:00 -
[43]
Caldari and Amarr are the complete opposite, with gal and min falling in between. If you want to throw in Mega and Temp thats fine, but if you take an Apoc and compare to the raven this is what happens:
Apoc has the most armor of a tier 2 BS, Raven the most shields
so in theory a Raven should be able to shield tank as well as an Apoc can armor tank, and we all know it cant. The Apoc uses lasers the raven missles, lasers take alot of cap missles take 0. Yet the apoc can still armor tank and the raven cant shield tank worth didly.
If you look at the cap-to-repair/boost ratios armor tanking is 1:2 while shield is 1:1. With lasers taking more cap and armor tanking less, and missle taking no cap and shield tank takes more, wouldnt that generally say both ships should have near the same amount of cap? Also we arent even mentioning shield tanking caldari gun boats, they are even worse off on cap than a missle boat.
Plain and simple: Shield tanking needs some lovin
|
marioman
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 20:12:00 -
[44]
Caldari and Amarr are the complete opposite, with gal and min falling in between. If you want to throw in Mega and Temp thats fine, but if you take an Apoc and compare to the raven this is what happens:
Apoc has the most armor of a tier 2 BS, Raven the most shields
so in theory a Raven should be able to shield tank as well as an Apoc can armor tank, and we all know it cant. The Apoc uses lasers the raven missles, lasers take alot of cap missles take 0. Yet the apoc can still armor tank and the raven cant shield tank worth didly.
If you look at the cap-to-repair/boost ratios armor tanking is 1:2 while shield is 1:1. With lasers taking more cap and armor tanking less, and missle taking no cap and shield tank takes more, wouldnt that generally say both ships should have near the same amount of cap? Also we arent even mentioning shield tanking caldari gun boats, they are even worse off on cap than a missle boat.
Plain and simple: Shield tanking needs some lovin
|
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:03:00 -
[45]
Absolutely wrong , it means the apoc is a capacitator monster and needs nerf.
Anyway if the raven would use torps at close range i believe the apoc is dead meat unless he uses large sb to defend
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:03:00 -
[46]
Absolutely wrong , it means the apoc is a capacitator monster and needs nerf.
Anyway if the raven would use torps at close range i believe the apoc is dead meat unless he uses large sb to defend
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:06:00 -
[47]
When i hear the word "nerf" warning bells go off......
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:06:00 -
[48]
When i hear the word "nerf" warning bells go off......
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
John Blackthorn
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:11:00 -
[49]
I dont' feel the mwd should have a shild pentalty either BUT if it does have one it should be a set benalty of like 1,000 shields or 1,500 shields. whatever ccp feels is balanced. When you have a pentalty that is a % of the total shields it hurts the ships that have there main strenth as shields more than if the ships strenth is armor.
apoc with 4000 shields 25% penalty is 3000 shields
raven with 7000 shields 25% pentaly is 5250
see what i mean?
|
John Blackthorn
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:11:00 -
[50]
I dont' feel the mwd should have a shild pentalty either BUT if it does have one it should be a set benalty of like 1,000 shields or 1,500 shields. whatever ccp feels is balanced. When you have a pentalty that is a % of the total shields it hurts the ships that have there main strenth as shields more than if the ships strenth is armor.
apoc with 4000 shields 25% penalty is 3000 shields
raven with 7000 shields 25% pentaly is 5250
see what i mean?
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:15:00 -
[51]
Setting a number would set off the whinge bells more than the current 25% (think it through, even though i do know what you mean)
Drop the shield penalty. You know, i hate the cap penalty, HATE it, it screws with my dom so much i cant really blaster with it... well, i CAN but often it gets flippin close to death. anyway, im hijaking and being a bad boy, and will stop right now.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 21:15:00 -
[52]
Setting a number would set off the whinge bells more than the current 25% (think it through, even though i do know what you mean)
Drop the shield penalty. You know, i hate the cap penalty, HATE it, it screws with my dom so much i cant really blaster with it... well, i CAN but often it gets flippin close to death. anyway, im hijaking and being a bad boy, and will stop right now.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 22:02:00 -
[53]
nah i changed my mind; putting a number as you suggest would be better, and people wouldnt mind so much, and it would be easier to balance.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 22:02:00 -
[54]
nah i changed my mind; putting a number as you suggest would be better, and people wouldnt mind so much, and it would be easier to balance.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Therax
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 22:14:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Therax on 18/11/2004 22:17:46
Hmm the whole armour tanking idea just seems wrong anyway, while you cannot find the word realism anywhere in EVE, the idea of being able to repair armour magically at a rate which absorbs damage just seems silly. Id like to get rid of armour tanking, but change resists on armour and the amount of armour on ships so you would have two rather different alternatives. You either shield tank and repair the damage, or let them chew into your armour which would take quite a while to do, so you effectively outlast them, either killing or driving them off. If it was balanced correctly then we might actually have some more diversity amongst races which EVE lacks with the exception of number and type of slots.
|
Therax
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 22:14:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Therax on 18/11/2004 22:17:46
Hmm the whole armour tanking idea just seems wrong anyway, while you cannot find the word realism anywhere in EVE, the idea of being able to repair armour magically at a rate which absorbs damage just seems silly. Id like to get rid of armour tanking, but change resists on armour and the amount of armour on ships so you would have two rather different alternatives. You either shield tank and repair the damage, or let them chew into your armour which would take quite a while to do, so you effectively outlast them, either killing or driving them off. If it was balanced correctly then we might actually have some more diversity amongst races which EVE lacks with the exception of number and type of slots.
|
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 22:57:00 -
[57]
Ever tried tanking a gankageddon with a armour tank? k, can't do it, ever tried with a raven shield tank, yep, can do it.
Shield tank isn't worse, it's different, and extremely viable. Armour tank has over shield tanking that it's more easy to sustain, especially on a cap monster like the poc you can keep the tank going for ages, Raven can't as easily, but it can soak a lot more damage in the same time spam, play your strenghts instead of whining about your weaknesses.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 22:57:00 -
[58]
Ever tried tanking a gankageddon with a armour tank? k, can't do it, ever tried with a raven shield tank, yep, can do it.
Shield tank isn't worse, it's different, and extremely viable. Armour tank has over shield tanking that it's more easy to sustain, especially on a cap monster like the poc you can keep the tank going for ages, Raven can't as easily, but it can soak a lot more damage in the same time spam, play your strenghts instead of whining about your weaknesses.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Nafri
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:03:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Gariuys
Ever tried tanking a gankageddon with a armour tank? k, can't do it, ever tried with a raven shield tank, yep, can do it.
Shield tank isn't worse, it's different, and extremely viable. Armour tank has over shield tanking that it's more easy to sustain, especially on a cap monster like the poc you can keep the tank going for ages, Raven can't as easily, but it can soak a lot more damage in the same time spam, play your strenghts instead of whining about your weaknesses.
every geddon with pulse lasers is a fearsome damage dealer
and i flown a armor tanked apoc, and armor tanked ravens, thy are sooo much better than any possible shield tank
Wanna fly with me?
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:03:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Gariuys
Ever tried tanking a gankageddon with a armour tank? k, can't do it, ever tried with a raven shield tank, yep, can do it.
Shield tank isn't worse, it's different, and extremely viable. Armour tank has over shield tanking that it's more easy to sustain, especially on a cap monster like the poc you can keep the tank going for ages, Raven can't as easily, but it can soak a lot more damage in the same time spam, play your strenghts instead of whining about your weaknesses.
every geddon with pulse lasers is a fearsome damage dealer
and i flown a armor tanked apoc, and armor tanked ravens, thy are sooo much better than any possible shield tank
Wanna fly with me?
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:25:00 -
[61]
Garius, i cant get my head around why a raven can take more damage in a shorter time than an apoc can in the same time.
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:25:00 -
[62]
Garius, i cant get my head around why a raven can take more damage in a shorter time than an apoc can in the same time.
san.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:27:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Gariuys
Ever tried tanking a gankageddon with a armour tank? k, can't do it, ever tried with a raven shield tank, yep, can do it.
Shield tank isn't worse, it's different, and extremely viable. Armour tank has over shield tanking that it's more easy to sustain, especially on a cap monster like the poc you can keep the tank going for ages, Raven can't as easily, but it can soak a lot more damage in the same time spam, play your strenghts instead of whining about your weaknesses.
every geddon with pulse lasers is a fearsome damage dealer
and i flown a armor tanked apoc, and armor tanked ravens, thy are sooo much better than any possible shield tank
sry was a bit confusing, too damn tired, meant trying to tank gankageddon damage, in a armour tank or in a shield tank, it's much easier to do in a shield tank, since you can shaft your cap into defense much faster, armour tank sustains longer, but tanks less damage. Trade off is in part, that most armour tanks don't combine well with long range, since grid requirements and both offensive ( RCU, PDS ) and your entire defense are fighting for the same slots.
Trouble is with ( IMHO ) amarr ships got so much grid and megapulses are so easy to fit and perform so well at reasonable ranges that you end up with a situation where some drawbacks of armour tanking don't really apply anymore.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:27:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Gariuys
Ever tried tanking a gankageddon with a armour tank? k, can't do it, ever tried with a raven shield tank, yep, can do it.
Shield tank isn't worse, it's different, and extremely viable. Armour tank has over shield tanking that it's more easy to sustain, especially on a cap monster like the poc you can keep the tank going for ages, Raven can't as easily, but it can soak a lot more damage in the same time spam, play your strenghts instead of whining about your weaknesses.
every geddon with pulse lasers is a fearsome damage dealer
and i flown a armor tanked apoc, and armor tanked ravens, thy are sooo much better than any possible shield tank
sry was a bit confusing, too damn tired, meant trying to tank gankageddon damage, in a armour tank or in a shield tank, it's much easier to do in a shield tank, since you can shaft your cap into defense much faster, armour tank sustains longer, but tanks less damage. Trade off is in part, that most armour tanks don't combine well with long range, since grid requirements and both offensive ( RCU, PDS ) and your entire defense are fighting for the same slots.
Trouble is with ( IMHO ) amarr ships got so much grid and megapulses are so easy to fit and perform so well at reasonable ranges that you end up with a situation where some drawbacks of armour tanking don't really apply anymore.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:31:00 -
[65]
Ships that armour tank (i.e apoc) often have less flexibility offensivly.
i.e the main shield tankers, caldari are fully capable of using e-warfare to mess with their opponents. No matter how good an armour tank is if an apoc is target jammed its a sitting duck (barely an missile capacity and only guns, no realistic ew capability at all).
The armour tank being better could be viewed basically as compensation for less tactical options presented by a lack of midslots.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2004.11.18 23:31:00 -
[66]
Ships that armour tank (i.e apoc) often have less flexibility offensivly.
i.e the main shield tankers, caldari are fully capable of using e-warfare to mess with their opponents. No matter how good an armour tank is if an apoc is target jammed its a sitting duck (barely an missile capacity and only guns, no realistic ew capability at all).
The armour tank being better could be viewed basically as compensation for less tactical options presented by a lack of midslots.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Reloaded INC
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 00:37:00 -
[67]
caldari should use their mids and lows for things over than amour tanking to be honest.
scorpion with -24 target jam +25 sensor strength ... lets see an amour tanked or damage fitted amarr deal to that .. well ok they would probarly just sit dumb founded the scorp would fire some pretty sparklers and then run away.
raven on the other hand with siege, ballistics and any room left for hardners or multis is quite a site to be rekined with.
plenty of other ways to use a ship endowed with midslots other than sheild tank. now lets say we have a tanked scorpion we know they suck t3h diddley for dealing damage but i bet it could take one hell of a pounding.
and ravens with tanks at close range eat all ships up as far as im aware. get inside that magic 10km range with a raven its all over rover.
I am the bad guy the kriptonite the green cronic.
|
Reloaded INC
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 00:37:00 -
[68]
caldari should use their mids and lows for things over than amour tanking to be honest.
scorpion with -24 target jam +25 sensor strength ... lets see an amour tanked or damage fitted amarr deal to that .. well ok they would probarly just sit dumb founded the scorp would fire some pretty sparklers and then run away.
raven on the other hand with siege, ballistics and any room left for hardners or multis is quite a site to be rekined with.
plenty of other ways to use a ship endowed with midslots other than sheild tank. now lets say we have a tanked scorpion we know they suck t3h diddley for dealing damage but i bet it could take one hell of a pounding.
and ravens with tanks at close range eat all ships up as far as im aware. get inside that magic 10km range with a raven its all over rover.
I am the bad guy the kriptonite the green cronic.
|
marioman
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 03:12:00 -
[69]
I'm not one to ask for nerfing so i would rather see shield tanking boosted in some way than armor tanking nerfed.
As for a raven and its missles...you seem to be forgetting about the upcomin missle nerf.
If you put a shield tanked raven and armor tanked apoc 1vs1 against each other...both equivilent skills, which one wins? An apoc can soak up all the damage a raven spits outs, but can a raven soak up all the damage an apoc spits out for as long? I know there was some1 on SiSi the other day goin on and on about how his apoc was soaking up all the damage a raven could dish out...ok but then i ask could a raven do the same thing to an apoc? my bet would be no. I mean seriously when people start tanking about armor tanking a Raven you know something is wrong.
|
marioman
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 03:12:00 -
[70]
I'm not one to ask for nerfing so i would rather see shield tanking boosted in some way than armor tanking nerfed.
As for a raven and its missles...you seem to be forgetting about the upcomin missle nerf.
If you put a shield tanked raven and armor tanked apoc 1vs1 against each other...both equivilent skills, which one wins? An apoc can soak up all the damage a raven spits outs, but can a raven soak up all the damage an apoc spits out for as long? I know there was some1 on SiSi the other day goin on and on about how his apoc was soaking up all the damage a raven could dish out...ok but then i ask could a raven do the same thing to an apoc? my bet would be no. I mean seriously when people start tanking about armor tanking a Raven you know something is wrong.
|
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 04:11:00 -
[71]
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
--
Director of Ganking:
Death Row Inc. |
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 04:11:00 -
[72]
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
--
Director of Ganking:
Death Row Inc. |
Black Lotus
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 06:07:00 -
[73]
LOL. ok. I have Ammar bs lvl 5. large enrgy lvl 5. basicly all my combat sp based around ammar.
However with cal bs lvl 4, and torps lvl 4. I can tell u that a raven will pwn an armor tanked apoc.
Raven can fit for amazing defense and massive fast dmg. Does it last long? no, but it doesnt need to in pvp.
Same thing with tempest. It can use all lows for dmg, and mids for tanking.
Apoc has to split this up between its midslots.
Lasers do not need to be nerfed. neither does armor tanking.
What needs to be balanced, is a even bigger STACKING penalty on dmg mods.
Tempest\Raven > Apoc 1v1. Pure tank and dmg owns a half tank, half dmg setup anyday.
People say theyve bought apocs, for what npc hunting? I have major skills for ammar and its uses. Yet i've now bought a raven.
|
Black Lotus
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 06:07:00 -
[74]
LOL. ok. I have Ammar bs lvl 5. large enrgy lvl 5. basicly all my combat sp based around ammar.
However with cal bs lvl 4, and torps lvl 4. I can tell u that a raven will pwn an armor tanked apoc.
Raven can fit for amazing defense and massive fast dmg. Does it last long? no, but it doesnt need to in pvp.
Same thing with tempest. It can use all lows for dmg, and mids for tanking.
Apoc has to split this up between its midslots.
Lasers do not need to be nerfed. neither does armor tanking.
What needs to be balanced, is a even bigger STACKING penalty on dmg mods.
Tempest\Raven > Apoc 1v1. Pure tank and dmg owns a half tank, half dmg setup anyday.
People say theyve bought apocs, for what npc hunting? I have major skills for ammar and its uses. Yet i've now bought a raven.
|
Black Lotus
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 06:11:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Hamatitio
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
LOL, pls tell me ur not talking about putting cpr's on a pvp setup... hahaha....
|
Black Lotus
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 06:11:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Hamatitio
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
LOL, pls tell me ur not talking about putting cpr's on a pvp setup... hahaha....
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 08:35:00 -
[77]
Armor tanking (and or the ridiculous hull tanking) is stupid. We should need to carry Tritanium around at least to be used to rebuild the armor.
Or we should always need to dock to repair armor and hull.
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 08:35:00 -
[78]
Armor tanking (and or the ridiculous hull tanking) is stupid. We should need to carry Tritanium around at least to be used to rebuild the armor.
Or we should always need to dock to repair armor and hull.
|
Luc Boye
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 08:52:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Mongo Peck
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
Nah, it would further nerf megathron. Megathron cant either shield nor armor tank properly, Raven could shield tank as much as Apoc could armor tank before cap relay nerf. The real problem is that all defence is based on cap, and amarr are cap monsters. That's the unbalance right there.
--
2004.12.29 23:33:40combatMining Pollution Cloud hits you, doing 140.0 damage. |
Luc Boye
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 08:52:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Mongo Peck
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
Nah, it would further nerf megathron. Megathron cant either shield nor armor tank properly, Raven could shield tank as much as Apoc could armor tank before cap relay nerf. The real problem is that all defence is based on cap, and amarr are cap monsters. That's the unbalance right there.
--
2004.12.29 23:33:40combatMining Pollution Cloud hits you, doing 140.0 damage. |
Riddari
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 09:14:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Luc Boye
The real problem is that all defence is based on cap, and amarr are cap monsters. That's the unbalance right there.
Similar unbalance to Caldari being missile monsters?
¼©¼
a history |
Riddari
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 09:14:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Luc Boye
The real problem is that all defence is based on cap, and amarr are cap monsters. That's the unbalance right there.
Similar unbalance to Caldari being missile monsters?
¼©¼
a history |
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 09:17:00 -
[83]
Yet again we bump into problems caused by CCPs instance on adhoc blancing rather than adherence to a rigorous physics model.
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 09:17:00 -
[84]
Yet again we bump into problems caused by CCPs instance on adhoc blancing rather than adherence to a rigorous physics model.
|
Rytir
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 13:52:00 -
[85]
Edited by: Rytir on 19/11/2004 14:15:40
Edited by: Rytir on 19/11/2004 13:55:26
Originally by: Luc Boye
Originally by: Mongo Peck
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
Nah, it would further nerf megathron. Megathron cant either shield nor armor tank properly, Raven could shield tank as much as Apoc could armor tank before cap relay nerf. The real problem is that all defence is based on cap, and amarr are cap monsters. That's the unbalance right there.
and you sir are thinking just for defense, remember that the apoc and geddon have a bonus on lasers and they use alot of cap. but to use the apoc or geddon properly you need to train alot of skills to lvl 5, therefore nerfing amarr ships will kill off the use of the apoc or geddon forever.
Remove the cap power relay penelty or reduce it.
also higher penelty's on the stacking of damage mods would also reduce the effectivness of the gankgeddon.
EDIT : another thing is the gankageddon is a pure offensive setup (no defense at all) so the damage it can do is at a big risk of losing the ship very quickly. so as it stands the gankageddon is not an exploit or unfair as it dies quick if it's jammed and scrambled.
so i think over all balance(except for the cap power relay nerf) is very good.
flame at will as this is what i believe
|
Rytir
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 13:52:00 -
[86]
Edited by: Rytir on 19/11/2004 14:15:40
Edited by: Rytir on 19/11/2004 13:55:26
Originally by: Luc Boye
Originally by: Mongo Peck
The only balance that needs addressing is either ..
They remove the Capacitor Power Relay -10% Shield Boost from Shield Modules or the introduce the same effect for Cap Rechargers on Armour Repairs.
Everyone suddenly bought Amarr (including myself) why?
Because Armour Tanking out proforms Shield Tanking.
Capacitor is life ....
Nah, it would further nerf megathron. Megathron cant either shield nor armor tank properly, Raven could shield tank as much as Apoc could armor tank before cap relay nerf. The real problem is that all defence is based on cap, and amarr are cap monsters. That's the unbalance right there.
and you sir are thinking just for defense, remember that the apoc and geddon have a bonus on lasers and they use alot of cap. but to use the apoc or geddon properly you need to train alot of skills to lvl 5, therefore nerfing amarr ships will kill off the use of the apoc or geddon forever.
Remove the cap power relay penelty or reduce it.
also higher penelty's on the stacking of damage mods would also reduce the effectivness of the gankgeddon.
EDIT : another thing is the gankageddon is a pure offensive setup (no defense at all) so the damage it can do is at a big risk of losing the ship very quickly. so as it stands the gankageddon is not an exploit or unfair as it dies quick if it's jammed and scrambled.
so i think over all balance(except for the cap power relay nerf) is very good.
flame at will as this is what i believe
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 15:51:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Pottsey on 19/11/2004 15:57:19
"Is there any circumstances in which the passive regeneration of shields becomes usefull? Im thinking here along the lines of shield extenders. I have always flown gallante so dont know much about shield tank, TBH."
Yes passive shield tanking can be usefull but it has a different set of problems then normal tanking along with different good points. Passive tanking is perfact for agent running you donÆt even have to worry about turning you shields on and off they are always on and never drain cap.
My passive Gallante tank gets 102 shield points per second or 408 over 4 seconds. Which I think is useful some of the time. If you need more then 102 points per second passive tanks are not usefull for you. The other problem with passive tanking is there are no T2 low slots modules that boost passive thanking yet.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 15:51:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Pottsey on 19/11/2004 15:57:19
"Is there any circumstances in which the passive regeneration of shields becomes usefull? Im thinking here along the lines of shield extenders. I have always flown gallante so dont know much about shield tank, TBH."
Yes passive shield tanking can be usefull but it has a different set of problems then normal tanking along with different good points. Passive tanking is perfact for agent running you donÆt even have to worry about turning you shields on and off they are always on and never drain cap.
My passive Gallante tank gets 102 shield points per second or 408 over 4 seconds. Which I think is useful some of the time. If you need more then 102 points per second passive tanks are not usefull for you. The other problem with passive tanking is there are no T2 low slots modules that boost passive thanking yet.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Jan Ors
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 15:52:00 -
[89]
Simple Solution:
À Get rid of the -10% shield boost on the Cap Power Relay.
À Give Capacitor Rechargers and Cap Power Relays the same bonus to cap recharge.
À Give both modules some proper fitting requirements - as to not have ships with both best weapons + tank. Make different versions for each ship size.
À Capacitor Rechargers should need a lot of power, cap power relays should need a lot of cpu.
It's just silly that both these modules have pathetically small fitting requirements, and is really the cause of all these problems. At the moment they are no-brainer modules.
________
My chosen sig won't fit. Fah. |
Jan Ors
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 15:52:00 -
[90]
Simple Solution:
À Get rid of the -10% shield boost on the Cap Power Relay.
À Give Capacitor Rechargers and Cap Power Relays the same bonus to cap recharge.
À Give both modules some proper fitting requirements - as to not have ships with both best weapons + tank. Make different versions for each ship size.
À Capacitor Rechargers should need a lot of power, cap power relays should need a lot of cpu.
It's just silly that both these modules have pathetically small fitting requirements, and is really the cause of all these problems. At the moment they are no-brainer modules.
________
My chosen sig won't fit. Fah. |
John Blackthorn
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 18:07:00 -
[91]
I just wanted to re-state that I don't have any problems with people armor tanking and don't want to see it nerfed.
The only issue I have is that the mwd 25% penalty to shields on Caldari (and other shield based ships) isn't fair.
Consider a Caldari assult with say 700 shields and 200 armor and
Ammar assult with 200 shields and 700 armor. the mwd really gimps the shield ship..
Fair would be no penatly to shields, or also put a %25 to armor (no i REALLY dont' want ot see this happen. As an alterntive and lesser damaging item would be a set amount of shields a mwd takes. So on a mwd 1 maybe it takes 200 shields. At least this penatly would be on all ships..
The percentage un-farily penatlizes a shild ship for using a mwd more than if somone is relying on armor.
Well thats 2 cents worth :P
-BT
|
John Blackthorn
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 18:07:00 -
[92]
I just wanted to re-state that I don't have any problems with people armor tanking and don't want to see it nerfed.
The only issue I have is that the mwd 25% penalty to shields on Caldari (and other shield based ships) isn't fair.
Consider a Caldari assult with say 700 shields and 200 armor and
Ammar assult with 200 shields and 700 armor. the mwd really gimps the shield ship..
Fair would be no penatly to shields, or also put a %25 to armor (no i REALLY dont' want ot see this happen. As an alterntive and lesser damaging item would be a set amount of shields a mwd takes. So on a mwd 1 maybe it takes 200 shields. At least this penatly would be on all ships..
The percentage un-farily penatlizes a shild ship for using a mwd more than if somone is relying on armor.
Well thats 2 cents worth :P
-BT
|
Xtro 2
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 18:52:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Earthan
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Megathrons just as good as an apoc at armour tanking to infinity, i can run everything like an apoc can and not run out of cap, just my cap levels at 35% where as the apoc would level at 48-55%, i trained ages for caldari/raven only to find you massivly outperform in a armour tank, balance it and ill go back to my favourate ship.
And dont give me any crap abour repair times, i can run 2x repairers and outlast combat my raven could only handle for <3minutes best with the beat gear and i have all relevant skills at level 5 in engineering.
Armour tanks win, end of story.
__________________________________________
Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights. |
Xtro 2
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 18:52:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Earthan
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Megathrons just as good as an apoc at armour tanking to infinity, i can run everything like an apoc can and not run out of cap, just my cap levels at 35% where as the apoc would level at 48-55%, i trained ages for caldari/raven only to find you massivly outperform in a armour tank, balance it and ill go back to my favourate ship.
And dont give me any crap abour repair times, i can run 2x repairers and outlast combat my raven could only handle for <3minutes best with the beat gear and i have all relevant skills at level 5 in engineering.
Armour tanks win, end of story.
__________________________________________
Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights. |
Oveur
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 18:58:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Dathias
Edited by: Dathias on 18/11/2004 13:14:55
Hi
Why CCP prefering armor tank as material defense and not shield as energy defense? Armor modules has better stats then eqv. shield modules, NPC uses armor tank too. Armor tanked ship is totally better then shield tanked ship (shield tanked ship is a little bit useless). Why armor as material based defense did not use materials for repair ? Why CCP hate shields ?
Because real men fly Apocalypses and Armagedddons, like I do.
But like somebody said, this one time, at bandcamp, it was the other way around. It'll get tuned again if I know TomB right
_____________________________
I say hey sky, s'other say I won say, I pray to J I get the same ol' same ol. |
Oveur
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 18:58:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Dathias
Edited by: Dathias on 18/11/2004 13:14:55
Hi
Why CCP prefering armor tank as material defense and not shield as energy defense? Armor modules has better stats then eqv. shield modules, NPC uses armor tank too. Armor tanked ship is totally better then shield tanked ship (shield tanked ship is a little bit useless). Why armor as material based defense did not use materials for repair ? Why CCP hate shields ?
Because real men fly Apocalypses and Armagedddons, like I do.
But like somebody said, this one time, at bandcamp, it was the other way around. It'll get tuned again if I know TomB right
_____________________________
I say hey sky, s'other say I won say, I pray to J I get the same ol' same ol. |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 19:18:00 -
[97]
Shield tanking and amrour tanking can only be balanced if ECM becomes hi-slot.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 19:18:00 -
[98]
Shield tanking and amrour tanking can only be balanced if ECM becomes hi-slot.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 19:20:00 -
[99]
I just knoooooooooooooow that answer isnt going to go down well.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 19:20:00 -
[100]
I just knoooooooooooooow that answer isnt going to go down well.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 19:39:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Xtro 2
Originally by: Earthan
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Megathrons just as good as an apoc at armour tanking to infinity, i can run everything like an apoc can and not run out of cap, just my cap levels at 35% where as the apoc would level at 48-55%, i trained ages for caldari/raven only to find you massivly outperform in a armour tank, balance it and ill go back to my favourate ship.
And dont give me any crap abour repair times, i can run 2x repairers and outlast combat my raven could only handle for <3minutes best with the beat gear and i have all relevant skills at level 5 in engineering.
Armour tanks win, end of story.
Ok then solve me plz this mystery why everybody changes to caldari ship or ammar ship and never to gallente?Hell many persons even change from gallente to ammar.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Earthan
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 19:39:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Xtro 2
Originally by: Earthan
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Megathrons just as good as an apoc at armour tanking to infinity, i can run everything like an apoc can and not run out of cap, just my cap levels at 35% where as the apoc would level at 48-55%, i trained ages for caldari/raven only to find you massivly outperform in a armour tank, balance it and ill go back to my favourate ship.
And dont give me any crap abour repair times, i can run 2x repairers and outlast combat my raven could only handle for <3minutes best with the beat gear and i have all relevant skills at level 5 in engineering.
Armour tanks win, end of story.
Ok then solve me plz this mystery why everybody changes to caldari ship or ammar ship and never to gallente?Hell many persons even change from gallente to ammar.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Jakal
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 21:14:00 -
[103]
well for the sake of balance lets put a -10% speed reduction on shield extender.
what? i though the theme of this was to give stupid half thought through suggestions?
-Adapt and Overcome.
|
Jakal
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 21:14:00 -
[104]
well for the sake of balance lets put a -10% speed reduction on shield extender.
what? i though the theme of this was to give stupid half thought through suggestions?
-Adapt and Overcome.
|
Znaei
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 22:12:00 -
[105]
Ok, low slot Cap relays decrease the effectiveness of shield boosters. Why not make med slot cap rechargers decrease the effectiveness of armor repairers?
I use armor tanking aswell, but I can see that armor tanking is by far better than shield tanking.
clagnuts> im drunk just come back from pirates night in spain , wtf i thought it was some eve guys getting together for a drink , turned out to be a feken real pirates show , doh |
Znaei
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 22:12:00 -
[106]
Ok, low slot Cap relays decrease the effectiveness of shield boosters. Why not make med slot cap rechargers decrease the effectiveness of armor repairers?
I use armor tanking aswell, but I can see that armor tanking is by far better than shield tanking.
clagnuts> im drunk just come back from pirates night in spain , wtf i thought it was some eve guys getting together for a drink , turned out to be a feken real pirates show , doh |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 22:26:00 -
[107]
Because cap rechargers dont have as good an effect on cap as relays, so its not fair to make them even worse.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.19 22:26:00 -
[108]
Because cap rechargers dont have as good an effect on cap as relays, so its not fair to make them even worse.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:09:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Dathias
Edited by: Dathias on 18/11/2004 13:14:55
Hi
Why CCP prefering armor tank as material defense and not shield as energy defense? Armor modules has better stats then eqv. shield modules, NPC uses armor tank too. Armor tanked ship is totally better then shield tanked ship (shield tanked ship is a little bit useless). Why armor as material based defense did not use materials for repair ? Why CCP hate shields ?
Because real men fly Apocalypses and Armagedddons, like I do.
But like somebody said, this one time, at bandcamp, it was the other way around. It'll get tuned again if I know TomB right
What the hell is he doing now anyways? Isn't it his job to balance modules and combat? In exodus there are only two new ship classes to balance, while we still got the issue of frigates and cruisers being useless without greater-than-cruise-missle speed, as well as projectiles being crap, hybrid eating more cap than lasers. EH!?
_____________________________________
Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning.
"Can I be a consultant for EVE II?" - WhiteDwarf |
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:09:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Dathias
Edited by: Dathias on 18/11/2004 13:14:55
Hi
Why CCP prefering armor tank as material defense and not shield as energy defense? Armor modules has better stats then eqv. shield modules, NPC uses armor tank too. Armor tanked ship is totally better then shield tanked ship (shield tanked ship is a little bit useless). Why armor as material based defense did not use materials for repair ? Why CCP hate shields ?
Because real men fly Apocalypses and Armagedddons, like I do.
But like somebody said, this one time, at bandcamp, it was the other way around. It'll get tuned again if I know TomB right
What the hell is he doing now anyways? Isn't it his job to balance modules and combat? In exodus there are only two new ship classes to balance, while we still got the issue of frigates and cruisers being useless without greater-than-cruise-missle speed, as well as projectiles being crap, hybrid eating more cap than lasers. EH!?
_____________________________________
Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning.
"Can I be a consultant for EVE II?" - WhiteDwarf |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:18:00 -
[111]
Um *seeker waves hand in the air* hybrids use more cap than lasers? how so?
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:18:00 -
[112]
Um *seeker waves hand in the air* hybrids use more cap than lasers? how so?
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Shamis Orzoz
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:25:00 -
[113]
Originally by: 0seeker0
Um *seeker waves hand in the air* hybrids use more cap than lasers? how so?
San.
I haven't checked the numbers recently, but with the ship bonus's that amarr bs's get I believe they use less cap than their corresponding hybrid given a certain level of amarr bs.
|
Shamis Orzoz
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:25:00 -
[114]
Originally by: 0seeker0
Um *seeker waves hand in the air* hybrids use more cap than lasers? how so?
San.
I haven't checked the numbers recently, but with the ship bonus's that amarr bs's get I believe they use less cap than their corresponding hybrid given a certain level of amarr bs.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:33:00 -
[115]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 20/11/2004 00:36:40
yikes, thats bad.
It is always cap trouble i have in gallante, and i have to think real carefull before using a mwd. Its enough to make me want to use ammarr, i tell you. All that juicy cap....
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:33:00 -
[116]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 20/11/2004 00:36:40
yikes, thats bad.
It is always cap trouble i have in gallante, and i have to think real carefull before using a mwd. Its enough to make me want to use ammarr, i tell you. All that juicy cap....
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
RollinDutchMasters
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:48:00 -
[117]
Change the 5% cap capacity bonus of the apoc and the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus for lasers.
That would bring apocs more in line with other ships in terms of tankability. It would also help with weapon balance, since lasers seem to have been balanced with no DoT bonuses in mind, and then a RoF bonus was added to the arma.
Alternatively, change the 5% cap bonus of the apoc to a 5% bonus to armor HP, and change the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus.
IMO, those two ship bonuses are causing the majority of the problems with armor/shield tanking balance.
Originally by: Sochin
CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
|
RollinDutchMasters
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 00:48:00 -
[118]
Change the 5% cap capacity bonus of the apoc and the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus for lasers.
That would bring apocs more in line with other ships in terms of tankability. It would also help with weapon balance, since lasers seem to have been balanced with no DoT bonuses in mind, and then a RoF bonus was added to the arma.
Alternatively, change the 5% cap bonus of the apoc to a 5% bonus to armor HP, and change the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus.
IMO, those two ship bonuses are causing the majority of the problems with armor/shield tanking balance.
Originally by: Sochin
CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
|
MadGaz
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 01:02:00 -
[119]
Arma is fine, leave the bonuses, and it will more than likely run out of cap unless you have some tech2 cap rechargers.
I wouldnt mind the Apocs bonus being changed to a more combat related one though.
------------------------------------------
|
MadGaz
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 01:02:00 -
[120]
Arma is fine, leave the bonuses, and it will more than likely run out of cap unless you have some tech2 cap rechargers.
I wouldnt mind the Apocs bonus being changed to a more combat related one though.
------------------------------------------
|
Kurenin
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 03:01:00 -
[121]
Edited by: Kurenin on 20/11/2004 03:06:17
Originally by: Hamatitio
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
I'm assuming your new to this game, since you obviously cant remember what happened before the cap relay nerf.
What happened was you'd find ravens flying around doing:
All damage types.
Constant damage (no misses or low hits).
Infinate cap.
Huge shield.
HELLO THATS REALLY BALANCED GG.
edit = Btw this is a really stupid and moronic thread. Every thread on balancing is started and populated by people who don't have a clue what they are talking about.
-----
[22:02] <Kurenin> anyhow, on a more serious note, what did you think of those ideas?
[22:02] <Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming
Inactivity wins you. |
Kurenin
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 03:01:00 -
[122]
Edited by: Kurenin on 20/11/2004 03:06:17
Originally by: Hamatitio
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
I'm assuming your new to this game, since you obviously cant remember what happened before the cap relay nerf.
What happened was you'd find ravens flying around doing:
All damage types.
Constant damage (no misses or low hits).
Infinate cap.
Huge shield.
HELLO THATS REALLY BALANCED GG.
edit = Btw this is a really stupid and moronic thread. Every thread on balancing is started and populated by people who don't have a clue what they are talking about.
-----
[22:02] <Kurenin> anyhow, on a more serious note, what did you think of those ideas?
[22:02] <Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming
Inactivity wins you. |
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 03:48:00 -
[123]
Edited by: Hamatitio on 20/11/2004 03:51:33
Originally by: Kurenin
Edited by: Kurenin on 20/11/2004 03:06:17
Originally by: Hamatitio
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
I'm assuming your new to this game, since you obviously cant remember what happened before the cap relay nerf.
What happened was you'd find ravens flying around doing:
All damage types.
Constant damage (no misses or low hits).
Infinate cap.
Huge shield.
HELLO THATS REALLY BALANCED GG.
edit = Btw this is a really stupid and moronic thread. Every thread on balancing is started and populated by people who don't have a clue what they are talking about.
I do remember the days actually. Ravens could tank for...
<drum roll please>
5 whole minutes, with the ability to tank 2 ships (maybe 3 if they werent amarr)
Apoc now:
Can tank forever, the only problem is the amount of repairing. Evenso, they can easily tank 3 ships shooting at them.
--
Director of Ganking:
Death Row Inc. |
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 03:48:00 -
[124]
Edited by: Hamatitio on 20/11/2004 03:51:33
Originally by: Kurenin
Edited by: Kurenin on 20/11/2004 03:06:17
Originally by: Hamatitio
Simple:
MAKE CALDARI SHIPS EXEMPT FROM CPR NERF.
This would make apocs unable to use 1 xl booster forever, but would also give Ravens the ability to last more than 15 seconds in a battle.
I'm assuming your new to this game, since you obviously cant remember what happened before the cap relay nerf.
What happened was you'd find ravens flying around doing:
All damage types.
Constant damage (no misses or low hits).
Infinate cap.
Huge shield.
HELLO THATS REALLY BALANCED GG.
edit = Btw this is a really stupid and moronic thread. Every thread on balancing is started and populated by people who don't have a clue what they are talking about.
I do remember the days actually. Ravens could tank for...
<drum roll please>
5 whole minutes, with the ability to tank 2 ships (maybe 3 if they werent amarr)
Apoc now:
Can tank forever, the only problem is the amount of repairing. Evenso, they can easily tank 3 ships shooting at them.
--
Director of Ganking:
Death Row Inc. |
Booky
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 05:49:00 -
[125]
I used a completely passive shield system on my First raven and it kicked ars until I got gaked by 4 at once. If they ever get around to releaseing the T2 passive equipment and shield rechargers I may try it again. I think I had my shield recharge to about 90-100 hp/sec, and I got better skills now so it would be even higher.
Spelling corrections welcome, but don't expect me to edit my post. |
Booky
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 05:49:00 -
[126]
I used a completely passive shield system on my First raven and it kicked ars until I got gaked by 4 at once. If they ever get around to releaseing the T2 passive equipment and shield rechargers I may try it again. I think I had my shield recharge to about 90-100 hp/sec, and I got better skills now so it would be even higher.
Spelling corrections welcome, but don't expect me to edit my post. |
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 06:02:00 -
[127]
howd you manage that? on a scorp w/ all slots devoted i only managed about 45-50.
--
Director of Ganking:
Death Row Inc. |
Hamatitio
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 06:02:00 -
[128]
howd you manage that? on a scorp w/ all slots devoted i only managed about 45-50.
--
Director of Ganking:
Death Row Inc. |
Dathias
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 09:12:00 -
[129]
Hi after day. please.. i dont think first question as discussion about nerf this ship only (apoc) or unnerf this ship only (raven etc..). Its simply. We have some amarr ship designed for shield too (assault frig..). I hope discussion will be targeted (mabye teoretically) for shield defense as eqv. for armor defense. Now is armor in 90pct case much better then shields (anyone know player who use shield if he has choice between shield and armor?) I hope this affect devs for doing something with this
|
Dathias
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 09:12:00 -
[130]
Hi after day. please.. i dont think first question as discussion about nerf this ship only (apoc) or unnerf this ship only (raven etc..). Its simply. We have some amarr ship designed for shield too (assault frig..). I hope discussion will be targeted (mabye teoretically) for shield defense as eqv. for armor defense. Now is armor in 90pct case much better then shields (anyone know player who use shield if he has choice between shield and armor?) I hope this affect devs for doing something with this
|
Clipped Wings
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 10:15:00 -
[131]
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Change the 5% cap capacity bonus of the apoc and the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus for lasers.
Yes, because evidently, lasers don't track well enough already?
Seriously, once you've seen a 'geddon pulse down frigates by the handful, you start to wonder what the devs were smoking when balancing laser tracking.
Fair enough, lasers hit instantly, etc etc, but for the sake of gameplay...seriously, I see people kitting 'Geddons and Apoc for frigate-killing duty...with BS-sized pulses.
Now, compare to the Minmatar in the corner, who now slaps lasers on his Tempest, because he'll do better damage, and actually hit something with them.
Seriously. The last thing lasers is better tracking.
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
That would bring apocs more in line with other ships in terms of tankability. It would also help with weapon balance, since lasers seem to have been balanced with no DoT bonuses in mind, and then a RoF bonus was added to the arma.
The DoT for lasers (Pulses in specific, since 95% of all Amarr ships seem to have pulses fitted) seems rather well-working now...Course, can't say much about megabeams and Tachyons, as I have yet to see people using it after the last change to lasers. Maybe I don't get out enough, but the arguments for using pulses (RoF, tracking and even damage) seem overwhelming.
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Alternatively, change the 5% cap bonus of the apoc to a 5% bonus to armor HP, and change the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus.
hmm...let's see...Might work, although I think it'd just make Apoc even more one-tracked than they are.
Fit pulses, heavy armor tank, medslots: cap rechargers, hey, ho, let's go. Question is if they should have a bonus that'd give them the possibility of more versatility instead? And I've already stated my opinions on the tracking... ;)
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
IMO, those two ship bonuses are causing the majority of the problems with armor/shield tanking balance.
Semi-agreed. The only problem is that Caldari ships are effectively unable to armor tank (and rightly so!), Minmatar ships...well, they're having it hard enough already, and Gallente ships don't have the cap for it (*cough* Railguns use more cap than lasers*cough*), so you may have a point.
Now, time for sleep.
-Clipped Wings of LFC
"I believe in the theoretical benevolence, and practical malignity of man."
~William Hazlitt
|
Clipped Wings
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 10:15:00 -
[132]
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Change the 5% cap capacity bonus of the apoc and the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus for lasers.
Yes, because evidently, lasers don't track well enough already?
Seriously, once you've seen a 'geddon pulse down frigates by the handful, you start to wonder what the devs were smoking when balancing laser tracking.
Fair enough, lasers hit instantly, etc etc, but for the sake of gameplay...seriously, I see people kitting 'Geddons and Apoc for frigate-killing duty...with BS-sized pulses.
Now, compare to the Minmatar in the corner, who now slaps lasers on his Tempest, because he'll do better damage, and actually hit something with them.
Seriously. The last thing lasers is better tracking.
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
That would bring apocs more in line with other ships in terms of tankability. It would also help with weapon balance, since lasers seem to have been balanced with no DoT bonuses in mind, and then a RoF bonus was added to the arma.
The DoT for lasers (Pulses in specific, since 95% of all Amarr ships seem to have pulses fitted) seems rather well-working now...Course, can't say much about megabeams and Tachyons, as I have yet to see people using it after the last change to lasers. Maybe I don't get out enough, but the arguments for using pulses (RoF, tracking and even damage) seem overwhelming.
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Alternatively, change the 5% cap bonus of the apoc to a 5% bonus to armor HP, and change the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus.
hmm...let's see...Might work, although I think it'd just make Apoc even more one-tracked than they are.
Fit pulses, heavy armor tank, medslots: cap rechargers, hey, ho, let's go. Question is if they should have a bonus that'd give them the possibility of more versatility instead? And I've already stated my opinions on the tracking... ;)
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
IMO, those two ship bonuses are causing the majority of the problems with armor/shield tanking balance.
Semi-agreed. The only problem is that Caldari ships are effectively unable to armor tank (and rightly so!), Minmatar ships...well, they're having it hard enough already, and Gallente ships don't have the cap for it (*cough* Railguns use more cap than lasers*cough*), so you may have a point.
Now, time for sleep.
-Clipped Wings of LFC
"I believe in the theoretical benevolence, and practical malignity of man."
~William Hazlitt
|
alphawolf2929
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 10:29:00 -
[133]
good point,i sheild tank because i need low slots for co proc's but my moa has
2000 sheild
1700 armor
1200 structure, shes a ***** too penatrate but doesent do as much damage as id like (4x neutrons 2x heavy missle)
|
alphawolf2929
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 10:29:00 -
[134]
good point,i sheild tank because i need low slots for co proc's but my moa has
2000 sheild
1700 armor
1200 structure, shes a ***** too penatrate but doesent do as much damage as id like (4x neutrons 2x heavy missle)
|
Levin Cavil
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 11:56:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Shield tanking and amrour tanking can only be balanced if ECM becomes hi-slot.
Please explain.
------------------------------
<Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming
|
Levin Cavil
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 11:56:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Shield tanking and amrour tanking can only be balanced if ECM becomes hi-slot.
Please explain.
------------------------------
<Hammerhead> we can't do anything that requires programming
|
mahhy
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 12:03:00 -
[137]
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Change the 5% cap capacity bonus of the apoc and the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus for lasers.
That would bring apocs more in line with other ships in terms of tankability. It would also help with weapon balance, since lasers seem to have been balanced with no DoT bonuses in mind, and then a RoF bonus was added to the arma.
No. The RoF bonus is the ONLY thing that makes the Arma attractive to fly. It has nothing making it worthwhile flying otherwise. Each ship should have it specialities, and the Arma is the Amarr damage dealer. The Apoc has other abilties.
Mega vs Domi is blasters vs. drones, Raven vs Scorp is huge damage vs shields/EW, etc. I don't know the Minnie ships at all.
The Apocs tankability is a different issue and again, I gotta ask why does everyone want to "nerf" crap? Lets give shield boosting a small boost instead.
Blah.
|
mahhy
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 12:03:00 -
[138]
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
Change the 5% cap capacity bonus of the apoc and the 5% RoF bonus of the arma to a 5% tracking bonus for lasers.
That would bring apocs more in line with other ships in terms of tankability. It would also help with weapon balance, since lasers seem to have been balanced with no DoT bonuses in mind, and then a RoF bonus was added to the arma.
No. The RoF bonus is the ONLY thing that makes the Arma attractive to fly. It has nothing making it worthwhile flying otherwise. Each ship should have it specialities, and the Arma is the Amarr damage dealer. The Apoc has other abilties.
Mega vs Domi is blasters vs. drones, Raven vs Scorp is huge damage vs shields/EW, etc. I don't know the Minnie ships at all.
The Apocs tankability is a different issue and again, I gotta ask why does everyone want to "nerf" crap? Lets give shield boosting a small boost instead.
Blah.
|
Bubba1977
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 14:08:00 -
[139]
Edited by: Bubba1977 on 20/11/2004 14:23:00
Bottom line:
Amarrian ships are perfect.
Caldari and Gallente ships need slight tweaking to their tanking abilities.
Minmitar ships are utter crap.
Solution:
LEAVE AMARRIAN SHIPS ALONE!!
Tweak Caldari and Gallente ships a bit.
Fix Minmitar ships.
__________________________________________________
|
Bubba1977
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 14:08:00 -
[140]
Edited by: Bubba1977 on 20/11/2004 14:23:00
Bottom line:
Amarrian ships are perfect.
Caldari and Gallente ships need slight tweaking to their tanking abilities.
Minmitar ships are utter crap.
Solution:
LEAVE AMARRIAN SHIPS ALONE!!
Tweak Caldari and Gallente ships a bit.
Fix Minmitar ships.
__________________________________________________
|
Demangel
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 16:26:00 -
[141]
uneducated guess here...
But maybe giving Caldari in particular, an "immunity" to the 25% loss of shield for MWD usage. Maybe instead, give it a slightly smaller speed boost for using em? Nothing major, just something to still give it a disadvantage, but not one to break em?
OR maybe give the Caldari a few new race bonuses for all shield oriented ships: Say for example: -5% cap need for shield boosting modules per level. And maybe if thats not enough a further -5% duration time for shield boosting modules per level?
This way they keep the penalties, but get compensating bonuses that ONLY apply to them and thier ships, so it doesn't bork everyone else, but gives them a possibly needed boost where they need it?
I'm not even sure it IS needed, as I don't fly em, I fly Gal ships 100%. So all I know is Armor tanking.
I know it works, and know it can suck sometimes too, as someone said, Armor tanking means your closer to death when things go wrong...
In my Rax I often look at those 800+ shields I have with my MWD on, and notice they are low , like say 400 HP's left and think... Hey, thats 400 less than max... If I get jumped right now... Thats 400 less the guy will have to do... Come on damnit... Recharge!
One comment I am in full agreement with, but only if it's done properly so nobody who armor tanks now gets nerfed into uselessness...
Is if Armor repair at least uses some trit, not even a lot, maybe like 1 unit for every 20 HP healed or something. IT would feel more realistic.
But better get, make tanking armor be more like boosting imunities and HP's through the roof... Not repairing.
Repair modules should remain in game, but have some rediculous refresh cycle, like 30 seconds so they are all but useless in combat. Meant to restore you between fights instead. You know?
But thats not going to happen, and maybe, with the way things are ATM with balancing, it would be a very bad idea.
Galaxion > If you drove a car shaped like a thorax women would call you
Demangel > Dude... I would call..
Demangel > wait that sounded g@y I bet.
Galaxion > Just a bit.
|
Demangel
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 16:26:00 -
[142]
uneducated guess here...
But maybe giving Caldari in particular, an "immunity" to the 25% loss of shield for MWD usage. Maybe instead, give it a slightly smaller speed boost for using em? Nothing major, just something to still give it a disadvantage, but not one to break em?
OR maybe give the Caldari a few new race bonuses for all shield oriented ships: Say for example: -5% cap need for shield boosting modules per level. And maybe if thats not enough a further -5% duration time for shield boosting modules per level?
This way they keep the penalties, but get compensating bonuses that ONLY apply to them and thier ships, so it doesn't bork everyone else, but gives them a possibly needed boost where they need it?
I'm not even sure it IS needed, as I don't fly em, I fly Gal ships 100%. So all I know is Armor tanking.
I know it works, and know it can suck sometimes too, as someone said, Armor tanking means your closer to death when things go wrong...
In my Rax I often look at those 800+ shields I have with my MWD on, and notice they are low , like say 400 HP's left and think... Hey, thats 400 less than max... If I get jumped right now... Thats 400 less the guy will have to do... Come on damnit... Recharge!
One comment I am in full agreement with, but only if it's done properly so nobody who armor tanks now gets nerfed into uselessness...
Is if Armor repair at least uses some trit, not even a lot, maybe like 1 unit for every 20 HP healed or something. IT would feel more realistic.
But better get, make tanking armor be more like boosting imunities and HP's through the roof... Not repairing.
Repair modules should remain in game, but have some rediculous refresh cycle, like 30 seconds so they are all but useless in combat. Meant to restore you between fights instead. You know?
But thats not going to happen, and maybe, with the way things are ATM with balancing, it would be a very bad idea.
Galaxion > If you drove a car shaped like a thorax women would call you
Demangel > Dude... I would call..
Demangel > wait that sounded g@y I bet.
Galaxion > Just a bit.
|
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 17:31:00 -
[143]
i'll gonna blame the whole system how tanking works 
currently we have:
 resistance and HP repaired each sec, while the actual amount of HP is "pretty" useless
now shouldnt it be:
resistance and mass amounts of HP
eg. you can not activate your shield booster/armor repairer if you recive any sort of agression... = you can not repair HP during a fight...
eg. give every ship something like 20x their current HPs...
as well as armor platings and shield extenders 10x their current HPs...
fights may take longer... is that bad???
your prey may logs off... this is bad but, can be countered... a ship reciving agression from a player will only try to warp off and will only disappear if it hasnt recived any agression from any players for 2 mins...
sadly it will be easier to run through blockades... screw IJ BMs??? btw we have MWDs (mobile warp disruptors in this case) dont we???
main issue is the balance btw cap useage for offence and defence ... since you wont be able to use your cap directly to boost your HPs. This could be countered so that resistance boosting mods use WAY more cap as compared to today ... to keep the cap
repairers would use the same amount of cap while they would boost considerably less HPs... so it WILL take time to repair your ship... and you may choose to actually use a station to repair your ship...
you can actually dmg a ship and if it hasnt a repairer with him he has to travel home to do repairs since in the next fight he could pop like a frigate...
now atm if you shoot a BS in your cruiser nothing happens... even if you would shoot 1 YEAR at that BS it will still tank the dmg... is this reasonable... on the other hand if your BS does only slightly more dmg as the other BS can tank than the same BS that can tank a cruiser FOREVER will only survive for a few SECS...
your shield has the advantage of recharging itself without the use of a booster while your armor has the advantage of slightly more resistance and less cap need for resistance boosting mods...
some stats:
raven
shield 100000 HP
recharge 10000 secs
armor about 25000 HP
structure 5000 HP
apoc
shield 25000 HP
recharge 10000 secs
armor 100000 HP
structure 5000 HP
the difference is first of all that our cruiser we used above WOULD be able to destroy that BS after some time... even if the target is tanked to hell... of course it would take ages but it will not be invulnerable...
remote repairers: they can NOT be used at a target which recives any sort of agression ... therefor you can NOT remote boost/repair during a fight... ONLY exception should be the support cruiser which has the ability to remote repair a target even if it recives some sort of agression
Greetings Grim |
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2004.11.20 17:31:00 -
[144]
i'll gonna blame the whole system how tanking works
currently we have:
resistance and HP repaired each sec, while the actual amount of HP is "pretty" useless
now shouldnt it be:
resistance and mass amounts of HP
eg. you can not activate your shield booster/armor repairer if you recive any sort of agression... = you can not repair HP during a fight...
eg. give every ship something like 20x their current HPs...
as well as armor platings and shield extenders 10x their current HPs...
fights may take longer... is that bad???
your prey may logs off... this is bad but, can be countered... a ship reciving agression from a player will only try to warp off and will only disappear if it hasnt recived any agression from any players for 2 mins...
sadly it will be easier to run through blockades... screw IJ BMs??? btw we have MWDs (mobile warp disruptors in this case) dont we???
main issue is the balance btw cap useage for offence and defence ... since you wont be able to use your cap directly to boost your HPs. This could be countered so that resistance boosting mods use WAY more cap as compared to today ... to keep the cap
repairers would use the same amount of cap while they would boost considerably less HPs... so it WILL take time to repair your ship... and you may choose to actually use a station to repair your ship...
you can actually dmg a ship and if it hasnt a repairer with him he has to travel home to do repairs since in the next fight he could pop like a frigate...
now atm if you shoot a BS in your cruiser nothing happens... even if you would shoot 1 YEAR at that BS it will still tank the dmg... is this reasonable... on the other hand if your BS does only slightly more dmg as the other BS can tank than the same BS that can tank a cruiser FOREVER will only survive for a few SECS...
your shield has the advantage of recharging itself without the use of a booster while your armor has the advantage of slightly more resistance and less cap need for resistance boosting mods...
some stats:
raven
shield 100000 HP
recharge 10000 secs
armor about 25000 HP
structure 5000 HP
apoc
shield 25000 HP
recharge 10000 secs
armor 100000 HP
structure 5000 HP
the difference is first of all that our cruiser we used above WOULD be able to destroy that BS after some time... even if the target is tanked to hell... of course it would take ages but it will not be invulnerable...
remote repairers: they can NOT be used at a target which recives any sort of agression ... therefor you can NOT remote boost/repair during a fight... ONLY exception should be the support cruiser which has the ability to remote repair a target even if it recives some sort of agression
Greetings Grim |
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 08:37:00 -
[145]
I must agree. The whole concept of shields is SF is to have something that stands between the non repairable hull and the enemy weapon fire.
I cant see that a civilization that is capable of repairing armor would bother to develop shields at all.
I think its too damned late now - perhaps CCP could start making new ships either have an inability to repair armor in space, and thus be shield tanked or nothing, as well as other ships that simply dont have any shield at all - pure armor tanks. Think of the balance starcraft achieved with the protoss and terrans - protoss had shields+armor, terrans had just armor, but could be repaired.
It is too damned late now, but, if I was to go back in time and influence the EVE design, I would make armor unrepairable, except by another ship with a repair gun + a hold full of an "Armor" commodity that gets used up by the repair gun as it sprays new armor onto the damaged ships hull. Shields are the dynamic protection.
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 08:37:00 -
[146]
I must agree. The whole concept of shields is SF is to have something that stands between the non repairable hull and the enemy weapon fire.
I cant see that a civilization that is capable of repairing armor would bother to develop shields at all.
I think its too damned late now - perhaps CCP could start making new ships either have an inability to repair armor in space, and thus be shield tanked or nothing, as well as other ships that simply dont have any shield at all - pure armor tanks. Think of the balance starcraft achieved with the protoss and terrans - protoss had shields+armor, terrans had just armor, but could be repaired.
It is too damned late now, but, if I was to go back in time and influence the EVE design, I would make armor unrepairable, except by another ship with a repair gun + a hold full of an "Armor" commodity that gets used up by the repair gun as it sprays new armor onto the damaged ships hull. Shields are the dynamic protection.
|
Black Lotus
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 10:10:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Hamatitio
I do remember the days actually. Ravens could tank for...
<drum roll please>
5 whole minutes, with the ability to tank 2 ships (maybe 3 if they werent amarr)
Apoc now:
Can tank forever, the only problem is the amount of repairing. Evenso, they can easily tank 3 ships shooting at them.
Sorry man, u may have missed my other post.
I dont want to make u feel like an iddiot.
But u need to learn how to set-up for pvp.
Want a 1vs1? u can fly apoc, see if u can tank me.
Problem here is, everyone expects their ship to be able to do everything and be the best at it.
Armor tanking is by no means uber. Shield tanking is just as good. It is very balanced atm.
And vs people who know wtf they are doing, that apoc that "setup" with a npc setup in a pvp fight, will lose fast to any experienced BS pilot.
Typical Apoc armor tank, which can be run forever, and is a npc setup.
4x cap recharger 2's.
Thermal\kinetic\exp hardners, 2 cap power relays, 2 large armor. (7500 cap hp\181 recharge with maxed skills.)
psss... even with that cap and recharge, i'll still take a raven or tempest into pvp over apoc.
Will die in about 45 seconds to my "PVP" fitted apoc.
It'll die even faster to a "PVP" fitted RAVEN or TEMPEST.
PLS UNDERSTAND THE WORD PVP HERE PEOPLE
So yeah, hammatitio, u want a 1vs1 , u can fly apoc with teh UBER armor tank....  . See if u can tank even 1 of my BS.
Not picking on u ham..
Thing is, people dont seem to understand to fit their ship up for diff uses. (pvp-npc-travel)
Point here is, quit using npc setups in pvp, then u get pwned by any other ship, then people think their ship sucks. It's the pilot that sucks.
ATM things are more balanced then ever with BS pvp.
If anything, Apoc's\Megathrons are on the low-end of the deal.
Tempests\raven's at the top.
|
Black Lotus
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 10:10:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Hamatitio
I do remember the days actually. Ravens could tank for...
<drum roll please>
5 whole minutes, with the ability to tank 2 ships (maybe 3 if they werent amarr)
Apoc now:
Can tank forever, the only problem is the amount of repairing. Evenso, they can easily tank 3 ships shooting at them.
Sorry man, u may have missed my other post.
I dont want to make u feel like an iddiot.
But u need to learn how to set-up for pvp.
Want a 1vs1? u can fly apoc, see if u can tank me.
Problem here is, everyone expects their ship to be able to do everything and be the best at it.
Armor tanking is by no means uber. Shield tanking is just as good. It is very balanced atm.
And vs people who know wtf they are doing, that apoc that "setup" with a npc setup in a pvp fight, will lose fast to any experienced BS pilot.
Typical Apoc armor tank, which can be run forever, and is a npc setup.
4x cap recharger 2's.
Thermal\kinetic\exp hardners, 2 cap power relays, 2 large armor. (7500 cap hp\181 recharge with maxed skills.)
psss... even with that cap and recharge, i'll still take a raven or tempest into pvp over apoc.
Will die in about 45 seconds to my "PVP" fitted apoc.
It'll die even faster to a "PVP" fitted RAVEN or TEMPEST.
PLS UNDERSTAND THE WORD PVP HERE PEOPLE
So yeah, hammatitio, u want a 1vs1 , u can fly apoc with teh UBER armor tank.... . See if u can tank even 1 of my BS.
Not picking on u ham..
Thing is, people dont seem to understand to fit their ship up for diff uses. (pvp-npc-travel)
Point here is, quit using npc setups in pvp, then u get pwned by any other ship, then people think their ship sucks. It's the pilot that sucks.
ATM things are more balanced then ever with BS pvp.
If anything, Apoc's\Megathrons are on the low-end of the deal.
Tempests\raven's at the top.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 10:13:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Levin Cavil
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Shield tanking and amrour tanking can only be balanced if ECM becomes hi-slot.
Please explain.
Ships that shield tank need med-slots and cannot use ECM alongwith that.
Ships that armour tank can use med slots for defensive ecm aswell as fully tank in lo slots. Sure, armour-tankers generally don't have many mid-slots but they still have enough to be pretty dirty.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 10:13:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Levin Cavil
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Shield tanking and amrour tanking can only be balanced if ECM becomes hi-slot.
Please explain.
Ships that shield tank need med-slots and cannot use ECM alongwith that.
Ships that armour tank can use med slots for defensive ecm aswell as fully tank in lo slots. Sure, armour-tankers generally don't have many mid-slots but they still have enough to be pretty dirty.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Beisser
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 11:47:00 -
[151]
the last time i looked at my apoc i needed all my medslots for caprecharge so nope not exactly ecm :)
-----------------------------------------------
|
Beisser
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 11:47:00 -
[152]
the last time i looked at my apoc i needed all my medslots for caprecharge so nope not exactly ecm :)
-----------------------------------------------
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 11:51:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Beisser
the last time i looked at my apoc i needed all my medslots for caprecharge so nope not exactly ecm :)
If you use ECM mods for defense, you may not require that kind of cap recharge though.
Never hurts to deviate from normal lines of setup thinking, does it.........
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 11:51:00 -
[154]
Originally by: Beisser
the last time i looked at my apoc i needed all my medslots for caprecharge so nope not exactly ecm :)
If you use ECM mods for defense, you may not require that kind of cap recharge though.
Never hurts to deviate from normal lines of setup thinking, does it.........
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Gungankllr
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 11:58:00 -
[155]
One thing everyone seems to miss is that when you armor tank, your shield is also recharging on a constant basis, taking some of the damage that would have been meant for your armor.
Shield Tankers don't get that. In fact, nobody I know of mounts an armor repairer on a shieldtank setup, so if you go into armor, your tank failed...
www.hadean.org
|
Gungankllr
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 11:58:00 -
[156]
One thing everyone seems to miss is that when you armor tank, your shield is also recharging on a constant basis, taking some of the damage that would have been meant for your armor.
Shield Tankers don't get that. In fact, nobody I know of mounts an armor repairer on a shieldtank setup, so if you go into armor, your tank failed...
www.hadean.org
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 13:08:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Gungankllr
Shield Tankers don't get that. In fact, nobody I know of mounts an armor repairer on a shieldtank setup, so if you go into armor, your tank failed...
No one has yet prooved that it is possible to get significant amounts of passive shield recharge. The hitpoints per second are tiny compared to the hitpoints per second damage or tanking going on.
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 13:08:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Gungankllr
Shield Tankers don't get that. In fact, nobody I know of mounts an armor repairer on a shieldtank setup, so if you go into armor, your tank failed...
No one has yet prooved that it is possible to get significant amounts of passive shield recharge. The hitpoints per second are tiny compared to the hitpoints per second damage or tanking going on.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 13:20:00 -
[159]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 21/11/2004 13:26:54
Gung; shield tankers do get that, and it makes it less likely for the tank to fail.
The thing is, maybe when the shield goes low a shield tanker thinks "hmm, maybe i should warp out now" But i can tell you when the armour creeps down and the all of a sudden the next shot takes 1/4 of your hull away... let me tell you, thats a focusing experience.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 13:20:00 -
[160]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 21/11/2004 13:26:54
Gung; shield tankers do get that, and it makes it less likely for the tank to fail.
The thing is, maybe when the shield goes low a shield tanker thinks "hmm, maybe i should warp out now" But i can tell you when the armour creeps down and the all of a sudden the next shot takes 1/4 of your hull away... let me tell you, thats a focusing experience.
San.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 14:05:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Pottsey on 21/11/2004 14:18:35
"No one has yet prooved that it is possible to get significant amounts of passive shield recharge. The hitpoints per second are tiny compared to the hitpoints per second damage or tanking going on."
So over 102 shield points per second passive is tiny? You can also mix passive with boosters. 80+ passive sheild points per second with a booster is a nice mix.
80 to 102 points per second is significant.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 14:05:00 -
[162]
Edited by: Pottsey on 21/11/2004 14:18:35
"No one has yet prooved that it is possible to get significant amounts of passive shield recharge. The hitpoints per second are tiny compared to the hitpoints per second damage or tanking going on."
So over 102 shield points per second passive is tiny? You can also mix passive with boosters. 80+ passive sheild points per second with a booster is a nice mix.
80 to 102 points per second is significant.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Xtro 2
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 14:16:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Earthan
Originally by: Xtro 2
Originally by: Earthan
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Megathrons just as good as an apoc at armour tanking to infinity, i can run everything like an apoc can and not run out of cap, just my cap levels at 35% where as the apoc would level at 48-55%, i trained ages for caldari/raven only to find you massivly outperform in a armour tank, balance it and ill go back to my favourate ship.
And dont give me any crap abour repair times, i can run 2x repairers and outlast combat my raven could only handle for <3minutes best with the beat gear and i have all relevant skills at level 5 in engineering.
Armour tanks win, end of story.
Ok then solve me plz this mystery why everybody changes to caldari ship or ammar ship and never to gallente?Hell many persons even change from gallente to ammar.
They move to caldari to use jammers, and i cant stand using jammers if i can help it, thats all caldari is good for, when you see a small caldari fleet you just know your getting webbed/scrammed/jammed en mass.
__________________________________________
Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights. |
Xtro 2
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 14:16:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Earthan
Originally by: Xtro 2
Originally by: Earthan
Mongo you just backed my post , not proved it wrong.
Its waht i was saying its because of the supreme capacitator and lasers on ammar ships.
The megathron wich also in term of slots can armour tank very good isnt hot at all hmm?( havent haerd one " this tmpest suck gonna buy a mega" often" this mega sucks time for apoc")
Its because not armour tanking makes ammar ships hot but supreme cap and lasers...
Megathrons just as good as an apoc at armour tanking to infinity, i can run everything like an apoc can and not run out of cap, just my cap levels at 35% where as the apoc would level at 48-55%, i trained ages for caldari/raven only to find you massivly outperform in a armour tank, balance it and ill go back to my favourate ship.
And dont give me any crap abour repair times, i can run 2x repairers and outlast combat my raven could only handle for <3minutes best with the beat gear and i have all relevant skills at level 5 in engineering.
Armour tanks win, end of story.
Ok then solve me plz this mystery why everybody changes to caldari ship or ammar ship and never to gallente?Hell many persons even change from gallente to ammar.
They move to caldari to use jammers, and i cant stand using jammers if i can help it, thats all caldari is good for, when you see a small caldari fleet you just know your getting webbed/scrammed/jammed en mass.
__________________________________________
Hell is nothing more than an office with fluorecent lights. |
GFLTorque
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 14:48:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Black Lotus
Sorry man, u may have missed my other post.
I dont want to make u feel like an iddiot.
But u need to learn how to set-up for pvp.
If anything, Apoc's\Megathrons are on the low-end of the deal.
Tempests\raven's at the top.
I never noticed when he was a m0o member that Ham seemed to struggle with his Indy setups when he wtfpwned ppl from in Indy.
Tempest at the top? Surely you jest? 
4 out of 3 people have trouble with fractions
|
GFLTorque
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 14:48:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Black Lotus
Sorry man, u may have missed my other post.
I dont want to make u feel like an iddiot.
But u need to learn how to set-up for pvp.
If anything, Apoc's\Megathrons are on the low-end of the deal.
Tempests\raven's at the top.
I never noticed when he was a m0o member that Ham seemed to struggle with his Indy setups when he wtfpwned ppl from in Indy.
Tempest at the top? Surely you jest?
4 out of 3 people have trouble with fractions
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 16:00:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Pottsey
Edited by: Pottsey on 21/11/2004 14:18:35
"No one has yet prooved that it is possible to get significant amounts of passive shield recharge. The hitpoints per second are tiny compared to the hitpoints per second damage or tanking going on."
So over 102 shield points per second passive is tiny? You can also mix passive with boosters. 80+ passive sheild points per second with a booster is a nice mix.
80 to 102 points per second is significant.
Haha. Somehow I know you would be pitching up. I still havnt seen the math backing up those claims however. I dount doubt you are getting a lot of shield recharge with your setup - I do need to investigate it - but I do recall thinking your build was rather - for my purposes - nerfed - quite a lot fo equipment sacrifices had to be made.
Plus, I was responding a claim that an armor tank setup is getting extra hitpoints from the shield recharge - which - given that its an armor tank - is not true.
|
DeFood
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 16:00:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Pottsey
Edited by: Pottsey on 21/11/2004 14:18:35
"No one has yet prooved that it is possible to get significant amounts of passive shield recharge. The hitpoints per second are tiny compared to the hitpoints per second damage or tanking going on."
So over 102 shield points per second passive is tiny? You can also mix passive with boosters. 80+ passive sheild points per second with a booster is a nice mix.
80 to 102 points per second is significant.
Haha. Somehow I know you would be pitching up. I still havnt seen the math backing up those claims however. I dount doubt you are getting a lot of shield recharge with your setup - I do need to investigate it - but I do recall thinking your build was rather - for my purposes - nerfed - quite a lot fo equipment sacrifices had to be made.
Plus, I was responding a claim that an armor tank setup is getting extra hitpoints from the shield recharge - which - given that its an armor tank - is not true.
|
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 16:29:00 -
[169]
ôstill havnt seen the math backing up those claims however.ö
The math is shield cap / shield recharge * 2.4 = shield points per second.
Not 100% convinced that 2.4 is correct but its around about that.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Pottsey
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 16:29:00 -
[170]
ôstill havnt seen the math backing up those claims however.ö
The math is shield cap / shield recharge * 2.4 = shield points per second.
Not 100% convinced that 2.4 is correct but its around about that.
_________________________________________________
Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source. |
Baggam
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 16:37:00 -
[171]
Personally, I think they should just reduce the Armor tank to the level at which you can Shield tank.
Make top end ships a bit weaker... and the game more fun. IMHO
|
Baggam
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 16:37:00 -
[172]
Personally, I think they should just reduce the Armor tank to the level at which you can Shield tank.
Make top end ships a bit weaker... and the game more fun. IMHO
|
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 19:47:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôstill havnt seen the math backing up those claims however.ö
The math is shield cap / shield recharge * 2.4 = shield points per second.
Not 100% convinced that 2.4 is correct but its around about that.
its * 2.5...
btw a armor tank can easily get up to 128 hp/each sec with over 60% in every resistance ... thats with 2x large accos now add another medium tech 2 repairer
however... as I already said above... I dont like the WHOLE tanking system... you get either ganked in a few secs or tank your foe forever there is not something like a close fight ... cuz most setups are sustaining... and if you do not more dot than he can tank you are actually shooting him for nothing... he will never ever die...
tanking currently
resistance and HP/secs while your total HP amount is pretty much useless
my way of doing it:
resistance and mass HP while you can NOT repair during a fight
Greetings Grim |
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 19:47:00 -
[174]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôstill havnt seen the math backing up those claims however.ö
The math is shield cap / shield recharge * 2.4 = shield points per second.
Not 100% convinced that 2.4 is correct but its around about that.
its * 2.5...
btw a armor tank can easily get up to 128 hp/each sec with over 60% in every resistance ... thats with 2x large accos now add another medium tech 2 repairer
however... as I already said above... I dont like the WHOLE tanking system... you get either ganked in a few secs or tank your foe forever there is not something like a close fight ... cuz most setups are sustaining... and if you do not more dot than he can tank you are actually shooting him for nothing... he will never ever die...
tanking currently
resistance and HP/secs while your total HP amount is pretty much useless
my way of doing it:
resistance and mass HP while you can NOT repair during a fight
Greetings Grim |
DJTheBaron
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 20:02:00 -
[175]
Personally i would like to know when ccp effectivley break soemthing they do not fix it in a timley mannor
projectiles, missiles, hitpoint regeneration, etc
many people do not want to, or will not wait months for their time trained setups to be fixed, there are people with months in gunnary and months of training for duel drived ships, then ccp decide it is wrong and "fix it", or break it and dont fix it again for some time
__________________________________________________
Scum, your all scum. |
DJTheBaron
|
Posted - 2004.11.21 20:02:00 -
[176]
Personally i would like to know when ccp effectivley break soemthing they do not fix it in a timley mannor
projectiles, missiles, hitpoint regeneration, etc
many people do not want to, or will not wait months for their time trained setups to be fixed, there are people with months in gunnary and months of training for duel drived ships, then ccp decide it is wrong and "fix it", or break it and dont fix it again for some time
__________________________________________________
Scum, your all scum. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |