| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
   |
Posted - 2010.03.19 00:34:00 -
[1]
Currently, weapon damage and ROF rigs take about 2x calibration points than all other "important" rigs.
Considering that both damage and rof rigs are stacking penalized with ship damage mods, is there any reason for their calibration requirement to be this high?
I have never seen any good reason for it and attribute this design flaw to "damage-phobia" that CCP seems to be suffering from. If it is a real condition then they should seek therapy, but somehow find the strength to admit they were wrong and overcome their fears by fixing the issue. |
Ophelia Ursus
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 04:39:00 -
[2]
Supported, this is one of my pet peeves. Maybe cut the calibration of the T1 rigs to 150 and the T2s to 225. |
Avatoin
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 04:45:00 -
[3]
Not Supported.
Damage RIGs are fine. They aren't meant to be an OMGWTF I can gank with my BC and 2k DPS. They can replace your damage mods, thus leaving you with low slots for other important things. They calibration points are high because they can be so effective in the right hands. Learn how to fit a ship other than, MAXIMIZE RAW DAMAGE. |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 05:06:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 19/03/2010 05:10:49
 Originally by: Avatoin
Not Supported.
Damage RIGs are fine. They aren't meant to be an OMGWTF I can gank with my BC and 2k DPS. They can replace your damage mods, thus leaving you with low slots for other important things. They calibration points are high because they can be so effective in the right hands. Learn how to fit a ship other than, MAXIMIZE RAW DAMAGE.
As it is now, the shield extender and armor buffer rigs are about 10x more valuable in PvP situation that a damage rigs.
Just 3 cheap buffer rigs are equivalent to a full grade Slave set. While it would take 2 damage rigs to achieve equivalent of 1 damage mod.
If you are seriously concerned about rig balance in PvP, and you are on the conservative side about how powerful they should be - you should also support changing buffer rigs to have same requirements as damage rigs. Am I correct? |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 06:27:00 -
[5]
Reducing them to 150 (50+ more than the 'utility' weapon rigs) would be near ideal.
Allows blowing two rigs in place of a damage mod and still have calibration for range, tracking etc. Especially potent on small hulls and hulls with limited 'spare' low slots.
If buffer module calibration is upped by 50 it still conveniently prevents faction hulls from being able to use 2 dmg + buffer rigs.
Buffer rigs really need to be looked at as well, way too good for their meagre cost, but not relevant to this thread unless title is changed  |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 14:39:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 19/03/2010 14:40:11
Never had a problem here... but then I tend to fit my ships differently... fail fits perhaps... but never encountered an issue with a short fall in calibration points.
Perhaps you should start posting your fits to prove your case... |
adriaans
Ankaa.
Nair Al-Zaurak
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 14:44:00 -
[7]
agree'ing on this. |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 16:42:00 -
[8]
Rarely see a reason to put a damage rig in. Regardless of the calibration points.
|
Ogogov
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 16:54:00 -
[9]
It strikes me that giving damage rigs a boost like this would serve to further make active tanking more obsolete, not supported. |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp.
Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 17:20:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Ogogov
It strikes me that giving damage rigs a boost like this would serve to further make active tanking more obsolete, not supported.
It's quite the opposite, actually.
Right now PvP setups are dominated by buffer tanking rigs, correct?
By making damage rigs a little more attractive, it reduces the usage of buffer rigs, which in turn increases the power ratio of active tank vs buffer tank. |
|
|
Ogogov
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 20:06:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Originally by: Ogogov
It strikes me that giving damage rigs a boost like this would serve to further make active tanking more obsolete, not supported.
It's quite the opposite, actually.
Right now PvP setups are dominated by buffer tanking rigs, correct?
By making damage rigs a little more attractive, it reduces the usage of buffer rigs, which in turn increases the power ratio of active tank vs buffer tank.
I can't think of a non-offensive way to tell you how much that made my head hurt. How would it affect buffer tanking worse than it would affect active tanking?
Buffer tanking is already preferable in any situation beyond small gang warfare where you have high incoming DPS - more than an active tank can handle. The more incoming DPS, the quicker the active tank will be overwhelmed and die.
In other words, this would further increase the need for larger buffers to keep a ship alive long enough for either RR platforms to target and start repping, or for it to find some kind of escape route OR deal enough damage back in a short enough time to live.
Either way, it does nothing to promote active tanks. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 20:45:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Ogogov
Either way, it does nothing to promote active tanks.
Where do you get the active tank tangent from? This is about a perceived imbalance of the fitting requirements of weapon rigs.
Active tanking vs. buffer tanking is an entirely different beast altogether with its own multiple proposals floating around. |
Arcane Azmadi
First Flying Wing Inc
Primary.
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 11:17:00 -
[13]
It's hard enough to justify using damage rigs over C3s/tank rigs as it is without making them hard to fit as well. Their power doesn't justify their excessive cost. Supported.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 15:17:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Arcane Azmadi
It's hard enough to justify using damage rigs over C3s/tank rigs as it is without making them hard to fit as well. Their power doesn't justify their excessive cost. Supported.
this man speaks the truth.
Quote:
giving damage rigs a boost like this would serve to further make active tanking more obsolete
Yes, i am grad you realised that more damage hurts tanks. All kinds of them.Equally,.
So active tanking needs adjustment.
|
lookatzebirdie
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 17:02:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Edited by: Ephemeron on 19/03/2010 05:10:49
Originally by: Avatoin
Not Supported.
Damage RIGs are fine. They aren't meant to be an OMGWTF I can gank with my BC and 2k DPS. They can replace your damage mods, thus leaving you with low slots for other important things. They calibration points are high because they can be so effective in the right hands. Learn how to fit a ship other than, MAXIMIZE RAW DAMAGE.
As it is now, the shield extender and armor buffer rigs are about 10x more valuable in PvP situation that a damage rigs.
Just 3 cheap buffer rigs are equivalent to a full grade Slave set. While it would take 2 damage rigs to achieve equivalent of 1 damage mod.
If you are seriously concerned about rig balance in PvP, and you are on the conservative side about how powerful they should be - you should also support changing buffer rigs to have same requirements as damage rigs. Am I correct?
u are coorrect I'd say.
I support this thread, If I can get 3 armor rigs on ship i should also get 3 damage rigs on.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |