EVE Search - Why are ships that use same size speed boosting mods penalized?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why are ships that use same size speed boosting mods penalized?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:00:00 - [1] I can understand why a cruiser using an oversized ab is penalized. Buy why is a bs that is using a bs sized ab or mwd penalized with additional mass? This makes absolutely no sense...unless CCP just wants to make this game as boring as watching grass grow. --
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:00:00 - [2] I can understand why a cruiser using an oversized ab is penalized. Buy why is a bs that is using a bs sized ab or mwd penalized with additional mass? This makes absolutely no sense...unless CCP just wants to make this game as boring as watching grass grow. --
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:18:00 - [3] My apoc has a mass of 107,500,000. Upon activation of a 100mn tech 2 ab, the mass goes up to 157,500,000. Is this working as intended??? Because if it is, it's a major nerf. --
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:18:00 - [4] My apoc has a mass of 107,500,000. Upon activation of a 100mn tech 2 ab, the mass goes up to 157,500,000. Is this working as intended??? Because if it is, it's a major nerf. --
Sekhen	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:22:00 - [5] Edited by: Sekhen on 18/12/2004 21:23:45 Originally by: StinkFinger My apoc has a mass of 107,500,000. Upon activation of a 100mn tech 2 ab, the mass goes up to 157,500,000. Is this working as intended??? Because if it is, it's a major nerf. Isnt that why the 100MN AB give 150MN thrust? ------------------------------------------------ If there is doubt, there is no doubt. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world dominatio
Sekhen	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:22:00 - [6] Edited by: Sekhen on 18/12/2004 21:23:45 Originally by: StinkFinger My apoc has a mass of 107,500,000. Upon activation of a 100mn tech 2 ab, the mass goes up to 157,500,000. Is this working as intended??? Because if it is, it's a major nerf. Isnt that why the 100MN AB give 150MN thrust? ------------------------------------------------ If there is doubt, there is no doubt. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world dominatio
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:25:00 - [7] Yet the acceleration on a bs is total crap when compared to pre patch. --
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:25:00 - [8] Yet the acceleration on a bs is total crap when compared to pre patch. --
The Chef	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:26:00 - [9] E = M(C^2) as the old saying goes! Although even at 100,000 meters/second the increase is negligable I would go with the bug theory person, and strongly suggest you report it using the CORRECT system (Ie: Bug Reporting on the menu to the left ==================================== EVEkill Visit our homepage
The Chef	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:26:00 - [10] E = M(C^2) as the old saying goes! Although even at 100,000 meters/second the increase is negligable I would go with the bug theory person, and strongly suggest you report it using the CORRECT system (Ie: Bug Reporting on the menu to the left ==================================== EVEkill Visit our homepage
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:30:00 - [11] Edited by: StinkFinger on 18/12/2004 21:30:55 Originally by: The Chef E = M(C^2) as the old saying goes! Although even at 100,000 meters/second the increase is negligable I would go with the bug theory person, and strongly suggest you report it using the CORRECT system (Ie: Bug Reporting on the menu to the left Wrong equation there. F=(Mass)(Acceleration) is what you need to look at. With F being equal, then mass and acceleration has a linear relationship; one goes up, the other goes down proportionaly. --
StinkFinger	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:30:00 - [12] Edited by: StinkFinger on 18/12/2004 21:30:55 Originally by: The Chef E = M(C^2) as the old saying goes! Although even at 100,000 meters/second the increase is negligable I would go with the bug theory person, and strongly suggest you report it using the CORRECT system (Ie: Bug Reporting on the menu to the left Wrong equation there. F=(Mass)(Acceleration) is what you need to look at. With F being equal, then mass and acceleration has a linear relationship; one goes up, the other goes down proportionaly. --
Znaei	Posted - 2004.12.18 21:34:00 - [13] Originally by: StinkFinger Edited by: StinkFinger on 18/12/2004 21:30:55 Originally by: The Chef E = M(C^2) as the old saying goes! Although even at 100,000 meters/second the increase is negligable I would go with the bug theory person, and strongly suggest you report it using the CORRECT system (Ie: Bug Reporting on the menu to the left Do they teach you that in SWA? /me applies for SWA Wrong equation there. F=(Mass)(Acceleration) is what you need to look at. With F being equal, then mass and acceleration has a linear relationship; one goes up, the other goes down proportionaly. 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 - 2004.12.18 21:34:00 - [14] Originally by: StinkFinger Edited by: StinkFinger on 18/12/2004 21:30:55 Originally by: The Chef E = M(C^2) as the old saying goes! Although even at 100,000 meters/second the increase is negligable I would go with the bug theory person, and strongly suggest you report it using the CORRECT system (Ie: Bug Reporting on the menu to the left Do they teach you that in SWA? /me applies for SWA Wrong equation there. F=(Mass)(Acceleration) is what you need to look at. With F being equal, then mass and acceleration has a linear relationship; one goes up, the other goes down proportionaly. 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
F'nog	Posted - 2004.12.18 22:19:00 - [15] If follow F=ma, then with the old system you got .97 m/s/s acceleration with a 100MN AB on an Apoc, but now it's .95 m/s/s, which really sucks. The devs need to redo the code so you can accelerate faster. Otherwise what's the point of getting more speed if you can't actually reach it?
F'nog	Posted - 2004.12.18 22:19:00 - [16] If follow F=ma, then with the old system you got .97 m/s/s acceleration with a 100MN AB on an Apoc, but now it's .95 m/s/s, which really sucks. The devs need to redo the code so you can accelerate faster. Otherwise what's the point of getting more speed if you can't actually reach it?
Johnson McCrae	Posted - 2004.12.19 00:51:00 - [17] The main problem, is when the ship is being given mass for the calculation, its not being given any AGILITY to compensate. Ships of the right size for the module sould be given enough agility to offset the extra mass, while those using oversized receives none. It ain't over till the fat lady falls on ya! [ 2004.10.09 02:50:23 ] (combat) Your 425mm Compressed Coil Gun I perfectly strikes Guardian Sentry, wrecking for 747.3 damage.
Johnson McCrae	Posted - 2004.12.19 00:51:00 - [18] The main problem, is when the ship is being given mass for the calculation, its not being given any AGILITY to compensate. Ships of the right size for the module sould be given enough agility to offset the extra mass, while those using oversized receives none. It ain't over till the fat lady falls on ya! [ 2004.10.09 02:50:23 ] (combat) Your 425mm Compressed Coil Gun I perfectly strikes Guardian Sentry, wrecking for 747.3 damage.
Bubba Fett	Posted - 2004.12.19 12:58:00 - [19] The current system seems reasonable to me. A ship is designed to handle well at it's normal speed. When you add an afterburner you're going to go fast, but not steer well. You're forcing your engine to more than double it's output, of course somethings going to suffer. The added mass is just an easy way for CCP to implement the effect of bad steering with added thrust using the existing game mechanics. Hopefully they'll hide all that stuff behind the scenes one day and make up an RP explaination on why the ship steers bad with extra thrust. Until then, I think the current working of AB's is exactly what they were looking for.
Bubba Fett	Posted - 2004.12.19 12:58:00 - [20] The current system seems reasonable to me. A ship is designed to handle well at it's normal speed. When you add an afterburner you're going to go fast, but not steer well. You're forcing your engine to more than double it's output, of course somethings going to suffer. The added mass is just an easy way for CCP to implement the effect of bad steering with added thrust using the existing game mechanics. Hopefully they'll hide all that stuff behind the scenes one day and make up an RP explaination on why the ship steers bad with extra thrust. Until then, I think the current working of AB's is exactly what they were looking for.
0seeker0	Posted - 2004.12.19 13:02:00 - [21] For my money a mwd should be even faster but slower accel, an ab should be slower speed but faster accel. And yes i know this isnt what seems most proper re; physics :) but i recon it would be nice for the game. Oh btw i dont mean ab should be slower than it is now i mean in relation to MWD as it would be. Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware. Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
0seeker0	Posted - 2004.12.19 13:02:00 - [22] For my money a mwd should be even faster but slower accel, an ab should be slower speed but faster accel. And yes i know this isnt what seems most proper re; physics :) but i recon it would be nice for the game. Oh btw i dont mean ab should be slower than it is now i mean in relation to MWD as it would be. Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware. Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
Dianabolic	Posted - 2004.12.19 13:09:00 - [23] The new propulsion changes have nerfed the hell out of my blastathron
Dianabolic	Posted - 2004.12.19 13:09:00 - [24] The new propulsion changes have nerfed the hell out of my blastathron
DeerHunter GE	Posted - 2004.12.20 08:55:00 - [25] Iam not sure if this thing with the mass is an bug or not. But i feel some kind of pleased with the nerf of MWD's and AB's. What sense does it make to let an BS accellerate and fly like an Cruiser or frig? and Cruisers who hunts frigs with dual AB's and MWD... Don't ask "can i have your stuff" because i'll give it to everybody else than you!
DeerHunter GE	Posted - 2004.12.20 08:55:00 - [26] Iam not sure if this thing with the mass is an bug or not. But i feel some kind of pleased with the nerf of MWD's and AB's. What sense does it make to let an BS accellerate and fly like an Cruiser or frig? and Cruisers who hunts frigs with dual AB's and MWD... Don't ask "can i have your stuff" because i'll give it to everybody else than you!
Rhagnor	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:30:00 - [27] Singularity(Test server) info note says something to the effect that the Propulsion chnages will beupdates as the previous release was bugged. Guess they are still tweaking with it
Rhagnor	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:30:00 - [28] Singularity(Test server) info note says something to the effect that the Propulsion chnages will beupdates as the previous release was bugged. Guess they are still tweaking with it
Ulendar	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:45:00 - [29] Well...from a scientific point of view, When aproaching lighspeed your mass will start increasing infinitly. So doing a microwarp would increase your mass... err whatever :p Originally by: cashman It's time for Eris to get a clue. CCP should make a statement about this. It's the exact same things as what Zombie did, you may not attack in "safe-areas" (empire/within sentry range) without loosing your ship.
Ulendar	Posted - 2004.12.20 11:45:00 - [30] Well...from a scientific point of view, When aproaching lighspeed your mass will start increasing infinitly. So doing a microwarp would increase your mass... err whatever :p Originally by: cashman It's time for Eris to get a clue. CCP should make a statement about this. It's the exact same things as what Zombie did, you may not attack in "safe-areas" (empire/within sentry range) without loosing your ship.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.