| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rigel Vex
Providence Directorate
2
   |
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:05:00 -
[31] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:Quote:How is there "skill" in pressing ALT-F1? (or F1, depending on where you place the module in your HUD) Timing your boosts to extract the maximum effectiveness from your ASB is non-trivial. If you just run it until it's dry, you're going to waste a lot of 'virtual' ehp.
^ this. |
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:07:00 -
[32] - Quote
You can read the same "timing" argument on the WoW forums concerning Paladin bubble.
Okay, so if you don't time your ASB a certain way you'll be less OP. My heart bleeds.
Rabble Rabble!! |
Dynast
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:13:00 -
[33] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:You can read the same "timing" argument on the WoW forums concerning Paladin bubble.
Okay, so if you don't time your ASB a certain way you'll be less OP. My heart bleeds.
If you read the wow forums, you should probably stick complaining about how underpowered your Blood Elf Prostitute is on the wow forums. |
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:17:00 -
[34] - Quote
Dynast wrote:Xuixien wrote:You can read the same "timing" argument on the WoW forums concerning Paladin bubble.
Okay, so if you don't time your ASB a certain way you'll be less OP. My heart bleeds. If you read the wow forums, you should probably stick complaining about how underpowered your Blood Elf Prostitute is on the wow forums.
Okay, I've read this about 7 times now and I still can't figure out what you're trying to say. I feel like the sentence is missing a word or two that would complete the puzzle.
Rabble Rabble!! |
Dynast
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:32:00 -
[35] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:Dynast wrote:Xuixien wrote:You can read the same "timing" argument on the WoW forums concerning Paladin bubble.
Okay, so if you don't time your ASB a certain way you'll be less OP. My heart bleeds. If you read the wow forums, you should probably stick complaining about how underpowered your Blood Elf Prostitute is on the wow forums. Okay, I've read this about 7 times now and I still can't figure out what you're trying to say. I feel like the sentence is missing a word or two that would complete the puzzle.
The implied meaning is that WoW is crap and you should know better than use it as a reference, as admitting you follow it suggests that you, yourself, are crap. |
Rigel Vex
Providence Directorate
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:44:00 -
[36] - Quote
Dynast wrote:
The implied meaning is that WoW is crap and you should know better than use it as a reference, as admitting you follow it suggests that you, yourself, are crap.
WoW is not crap! ...It's just for 14 year olds. |
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 00:57:00 -
[37] - Quote
Dynast wrote:Xuixien wrote:Dynast wrote:Xuixien wrote:You can read the same "timing" argument on the WoW forums concerning Paladin bubble.
Okay, so if you don't time your ASB a certain way you'll be less OP. My heart bleeds. If you read the wow forums, you should probably stick complaining about how underpowered your Blood Elf Prostitute is on the wow forums. Okay, I've read this about 7 times now and I still can't figure out what you're trying to say. I feel like the sentence is missing a word or two that would complete the puzzle. The implied meaning is that WoW is crap and you should know better than use it as a reference, as admitting you follow it suggests that you, yourself, are crap.
Oh okay, so just trolling then.
Rabble Rabble!! |
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
30
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:08:00 -
[38] - Quote
-oh Iove the forums- |
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
30
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:10:00 -
[39] - Quote
Sheynan wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:Sheynan wrote:The only fix they need is to forbid reloading one booster while another is boosting. So if you decide to reload one of your boosters, all of them go into the 60secs reload time even if they are fully loaded.  You are in favour of a similar change to cap boosters also? You know so they can't run both reppers at once.
?
(I'm just going to leave a simple question mark here because I have no idea what you mean, are you speaking of normal cap boosters and about what kind of reppers ?)
The only thing I wanted to adress was the possibility of perma-tanking with multiple ASBs. Which is a role of traditional shield boosters and not ASBs and thus should be eliminated.
There should always be a "reload timeframe" where no ASBs are running and the ship is ****** if the opponent is stil alive and shooting.
|
Pinky Feldman
Gank Bangers
Moar Tears
232
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:19:00 -
[40] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:Pinky Feldman wrote:Elvis Fett wrote:For me the problem with the ASB is it makes normal shield boosters totally irrelevant. Currently the ASB reps about 60% more shield than a normal T2 shield booster. That is something I just don't understand, it seems backwards. If the ASB and normal shield booster both gave the same amount of shield, the ASB would still be superior. With a normal shield booster you usually need a cap battery in one of your mid slots to run it, with the ASB that cap battery is not necessary giving you an extra mid slot for more tank. The ASB is also neut proof, which is a pretty big deal in both pvp and pve. Actually I have heard a couple people claim to be running lvl 5 missions in active shield tanked ships with ASBs. I am too scared to lose a BS PvE'ing to try for myself, but it seems plasuible
Instead of nerfing the ASB into the ground, i rather see normal shield boosters get a big buff. Or possibly just switch the two's shield repping amount so the normal SB reps 60% more shield as the ASB. Either way large fleets are still going to buffer tank because they have logi. Increasing the effectiveness of active tanking just gives smaller gangs a better chance of engaging a larger gang and coming out on top. Overall I like the idea of the ASB, I just don't like seeing it being the only effective way of active tanking for PvP. Normal shield boosters were totally irrelevant beforehand unless you wanted to use boosters, links, and a faction/deadspace booster. And even with all that, theres a good chance you'd still probably die in a fire to a single neuting ship before you could kill it. The issue isn't that ASBs are overpowered, the issue is that active shield tanking beforehand was hilariously underpowered and now active shield tanking finally has some relevance. Because armor reps don't need cap.
Ships that Armor tank generally tend to have utility mids so you can fit dual cap boosters of appropriate size without any problem in addition to a prop mod and two tackle mods.
Try doing that on a shield ship and you'll quickly see why active shield tanking has been underpowered for so long.
The moar you cry the less you pee |
|
|
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
71
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:23:00 -
[41] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:You can read the same "timing" argument on the WoW forums concerning Paladin bubble.
Okay, so if you don't time your ASB a certain way you'll be less OP. My heart bleeds.
You haven't actually established the validity of the comparison between 'Paladin bubbles' (whatever those are) and ASBs, so the raising the fact that WoW players defend bubbles using a 'timing' argument is both irrevelant and fallacious. Besides which, good timing is an element of skill in any game where time is a relevant factor.
Moreover, if you don't time your ASB properly, you'll fall on your face and leave your ass flapping in the wind. It's worse than useless, because to fit that ASB you gave up a midslot, which means you're either short on buffer or sacrificed utility in order to have a short-duration high-dps tank. A clever opponent will just stand off until you run out of charges and kill you on your reload. |
Klown Walk
Knysna Grim Reapers
Absolute Darkness
110
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:36:00 -
[42] - Quote
How often did you see active shield tanked ships before the asb? |
Garven Dreis
Kicking Smurfs
The Marmite Collective
64
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:41:00 -
[43] - Quote
Dual Large ASB Ferox's are indeed p cool. It's those dual X-Large ASB Maels that are amazing. It would be interesting to have 3 ASB's per ship, which would allow you, charges permitting, to run a boost constantly.
In Manticore we Trust |
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:48:00 -
[44] - Quote
Pinky Feldman wrote:Xuixien wrote:Pinky Feldman wrote:Elvis Fett wrote:For me the problem with the ASB is it makes normal shield boosters totally irrelevant. Currently the ASB reps about 60% more shield than a normal T2 shield booster. That is something I just don't understand, it seems backwards. If the ASB and normal shield booster both gave the same amount of shield, the ASB would still be superior. With a normal shield booster you usually need a cap battery in one of your mid slots to run it, with the ASB that cap battery is not necessary giving you an extra mid slot for more tank. The ASB is also neut proof, which is a pretty big deal in both pvp and pve. Actually I have heard a couple people claim to be running lvl 5 missions in active shield tanked ships with ASBs. I am too scared to lose a BS PvE'ing to try for myself, but it seems plasuible
Instead of nerfing the ASB into the ground, i rather see normal shield boosters get a big buff. Or possibly just switch the two's shield repping amount so the normal SB reps 60% more shield as the ASB. Either way large fleets are still going to buffer tank because they have logi. Increasing the effectiveness of active tanking just gives smaller gangs a better chance of engaging a larger gang and coming out on top. Overall I like the idea of the ASB, I just don't like seeing it being the only effective way of active tanking for PvP. Normal shield boosters were totally irrelevant beforehand unless you wanted to use boosters, links, and a faction/deadspace booster. And even with all that, theres a good chance you'd still probably die in a fire to a single neuting ship before you could kill it. The issue isn't that ASBs are overpowered, the issue is that active shield tanking beforehand was hilariously underpowered and now active shield tanking finally has some relevance. Because armor reps don't need cap. Ships that Armor tank generally tend to have utility mids so you can fit dual cap boosters of appropriate size without any problem in addition to a prop mod and two tackle mods. Try doing that on a shield ship and you'll quickly see why active shield tanking has been underpowered for so long.
No such thing as dual webs and a nos.
Rabble Rabble!! |
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 01:53:00 -
[45] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:Xuixien wrote:You can read the same "timing" argument on the WoW forums concerning Paladin bubble.
Okay, so if you don't time your ASB a certain way you'll be less OP. My heart bleeds. You haven't actually established the validity of the comparison between 'Paladin bubbles' (whatever those are) and ASBs, so the raising the fact that WoW players defend bubbles using a 'timing' argument is both irrevelant and fallacious. Besides which, good timing is an element of skill in any game where time is a relevant factor. Moreover, if you don't time your ASB properly, you'll fall on your face and leave your ass flapping in the wind. It's worse than useless, because to fit that ASB you gave up a midslot, which means you're either short on buffer or sacrificed utility in order to have a short-duration high-dps tank. A clever opponent will just stand off until you run out of charges and kill you on your reload.
Because in a 1v1 engagement, the amount of DPS most frigates put out compared to the amount of shields regenerated with the ASB makes the frigate with the ASB nigh invulnerable - for a limited time. Which is exactly what a Paladin bubble in WoW is, and you hear the very exact same arguments used to defend it as a game mechanic: "it's okay to have limited invulnerability you have to time it properly".
Not to mention it makes shield ships that were already beefy (Merlins anyone?) virtually indestructible within the time frame of most frigate engagements.
And yeah, a clever opponent will stand off until you're out of charges - by that time you're overheating your prop and disengaging, or the other person has lost the war of attrition (HP) and left, or has no chance - after all, by the time you run out of charges, you still have high shields, because the ASB lets you press "start over" on your side of the HP race.
Rabble Rabble!! |
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 02:07:00 -
[46] - Quote
NOTE My contention isn't that ASB's exist, it's the amount of HP they rep, which needs to be iterated upon.
Rabble Rabble!! |
Dynast
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 02:08:00 -
[47] - Quote
Sheynan wrote:The only thing I wanted to adress was the possibility of perma-tanking with multiple ASBs. Which is a role of traditional shield boosters and not ASBs and thus should be eliminated.
There should always be a "reload timeframe" where no ASBs are running and the ship is ****** if the opponent is stil alive and shooting.
...you can't perma-tank with a mod that requires charges.
And really, the ASB is not more powerful than the other options, namely buffer tanking. You can put a XL on a battlecruiser with 40k EHP and tack on another 25-50k per cycle depending on resists.. provided you make it through the full cycle. Compared to 70-90k buffer tanks on Drakes, Harbs, and the like. Given that the ASB requires you survive the whole cycle to get the full effect of that first cycle, it's not unreasonable that you have the option of another 2-3 cycles, charges permitting. |
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 02:10:00 -
[48] - Quote
edit: posted in wrong thread
Rabble Rabble!! |
Dynast
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
63
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 02:46:00 -
[49] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:1) I never said "perma".
2) I'm specifically referring to frigate level engagements, as indicated by the language of my posts.
Perhaps, but they guy I responded to did.
As for frig engagements, yup the ASB is powerful. It feels a lot like when people first started fiting MSEs to frigs.. it was like, "wtf it isn't supposed to have that much". Engagement parameters changed a bit, ship preferences changed a bit, nd life went on. |
Pinky Feldman
Gank Bangers
Moar Tears
234
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 03:19:00 -
[50] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:Pinky Feldman wrote:Xuixien wrote:Pinky Feldman wrote:Elvis Fett wrote:For me the problem with the ASB is it makes normal shield boosters totally irrelevant. Currently the ASB reps about 60% more shield than a normal T2 shield booster. That is something I just don't understand, it seems backwards. If the ASB and normal shield booster both gave the same amount of shield, the ASB would still be superior. With a normal shield booster you usually need a cap battery in one of your mid slots to run it, with the ASB that cap battery is not necessary giving you an extra mid slot for more tank. The ASB is also neut proof, which is a pretty big deal in both pvp and pve. Actually I have heard a couple people claim to be running lvl 5 missions in active shield tanked ships with ASBs. I am too scared to lose a BS PvE'ing to try for myself, but it seems plasuible
Instead of nerfing the ASB into the ground, i rather see normal shield boosters get a big buff. Or possibly just switch the two's shield repping amount so the normal SB reps 60% more shield as the ASB. Either way large fleets are still going to buffer tank because they have logi. Increasing the effectiveness of active tanking just gives smaller gangs a better chance of engaging a larger gang and coming out on top. Overall I like the idea of the ASB, I just don't like seeing it being the only effective way of active tanking for PvP. Normal shield boosters were totally irrelevant beforehand unless you wanted to use boosters, links, and a faction/deadspace booster. And even with all that, theres a good chance you'd still probably die in a fire to a single neuting ship before you could kill it. The issue isn't that ASBs are overpowered, the issue is that active shield tanking beforehand was hilariously underpowered and now active shield tanking finally has some relevance. Because armor reps don't need cap. Ships that Armor tank generally tend to have utility mids so you can fit dual cap boosters of appropriate size without any problem in addition to a prop mod and two tackle mods. Try doing that on a shield ship and you'll quickly see why active shield tanking has been underpowered for so long. No such thing as dual webs and a nos.
I am now convinced that you don't actually play EVE.
The moar you cry the less you pee |
|
|
Xuixien
Rifterlings
Ushra'Khan
72
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 03:22:00 -
[51] - Quote
Pinky Feldman wrote:
I am now convinced that you don't actually play EVE.
Because insults prove points.
Rabble Rabble!! |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
453
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 04:41:00 -
[52] - Quote
If I am going to fit an active shield booster to my ship - it needs to produce enough reps to justify itself over a similar sized shield extender. Let's take a look.
Harpy with one EM rig on:
Adding a MSE gives you 1302 more shield and a regeneration rate of 45. If instead we add a MASB - we get 1606 injectable shield over 25.5 seconds. The natural shield regeneration rate is only 26 though. (45 - 26 = 19 difference)
25.5 seconds * 19 shield hp = 484.5 shield that the MSE can regenerate in the time it takes you to use the 10 charges on the MASB. 1302 + 484 = 1786 > 1606.
It's pretty damn close. If i do just one more rep on my own cap then it's a justifiable fit. I'm going to have to consider my signature radius, alpha protection, ect in making a final decision.
Eagle with two EM rigs and an Adaptive Invuln II:
LSE II vs. LASB
This one is more in favor of the LASB. Same math style. 3282 + 44.2 * (78 - 35) = 5182 < 5577. If we do one field extender rig plus the em rig i can get that first number up to 5360. It's still fairly close though.
The X-L ASB is where the math totally gets blown away though. There is nothing to compare it to. |
Pinky Feldman
Gank Bangers
Moar Tears
234
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 07:18:00 -
[53] - Quote
Xuixien wrote:Pinky Feldman wrote:
I am now convinced that you don't actually play EVE.
Because insults prove points.
You haven't proved a single point other or really refuted any of my points regarding the issues with active shield tanking other than attempt to make witty one liners that show nothing. The point remains that up until the ASB, active shield tanking was a complete joke and was so ridiculously niche that it was rarely used.
People seem to get upset and complain that something must be OP and needs to be nerfed if it happens to beat them. The fact that the ASB allows active shield tanking to do things it previously couldn't is the entire point of introducing new modules. It still dies terribly in large fleet engagements, heaven forbid, small gang warfare gets a buff.
I've killed tons of ASB fit ships, so i'd say the feature is working intended. Sure a lot of people argue that the ability to run two is unbeatable, but i've killed enough people running dual booster setups that i'd argue it isn't. People just need to understand that matchups that were previously clear cut are now much more different due to the introduction of a new module.
The moar you cry the less you pee |
Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
222
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:08:00 -
[54] - Quote
I would like to have one of the ASB apologists take a look at this and tell me that it isn't overpowered.
http://i.imgur.com/UpO5K.jpg
An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |
Wuxi Wuxilla
The Tuskers
40
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:47:00 -
[55] - Quote
Tanks for a whooping 30secs, has low dps and an em-hole as big as the moon.
No, that isn't overpowered. |
Pinky Feldman
Gank Bangers
Moar Tears
234
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:52:00 -
[56] - Quote
EFT warrior much?
The moar you cry the less you pee |
Lugalzagezi666
46
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:53:00 -
[57] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
25.5 seconds * 19 shield hp = 484.5 shield that the MSE can regenerate in the time it takes you to use the 10 charges on the MASB. 1302 + 484 = 1786 > 1606.
This is true only if your shields are around 33% for the whole 25,5 seconds, actual shield hp regenerated will be much lower in real combat situation. And then there is sig radius penalty for mse to consider (around 20%). |
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
351
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 11:56:00 -
[58] - Quote
also dual rep vengeance can get 350 dps tanked without spending much on c-type centii stuff.
ASB's are very good and its really very nice to see shield tankers making a come back.
Due to number of slots available on BS and their fitting, perhaps the X-L version should be limited to one per ship, but other smaller ships i think should be allowed two.
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy
Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 12:03:00 -
[59] - Quote
Sheynan wrote:Sheynan wrote:Moonlit Raid wrote:Sheynan wrote:The only fix they need is to forbid reloading one booster while another is boosting. So if you decide to reload one of your boosters, all of them go into the 60secs reload time even if they are fully loaded. You are in favour of a similar change to cap boosters also? You know so they can't run both reppers at once. ? (I'm just going to leave a simple question mark here because I have no idea what you mean, are you speaking of normal cap boosters and about what kind of reppers ?) The only thing I wanted to adress was the possibility of perma-tanking with multiple ASBs. Which is a role of traditional shield boosters and not ASBs and thus should be eliminated. There should always be a "reload timeframe" where no ASBs are running and the ship is ****** if the opponent is stil alive and shooting.
Normal cap boosts and armour reppers. the reload on a normal cap boost is pretty short meaning they can easily be run close to permanent, meaning reppers can be run close to permanent. Why should shield reppers suffer a massive wait between reloads when armour tanks not only have an equivalent that reloads much faster but also have a buffer for reloading (the capacitor). |
Lugalzagezi666
46
|
Posted - 2012.07.27 12:03:00 -
[60] - Quote
Dual rep vengeance has to drop web and fit cap booster, that makes it complete ****. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |