EVE Search - [Module Proposal] Energy rerouter, Shield to Propulsion, Shield to Cap

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

[Module Proposal] Energy rerouter, Shield to Propulsion, Shield to Cap

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
GeekAntic	Posted - 2011.01.19 01:05:00 - [1] Hi, i would like to present an idea about Shield Energy Converters. The proposed Medium Modules are: Shield Recharge to Cap Recharge Converter and Shield Recharge to Propulsion Converter Background: If you are armor tanking it is nice to have a shield but it gets down very quick and is actually not needed. Sure its borowed time... Removing the Shield completly by fitting an above mentioned Module may use the 'wasted' shield energy to boost other more useful attributes of a ship. Module attributes: ONLY ONE energy rerouter fittable at time. The shield recharge rate could be seen as 1GJ = 1HP So a module needs to have an efficency classifiing it. For example T1 may have 60% up to 80% and T2 85% So at a actual shield recharge rate of 1,57HP/s (Thorax) results in 0,942 to 1,33 Cap/s The Myrmidon shields might recharge at 2,79 -> 2,3 Cap/s with T2 SRC The Hyperion will transform 3Hp->2,55 Cap/s and so on... A Balanced Propulsion rerouter should make use of the mass of a ship. Big mass less Effect. Fitting it on a frig has a big impact but at the cost of a fairly high amount of hp and vice versa for BS. Let us be honest, everybody should help saving energy
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2011.01.19 01:21:00 - [2] àso, basically, a Cap Power Relay? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Headerman Minmatar Metanoia. Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.01.19 02:29:00 - [3] If this happened, other modules would need to be nerfed.
i5L4NDOF5T4BiLiTY Gallente Bacno Ltd.	Posted - 2011.01.19 02:33:00 - [4] Features and Ideas Discussion, this isnt it.
GeekAntic	Posted - 2011.01.19 10:10:00 - [5] Originally by: i5L4NDOF5T4BiLiTY Features and Ideas Discussion, this isnt it. You are right, i am sorry for misplacing the topic. MOD please move or delete this thread.

CCP StevieSG	Posted - 2011.01.19 10:18:00 - [6] Moved to Features and Ideas from EVE General.

Nisshoku	Posted - 2011.01.19 11:16:00 - [7] yeah, opting to basically remove your shields in favor for some more active armor tanking would be sweet. armor tanking is already weak in comparison, and it doesn't make sense to have that much power routed to your shields that do no good anyway. I'd like a mid slot, that re-routes shield power (basically removes your shield) to your armor tanking, either making it cheaper per repair, or boosting cap regeneration. Then I might actually consider active armor tanking once again :P That's more than unlikely as it stands now.
Emporer Jensen Krull	Posted - 2011.01.19 11:31:00 - [8] This is not Star Trek Online!
Nisshoku	Posted - 2011.01.19 11:34:00 - [9] Originally by: Emporer Jensen Krull This is not Star Trek Online! that's totally true, therefore: armor tanking should also be viable :P
Salpad Caldari Carebears with Attitude	Posted - 2011.01.20 10:20:00 - [10] So one of the proposed modules removes all of the passive shield recharge, in favour of increased cap recharge? Isn't that the wet dream for an active shield tanker? If you're going to fit a shield booster anyway, and run it, you don't need the pitiful passive regen and might as well put it to to good use. -- Salpad
Iam Widdershins Project Nemesis WE FORM VOLTRON	Posted - 2011.01.20 10:47:00 - [11] Originally by: Salpad So one of the proposed modules removes all of the passive shield recharge, in favour of increased cap recharge? Isn't that the wet dream for an active shield tanker? If you're going to fit a shield booster anyway, and run it, you don't need the pitiful passive regen and might as well put it to to good use. Yeah, except that the way he outlined it it produces basically no benefit. That's really not a lot of cap, and saying that any module provides bonuses for free is a lie. It's not free. That's a whole slot on your ship you could've put an actual USEFUL module in.
Nisshoku	Posted - 2011.01.20 12:41:00 - [12] Originally by: Salpad So one of the proposed modules removes all of the passive shield recharge, in favour of increased cap recharge? Isn't that the wet dream for an active shield tanker? If you're going to fit a shield booster anyway, and run it, you don't need the pitiful passive regen and might as well put it to to good use. just removing the passive part is kinda useless tbh. remove the shields all together! then I guess a shield booster wouldn't be happy with it :P
GeekAntic	Posted - 2011.01.26 10:46:00 - [13] Edited by: GeekAntic on 26/01/2011 10:51:30 Originally by: Nisshoku Originally by: Salpad So one of the proposed modules removes all of the passive shield recharge, in favour of increased cap recharge? Isn't that the wet dream for an active shield tanker? If you're going to fit a shield booster anyway, and run it, you don't need the pitiful passive regen and might as well put it to to good use. just removing the passive part is kinda useless tbh. remove the shields all together! then I guess a shield booster wouldn't be happy with it :P I already wrote that the shield should be removed COMPLETLY, but thanks for adding authority to this part of the concept. Originally by: Tippia àso, basically, a Cap Power Relay? Hm, the bonus of the Power Relay is nearly the same as i proposed for the schield converter module. Perhaps the effect is to weak for removing the complete shield. And as proposed it also does not benefit from the stacking bonus of Cap Rechargers... Would it be a better approach to add a certain amount of the shield directly to the capacitor? But what to do with the shields recharge time? Ignoring it completly would result in a totaly overpowerd module. Adding the shield recharge time directly makes the module decrease the average capacitors recharge rate. Perhaps the peak recharge rate would increase? To proof that somebody needs to examine the first derivate of the capacitor recharge formula and compare the maximas. But I really think that the recharge curve will be flatter adding recharge time and energy of the shield... Has somebody an Idea for a balanced formula for that proposed modules?
Iam Widdershins fgtsrfgts amirite	Posted - 2011.02.05 15:54:00 - [14] Originally by: GeekAntic Edited by: GeekAntic on 26/01/2011 10:51:30 Originally by: Nisshoku Originally by: Salpad So one of the proposed modules removes all of the passive shield recharge, in favour of increased cap recharge? Isn't that the wet dream for an active shield tanker? If you're going to fit a shield booster anyway, and run it, you don't need the pitiful passive regen and might as well put it to to good use. just removing the passive part is kinda useless tbh. remove the shields all together! then I guess a shield booster wouldn't be happy with it :P I already wrote that the shield should be removed COMPLETLY, but thanks for adding authority to this part of the concept. Originally by: Tippia àso, basically, a Cap Power Relay? Hm, the bonus of the Power Relay is nearly the same as i proposed for the schield converter module. Perhaps the effect is to weak for removing the complete shield. And as proposed it also does not benefit from the stacking bonus of Cap Rechargers... Would it be a better approach to add a certain amount of the shield directly to the capacitor? But what to do with the shields recharge time? Ignoring it completly would result in a totaly overpowerd module. Adding the shield recharge time directly makes the module decrease the average capacitors recharge rate. Perhaps the peak recharge rate would increase? To proof that somebody needs to examine the first derivate of the capacitor recharge formula and compare the maximas. But I really think that the recharge curve will be flatter adding recharge time and energy of the shield... Has somebody an Idea for a balanced formula for that proposed modules? This can't be balanced really. All sorts of ships have all sorts of wildly varying cap recharge and shield recharge rates. You're asking for two stats that are pretty much completely unrelated to be able to be merged together on any ship; this is guaranteed to be game-breaking.

Pages: [1] :: 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.