Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
203
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 11:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
Recently I took interest in those tanking modules ( never used anything more than one c-type booster before ) and it seems that there are some serious inconsistencies regarding those mods. I'm sure that others have also identified this problem although I haven't seen any threads about it and I'm visiting forums regularly and even if there were some threads long time ago the problem remains.
The core differences between armour reppers and shields boosters are as follows : Reppers - less cap used - more reps given - long cycles - reps at end of cycle
Boosters - more cap used - less reps given - short cycles - reps at beginning of the cycle
Of course there are more differences between armour and shield tanking but they are not really relevant in this specific situation.
Those core concepts are implemented on the level of base modules ( T1 and T2 ) and it works as it should. Deadspace mods however behave differently. Shield boosters have taken over benefits of reppers ( less cap, more reps ) but are also maintaining their inherent advantages. The problems seems to be limited to small and medium modules.
Here are results of my testing :
Relevant skills at 5, no rigs, implants or hull modifiers.
Small mods
- repper/booster base increase in repping effectiveness ( cap stays the same ) repper T1->T2 33% booster T1->T2 30%
increase of repping effectiveness for deadspace mods
......................coreli.......centii......pithi...........gisti T2->C-type.....10%........23%......83%......30% T2->B-type.....20%........35%.....116%......36% T2->A-type.....30%........46%.....153%......90%
capacitor modifiers ( 'minus' meaning reduction of cap needed )
......................coreli.......centii......pithi.......gisti T2->C-type.....0%........12.5%......0%......-45% T2->B-type.....0%........12.5%......0%......-40% T2->A-type.....0%........12.5%......0%......-35%
To put it in a more meaningful form lets see how it all works out when time is taken into account.
time span of test..........18seconds number of SAR reps....4 number of SSB reps....10 modules used in test : SAR : T2, coreli/centii a-type SSB : T2, pithi/gisti a-type
.............................T2sar...T2sb......coreli.....centii.....pithi...............gisti repping amount....320......300.........416.......468.......760.....570 cap used..............160......180.........160........180......160..........117
pithi booster is repping 62% more than centii repper while using 11% less cap gistii booster is repping 21% more than centii repper while using 35% less cap
Medium mods
- repper/booster base increase in repping effectiveness ( cap stays the same ) repper T1->T2 33% booster T1->T2 32%
increase of repping effectiveness for deadspace mods
......................corelum...centum....pithum...........gistum T2->C-type.....10%........23%.......81%..........28% T2->B-type.....20%........35%......115%.........37% T2->A-type.....30%........46%......153%.........88%
capacitor modifiers ( 'minus' meaning reduction of cap needed )
......................corelum...centum....pithum....gistum T2->C-type.....0%..........12.5%.......0%.......-46% T2->B-type.....0%..........12.5%.......0%.......-41% T2->A-type.....0%..........12.5%.......0%.......-36%
And another test :
time span of test..........63 seconds number of SAR reps....7 number of SSB reps....22 modules used in test : SAR : T2, corelum/centum a-type SSB : T2, pithum/gistum a-type
.............................T2sar...T2sb......corelum.....centum.......pithum................gistum repping amount....2240.....1980.........2912........3276.........5016.........3740 cap used..............1120......1188.........1120........1260..........1188.............752
pithum booster is repping 53% more than centum repper while using 5% less cap gistum booster is repping 14% more than centum repper while using 40% less cap
As you can see those boosters are breaking core design concepts of SAR/SSB, what's even worse those differences are beyond extreme. I'm yet to test other modules extensively but it seems that large reppers/boosters are working as they should ( they are conforming to design concepts and in no way seem OP ). My first test on deadspace EANM and Adaptive fields shows that the same inconsistencies can be also observed there but I didn't have the time to run the numbers.
If I didn't fcked up something during my testing ( very unlikely ) then I believe we need to... |
Nestara Aldent
Citimatics
84
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 12:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Yes they aren't balanced. Expect CCP to boost shield tanking even more in the future! |
Melina Lin
Universal Frog
33
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 12:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
So, Tengu selling like crazy, frigate mods collecting premium prizes for years and it just hit you that the mods are a bit op?
Anyway, I agree. There's no nerf bat big enough to sort this craziness out. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
728
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 12:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nestara Aldent wrote:Yes they aren't balanced. Expect CCP to boost shield tanking even more in the future!
I'm quite sure they can perfectly sort out all numbers, take a close look at and eventually bring something unique making this specific tanking a little bit more interesting.
What if they introduce some mod not using cap but cap booster charges and reps huge amounts of shields? Yes please more shield mods and stronger, I still have some trouble making my Megathron have a decent shield tank, I need more mods. brb |
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
203
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 12:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
Melina Lin wrote:So, Tengu selling like crazy, frigate mods collecting premium prizes for years and it just hit you that the mods are a bit op?
I always assumed that those mods are selling like crazy because of ships like Tengu, Loki, Sliepnir and the fact that active shield tanking is generally superior to active armour tanking. I never assumed that the modules themselves are completely out of whack in terms of actual numbers. I never really cared about the stats themselves ( I don't use them myself ). Well that's not entirely true, I do care about one stat and that is selling price. I sell quite a lot of those mods ( especially pithum line ).
Also - EvE players are always whining when something is terribly out of whack and I never saw threads about it. |
Cpt Gobla
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
59
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 13:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Nestara Aldent wrote:Yes they aren't balanced. Expect CCP to boost shield tanking even more in the future! I'm quite sure they can perfectly sort out all numbers, take a close look at and eventually bring something unique making this specific tanking a little bit more interesting. What if they introduce some mod not using cap but cap booster charges and reps huge amounts of shields? Yes please more shield mods and stronger, I still have some trouble making my Megathron have a decent shield tank, I need more mods.
Oooh! I wants me a shield tanked Geddon!
OT: Yup, deadspace shield boosters are silly. It gets even more silly when you realise that ASBs rep more than the best officer boosters.
Granted, the market balances it out somewhat. Especially the Gist Boosters are insanely expensive. But nonetheless it probably could be improved a whole lot. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9501
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 14:49:00 -
[7] - Quote
GǪso why is any of this a problem? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance
1212
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 17:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
That shield tanking is once again ridiculously superiour to armor to an extent that looks like complete oversight by the guys who designed Pithi boosters? That it's one module that adds to the OPness of Tengu? Differences like this affects the whole geography of exploration... you can do better, dear Tipsy!
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
355
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 17:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
deal with it. (GîÉGûá_Gûá)
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |
Roime
Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance
1212
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 18:23:00 -
[10] - Quote
"lol"
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
|
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 19:45:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GǪso why is any of this a problem?
Are you trying to insult your own intelligence or is it just some poor attempt at trolling? Either the case you of all people can do better than that.
My thoughts exactly Well, he stated that he very much likes his Tengu on several occasions so this kind of reaction is to be expected. No one likes when you try to screw over their favourite toys
|
Ashera Yune
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 22:04:00 -
[12] - Quote
Active armor tanking is mostly a joke and is ill suited for PVP, unless you spurge billions on Deadspace, Drugs, and boosters to make it even considered viable.
Active armor tank bonus is found mostly on gallente and is more harmful than helpful, due to significant powergrid requirements and the mandatory cap boosters which reduce the midslots used for tackle.
Active armor tanking makes gallente blaster boats slow and clumsy due to rigs.
Active armor tanking is only good for frigates(not sure now with ASB) and Carriers and Dreads. "Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth."
-áKahlil Gibran |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
730
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 23:42:00 -
[13] - Quote
Ashera Yune wrote:Active armor tanking is only good for frigates
They're still better with ASBs, try it out, difference is just insane.
brb |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9505
|
Posted - 2012.09.15 23:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
Roime wrote:That shield tanking is once again ridiculously superiour to armor to an extent that looks like complete oversight by the guys who designed Pithi boosters? That it's one module that adds to the OPness of Tengu? Differences like this affects the whole geography of exploration... you can do better, dear Tipsy! Shield tanking isn't particularly affected by these modules because they're too rare to be used outside of very specific situations. If the Tengu is overpowered, then the solution is to fix the Tengu (but then, it only overpowers it in that very specific situation, where balance isn't particularly important to begin with and where the Tengu isn't the best ship anyway). The Gǣgeography of explorationGǥ isn't really meant to be balanced to begin withGǪ
So what's the problem?
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote:Are you trying to insult your own intelligence or is it just some poor attempt at trolling? No. I'm asking you a question. I can't help noticing that you couldn't answer it.
So what's the problem?
Ashera Yune wrote:Active armor tanking is mostly a joke and is ill suited for PVP, unless you spurge billions on Deadspace, Drugs, and boosters to make it even considered viable. More accurately, active anything-tanking is ill-suited for PvP unless we're talking about ASBs (and even then, it's still only for rather small engagements), which isn't what's being discussed here. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
356
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 02:31:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tippia wrote: So what's the problem?
i don't see it either.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |
Tomcio FromFarAway
Singularity's Edge
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 06:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Shield tanking isn't particularly affected by these modules because they're too rare to be used outside of very specific situations.
Are you suggesting that all those deadspace fitted, pve Tengus are 'rare'? That's an interesting assessment.
Also - deadspace fitted Tengus, Lokis and even Sliepniers are being actively used in pvp. Of course they are in the minority but that doesn't mean they aren't there.
Tippia wrote: (but then, it only overpowers it in that very specific situation, where balance isn't particularly important to begin with and where the Tengu isn't the best ship anyway).
It is one of the most popular ships and one of the reasons is it's tanking capability provided by extremely OP mods.
Tippia wrote: The Gǣgeography of explorationGǥ isn't really meant to be balanced to begin withGǪ
Actually it should be ( content wise ). That doesn't mean it's profitability shouldn't be influenced by 'demand' factor. However when this demand is a result of the OPness of modules then there is a problem. Those mods wouldn't be as popular ( profitable ) if it wasn't to the fact that they are simply too good when compared to other comparable mods.
nullsec << Caldari/Angel low/hi Isn't that a contradiction of of 'risk vs reward' concept? The concept you are referring to ( and supporting ) quite often in your posts?
Tippia wrote: So what's the problem?
The fact that we have very popular modules, used on very popular ships and that those modules are not only breaking core design decisions but are doing so with extremity then I believe it is a problem. If the differences were minor I would say : "screw it, it's nothing big" but if the differences reach silly levels ( ~150% ) then it is just not right.
|
Gabrielle Lamb
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
30
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 09:12:00 -
[17] - Quote
Yeah, small and medium deadspace boosters are awesome!
Have you seen the T2 versions though? They're so crappy and give such a bad boost to cap ratio nobody ever uses them. The problem isn't the Deadspace versions beeing too good, it's that the T2 versions need a massive buff!
T2 Armor repairers for instance are perfectly usable and solid modules, Deadspace versions are awesome versions of the same modules.
Comparing a Tengu with a Gist Med Shield booster + Boost Amp +C-Type Invuln Field + A-Type EM Ward field to a Proteus with 2x C-Type EANMS, A-Type Explosive and a Deadspace Armor repper, and you'll find the Proteus not only has more EHP but also a higher sustainable tank. |
Gabrielle Lamb
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
30
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 09:16:00 -
[18] - Quote
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote: nullsec << Caldari/Angel low/hi Isn't that a contradiction of of 'risk vs reward' concept? The concept you are referring to ( and supporting ) quite often in your posts?
Simply not true though, the average DED 10 site pays ~2b or so the average DED6 site ~300m and the average DED4 site maybe 50, for DED3 in Gurista space you're lucky if you get an average of 25m or so because only a single good module can even drop. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9510
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 09:54:00 -
[19] - Quote
Tomcio FromFarAway wrote:Are you suggesting that all those deadspace fitted, pve Tengus are 'rare'? No. I'm stating that the modules are rare.
Quote:It is one of the most popular ships and one of the reasons is it's tanking capability provided by extremely OP mods. GǪand it's popular in an area where balance isn't particularly important and where the Tengu isn't the best ship to begin with. Balance is a spectacularly low priority when all you're doing is shooting rats (and if you're shooting something else, these modules are rather behind on the power curve and thus not worth the cost).
Quote:Actually it should be ( content wise ). CCP disagrees. They're very fond of imbalances between different parts of space.
Quote:Those mods wouldn't be as popular ( profitable ) if it wasn't to the fact that they are simply too good when compared to other comparable mods.
nullsec << Caldari/Angel low/hi Isn't that a contradiction of of 'risk vs reward' concept? No, largely because it's not a particularly well-supported claim. The same exploration opportunities exist in null, following the same reward curve, and they take a back-seat to other means of making money. Additionally, since you included lowsec, you already have something that's higher risk for your higher reward.
Quote:The fact that we have very popular modules, used on very popular ships and that those modules are not only breaking core design decisions but are doing so with extremity then I believe it is a problem. GǪand that problem isGǪ? Being popular is not a problem, and the GÇ£core design decisionsGÇ¥ rather sound like something you've made up. Also, even if it did existGǪ so what? We're talking about the very highest end of modules here GÇö breaking out of the mould is rather something you'd expect them to do. It just sounds like you're making a reversed appeal to popularity: everyone likes them, so they must be something badGǪ Yes, they're good modules. So what? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Cpt Gobla
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
60
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 10:16:00 -
[20] - Quote
The problem isn't that these modules simply exist. That's fine. The problem isn't that these modules break the mould. That's fine. The problem isn't that these modules are hugely popular. That's fine.
The problem is that shield boosters are the only high-end module that breaks the mould.
If high-end modules can be expected to break the mould then why aren't there large armor reps with 200 cap cost? Why aren't there A-Type Energized Adaptive Membranes with 50% resists? Why aren't there deadspace MWDs with 1000% speed boosts? Why aren't there officer ECMs with 10+ jam strength?
I mean they're high-end modules that can be expected to break the mould right?
Except they don't. None of them do. Only shield boosters do.
That's what's wrong. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9510
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 10:35:00 -
[21] - Quote
Cpt Gobla wrote:The problem is that shield boosters are the only high-end module that breaks the mould.
If high-end modules can be expected to break the mould then why aren't there large armor reps with 200 cap cost? Why aren't there A-Type Energized Adaptive Membranes with 50% resists? Why aren't there deadspace MWDs with 1000% speed boosts? Why aren't there officer ECMs with 10+ jam strength? GǪand what are the supposed moulds for these modules?
But ok, at least that's a reason. It still leaves the question of GÇ£so what?GÇ¥ That's just a template-matching error, not a balancing problem. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Cpt Gobla
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
60
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 10:44:00 -
[22] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Cpt Gobla wrote:The problem is that shield boosters are the only high-end module that breaks the mould.
If high-end modules can be expected to break the mould then why aren't there large armor reps with 200 cap cost? Why aren't there A-Type Energized Adaptive Membranes with 50% resists? Why aren't there deadspace MWDs with 1000% speed boosts? Why aren't there officer ECMs with 10+ jam strength? GǪand what are the supposed moulds for these modules? But ok, at least that's a reason. It still leaves the question of Gǣso what?Gǥ That's just a template-matching error, not a balancing problem.
Then let's call it a template-matching error, should be even easier to fix.
Simply match the deadspace shield boosters to the template used by every single other deadspace module and we can all be happy and go home.
I mean surely a single playstyle shouldn't profit from what's essentially a typo by one of the devs? |
Nihil Nobilitae
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 10:51:00 -
[23] - Quote
Cpt Gobla wrote: If high-end modules can be expected to break the mould then why aren't there large armor reps with 200 cap cost? Why aren't there A-Type Energized Adaptive Membranes with 50% resists? Why aren't there deadspace MWDs with 1000% speed boosts? Why aren't there officer ECMs with 10+ jam strength?
Cause they're passive, not active. And therefore don't add up with the already immense cap comsumption of active shield tanking.
You can easily run a Large Armor Repairer in a cap stable setup without gimping yourself. The same can't be said for a Large or X-Large Shield Booster. Therefore even battleships have to move down to mediums while supplementing them with a Crystal set just in order to have a sustainable defense. |
Cpt Gobla
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
60
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 11:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nihil Nobilitae wrote:Cpt Gobla wrote: If high-end modules can be expected to break the mould then why aren't there large armor reps with 200 cap cost? Why aren't there A-Type Energized Adaptive Membranes with 50% resists? Why aren't there deadspace MWDs with 1000% speed boosts? Why aren't there officer ECMs with 10+ jam strength?
Cause they're passive, not active. And therefore don't add up with the already immense cap comsumption of active shield tanking. You can easily run a Large Armor Repairer in a cap stable setup without gimping yourself. The same can't be said for a Large or X-Large Shield Booster. Therefore even battleships have to move down to mediums while supplementing them with a Crystal set just in order to have a sustainable defense.
Why would you want to be cap-stable?
Neither my shield tanked nor armour tanked setups are cap-stable, nor do my shield setups use deadspace mods, and they perform perfectly fine.
If I can do it with subpar shield tanking skills and a simple T2 large shield booster then you're really doing it horribly wrong if you need deadspace boosters and crystals.
Not to mention that of all those modules only a single one is actually passive...
I mean passive ECM? Passive MWD? Passive armor reps? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9510
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 11:07:00 -
[25] - Quote
Cpt Gobla wrote:Then let's call it a template-matching error, should be even easier to fix. GǪif a fix is at all needed, which remains to be seen. Again, what's the problem?
As people have pointed out, just comparing the modules doesn't tell us much GÇö they need a context in which they work and need to be compared within that context. Saying that shield boosters are out of whack compared to armour boosters just by comparing the stats is like saying that target painting is a more potent ewar than ECM because it has higher range and lower cap drawGǪ GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
733
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 11:53:00 -
[26] - Quote
Nihil Nobilitae wrote:You can easily run a Large Armor Repairer in a cap stable setup without gimping yourself. The same can't be said for a Large or X-Large Shield Booster. Therefore even battleships have to move down to mediums while supplementing them with a Crystal set just in order to have a sustainable defense.
I strongly recommend you to share your uber Hyperion/Megathron cap stable running 1 single uber dead space LAR fit that isn't a lol PVE setup or an awesome loot pi+¦ata brick alike with mids and rigs wasted by cap recharge mods, even then you can't get anything cap stable unless you are lol fit AB.
Awesome indeed, extremely well balanced.
*returns fit his double XL-ASB sleipnir*
brb |
Cpt Gobla
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
60
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 12:24:00 -
[27] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Cpt Gobla wrote:Then let's call it a template-matching error, should be even easier to fix. GǪif a fix is at all needed, which remains to be seen. Again, what's the problem? As people have pointed out, just comparing the modules doesn't tell us much GÇö they need a context in which they work and need to be compared within that context. Saying that shield boosters are out of whack compared to armour boosters just by comparing the stats is like saying that target painting is a more potent ewar than ECM because it has higher range and lower cap drawGǪ
Oh, well if it isn't a problem then shall we just increase the rep amount and vastly decrease the cap cost of deadspace armour reps? Let's also introduce 10+ jam strength officer ECM and deadspace ABs that go as fast as MWDs.
I mean it'll only be a template-matching error. It won't actually be a problem. Shortly after introducing them their prices will skyrocket meaning they won't be cost effective for PvP, so by the same logic applied to shield boosters they'll be perfectly balanced.
And the OP was about comparing shield boosters and armour reps in a PvE context, where these boosters are most commonly used, showing that shield boosters are vastly superior. From this we can draw two conclusions:
Either it is a problem and thus shield boosters should be reduced in effectiveness. Or it isn't a problem and thus armour reps can be increased to the same effectiveness without any problems and only increase the variety of ships flown in that context.
Either way, there's absolutely no reason for such a disparity between shield boosters and armour reps. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9511
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 12:54:00 -
[28] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:I strongly recommend you to share your uber Hyperion/Megathron cap stable running 1 single uber dead space LAR fit that isn't a lol PVE setup or an awesome loot pi+¦ata brick alike with mids and rigs wasted by cap recharge mods, even then you can't get anything cap stable unless you are lol fit AB.
Awesome indeed, extremely well balanced.
*returns fit his double XL-ASB sleipnir* GǪbut that's the whole thing, isn't it? Of course it'll be a PvE setup because that's what's being discussed. In fact, the only place where this GÇ£imbalanceGÇ¥ exists/ is in PvE, where imbalances don't particularly matter. In PvP, the shield boosters in question simply aren't worth it GÇö even more so now that ASBs have come along.
Cpt Gobla wrote:Oh, well if it isn't a problem then shall we just increase the rep amount and vastly decrease the cap cost of deadspace armour reps? Let's also introduce 10+ jam strength officer ECM and deadspace ABs that go as fast as MWDs. Nice straw man. Too bad that straw man arguments are fallacies.
So, again, what is the problem?
Quote:Either it is a problem and thus shield boosters should be reduced in effectiveness. Or it isn't a problem and thus armour reps can be increased to the same effectiveness without any problems and only increase the variety of ships flown in that context. Except that, as people have been pointing out, the imbalance doesn't really exist once you put the modules into a context and stop comparing them in a complete void just based on their individual stats. There are no ships that are held back from being awesome in PvE just because the high-meta armour reppers don't work like the high-meta shield boosters. Put another wayGǪ
Quote:Either way, there's absolutely no reason for such a disparity between shield boosters and armour reps. GǪwhat disparity? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
Cpt Gobla
No Bullshit Jokers Wild.
61
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 12:56:00 -
[29] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Quote:Either way, there's absolutely no reason for such a disparity between shield boosters and armour reps. GǪwhat disparity?
You forgot the OP already?
Read it again.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
9511
|
Posted - 2012.09.16 13:31:00 -
[30] - Quote
Cpt Gobla wrote:You forgot the OP already? No, but the OP only shows a bunch of context-less comparisons of incomplete numbers. He's making that GÇ£TP is better than ECMGÇ¥ leap of logic mentioned earlier.
So: what disparity? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |