EVE Search - Armor plates, are they overpowered?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Armor plates, are they overpowered?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Altai Saker	Posted - 2005.07.19 11:52:00 - [1] I fit a 400 plate on my taranis... I can engage any interceptor in the game without a chance of losing, (bar a jagerbomb style setup) and I have an mwd on. I have to make sacrifices... 2 ions 1 electron.... or 3 electrons and a nos... but really thatÆs not too bad considering just how much I gain. I guess my issue is not so much armor plates, but "oversized" armor plates... and yes I consider the 400 plate a bit big for a ceptor... and a 1600 plate on a thorax is just insane... 5k armor and 8 heavy drones... why not just make the thorax a tier 1 bs? (yes I am taking the **** here it isnÆt that bad but cÆmon what ship of equal size can stand to that) I understand ALOT of people love the oversized armor plate thing and I do to, but looking at setups... if you donÆt fit your ship with an oversized plate... you will lose to a plated setup... theirs no way around it except outranging and that is easily avoided in both examples I gave. So in conclusion you have to remove a setup to promote setup diversityà What I would like to see them do is increase assault frigs base armor or alternatively just increase the PG so that they can fit a 400 plate but a ceptor canÆt. It's late, donÆt flame me too bad.
Rodj Blake	Posted - 2005.07.19 11:59:00 - [2] The problem is that cruisers tend to die very quickly in fights, so people use armour plates to get around this. Using oversized modules is not ideal, but it makes sense until cruisers are beefed up. Dolce et decorum est pro imperator mori
Julien Derida	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:02:00 - [3] I agree. The plate boost was a very silly move on CCPs part. The plate Claw and plate Rax were overpowered before the boost. Now they're stupid. I'm having a lot of fun flying plated inties at the moment, but they make AFs obsolete. That isn't a good thing. ---------------------------------------- Chief Inspector of the Style Police - FRICK
Nafri	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:05:00 - [4] When thy finally give cruisers more then 2k armor/shield HPs it would make sense to limit cruisers to 800mm plates and frigs to 200mm plates. But atm cruisers without plate setup are obsolete
MrRookie	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:07:00 - [5] Pfft the plates/extenders doesnt make the ships bether. A thorax with a plate still doesnt tank bether, it only extends the death when facing equal or biggers ships. The same goes for the other ships _____________________________________________ \o/ I got a siggy... WTB 3x Medium Modulated Pulse Energy Beams http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=139877
TURBOman	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:10:00 - [6] So, u use plated intys now eh altai ? ;) good think to know when i encounter you next time heh
Altai Saker	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:15:00 - [7] Edited by: Altai Saker on 19/07/2005 12:17:31 Originally by: MrRookie Pfft the plates/extenders doesnt make the ships bether. A thorax with a plate still doesnt tank bether, it only extends the death when facing equal or biggers ships. The same goes for the other ships A tank is just about surviving long enough to kill your opponent. All any tank does is "extend death" it just so happens that 100% of the time that extensions overlaps the golden zone of the other ship dying while your at half armor. Turbo: How do you think I manage to live against your taranis and kestrel on me? :P I have lost that setup so many times it cant be a secret how I kit out all you would ever have to do is ask drunkenone turbo :) gf again
Eyeshadow	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:39:00 - [8] Originally by: MrRookie Pfft the plates/extenders doesnt make the ships bether. A thorax with a plate still doesnt tank bether, it only extends the death when facing equal or biggers ships. The same goes for the other ships Sorry but a rax with 1600 plate now is seriously tough. I went 1on1 with 1 in my deimos (which runs a 400mm rolled + heavy ions). The rax was running a 1600 rolled and kin/therm hards + 8 berserkers. I ballsed up the piloting a bit and he got to right at the edge of my falloff but even so, it took me ages to kill him and his drones were ripping me up big style. I really dont understand why they changed plates so drastically. Yes the 1600 plate is tasty for BS but it just makes cruisers a little overpowered. 5/6k armor on a thorax is a bit crap considering it can still use its 8 heavy drones. And i wont even start on 400mm plates ceptors. They are now the standard setup and it sux. Please up the fitting reqs to make 400/800 cruiser size and 1600 BS size and leave the 50/100/200 for frigs. Then it will be a little better. atm, its a bit sorta meh Forums: Sharks * MC
MrRookie	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:56:00 - [9] The thorax pilot was lucky you didnt take his drones first. I asume you were using blasters so you should have killed them first. How much harm could he cause you withouth the drones and mostlikely fitted small neutron blasters? Besides gank is more silly than 5k armor on the cruisers, and as long 8 heatsink 2s is the most popular modules for the Armageddon this is the best counter we get :) _____________________________________________ \o/ I got a siggy... WTB 3x Medium Modulated Pulse Energy Beams http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=139877
Brisi	Posted - 2005.07.19 12:57:00 - [10] Originally by: Eyeshadow Originally by: MrRookie Pfft the plates/extenders doesnt make the ships bether. A thorax with a plate still doesnt tank bether, it only extends the death when facing equal or biggers ships. The same goes for the other ships Sorry but a rax with 1600 plate now is seriously tough. I went 1on1 with 1 in my deimos (which runs a 400mm rolled + heavy ions). The rax was running a 1600 rolled and kin/therm hards + 8 berserkers. I ballsed up the piloting a bit and he got to right at the edge of my falloff but even so, it took me ages to kill him and his drones were ripping me up big style. I really dont understand why they changed plates so drastically. Yes the 1600 plate is tasty for BS but it just makes cruisers a little overpowered. 5/6k armor on a thorax is a bit crap considering it can still use its 8 heavy drones. And i wont even start on 400mm plates ceptors. They are now the standard setup and it sux. Please up the fitting reqs to make 400/800 cruiser size and 1600 BS size and leave the 50/100/200 for frigs. Then it will be a little better. atm, its a bit sorta meh I agree, also putting a 1600mm rolled tungsten plate on a Sacrilege makes for an almost inpenetrable tank.

Avalon Beholder	Posted - 2005.07.19 13:11:00 - [11] a HAC with a 1600 plate will 90% of the tiem beat a HAC without one.
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2005.07.19 13:13:00 - [12] Plates can still be countered, for example I reckon a 800mm + NOS rax shud easily beat a 1600mm rax. I dont know if it'd work for inties tho. Also another thing... 1600 is insane in a thorax but dont forget about the other cruisers, its quite balanced for those since it forces you to lay small guns in highslots... dont blame plates, blame the rax with his insane drone bay and as someone pointed out earlier, try to go for the drones first... its kind of the only way - Gob
Antic	Posted - 2005.07.19 13:27:00 - [13] the 400 plate inty is a problem yes.
theRaptor	Posted - 2005.07.19 20:51:00 - [14] A medium range inty should be able to beat a plate close range inty any day of the week. With the agility nerf you shouldn't be able to catch the medium range Inty with a web. Why don't people try to adapt first before whining nerf to everything new? Maybe they need to up the agility penalty on the plates to 15% - 20%. That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die. -- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure.
slapp	Posted - 2005.07.19 21:10:00 - [15] I like my 200mm rolled tungsten plate + armor repper just fine. Add an AB, Web and !SECRET ENGRIDIENT! and you wtfpwn destroyers/other ceptors (pre-patch, the secret engridient was target painter II. Ceptor with the size of the moon 4tw) __________________________________________________ CAREBEAR, n. A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in CCP affairs has always been dominant and controling.
Vigilant	Posted - 2005.07.19 21:14:00 - [16] Originally by: theRaptor A medium range inty should be able to beat a plate close range inty any day of the week. With the agility nerf you shouldn't be able to catch the medium range Inty with a web. Why don't people try to adapt first before whining nerf to everything new? Maybe they need to up the agility penalty on the plates to 15% - 20%. They don't like loosing I guess.... Any setup, in an MMO is always abused... Just how these kinda of games work... then either the maker (i.e. CCP) decides to NERF it or leaves it be, cause they don't see a issue ...
Noriath	Posted - 2005.07.19 21:48:00 - [17] Instead of just increasing HP of plates they should have combined passive resistance mods and plates into ne item and added a 3200 plate that uses up 2000 grid.
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:34:00 - [18] Edited by: DrunkenOne on 19/07/2005 22:34:45 Unbelievably overpowered, but I think that actually might be a good thing in some cases, as it makes tank better than gank (and more time fighting is always better than less time fighting). Although there is definatly a problem when a cruiser fitting BS armor + frig guns beats a cruiser fitting cruiser armor and cruiser guns. And this ISNT just on the rax, its on a plate rupture, a plate maller, plate vexor, etc. And yeah plate intys are just insane.
Isonkon Serikain	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:34:00 - [19] Yeah, change the mass of the plates so that an inti trying to fit a 400mm plate would take ages (as in several minutes) to accelerate to full speed... Adding some Newtonian realism to this... Or increasing the PG requs of the plate would be nice as well... I think the plate boost and other riduculous imbalances (like the grid requirements of small autocannons, you can slap them on for free, pretty much) allow for crazy setups like the famed plated claws that can take out assault frigates. This should not be.
theRaptor	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:39:00 - [20] Originally by: Vigilant Originally by: theRaptor A medium range inty should be able to beat a plate close range inty any day of the week. With the agility nerf you shouldn't be able to catch the medium range Inty with a web. Why don't people try to adapt first before whining nerf to everything new? Maybe they need to up the agility penalty on the plates to 15% - 20%. They don't like loosing I guess.... Any setup, in an MMO is always abused... Just how these kinda of games work... then either the maker (i.e. CCP) decides to NERF it or leaves it be, cause they don't see a issue ... The thing that annoys me is not putting any thought into how these extreme setups can be beaten. Its like whining about how uber drones are when you haven't even thought to try and shoot them. The fact is that everyone I know who flies minnie ceptors has been using 400mm plates forever, and winning nearly all 1 on 1's. Yet suddenly now its a problem? The only real problem is that frigates can get around 2/3's extra grid through the use of MAPC's. Other classes of ship have to gimp their turrets to fit oversized plates. But if CCP take out MAPC's then it gimps a lot of non-abusive frigate fittings. There are three solutions. 1) Reduce the plates HP. 2) Increase the agility penalty (favoured by me). 3) Restrict MAPC's (say to one per ship). Really I don't see a major problem with how they are now. But gimping the agility does make sense to me if they need to fix the "problem". It wouldn't affect armoured close range killers that are attacking dessies or cruisers, but it would make them vulnerable to medium range frigs. That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die. -- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure.

Selim	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:42:00 - [21] Edited by: Selim on 19/07/2005 22:43:06 Originally by: Isonkon Serikain Yeah, change the mass of the plates so that an inti trying to fit a 400mm plate would take ages (as in several minutes) to accelerate to full speed... Adding some Newtonian realism to this... Or increasing the PG requs of the plate would be nice as well... I think the plate boost and other riduculous imbalances (like the grid requirements of small autocannons, you can slap them on for free, pretty much) allow for crazy setups like the famed plated claws that can take out assault frigates. This should not be. Autocannons are supposed to be easy to fit. As for plates, I think they should give a mass increase. 250,000 for 400mm, 2.5m for 800, and 25m for 1600mm. 125,000 for 200mm, 75,000 for 100mm, and uh... 50mm are useless. Or something like those values, no more than that though.
theRaptor	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:43:00 - [22] Originally by: DrunkenOne Although there is definatly a problem when a cruiser fitting BS armor + frig guns beats a cruiser fitting cruiser armor and cruiser guns. And this ISNT just on the rax, its on a plate rupture, a plate maller, plate vexor, etc. Yes boost cruiser guns. That is the real reason people get away with using 1600 plates and frig guns, because cruiser guns suck. That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die. -- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure.
Blind Fear	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:49:00 - [23] Plate cruisers (especially thoraxes and mallers) make non-plate cruisers obsolete. Its less of a problem on intys because they are ships that rely on speed to get in range, and losing speed does open room for counters.
Zentarion	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:54:00 - [24] Edited by: Zentarion on 19/07/2005 22:57:10 Just let every plate increase the mass of a ship by a fixed amount for the platesize. If a 1600mm plate added 10.000.000 kg to a 12.000.000 kg thorax it would decrease it mobility by alot. But the same plate on a battleship with 100.000.000 kg mass would mean a lot more. This could even replace the speed penalty?. If we did this, any oversized plate would carry a large disadvantage. Thats at least my idea to solving the problem. Edit just saw it was suggested before me - so I cant really take credit for it anyways...... still a good idea though.
Meridius	Posted - 2005.07.19 22:57:00 - [25] Originally by: theRaptor Yes boost cruiser guns. That is the real reason people get away with using 1600 plates and frig guns, because cruiser guns suck. The guns are fine in terms of damage/rof. Fitting can be tweaked here and there... The way cruisers are designed is the main problem. They are much harder to fit relative to battleships. ________________________________________________________
Sadist	Posted - 2005.07.19 23:10:00 - [26] Non-plate cruisers? To my knowledge just about any cruiser, except maybe some caldari can fit plates, and if they can't they fit shield extenders. This is a solution to make cruisers not totally suck, a half-arsed solution like most of the things, but still a solution. --------------- Originally by: Dark Shikari "One Trit to rule them all, One Trit to find them, One Trit to bring them all, and in the veldspar bind them"
Isonkon Serikain	Posted - 2005.07.19 23:13:00 - [27] Originally by: Selim Edited by: Selim on 19/07/2005 22:43:06 Autocannons are supposed to be easy to fit. As for plates, I think they should give a mass increase. 250,000 for 400mm, 2.5m for 800, and 25m for 1600mm. 125,000 for 200mm, 75,000 for 100mm, and uh... 50mm are useless. Or something like those values, no more than that though. Why should autocannons be this insanely easy to fit? 4 grid for a gun that puts out almost as much damage than a gun that requires twice the amount of grid is ridiculous... you take a look at the fittings of cruiser or battleship sized autocannons, and their fitting requirements are more balanced.
theRaptor	Posted - 2005.07.19 23:16:00 - [28] Originally by: Meridius The guns are fine in terms of damage/rof. Fitting can be tweaked here and there... The way cruisers are designed is the main problem. They are much harder to fit relative to battleships. Yeah but thats the problem. You have to gimp them so much to fit non-named good guns. The top tier cruiser guns are fitted so rarely because you can't even fit a non-plate tank with them normally. That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die. -- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure.
Angelus X	Posted - 2005.07.19 23:22:00 - [29] Edited by: Angelus X on 19/07/2005 23:23:24 Edited by: Angelus X on 19/07/2005 23:22:51 Originally by: Altai Saker I fit a 400 plate on my taranis... I can engage any interceptor in the game without a chance of losing.... .....What I would like to see them do is increase assault frigs base armor or alternatively just increase the PG so that they can fit a 400 plate but a ceptor canÆt. Not saying your points are invalid, they certainly ain't, but.. eh? You sure there isn't something else to do with plates your upset about?
Killer Dragon	Posted - 2005.07.19 23:26:00 - [30] God, more and more *****ing and wantting more nurfs. Just Deal with what u got now. If u cant find a way to kill a thorax with a 1600mm plate. Then get a BS. Work around it insted of "OMG I cant beat this. This shuldnt be abile to be fitted on this SHip. NURF IT. Its to strong. NURF NURF NURF" Thats all i see in these forums now.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: 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.