Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
663
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Nobody uses the Micro or Small shield extenders. Frigates get a medium, and anything cruiser and above uses large.
I think that with the current buffs to active armour tanking, and presumably more on the way, that it is time that shield tankers had an answer to the 1600mm plate, and I'd also like to propose that the lower sized shield extenders be buffed so they might actually be used. The idea is that Frigates use the micro and smalls, cruisers and BCs use the medium, and BS use the large. Here's my suggestions:
Micro Shield Extender II (slightly worse than 200mm plate) PG/CPU: 1/17 Shield: +550 Sig Radius: +3
Small Shield Extender II (carbon copy of current MSE II, slightly worse than 400mm plate) PG/CPU: 31/34 Shield: +1050 Sig Radius: +7
Medium Shield Extender II (slight nerf on current LSE II, slightly worse than 800mm plate) PG/CPU: 160/46 Shield: +2350 Sig Radius: +23
Large Shield Extender II (slightly worse than the 1600mm plate) PG/CPU: 180/100 Shield: +4700 Sig Radius: +50 |
AGSeeker
Crytek Network
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Nobody uses the Micro or Small shield extenders. Frigates get a medium, and anything cruiser and above uses large.
I think that with the current buffs to active armour tanking, and presumably more on the way, that it is time that shield tankers had an answer to the 1600mm plate, and I'd also like to propose that the lower sized shield extenders be buffed so they might actually be used. The idea is that Frigates use the micro and smalls, cruisers and BCs use the medium, and BS use the large. Here's my suggestions:
Micro Shield Extender II (slightly worse than 200mm plate) PG/CPU: 1/17 Shield: +550 Sig Radius: +3
Small Shield Extender II (carbon copy of current MSE II, slightly worse than 400mm plate) PG/CPU: 31/34 Shield: +1050 Sig Radius: +7
Medium Shield Extender II (slight nerf on current LSE II, slightly worse than 800mm plate) PG/CPU: 160/46 Shield: +2350 Sig Radius: +23
Large Shield Extender II (slightly worse than the 1600mm plate) PG/CPU: 180/100 Shield: +4700 Sig Radius: +50
Well..no. Active Shield tanking is better than active armor tanking (Ancillary shield booster). So its fair enough that armor buffer tanking is supirior to shield buffer tanking. Also shields have a passive regen, where armor has higher overall resists.
|
Inkarr Hashur
Sine Nobilitatis
201
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:35:00 -
[3] - Quote
The existence of modules that no one ever uses is silly though. When was the last time you saw someone with a 200mm plate or a micro shield extender?
Now, the standard of common sense does still apply: If it isn't broken, don't fix it. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
663
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
AGSeeker wrote:Well..no. Active Shield tanking is better than active armor tanking (Ancillary shield booster). So its fair enough that armor buffer tanking is supirior to shield buffer tanking. Also shields have a passive regen, where armor has higher overall resists.
So, you're perfectly happy with buffs to active armour tanking, but not with buffs to buffer shield tanking? Hypocritical much? |
The Renner
Canadian Operations Yulai Federation
16
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
50mm and 100mm plates are useless as well, they need to be made useful/removed along with small extenders.
That large extender buff would be overpowered though. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
663
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
The Renner wrote:50mm and 100mm plates are useless as well, they need to be made useful/removed along with small extenders.
Agreed. Personally I would just remove them. There are already way more sizes of plates than are actually needed.
The Renner wrote:That large extender buff would be overpowered though.
How so? |
AGSeeker
Crytek Network
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:48:00 -
[7] - Quote
Paikis wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Well..no. Active Shield tanking is better than active armor tanking (Ancillary shield booster). So its fair enough that armor buffer tanking is supirior to shield buffer tanking. Also shields have a passive regen, where armor has higher overall resists. So, you're perfectly happy with buffs to active armour tanking, but not with buffs to buffer shield tanking? Hypocritical much?
Largest active shield booster is X-Large, largest active armor repper is large. Largest shield extender is large, largest armor plate is 1600mm (x-large).
So bassicly u want that passive shield tanking is equal passive armor tanking. But active armor tanking is no were near active shield tanking. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2080
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 21:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
Active and buffer tanking are in no way related to each others, and the other properties of buffer tanks balance each others out.
tank vs gank mobility vs midslots
On top of that shield repairs automagically.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
The Renner
Canadian Operations Yulai Federation
16
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 22:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Paikis wrote:The Renner wrote:50mm and 100mm plates are useless as well, they need to be made useful/removed along with small extenders. Agreed. Personally I would just remove them. There are already way more sizes of plates than are actually needed. The Renner wrote:That large extender buff would be overpowered though. How so?
point for point shields > armor (shield regens naturally, reps are applied at the beginning of cycle, invulns > EANMs)
If large extenders were about as good as 1600 plates then subcap armor ships lose another advantage.
|
Trinkets friend
Minmatar-Amarr Man-Boy Love Association
923
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 00:54:00 -
[10] - Quote
The only solution is to remove the 50mm, 100mm plates and the micro and maybe small shield extenders from the game.
200mm plates are used now and then. The objective of fitting a buffer is, of course, to make that buffer as big as possible. You achieve this, often, by foregoing a resist module for an RCU or Micro APC, or rig with Ancillary Current Routers instead of resist rigs, if that is enough to tip you over into fitting a 1600mm vs 800mm, or 400mm vs 200mm (and same for shield). However, sometimes the maths don't work, and you need those smaller plate sizes.
However, in the shield arena, the fitting choice and the way the PG and CPU maths work on every frigate or destroyer goes, and the way the fit becomes more viable with the addition of unbonused TD's or RSD's, you are better off foregoing an MSE for an MASB, and if you can''t fit an MASB, you fit a TD and rethink your fit versus sticking on a Small Shield Extender II which does absolutely nothing for you.
To be honest, small shield extenders and 100mm plates exist only to be fit to megathrons by nubs.
But I also don't support fiddling the shield extender maths in any fashion. They are what they are, they are just named inappropriately, where a large is really a medium, and an XL-ASB is really a Large. So get over it. Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed. http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
|
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
783
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 02:34:00 -
[11] - Quote
Add speed penalty to shield extenders. There, balanced. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1188
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 02:47:00 -
[12] - Quote
Paikis wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Well..no. Active Shield tanking is better than active armor tanking (Ancillary shield booster). So its fair enough that armor buffer tanking is supirior to shield buffer tanking. Also shields have a passive regen, where armor has higher overall resists. So, you're perfectly happy with buffs to active armour tanking, but not with buffs to buffer shield tanking? Hypocritical much?
If by perfectly happy you mean that while buffer and active armor tanking suck compared to shield, but by not as much as before, then I guess yes. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
110
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 02:56:00 -
[13] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Add speed penalty to shield extenders. There, balanced.
I'd actually be open to this idea if it replace sig radius going to crap. Its not like most of the caldari ships I fly will bring home 1st place finishes from quartermile runs on trackday now anyway. |
Taoist Dragon
Bastion of Mad Behaviour
269
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 03:40:00 -
[14] - Quote
Please not another lets make shield and armour tanking the same thread!
the smaller plates 20mm and 100mm are indeed very rarely used but the 200mm plates are used in plenty of frig pvp fits.
and yes the small extender is also very rarely used but it is used....but generally most people fit something else instead.
stop trying to make shield and armour the same. For active or buffer. THEY ARE DIFFERENT! That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
784
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 03:53:00 -
[15] - Quote
Taoist Dragon wrote:Please not another lets make shield and armour tanking the same thread!
the smaller plates 20mm and 100mm are indeed very rarely used but the 200mm plates are used in plenty of frig pvp fits.
and yes the small extender is also very rarely used but it is used....but generally most people fit something else instead.
stop trying to make shield and armour the same. For active or buffer. THEY ARE DIFFERENT!
So flip the penalties, shield gets -speed and armor gets +radius. There, still different. Or do you mean... some people are more different than others. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
110
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 03:55:00 -
[16] - Quote
with the new skills the 200's seem decent. If you splurge for the "cheap" ds ab's its gets you a little more spring in your step it looks like.
SSE....while not popular can be useful. I liked them on bombers. As my main bomber was manticore I ewar fit (ecm, damps, etc) basically if they were ineffective and I could not gtfo....SSE or MSE just be a difference in how long till I'd go boom. In a bad situation that MSE is just making it so the noob with crap weapons support skills has an easier target to hit lol. |
BadAssMcKill
Ghost Headquarters The Ghost Army
125
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 04:22:00 -
[17] - Quote
Practically no one uses 800mm plates on cruisers Starships were meant to fly~ |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
784
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 06:04:00 -
[18] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Practically no one uses plates on cruisers
Fixed that for ya. These days you only get to catch slow cruisers in your dreams. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |
Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics K162
1435
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 07:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
no one uses anything other than 400mm and 1600mm plates either, what's your point? |
Trinkets friend
Minmatar-Amarr Man-Boy Love Association
927
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 07:17:00 -
[20] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote: In a bad situation that MSE is just making it so the noob with crap weapons support skills has an easier target to hit lol.
You really have no idea how little difference in siggnature radius you get from an MSE versus a SSE, and how little that really makes a difference to whether or not a nub hits you. I put it to you, good sir, that you die more often from bad piloting with stealth bombers than from a bad experience on the fitting screen.
Taking submissions for "Trinkets friendly Advice Column" via evemail or private convo in-game. Anonymity sorta guaranteed. http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
|
Cambarus
Aliastra Gallente Federation
264
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 07:29:00 -
[21] - Quote
I count 11 shield tanked ships in eve-kill's top 20 flown this month, and that's only because the cane, loki, thorax and SFI can be tanked either way, and not everyone fits a tank to the manti and hound. By comparison, the only pure armor tankers on that list are the zealot and the oracle.
Clearly shield buffer tanks are in need of a buff. |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
27
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 07:37:00 -
[22] - Quote
Paikis wrote:The Renner wrote:50mm and 100mm plates are useless as well, they need to be made useful/removed along with small extenders. Agreed. Personally I would just remove them. There are already way more sizes of plates than are actually needed. The Renner wrote:That large extender buff would be overpowered though. How so?
You know how Drakes currently can fit 3 Large Shield Extender II if you've got enough skills? That's why, on any BC Armor buffer you use 1x 1600mm plate, to get either 2x damage mods and a hardener or you get 3x damage mods.
We'd need XL-Shield Extenders if anything, but then we'd need a bigger plate, since armor doesn't regen over time as shields do. |
bufnitza calatoare
Nex Angelus. Unclaimed.
69
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:04:00 -
[23] - Quote
Paikis wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Well..no. Active Shield tanking is better than active armor tanking (Ancillary shield booster). So its fair enough that armor buffer tanking is supirior to shield buffer tanking. Also shields have a passive regen, where armor has higher overall resists. So, you're perfectly happy with buffs to active armour tanking, but not with buffs to buffer shield tanking? Hypocritical much?
tell you what!
when plates allow a passive regen then you can *****.
in the mean time stop with the stupid posts. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
666
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:06:00 -
[24] - Quote
It's so cute how you people think passive regen is relevant. |
Mike Whiite
Cupid Stunts. Casoff
136
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:09:00 -
[25] - Quote
Maybe the scaling as a whole is a problem.
Nobody (almost) uses micro or small shield and small 50/100 plate.
partly because sizing only seems to be ballenced in the highslot aera. (weapon sizes, Neuts and Nossies have a size diference)
Mid and low slots only have the defence modules divided in small, medium, large, ect ect.
But for instance the Midslot E-war is on size fits all, suport modules in low slots, same story.
Now in the current set up a frigate need to be able to use those suport modules as well as a bigger vessle, but you should still need the flexibillity to fit anything else. which leaves the oppertunity to leave some modules out and use it on a higher defence.
might be worthwhile to look at that. |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
27
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:12:00 -
[26] - Quote
Paikis wrote:It's so cute how you people think passive regen is relevant.
But it is. a Drake can passively tank 200-300 DPS as a pvp fit. But increasing total Shield HP you get more Passive tank... A Drake can already have 100k EHP buffer, with 200-300 Passive tank... How is Passive regen not relevant to the subject? |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
666
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:15:00 -
[27] - Quote
culo duro wrote:Paikis wrote:It's so cute how you people think passive regen is relevant. But it is. a Drake can passively tank 200-300 DPS as a pvp fit. But increasing total Shield HP you get more Passive tank... A Drake can already have 100k EHP buffer, with 200-300 Passive tank... How is Passive regen not relevant to the subject?
Post this PvP DRAEK with 100k eHP and 300 eHP/sec passive tank. I need a good laugh, and the only way you're getting anywhere CLOSE to those numbers is by doing something stupid. |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
27
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:27:00 -
[28] - Quote
Paikis wrote:culo duro wrote:Paikis wrote:It's so cute how you people think passive regen is relevant. But it is. a Drake can passively tank 200-300 DPS as a pvp fit. But increasing total Shield HP you get more Passive tank... A Drake can already have 100k EHP buffer, with 200-300 Passive tank... How is Passive regen not relevant to the subject? Post this PvP DRAEK with 100k eHP and 300 eHP/sec passive tank. I need a good laugh, and the only way you're getting anywhere CLOSE to those numbers is by doing something stupid or otherwise fudging things.
http://p0wnd.nl/kb/index.php/kill_detail/7130/ |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
667
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:51:00 -
[29] - Quote
a. 2% over on CPU b. 3% over on PG c. 99,875 eHP d. 193 eHP/sec passive regen
You're over on fittings, requiring at least 2 fittings implants (I assume the 2 Genolution implants), and you're short by a looong way on your claims of 300/sec passive regen. |
culo duro
Federal Enslavement
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 09:10:00 -
[30] - Quote
Paikis wrote:a. 2% over on CPU b. 3% over on PG c. 99,875 eHP d. 193 eHP/sec passive regen
You're over on fittings, requiring at least 2 fittings implants (I assume the 2 Genolution implants), and you're short by a looong way on your claims of 300/sec passive regen.
If you fly a drake, you use PG Implants. Also since i actually use implants you reach past the 100k EHP point. with 200-300 Passive regen.
But the part you seem to forget is that if you made the Large Shield Extender have 4k HP instead of the current 2625 HP. it'll be way too op. The Drake is great as it is. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |