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. |

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
667
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 09:25:00 -
[31] - Quote
culo duro wrote: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.
Hey, if we're going to use implants, then I have a 200k eHP prophecy that would like to have a word, and all that took was a set of slaves and a couple 'noble' implants. How long does it take to regenerate 90,000 eHP at 300/sec? About 5 minutes.
Please note the increase in fittings for the 4k HP LSE. Sure its nice to have a larger shield extender, but your current DRAEK is already over on fitting, and still only barely breaks HALF the eHP of a prophecy. This new XLSE has increased fitting requirements. It's not like I'm trying to just hand out an extra couple thousand eHP to shield ships. You can't even remove 2 LSEs and add one XLSE, because the CPU cost of one XLSE is more than double two LSEs. |

culo duro
Federal Enslavement
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 10:11:00 -
[32] - Quote
Paikis wrote:culo duro wrote: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. Hey, if we're going to use implants, then I have a 200k eHP prophecy that would like to have a word, and all that took was a set of slaves and a couple 'noble' implants. How long does it take to regenerate 90,000 eHP at 300/sec? About 5 minutes. Please note the increase in fittings for the 4k HP LSE. Sure its nice to have a larger shield extender, but your current DRAEK is already over on fitting, and still only barely breaks HALF the eHP of a prophecy. This new XLSE has increased fitting requirements. It's not like I'm trying to just hand out an extra couple thousand eHP to shield ships. You can't even remove 2 LSEs and add one XLSE, because the CPU cost of one XLSE is more than double two LSEs.
I'd love to see that fit, because the only way i can get a 200k EHP on a prophecy is by having no neuts on the high slots. 140k EHP with 3 med neuts and 2 small neuts.
If you can't see that if you gave the drake a total of 4K more Shield it would be insane. Shield tanking is already more agile than Armor buffer tanking, and you want it to be buffed more? |

Ohishi
Apocalypse Reign
32
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 10:13:00 -
[33] - Quote
culo duro wrote: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. That's funny, I flew drakes and have snake and HML implants. Never once did I need a power grid implant. |

Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 14:48:00 -
[34] - Quote
You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
|

AGSeeker
Crytek Network
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 15:18:00 -
[35] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same.
If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? |

Lili Lu
701
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 15:19:00 -
[36] - Quote
Paikis wrote: 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. Shield buffer is fine. The top 20 of EVE-kill is full of shield buffer. There simply is no problem calling out for an answer. Your suggestion that there should be a larger shield extender is bad and you should feel bad.
As for micro and small extenders, take a look at 50mm and 100mm plates. That basically only noobs actually fit these modules is no big deal. Or did you make the mistake of buying a tech II small shield extender BPO or some such? |

Steel Roamer
Pandemic Legion Academy
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 19:42:00 -
[37] - Quote
AGSeeker wrote: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.
Active shield was only popular when it worked pre-ASB nerf. Active tanking nowadays only works with off-grid links.
CCP will just add some more ancillary modules and pretend there isn't an imbalance. |

Diesel47
Bad Men Ltd.
501
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 01:15:00 -
[38] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote: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.
Yeah because the entire game balance should revolve around what YOU personally do.
This is the mindset thats the cause for all the whine and nerf threads that plague these forums. |

Tsukino Stareine
EVE University Ivy League
19
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:04:00 -
[39] - Quote
the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size |

sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
797
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:05:00 -
[40] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size
Yes, because it matters. Standings Improvement Service https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=19454 |

Inkarr Hashur
Sine Nobilitatis
207
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:19:00 -
[41] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters. 
It should usually make up between 5 and 10% of your final active tank. You want to give that up?
edit: Oh whoops we're talking extenders not actual tanking. Yeah my bad.
No, talking pure buffer, it doesn't really end up being significant unless you build the tank around it, which has its own drawbacks. I'll bow out of this. |

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
671
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 02:46:00 -
[42] - Quote
Inkarr Hashur wrote:sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters.  It should usually make up between 5 and 10% of your final active tank. You want to give that up? edit: Oh whoops we're talking extenders not actual tanking. Yeah my bad. No, talking pure buffer, it doesn't really end up being significant unless you build the tank around it, which has its own drawbacks. I'll bow out of this.
It's also pretty useless on anything that isn't a Drake (or a Rattlesnake) |

culo duro
Federal Enslavement
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 07:43:00 -
[43] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Inkarr Hashur wrote:sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters.  It should usually make up between 5 and 10% of your final active tank. You want to give that up? edit: Oh whoops we're talking extenders not actual tanking. Yeah my bad. No, talking pure buffer, it doesn't really end up being significant unless you build the tank around it, which has its own drawbacks. I'll bow out of this. It's also pretty useless on anything that isn't a Drake (or a Rattlesnake)
You've never flown nano ships have you?
LSE II are fine. You know when you fly shield tanked ships, you can tank omni way better than armor, which is why most mission ships are shield tanked (Not taking into account Extra DPS etc), and you get a passive recharge on your shield. No matter how many LSEs you add, you will only increase the shield recharge.
Let's take the Rokh as an example. Shield 10625 (Nothing) recharge time 1825 Sec. and it peaks at 14,7 HP/s. You add a LSE, Total Shield goes up, recharge rate stays the same. we do now have 13906k Shield with the same recharge time. You add a few Hardeners for more resistance, we now got 50k EHP in Shields with a recharge time of 1825 Seconds.
anyway back to my point. Our standard Rokh got 20k EHP in it's shields, that recharges over 1825 seconds. Which is why shields are awesome, i fly armor myself, but damn, we'd need a plate buff to make up for the passive recharge rate on a drake.
Shield Extenders don't need a change. It's the same thing with everyone that flew a ship that got nerfed, "OMG YOU RUINED MY SHIP" it's stupid. |

Danny John-Peter
New Eden Renegades Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
199
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 10:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
culo duro wrote: Our standard Rokh got 20k EHP in it's shields
Wow, you must have a really **** standard Rokh fit. |

culo duro
Federal Enslavement
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 10:15:00 -
[45] - Quote
Danny John-Peter wrote:culo duro wrote: Our standard Rokh got 20k EHP in it's shields
Wow, you must have a really **** standard Rokh fit.
When i say standard i mean no fit All V. |

Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 13:34:00 -
[46] - Quote
AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask?
No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems.
|

Roime
Shiva Furnace
2095
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 14:14:00 -
[47] - Quote
300%
Sure it wasn't over 9000%?
(AAR is 68% better than a T2 repper for 8 cycles, after that it's less than T1 repper.)
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |

Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
41
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 16:01:00 -
[48] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems.
Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite
|

Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 17:28:00 -
[49] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite
Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron. |

AGSeeker
Crytek Network
2
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 17:32:00 -
[50] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron.
Stop trolling. U dont know what u are talking about.
The AAR reps 68% (if u dont belive that, just read the dev blogs or look at the numbers) more than a T2 repper for 8 cycles. And the cycle-time is much longer than the ASB one.
Edit: And the AAR uses cap, regardless of the nanite paste and without paste it reps only 66% of a T1 Repper. |

Drake Doe
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
41
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 17:38:00 -
[51] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot |

culo duro
Federal Enslavement
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 19:21:00 -
[52] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Dav Varan wrote:AGSeeker wrote:Dav Varan wrote:You can't really change the effective sizes of mods like this.
All the fits in eve would break for no good reason.
Theres an argument for a better buffer mod at the top end for shield now that armor has had a significant active buff.
An XL shield extender with double the stats of a large would be the way to do it though.
We would not want to hand over piles of isk to the Micro and Small shield extender T2 BPO holders.
Well i wouldn't call it a good buff for active armor tanking. Despite the lower PG need and the from lower speed to higher PG need on armor rigs, the rep amount and extrem long cycle time on the armor reppers stayed the same. If shield tankers get a x-large shield extender, then I demand a x-large armor repper or at least shorter cycle time and a capless ancillary armor repper. But were would be the difference then to shield tanking I ask? No you dont need all those things , armor just got a 300% boost to active burst tanking as well as the speed improvements. Thats a significant lift to small operation active boosting. Given that was previosley the domain of shield and large ship tanking is the realm of armor. there needs to be improvement in large ship shield buffer tanking to maintain the overall effectiveness of both systems. Sp despite buffer tanking being meant to be better for armor yet you want an x l extender and deny mods similar to what armor doesn't have an equal to? Hypocrite Active armor repping just had its massive boost Oblivious moron.
You talking about that Anci armor repper which really only works if you got 2 reppers, and then it turns off fast? |

Tsukino Stareine
EVE University Ivy League
20
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 23:31:00 -
[53] - Quote
sabre906 wrote:Tsukino Stareine wrote:the reason the largest extenders you can get now is LSE II is because of passive recharge scaling with shield size Yes, because it matters. 
why wouldn't it matter? You could make some quite ridiculous passive tanking fits on battlecruiser and above fits like on drakes, feroxes etc. Passive shield tanking could quite possibly become viable in pvp if that happened. |

Dibblerette
The Phantom Regiment THE ROYAL NAVY
143
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 07:04:00 -
[54] - Quote
Just wanted to say that I do infact use 200mm plates on the Punisher, along with a small rep and a nos. Bleeder punisher ftw! |

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
675
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 08:27:00 -
[55] - Quote
Dibblerette wrote:Just wanted to say that I do infact use 200mm plates on the Punisher, along with a small rep and a nos. Bleeder punisher ftw!
Aye, I use a similar fit on Rifters as well. 800mm plates do get used on some of my cruisers also. The ones that aren't bait tanked anyway.
I checked my Maelstrom fit eariler... 14 hp/sec passive tank. I figured with a passive tank that high, I could take the repper off. |

culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 09:21:00 -
[56] - Quote
Paikis wrote:Dibblerette wrote:Just wanted to say that I do infact use 200mm plates on the Punisher, along with a small rep and a nos. Bleeder punisher ftw! Aye, I use a similar fit on Rifters as well. 800mm plates do get used on some of my cruisers also. The ones that aren't bait tanked anyway. I checked my Maelstrom fit eariler... 14 hp/sec passive tank. I figured with a passive tank that high, I could take the repper off.
You really don't know how Shield recharge work do you? Every ship got a normal recharge time. Maelstroms being 1875 seconds. To decrease that you need Shield Rechargers or Power Relays, to decrease that time. Or you can use Shield Extenders to make your total shield higher. You get some more sig radius but armor tank lose agility.
God dammit. |

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
675
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 09:44:00 -
[57] - Quote
culo duro wrote:You really don't know how Shield recharge work do you? Every ship got a normal recharge time. Maelstroms being 1875 seconds. To decrease that you need Shield Rechargers or Power Relays, to decrease that time. Or you can use Shield Extenders to make your total shield higher. You get some more sig radius but armor tank lose agility.
God dammit.
I am well aware how passive shield tanking works. Just as I am well aware how completely useless it is if you don't fit for it. Most fights take several minutes for that passive recharge to amount to anywhere close to the extra hit points that an armour tanker would have just had the whole time.
A Drake (with fititng implants) gets about 100,000 EHP and 193/sec passive recharge. To do this it gets only a long point, with 8 slots dedicated to tank and 3 damage mods (standard)
A Prophecy with no implants, can get 132,000 EHP. It has an 8 slot tank, MWD, scram, web, and 3 damage mods. It will take 2 minutes and 45 seconds for the Drake to passively regenerate enough HP to cover the 32k extra hp that the Prophecy has had since the start of the engagement. Oh, that's assuming that the Drake gets peak recharge the whole time. It doesn't.
Oh, and 5 neuts. Did I mention the Prophecy can fit 5 neuts with all that tank? Enough neuting power to drain that Drake's cap dry in under 30 seconds, at which point the Drake has 47,417 EHP and only 87/sec passive recharge. Which leads to the Prophecy killing the Drake every time.
The current Drake can NEVER regenerate enough hp from passive recharge to offset the raw buffer deficit it starts with. |

culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 09:53:00 -
[58] - Quote
Paikis wrote:culo duro wrote:You really don't know how Shield recharge work do you? Every ship got a normal recharge time. Maelstroms being 1875 seconds. To decrease that you need Shield Rechargers or Power Relays, to decrease that time. Or you can use Shield Extenders to make your total shield higher. You get some more sig radius but armor tank lose agility.
God dammit. I am well aware how passive shield tanking works. Just as I am well aware how completely useless it is if you don't fit for it. Most fights take several minutes for that passive recharge to amount to anywhere close to the extra hit points that an armour tanker would have just had the whole time. A Drake (with fititng implants) gets about 100,000 EHP and 193/sec passive recharge. To do this it gets only a long point, with 8 slots dedicated to tank and 3 damage mods (standard) A Prophecy with no implants, can get 132,000 EHP. It has an 8 slot tank, MWD, scram, web, and 3 damage mods. It will take 2 minutes and 45 seconds for the Drake to passively regenerate enough HP to cover the 32k extra hp that the Prophecy has had since the start of the engagement. Oh, that's assuming that the Drake gets peak recharge the whole time. It doesn't. Oh, and 5 neuts. Did I mention the Prophecy can fit 5 neuts with all that tank? Enough neuting power to drain that Drake's cap dry in under 30 seconds, at which point the Drake has 47,417 EHP and only 87/sec passive recharge. Which leads to the Prophecy killing the Drake every time. The current Drake can NEVER regenerate enough hp from passive recharge to offset the raw buffer deficit it starts with.
Actually there is. Stay out of 12,6KM (Med neut range) since it's only got 1 web you fit one or fly away. |

Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:00:00 -
[59] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote: Stuff.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot
Calculate the amount of cap used by a small anc repper ( with chanrges loaded ) to rep 1000hp Now calculate the amount of cap used by a standard repper to do the same.
Realise you are thick and need to have things explained to you.
|

culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:05:00 -
[60] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote: Stuff.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot
Calculate the amount of cap used by a small anc repper ( with chanrges loaded ) to rep 1000hp Now calculate the amount of cap used by a standard repper to do the same. Realise you are thick and need to have things explained to you.
Now add all that up to that you buy **** expensive charges and end up with only being able to fit one, so you need a normal repper anyway, because it's reload time is 60 seconds.... |

AGSeeker
Crytek Network
2
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:18:00 -
[61] - Quote
culo duro wrote:Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote: Stuff.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot
Calculate the amount of cap used by a small anc repper ( with chanrges loaded ) to rep 1000hp Now calculate the amount of cap used by a standard repper to do the same. Realise you are thick and need to have things explained to you. Now add all that up to that you buy **** expensive charges and end up with only being able to fit one, so you need a normal repper anyway, because it's reload time is 60 seconds....
And add a damn long cycle time. |

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
675
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:26:00 -
[62] - Quote
culo duro wrote:Actually there is. Stay out of 12,6KM (Med neut range) since it's only got 1 web you fit one or fly away.
Honestly, its got 4 mids. Fit 2 webs on the Proph. Alternatively, web drones are good for getting into range, and the Proph has a HUGE drone bay. You cannot stay out of range of my Proph. If you engage, you die. |

Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:32:00 -
[63] - Quote
Dav Varan wrote:Drake Doe wrote: Stuff.
Oh so you're saying being limited to one anc repper that still drains cap is a massive boost? Idiot
Calculate the amount of cap used by a small anc repper ( with chanrges loaded ) to rep 1000hp Now calculate the amount of cap used by a standard repper to do the same. Realise you are thick and need to have things explained to you.
just did the math for you , cause I dont think you will be able to do it.
Before skills are taken into account on a dual rep setup with injector a small anc replacing a small armor will save you 150cap for every 1000 hp repped.
Of course you have to press buttons and shite,
So you have to manage the cap a bit more , but at least you have the option of management an asb repped ship will not have a slot for and injector as well , meaning while the tank is caplesss , tackle propulsion ans guns are vulnerable to cap warefare and can be completelly shutoff , whereas on anc repped ships you have choices.
I'm sorry if the armor boost was not the one button press capless solution you wanted, but for decent pvp'rs the choices presented offer more advantages than downsides.
Anyway comparing armor before the patch to armor after the patch its a clear boost to small stuff.
armor tanked ships are faster and can use less cap if flown with ability.
Given the clear boost to small armor when the time comes to balance the battleships ccp should not shy away from introducing XL shield extenders to facility similar levels of buffer tanking balance between shield and armor fleets.
In fact an XL extender may be the only way to achive balance.
|

culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:35:00 -
[64] - Quote
Paikis wrote:culo duro wrote:Actually there is. Stay out of 12,6KM (Med neut range) since it's only got 1 web you fit one or fly away. Honestly, its got 4 mids. Fit 2 webs on the Proph. Alternatively, web drones are good for getting into range, and the Proph has a HUGE drone bay. You cannot stay out of range of my Proph. If you engage, you die.
So either you're lacking a MWD or a cap booster, you can wave goodbye either way that Drake is going to fly away if he knows what's up. Neut boats are good, but they need a fleet to function properly. |

Paikis
Vapour Holdings
675
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:47:00 -
[65] - Quote
culo duro wrote:So either you're lacking a MWD or a cap booster, you can wave goodbye either way that Drake is going to fly away if he knows what's up. Neut boats are good, but they need a fleet to function properly.
The prophecy has 4 mids. 2 webs, MWD, scram. if you want to engage, you're going to be inside 17kms for your HAMs to hit. And it doesn't need a cap injector. It can run everything for 10 minutes until it is in range. Once it is in range it doesn't need the MWD, the Drake will be dual-webbed and going nowhere.
Like I said, if you engage, you're going to die.
EDIT: And before you say it, no you can't kite. 5 web drones will slow you down enough that the prophecy is faster, at which point you either warp out VERY fast, or you die. That's if you even notice the drones before its too late. I've only had one guy shoot my drones so far. no one expects web drones, so they get ignored a lot. |

culo duro
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
31
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:54:00 -
[66] - Quote
Paikis wrote:culo duro wrote:So either you're lacking a MWD or a cap booster, you can wave goodbye either way that Drake is going to fly away if he knows what's up. Neut boats are good, but they need a fleet to function properly. The prophecy has 4 mids. 2 webs, MWD, scram. if you want to engage, you're going to be inside 17kms for your HAMs to hit. And it doesn't need a cap injector. It can run everything for 10 minutes until it is in range. Once it is in range it doesn't need the MWD, the Drake will be dual-webbed and going nowhere. Like I said, if you engage, you're going to die. EDIT: And before you say it, no you can't kite. 5 web drones will slow you down enough that the prophecy is faster, at which point you either warp out VERY fast, or you die. That's if you even notice the drones before its too late. I've only had one guy shoot my drones so far. no one expects web drones, so they get ignored a lot.
Are you flying in WH space? else i'd love to know how you catch people. Specifically by putting Web drones on them. Have you ever heard of the insta warp Freighters?
How do you fit your Prophecy? Run everything for 1 mins?
This fit is stable for 1min and 23seconds w/o the MWD. Notice the empty slot is for either a Web or a Cap Booster.
Quote: [Prophecy, Pvp Bufer] Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Damage Control II
[empty med slot] Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Warp Disruptor II Stasis Webifier II
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Hammerhead II x5 Ogre II x3
|

Claire Raynor
NovaGear
93
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:19:00 -
[67] - Quote
I hope to learn something here in any replies I might get.
I have moved fully to Armour tanking. Mostly I do missions. I fit reppers but not the new AAR units. This means I take a Mid slot for the CAP booster. I do this so that I leave mids for a Point, Prop, and another peice of Utility. Typically that would be a Web or a Target Painter.
Because I fly in fleets where the battleships fit remote reppers my Caldari Pilot also Armour tanks his Raven. I find that with the raven now having many utility slots with target painters and webs I can put down more actual DPS than before. (But not maybe as muh Real DPS as I could have done with the 4 BCUs - but it will not be by much). This way the Raven supports/enhances the DPS of the other ships with teh painters as the other ships help the raven by repping it should it ever get in trouble.
So - With an Active Armour tank - When or Would you ever add a Plate to the mix? I guess that would be a PvP question. I imagine that in a PvP situation you would not take the Repper at all and fit a plate in its stead - you would still have the resists to help the logistics - and you would swap the Rigs for damage as opposed to Active Armour Rep rigs.
Does anyone use a non-buffered Active Armour tank in PvP? Does it compromise Damage too much? Does anyone use a buffered Active Armour Tank at all - or is that a niche? I'd love someone to say something about active armour fits that incorporate a plate even if it is just to confirm that it is a bad sub-optimal fit.
But I used to fly sheilds exclusivly. I liked not having to repair stuff after missions. But I also started to move away from fully Passive fits on my Maelstroms to high resistance fits with boosters and Cap boosters. I dropped the Sheild Boost Amplifier too in the end. My Maelstoms can generate massive active EHP regeneration. But then again - without utility mids - they are also incapable of hitting anything without support if the enemies get in close. That is something my Armour ships do not suffer.
I find the different strategies available great fun. I might soon re-purpose my Maelstroms and try them with a Resists and Repper armour fit and put tracking computers, webs and TPs on the mids. Just to see, (although I doubt it because of the ship's bonus).
I guess there is a balance. One that I have not found. When I start tanking my ships I kind of don't stop. I should because sometimes I hardly ever have to use the reppers. And I really hardly ever have to use the Cap Boosters. Maybe I could lose some resitance modules and put some damage on there. Like with the Maelstrom - maybe I could lose some Hardners and get some utility slots on the mids back.
Maybe if I learn some balance in my fits then I might move back to the LSEs.
As for the LSEIIs. Well I use LSEIIs on my cruisers if they have space after a Prop, Point, Web, and Invul. If Cap Regen is tight I might miss off the Invul and go straight to the LSEIIs - the DCU and Damage on the bottom. If it is an Armour Cruiser I would use an 800 plate and an EANM with a Hardner and then a DCU and damage on any remaining slots. On the Frigates if I use an MSEII then fine - otherwise I put a 400 plate, DCU and Adaptive Nano on my Rifters.
I don't use the LSEIIs on my Battleships because I just found them to be not big enough. I rapidly moved from them to the full resist plus booster setups. But would this work in PvP? A 2K DPS tank is great till you run out of CAP Boosters - and with everything overheated it would be epic. My Big issue with the LSEIIs on battleships was that I did the build and had a load of powergrid left over that I wanted to use on something and so I longed for a bigger module.
However - I err on the side of caution. Bigger buffer modules mean you will get mids back for the same buffer you had before. Combine more buffer with more resists in those free slots means even more buffer - it could get silly quite quickly. Passive regen on sheild extenders can make a dent in the real dps applied by someone - and unlike EANMs which can not be overheated - Invuls can be overheated to make that passive regen bigger should it be needed.
Part of me would then say - OK well make a bigger XLSE but make it reduce passive regen rates. But then I have fallen into the trap. . . I'm thinking about making Sheilds the same as armour - which is a bad idea.
Ultimatly - as my fitting skills got better and I had PG left over after filling up with LSEIIs on my Battleships - I stuck a medium Shield Booster on. Then I realised that resists helped the booster more than a buffer. . . And I ended up with the XL booster resist setups. . . I think most people do. |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |