EVE Search - Shield Extender vs Armor Plating

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Shield Extender vs Armor Plating

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.08.07 04:22:00 - [1] Armor plating is 2x better. Why? Shield Extenders should give more HP, maybe not as much as plating but it shouldnt be only half as good. Shield Recharge is a nonfactor in PvP, so let's not use that crutch for an argument. I think shield extenders should either give you much more HP or be given resist bonuses (they have values for resistance but they are all set to zero). Shields have much worse resistance than armor anyways, right? ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Sorja	Posted - 2005.08.07 04:26:00 - [2] If you look down on this board, there are some discusisons about it already and yes it came out clearly that extenders are not that great, for the least one can say, and plates (especially oversized) have a pretty good time at the moment.
Soren	Posted - 2005.08.07 04:27:00 - [3] Edited by: Soren on 07/08/2005 04:28:47 Res bonuses would be cool, I agree sheild extenders they need to be upgraded. dunno if you saw this _________________________________________________________
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.08.07 04:30:00 - [4] Edited by: Jim Raynor on 07/08/2005 04:33:11 No i was just looking at armor plates and shield extenders today and was like "wow, shield extenders blow total ass compared to armor plates". didnt notice another thread about this, oh well. Don't read forums much lately. But anyways yeah a 800mm Armor Plate II is 1682hp and a Medium Shield Extender II is 840hp, that is quite a difference, add in the fact armor has much better natural resistance, that is a huge difference. Shield extenders are useless.. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Will Basthard	Posted - 2005.08.07 04:48:00 - [5] Edited by: Will Basthard on 07/08/2005 04:49:24 Jim... I know your a missile guy but I know you love your gun scorpians too. Shields suck compared to armor, I agree, I am thinking about this setup which that I put in another post : 4 Dual 425mm ACs, 2 Heavy Launchers AB, Web, 6 cap charger IIs 2 1600 plates and 2 Large Accomodations 15 Medium Drones I don't know if its better than a shield tank but seems like it could be fun.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.08.07 04:55:00 - [6] Originally by: Will Basthard Edited by: Will Basthard on 07/08/2005 04:49:24 Jim... I know your a missile guy but I know you love your gun scorpians too. Shields suck compared to armor, I agree, I am thinking about this setup which that I put in another post : 4 Dual 425mm ACs, 2 Heavy Launchers AB, Web, 6 cap charger IIs 2 1600 plates and 2 Large Accomodations 15 Medium Drones I don't know if its better than a shield tank but seems like it could be fun. if you're tanking a scorpion you're dumb, no offense. that's not the strength of the ship at all. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.08.07 05:03:00 - [7] The fitting requirements def need reviewing. ~Sobe Captain Cutie, Razor's Kiss Combat Pilot and looking for a corp? Check AGSYN out here
Will Basthard	Posted - 2005.08.07 05:14:00 - [8] Originally by: Jim Raynor Originally by: Will Basthard Edited by: Will Basthard on 07/08/2005 04:49:24 Jim... I know your a missile guy but I know you love your gun scorpians too. Shields suck compared to armor, I agree, I am thinking about this setup which that I put in another post : 4 Dual 425mm ACs, 2 Heavy Launchers AB, Web, 6 cap charger IIs 2 1600 plates and 2 Large Accomodations 15 Medium Drones I don't know if its better than a shield tank but seems like it could be fun. if you're tanking a scorpion you're dumb, no offense. that's not the strength of the ship at all. No its not but I hate ewar and I am bored with shield tanking. This is different and works quite well.
Caeden Nicomachean	Posted - 2005.08.07 05:50:00 - [9] As has been mentioned many times before, make extenders low slot. Give a healthy stacking penalty to ensure nutty setups don't happen.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.08.07 08:06:00 - [10] ôAs has been mentioned many times before, make extenders low slot. Give a healthy stacking penalty to ensure nutty setups don't happen.ö Most people are complaining the hitpoints are to low on shield extenders and you want to lower them even more by giving a healthy stacking penalty! WhatÆs the reasoning in that and how will that fix anything? ôShield Extenders should give more HP, maybe not as much as plating but it shouldnt be only half as good.ö Thre are more pratical ways to boost shields with %mods then there are amour plates. Most setups have 2 or 3 PDS modules to boost cap enough to use weapons and EW modules which also boosts shields. Then there are those cheap sub 100k implants. Amour has nothing in comparison no cheap implants and no usefull %mod like a PDS module. The only +% amour moduel I know of is useless as your better off fiting in more plates over useing it. ôBut anyways yeah a 800mm Armor Plate II is 1682hp and a Medium Shield Extender II is 840hp,ö YouÆre comparing an 800mm armour plate that useÆs up 230 Powergrid to a shield extender that useÆs up 62.25 powergrid. ThatÆs over 3.5 times more powergrid needed to fit. So when powergrid is tight the shield extender is better. But when CPU is tight amour plates are better. What if you need damage mods? Also what happens when you compare a normal setup with 3 PDS modules or how every many most people use with 1 cheap implant against a normal Armor Plate setup? You will find the hitpoint gap is a lot closer between the two modules. Armor Plate still have more hitpoints but its not twice as many more. "Shield Recharge is a nonfactor in PvP, so let's not use that crutch for an argument." If shield recharge is useless why do so many people take shield boosters and passive regen tanks? When testing I found hitpoints are best in high damage battles with damage mods but HP regen was still useful. In lower damage battles without damage mods I found regen to be the best option. Shields have much worse resistance than armor anyways, right?ö It depends on the ship sometimes better resistance sometimes worse. ôShield extenders are useless..ö Considering how many useful setups out there that work both for PvP and soloing lvl 4 missions I donÆt think its fair to say shield extenders are useless. They might have problems but they are far from useless. _________________________________________________ Nominate famous people in Eve who had an impact on you.
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.08.07 08:33:00 - [11] Quote: ôBut anyways yeah a 800mm Armor Plate II is 1682hp and a Medium Shield Extender II is 840hp,ö YouÆre comparing an 800mm armour plate that useÆs up 230 Powergrid to a shield extender that useÆs up 62.25 powergrid. ThatÆs over 3.5 times more powergrid needed to fit. So when powergrid is tight the shield extender is better. But when CPU is tight amour plates are better. Don't be silly, the CPU usage of the shield extender is very high, it's just as hard if not harder to fit than an armor plate, in fact its easier to fit armor plates to be honest, on most ships. A Medium Shield Extender II gives you LESS HP (842 vs 800) than a 400mm Plate II ok??? The fitting for a 400mm armor plate is 23cpu/35pg. Quote: What if you need damage mods? Also what happens when you compare a normal setup with 3 PDS modules or how every many most people use with 1 cheap implant against a normal Armor Plate setup? You will find the hitpoint gap is a lot closer between the two modules. Armor Plate still have more hitpoints but its not twice as many more. It's not close at all, armor plating is better. Shield extenders don't give enough HP or produce enough passive regeneration to be considered useful, at all. They take up a lot of CPU are hard to fit on most setups and suck. Armor plating can be useful, shield extenders -- just aren't.. Quote: "Shield Recharge is a nonfactor in PvP, so let's not use that crutch for an argument." If shield recharge is useless why do so many people take shield boosters and passive regen tanks? When testing I found hitpoints are best in high damage battles with damage mods but HP regen was still useful. In lower damage battles without damage mods I found regen to be the best option. Raise your hand if you use passive shield tanking in PvP? No one? Exactly. Quote: Shields have much worse resistance than armor anyways, right?ö It depends on the ship sometimes better resistance sometimes worse. On T1 ships armor has superior resists, on T2 they generally do as well. Quote: ôShield extenders are useless..ö Considering how many useful setups out there that work both for PvP and soloing lvl 4 missions I donÆt think its fair to say shield extenders are useless. They might have problems but they are far from useless. No, they're pretty useless. No real PvP setup uses them. An armor plate is much better -- everyone with a clue knows this. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.08.07 09:10:00 - [12] Edited by: Pottsey on 07/08/2005 09:10:00 Double post _________________________________________________ Nominate famous people in Eve who had an impact on you.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.08.07 09:10:00 - [13] Edited by: Pottsey on 07/08/2005 09:14:40 Edited by: Pottsey on 07/08/2005 09:13:30 ôDon't be silly, the CPU usage of the shield extender is very high, it's just as hard if not harder to fit than an armor plate,ö It depends on the ship take Covert op ships if the scout wants decent hitpoints so he can warp out if he is spotted without dieing in 1 volley his only option is to use shield extenders. As Covert ships have loads of CPU but little powergrid. Shield extenders take up less powergrid so they fit. Other ships just donÆt have enough low slots to make a decent amour plate ship yet they have enough mid slots for shield extenders. Its not a clear case of 1 is better then the other it depends on the ship you are flying. Just because amour plates work best on your ship does not mean extenders are useless on everything. Some setups have lots of free CPU some lots of Powergrid. Its not a case of all steups have free Powergrid and littel CPU like you say. ôIt's not close at all, armor plating is better. Shield extenders don't give enough HP or produce enough passive regeneration to be considered useful, at all. They take up a lot of CPU are hard to fit on most setups and suck. Armor plating can be useful, shield extenders -- just aren't..ö Take a look at the other thread. The T1 Kestrel had 960 amour hitpoints using the biggest amour plates it could fit. The Merlin had 1031.25 amour hitpoints and 125mm railguns. The Tristan with 1 extender had 1,563 hitpoints, and a better weapon system fitted. ThatÆs 60%+ more hitpoints over the Kestrel along with more damage output with the extender ship. http://www.dissonance-corp.com/screenshots\tristan.jpg had The other Tristan with 150mm railguns had 1,357 hitpoints http://www.dissonance-corp.com/screenshots/tristan1.jpg Yet you say amour plating is better? How is losing 16+ HP/s and losing total hitpoints by using amour plating better? You also have to downgrade weapons as often like with the Kestrel and Merlin the plates take up to much powergrid so there is no room for top end weapons. You keep saying they donÆt produce enough passive regen to be useful. How do you work that out when you get more regen then shield boosters? Why do so many people say shield boosters are useful yet passive regen is not. Small shield booster is 10 HP/s my passive frigate with 1 shield extender has 16 HP/s. That seems usefull to me. The Merlin is better at EW but its tank and weapons are worse with plates. Personally I donÆt think plate or extenders are better then each other. Each it pretty much balanced and which one I use depends on the ship and ships job. Sometimes I amour tank come out best sometimes I shield tanks. Some ships get more hitpoints with plates some extenders. That and when the shields have way better resistance why use plates? You use whats best for the ship you are in. Which could be plates or extenders. ôA Medium Shield Extender II gives you LESS HP (842 vs 840) than a 400mm Plate II ok??? The fitting for a 400mm armor plate is 23cpu/35pg.ö As I said in the other thread its not the individual modules that matter but how the ship works as a hole. When comparing the ships the extender ships always came out with more hitpoints and more regen then the plate ships in the other tread. _________________________________________________ Nominate famous people in Eve who had an impact on you.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2005.08.07 11:23:00 - [14] Originally by: Will Basthard Edited by: Will Basthard on 07/08/2005 04:49:24 Jim... I know your a missile guy but I know you love your gun scorpians too. Shields suck compared to armor, I agree, I am thinking about this setup which that I put in another post : 4 Dual 425mm ACs, 2 Heavy Launchers AB, Web, 6 cap charger IIs 2 1600 plates and 2 Large Accomodations 15 Medium Drones I don't know if its better than a shield tank but seems like it could be fun. Bad setup. Without any of the minmatar bonuses you have a very low damage output for a BS. The 2 1600 plates will make you really slow, even with an AB. I don't think you have enough cap recharge to run 2 large accos forever (not that it will matter). Your lack of resists mean that another BS will take some time to chew through your armor, but even some cruisers would be able to break your tank.
Caeden Nicomachean	Posted - 2005.08.07 13:54:00 - [15] Originally by: Pottsey ôAs has been mentioned many times before, make extenders low slot. Give a healthy stacking penalty to ensure nutty setups don't happen.ö Most people are complaining the hitpoints are to low on shield extenders and you want to lower them even more by giving a healthy stacking penalty! WhatÆs the reasoning in that and how will that fix anything? Let me be clearer. 1. Make extenders low slot 2. Apply a harsh stacking penalty 3. Adjust the fitting requirements to be more in line with armor plates Now - the better solution for number 2 might be to apply harsh penalties for using oversized units, and do the same for plates. Easier and better solution might be to up the fitting reqs on 400 plates and above and medium ext and above, then adjust down the fitting reqs of the micro shield ext and 50/100/200 plates. I'd rather see stacked 200's than standard 400's. The tristan was a good example - straight to mediums. Sounds to me like you are happy with things because you fly an esoteric setup that works on a couple of frigates in the game if supported by a crew of frigates. Extenders need to be brought into mainstream, and that means moving them to low slots to get them out of the way of utilitarian mods. This will increase diversity of loadouts - you see it. You said folks couldn't apply basic math, but I fear you are being religious about this
Nafri	Posted - 2005.08.07 14:25:00 - [16] Originally by: Pottsey Edited by: Pottsey on 07/08/2005 09:23:44 ôDon't be silly, the CPU usage of the shield extender is very high, it's just as hard if not harder to fit than an armor plate,ö It depends on the ship take Covert op ships if the scout wants decent hitpoints so he can warp out if he is spotted without dieing in 1 volley his only option is to use shield extenders. As Covert ships have loads of CPU but little powergrid. Shield extenders take up less powergrid so they fit. Other ships just donÆt have enough low slots to make a decent amour plate ship yet they have enough mid slots for shield extenders. Another problem is scouts often have warp core stabiliserÆs in the low slots. Its not a clear case of 1 is better then the other it depends on the ship you are flying. Just because amour plates work best on your ship does not mean extenders are useless on everything. Some setups have lots of free CPU some lots of Powergrid. Its not a case of all setups have free Powergrid and littel CPU like you say. ôIt's not close at all, armor plating is better. Shield extenders don't give enough HP or produce enough passive regeneration to be considered useful, at all. They take up a lot of CPU are hard to fit on most setups and suck. Armor plating can be useful, shield extenders -- just aren't..ö Take a look at the other thread. The T1 Kestrel had 960 amour hitpoints using the biggest amour plates it could fit. The Merlin had 1031.25 amour hitpoints and 125mm railguns. The Tristan with 1 extender had 1,563 hitpoints, and a better weapon system fitted. ThatÆs 60%+ more hitpoints over the Kestrel along with more damage output with the extender ship. http://www.dissonance-corp.com/screenshots\tristan.jpg had The other Tristan with 150mm railguns had 1,357 hitpoints http://www.dissonance-corp.com/screenshots/tristan1.jpg Yet you say amour plating is better? How is losing 16+ HP/s and losing total hitpoints by using amour plating better? You also have to downgrade weapons as often like with the Kestrel and Merlin the plates take up to much powergrid so there is no room for top end weapons. You keep saying they donÆt produce enough passive regen to be useful. How do you work that out when you get more regen then shield boosters? Why do so many people say shield boosters are useful yet passive regen is not. Small shield booster is 10 HP/s my passive frigate with 1 shield extender has 16 HP/s. That seems usefull to me. The Merlin is better at EW but its tank and weapons are worse with plates. Personally I donÆt think plate or extenders are better then each other. Each it pretty much balanced which one I use depends on the ship and ships job. Sometimes I amour tank as it comes out best, sometimes I shield tank. Some ships get more hitpoints with plates some extenders. That and when the shields have way better resistance why use plates? You use whats best for the ship you are in. Which could be plates or extenders. ôA Medium Shield Extender II gives you LESS HP (842 vs 840) than a 400mm Plate II ok??? The fitting for a 400mm armor plate is 23cpu/35pg.ö As I said in the other thread its not the individual modules that matter but how the ship works as a hole. When comparing the ships the extender ships always came out with more hitpoints and more regen then the plate ships in the other tread. Its might not be true for all ships but it was true for the ship setups posted. Pottsey, before you ever post about the usefullness of shield extenders compared to armor plates on smaller ships please read my post in the other thread, and you will see, there is hardly a situation you want a shield extender wasting a modslot Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now?
JoeSomebody	Posted - 2005.08.07 14:32:00 - [17] Originally by: Caeden Nicomachean Originally by: Pottsey ôAs has been mentioned many times before, make extenders low slot. Give a healthy stacking penalty to ensure nutty setups don't happen.ö Most people are complaining the hitpoints are to low on shield extenders and you want to lower them even more by giving a healthy stacking penalty! WhatÆs the reasoning in that and how will that fix anything? Let me be clearer. 1. Make extenders low slot 2. Apply a harsh stacking penalty 3. Adjust the fitting requirements to be more in line with armor plates I have counter suggestion: 1) make EW high slot 2) make small/micro/medium extenders closer to their armor counterparts hp-wise ____ When flying by Concord Customs Commander's Dominix I distinctly heard him saying "... world domination..."
Harry Voyager	Posted - 2005.08.07 14:33:00 - [18] A stacking penalty is out of line for a linear progression device, such as shield and armour extenders. It was appropriate for hardeners because hardeners have a geometric effect that made 2nd and 3rd hardeners even more effective than the first hardener added. Frankly I fail to see your reasoning at all why mounting multiple extenders or plates should be nerfed, besides a desire to force everyone into very narrow ship fitting capabilities. As for the hp increase given by shield extenders, right now it is balanced such that one cannot build a hard passive tank. Were shield extenders given even greater hp boost, then it would, in fact, be quite viable to built a hard passive tank. I.e. you would see Apoc grade passive tanks. Frankly, I doubt we really need that just this instance. Harry Voyager
Caeden Nicomachean	Posted - 2005.08.07 15:20:00 - [19] Originally by: Harry Voyager A stacking penalty is out of line for a linear progression device, such as shield and armour extenders. It was appropriate for hardeners because hardeners have a geometric effect that made 2nd and 3rd hardeners even more effective than the first hardener added. Frankly I fail to see your reasoning at all why mounting multiple extenders or plates should be nerfed, besides a desire to force everyone into very narrow ship fitting capabilities. As for the hp increase given by shield extenders, right now it is balanced such that one cannot build a hard passive tank. Were shield extenders given even greater hp boost, then it would, in fact, be quite viable to built a hard passive tank. I.e. you would see Apoc grade passive tanks. I think you answered your own question here - stacking penalties would ensure passive tanks don't get out of control. And I want diversity in setups, not the opposite.. Originally by: JoeSomebody I have counter suggestion: 1) make EW high slot 2) make small/micro/medium extenders closer to their armor counterparts hp-wise I like this a lot. Shield/armor tank combos might get mean though. Still worth exploring I think. I think it would shake things up.
Will Basthard	Posted - 2005.08.07 15:40:00 - [20] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: Will Basthard Edited by: Will Basthard on 07/08/2005 04:49:24 Jim... I know your a missile guy but I know you love your gun scorpians too. Shields suck compared to armor, I agree, I am thinking about this setup which that I put in another post : 4 Dual 425mm ACs, 2 Heavy Launchers AB, Web, 6 cap charger IIs 2 1600 plates and 2 Large Accomodations 15 Medium Drones I don't know if its better than a shield tank but seems like it could be fun. Bad setup. Without any of the minmatar bonuses you have a very low damage output for a BS. The 2 1600 plates will make you really slow, even with an AB. I don't think you have enough cap recharge to run 2 large accos forever (not that it will matter). Your lack of resists mean that another BS will take some time to chew through your armor, but even some cruisers would be able to break your tank. And on an insured ship this means exaclty what? Ill trade a ship that is is defacto for a ship that is not thought about yet capable. Who said it was the best... noone... its different and IS capable.
Ebil Icequeen	Posted - 2005.08.07 15:43:00 - [21] are we forgetting that shield tankers have their armor/hull hp to fall back on after the tank fails?...once an armor tanker loses his tank he is pretty screwed. A crow (shield tanker) uses armor plating and does pretty well, why doesn't everyone stop trying to nerf stuff and just get on with it.
JoeSomebody	Posted - 2005.08.07 15:53:00 - [22] Originally by: Ebil Icequeen are we forgetting that shield tankers have their armor/hull hp to fall back on after the tank fails?...once an armor tanker loses his tank he is pretty screwed. no, it is you forgeting that armor tank uses both shield and armor, while shield tank - only shields. ____ When flying by Concord Customs Commander's Dominix I distinctly heard him saying "... world domination..."
Nafri	Posted - 2005.08.07 16:00:00 - [23] Originally by: JoeSomebody Originally by: Caeden Nicomachean Originally by: Pottsey ôAs has been mentioned many times before, make extenders low slot. Give a healthy stacking penalty to ensure nutty setups don't happen.ö Most people are complaining the hitpoints are to low on shield extenders and you want to lower them even more by giving a healthy stacking penalty! WhatÆs the reasoning in that and how will that fix anything? Let me be clearer. 1. Make extenders low slot 2. Apply a harsh stacking penalty 3. Adjust the fitting requirements to be more in line with armor plates I have counter suggestion: 1) make EW high slot 2) make small/micro/medium extenders closer to their armor counterparts hp-wise EW highslots is not very wise, cause all EW ships have midslots for it Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now?
Caeden Nicomachean	Posted - 2005.08.07 16:03:00 - [24] Originally by: Ebil Icequeen are we forgetting that shield tankers have their armor/hull hp to fall back on after the tank fails?...once an armor tanker loses his tank he is pretty screwed. A crow (shield tanker) uses armor plating and does pretty well, why doesn't everyone stop trying to nerf stuff and just get on with it. Don't feed the trolls.
Harry Voyager	Posted - 2005.08.07 16:07:00 - [25] Edited by: Harry Voyager on 07/08/2005 16:09:40 Originally by: Caeden Nicomachean Originally by: Harry Voyager A stacking penalty is out of line for a linear progression device, such as shield and armour extenders. It was appropriate for hardeners because hardeners have a geometric effect that made 2nd and 3rd hardeners even more effective than the first hardener added. Frankly I fail to see your reasoning at all why mounting multiple extenders or plates should be nerfed, besides a desire to force everyone into very narrow ship fitting capabilities. As for the hp increase given by shield extenders, right now it is balanced such that one cannot build a hard passive tank. Were shield extenders given even greater hp boost, then it would, in fact, be quite viable to built a hard passive tank. I.e. you would see Apoc grade passive tanks. I think you answered your own question here - stacking penalties would ensure passive tanks don't get out of control. And I want diversity in setups, not the opposite.. Even with a massive stacking penalty single extender tankign would still be extremely potent with only a modest increase in extender capacity. Given even a single 3000hp shield extender, it is quite possible to make a low CPU/Grid 110 sps peak tank just on a Tempest. Combined with the 9000+ shield hp one would have to chew through just to get to the crunchy center, we're talking about a well neigh unstoppable tank here. You can't even vamp the thing to death, because it's tank doesn't rely on cap. Even bumping it up to 2500 hp per extender starts to push single extender passive tanks into effectiveness. I really don't think you've thought through passive shield tanking. Harry Voyager
Caeden Nicomachean	Posted - 2005.08.07 16:10:00 - [26] Originally by: Nafri EW highslots is not very wise, cause all EW ships have midslots for it So restrict the change to webbers, maybe scramblers.
Caeden Nicomachean	Posted - 2005.08.07 16:16:00 - [27] Originally by: Harry Voyager Given even a single 3000hp shield extender, it is quite possible to make a low CPU/Grid 110 sps peak tank just on a Tempest. Combined with the 9000+ shield hp one would have to chew through just to get to the crunchy center, we're talking about a well neigh unstoppable tank here. You can't even vamp the thing to death, because it's tank doesn't rely on cap. Even bumping it up to 2500 hp per extender starts to push single extender passive tanks into effectiveness. I really don't think you've thought through passive shield tanking. This discussion is aimed at frigates. The other ship classes neither have fitting issues for shield tanking, nor do they need fit a scrambler/webber if they have a tackler about. Cruisers and up have realistic options, want to increase that at the frigate level. The trick is doing it without creating more problems than it solves, that is all. Moving web and maybe scram to highslots seems like an interesting way to deal with it, along with some fitting love for the lower level extenders.
JoeSomebody	Posted - 2005.08.07 16:18:00 - [28] Originally by: Nafri EW highslots is not very wise, cause all EW ships have midslots for it good point... so i retract that and change EW for just web/scram as was suggested above ____ When flying by Concord Customs Commander's Dominix I distinctly heard him saying "... world domination..."
Hanns	Posted - 2005.08.07 16:46:00 - [29] Edited by: Hanns on 07/08/2005 16:47:46 I agree that shield extenders need some love, but plz stop comparing Battleship modules to Cruiser to frigate modules!! 400mm = Cruiser, so dont compare to a small shield extender, same for 800mm is a BS module, so dont compare to a Medium extender just view the 1600mm as an XLarge shield extender (i know that dosent exist but thats how the plates pan out.) Sig by Mr Floppyknickers
Junna Isiene	Posted - 2005.08.07 17:13:00 - [30] Originally by: Harry Voyager Given even a single 3000hp shield extender, it is quite possible to make a low CPU/Grid 110 sps peak tank just on a Tempest. Combined with the 9000+ shield hp one would have to chew through just to get to the crunchy center, we're talking about a well neigh unstoppable tank here. In order to achieve 110 shield per second peak recharge on Tempest with single 3000 hp shield extender, the shield recharge rate would need to be reduced from base 2000 sec to 200 sec, that is raduced 10 times. Please post exact setup which would result in this kind of shield recharge. Because something tells me it'd take enough slots to ensure this awesome tank could do f.ck all but awesomely tank... which is hardly something to get in arms about.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.