Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aivo Dresden
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
151
|
Posted - 2013.12.21 13:14:00 -
[31] - Quote
Nice thread! Some good information. |
Decaneos
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2013.12.21 15:04:00 -
[32] - Quote
Aralieus wrote:Tracking Disruptor II
The t2 version is half the price of its meta 4, so if you have spare fitting its only logical you would fit the T2 varient thus it does have its use. |
Alice Ituin
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
20
|
Posted - 2013.12.21 16:33:00 -
[33] - Quote
ECCM Radar II meta 4 costs a fraction of the T2, needs less cpu and less cap why do people even build those?^^ |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1923
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 00:12:00 -
[34] - Quote
Price is/should not be a factor when it comes to deciding what is better meta4 or T2. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Decaneos
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
62
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 01:11:00 -
[35] - Quote
Cant seem to find anymore at the moment! |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1923
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 02:45:00 -
[36] - Quote
T2 stasis webifier is worst than meta 4 (by means of fitting requirements) T2 warp scrambler is worse (by means of fitting requirements) Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Decaneos
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
63
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 12:10:00 -
[37] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:T2 stasis webifier is worst than meta 4 (by means of fitting requirements) T2 warp scrambler is worse (by means of fitting requirements)
this may be true, but the T2 version is cheaper thus if you have fitting space you would buy the t2 version for your pvp ship. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1924
|
Posted - 2013.12.24 14:01:00 -
[38] - Quote
Decaneos wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:T2 stasis webifier is worst than meta 4 (by means of fitting requirements) T2 warp scrambler is worse (by means of fitting requirements) this may be true, but the T2 version is cheaper thus if you have fitting space you would buy the t2 version for your pvp ship. The T2 version is only cheaper specifically because it is worse than the meta 4 version. If the T2 version is buffed or tr meta 4 version is nerfed the prices will change accordingly.
This is true for all meta 4 that is more expensive than T2. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
nyord Miromme
Eat My Shorts Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2013.12.26 18:31:00 -
[39] - Quote
i have a strange one for the second post mining laser upgrade meta 4 is better than T2 it cost like infinite. and i not in agrement their are some meta 4 mudules that are hilarios expensive and not better than T2 like damage controll shild boost amp and microauxilary power core. |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
460
|
Posted - 2013.12.27 13:53:00 -
[40] - Quote
Please do not consider price for this list. Price is set entirely buy market supply/demand and is a variable. Despite the fact that T2 is manufactured by players and meta gear is loot only, there is little correlation between where the items come from and price.
For example, at the time of this post, T2 ECM is far more expensive than meta 4. It used to be the other way around.
I'm glad to see this post get stickied. The disparity between meta 4 and T2 gear is a big black eye on equipment balancing that really needs to be addressed. Free Ripley Weaver! |
|
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
172
|
Posted - 2013.12.28 14:43:00 -
[41] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Despite the fact that T2 is manufactured by players and meta gear is loot only, there is little correlation between where the items come from and price.
True most of the time, but there are exceptions. Internal force field arrays would probably be a lot cheaper if they could be looted from more than a single niche faction that everyone hates fighting even more than most pve
|
Niclas Solo
Caldari High Prime The Marmite Collective
26
|
Posted - 2013.12.28 16:13:00 -
[42] - Quote
Jon Joringer wrote:Niclas Solo wrote:Small and medium cap boosters, large also if you don't use navy 800. Web and short point. There's a difference of being able to fit one more navy 400 charge in the tech II medium cap booster as opposed to the meta 4. Quite handy if you are battling against neuts and so don't want to use 800s.
Of course, thats a huge different if you have room for one more. But if you use navy 400 in small or navy 800 in medium or standard 800 in large then there is no reason to use T2.
Also one medium meta 4 with one navy 800 give more cap/sec then a medium T2 with 3 navy 400. |
Niclas Solo
Caldari High Prime The Marmite Collective
26
|
Posted - 2013.12.28 16:22:00 -
[43] - Quote
Decaneos wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:T2 stasis webifier is worst than meta 4 (by means of fitting requirements) T2 warp scrambler is worse (by means of fitting requirements) this may be true, but the T2 version is cheaper thus if you have fitting space you would buy the t2 version for your pvp ship.
Don't forget that they use a lot less cap also, around 20-30%. I think that alone is worth a few isk. |
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
635
|
Posted - 2013.12.31 05:21:00 -
[44] - Quote
Add to the list:: Capacitor Power Relay II
T2 version uses more than twice CPU for the same price and benefits. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |
Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
131
|
Posted - 2013.12.31 14:51:00 -
[45] - Quote
Add to the list those modules that you have left out due to price. Prices fluctuate all the time, the stats don't though (until an update of course).
Also add:
Capacitor Power Relay II (meta4 has less fittings, less shield boost penalty and the same cap recharge bonus)
EM-Thermal-Kinetic-Explosive Plating II (meta4 gives the same while costing less and requiring the skill at I)
|
Ace Echo
The Shadow Raiders Fleet Coordination Coalition
48
|
Posted - 2014.01.02 02:44:00 -
[46] - Quote
It appears that the t2 ECCMs can take more heat than the meta-4 ones. That's a stat advantage. Not a big advantage but might at least be worth parenthetically mentioning. |
Niclas Solo
Caldari High Prime The Marmite Collective
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.03 17:10:00 -
[47] - Quote
Ace Echo wrote:It appears that the t2 ECCMs can take more heat than the meta-4 ones. That's a stat advantage. Not a big advantage but might at least be worth parenthetically mentioning.
Are you sure about that? EFT say meta 4 last 5:40 for me and T2 4:10 T2 also use 33% more cap. |
Decaneos
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
81
|
Posted - 2014.01.03 17:31:00 -
[48] - Quote
Ace Echo wrote:It appears that the t2 ECCMs can take more heat than the meta-4 ones. That's a stat advantage. Not a big advantage but might at least be worth parenthetically mentioning.
I'm sorry but i do not see this, the heat damage is the same
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
839
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 08:31:00 -
[49] - Quote
I wish that you could see fit to give the T2 MWDs a special place on your second post. To say their bonus is situational is ignoring that the tiny bit of a bonus they actually give is more or less eliminated by actually usiing the module. They cost 17% of your max capacitor instead of 19%, but they cost 10% more capacitor to activate. Their heat absorption appears to be identical from the attributes list. The only other difference is they cost more powergrid.
So you pay more powergrid for a module that only saves you capacitor when it's off, and may actually cost you more when it's on. That's not what I call situational. That's a case of it's only better when you might just not want to fit a MWD at all. And that's not to mention its price is on the high end of tech 2 modules.
And speaking of price, the market price of meta 4 modules fluctuates a lot. For one, the meta 4 versions of energy neutralizers are often more expensive than the tech 2, but not always because they aren't actually an uncommon drop. They're just popular. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2112
|
Posted - 2014.01.13 13:24:00 -
[50] - Quote
Not sure if it has been mentioned, but meta 4 mining laser upgrade is better than T2 as well as meta 4 ice harvester upgrades are better than t2.
This one is kinda an odd situation. Meta 4 remote armor repairers when everything is broken down it seems that meta 4 is superior to t2. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
843
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 04:22:00 -
[51] - Quote
Meta 4 mining laser and ice harvester upgrades are indeed superior to tech 2, but they are much more expensive.
Meta 4 armor repairers repair the same amount but slower and they cost more capacitor. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2112
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 04:36:00 -
[52] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Meta 4 armor repairers repair the same amount but slower and they cost more capacitor. They use the same amount of cap, and have lower fitting requirements, but have about a 10% slower cycle time.
And you know cost doesnt meant anything when it comes to meta 1-4 modules. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
843
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 04:38:00 -
[53] - Quote
No, they cost more cap per cycle. That means more cap used for the same amount of armor repaired. The meta 4 repairers are both slower and less efficient.
The price of meta 4 modules matters when they are upwards of 5 million ISK and the tech 2 is barely over 1 mil. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2112
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 04:56:00 -
[54] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:No, they cost more cap per cycle. That means more cap used for the same amount of armor repaired. The meta 4 repairers are both slower and less efficient.
Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer 600MW 32CPU Activation Cost 252 GJ Optimal Range 8400m Activation Time 5s Armor HP Repaired 384
Large Remote Armor Repairer II 660MW 48CPU Activation Cost 252 GJ Optimal Range 8400m Activation Time 4.5s Armor HP Repaired 384 Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
849
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 17:51:00 -
[55] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer Activation Cost 252 GJ
Large Remote Armor Repairer II Activation Cost 252 GJ
That's interesting. You check only the large, and I check only the small and medium. I stopped there because I assumed the same trend would follow to the large. Anyway, the large tech 2 has the same activation cost at the large meta 4, but the medium and small meta 4s have a higher activation cost than the tech 2. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. (had this sig BEFORE Odyssey BC rebalance) And bring back the missile Inquisitor!! |
Dkeh Weis
Benzene Inc. Relic Accord
51
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 17:40:00 -
[56] - Quote
T2 cargo scans should not be on this list. Same fitting requirement, same activation cost, cycle time is 2 seconds slower. When using them to scan ghost sites, the extra time is definitely worth the cost. |
Decaneos
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
92
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 14:26:00 -
[57] - Quote
Dkeh Weis wrote:T2 cargo scans should not be on this list. Same fitting requirement, same activation cost, cycle time is 2 seconds slower. When using them to scan ghost sites, the extra time is definitely worth the cost.
Sorry but that is not what i see at all, the stats for the meta 4 and the T2 are the same except for the meta 4 requiring 1 less cpu. Perhaps you were looking at the cargo scanner I which indeed has a 5 sec cycle time, how ever the meta 4 has 3 seconds just like the T2. |
Dkeh Weis
Benzene Inc. Relic Accord
51
|
Posted - 2014.01.22 16:40:00 -
[58] - Quote
You are entirely right, and I derped out hard >_< Eve will make you work a solid month all on your own for your first cookie. Then kick you in the nuts and take that cookie, and laugh at you for thinking you could have a cookie at all. |
Dan Rae
EVE University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 15:50:00 -
[59] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Please do not consider price for this list. Price is set entirely buy market supply/demand and is a variable. Despite the fact that T2 is manufactured by players and meta gear is loot only, there is little correlation between where the items come from and price.
For example, at the time of this post, T2 ECM is far more expensive than meta 4. It used to be the other way around.
I'm glad to see this post get stickied. The disparity between meta 4 and T2 gear is a big black eye on equipment balancing that really needs to be addressed.
Fully agree, T2 should be superior in stats and cost more, otherwise it would be "pointless" training skills to a high enough level to equip T2 modules throughout. |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
82
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 19:56:00 -
[60] - Quote
Ta'krite wrote:Regardless of how situational the t2 mwds are they do not qualify for this list as they do have a stat advantage in one area.
It is a wash with the meta...yeha they have a smaller cap penalty but are more intensive to run resulting in basically being no better. Plus they are harder to fit. So they are by any analysis of the facts...worse.
T2 should offer a more significant advantage in cap penalty reduction, as deadspace c-types start at about -8% instead of t2's -19%. Change t2 to say... -15% or -13% and we're in range of a real improvement. And make its cap use per cycle the same as the meta. Leave fittings higher as a way to 'pay' for those advantages while giving a clear reason to spend cpu/grid in that manner. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |