EVE Search - The 50% and plates/shield extenders

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The 50% and plates/shield extenders

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
CivrGrrl19	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:10:00 - [1] Some else already made the point that the 50% bonus to plates will create a huge divide between ships that literally can not fit (plates) and those that typically fit plates because they have PG to spare. This person was correct, and I hope that this issue is recognized. It has also been recognized by someone that the 50% bonus gives a stealth super-buff to passive tank bonus ships. This person was ALSO correct, and I hope that this issue is recognized. I have to bring up a seperate issue however - one that I haven't seen addressed. What about ships whose typical setup is large numbers of shield extenders (passive shield tanks)? Doesn't this 50% bonus benefit them WAY too much? Take for example the Ferox. Typical setups for the Ferox include between 2 and 4 shield extenders. In "the old days", that meant that between 4200 and 8400 extra shield HP were being added to the ship (I'm assuming tech 2 large shield extenders here). Post-50% bonus, this means that between 6300 and 12600 shield HP is being added. That is a pretty huge bonus. I think there is something wrong here... The larger the HP of a ship, the larger the bonus is. Because passive tanking is something that isn't really possible on armor tanking ships, I think this creates a huge imbalance. Does anyone else see this?
lofty29 Praxiteles Inc.	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:14:00 - [2] The ships that cannot fit plates are having pg + cpu boosts coincidentally, its roughly the right amount to fit a plate for that class of ship. --- Praxitele's Inc. is Recruiting!
CivrGrrl19	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:16:00 - [3] Edited by: CivrGrrl19 on 22/10/2006 11:17:07 But plates hurt more than just fittings. Megathron with plate? Ugh. Thorax with plate? Ugh. Not to mention the brutix! Thing is, even though sig radius is affected by the shield extenders, that doesn't really matter for the ferox or raven. Quite aside from the MASSIVE boost that passive shield tanked ships are getting from this :S My two favorite ships are completely screwed.
ThaMa Gebir Gallente Raddick Explorations Myriad Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:17:00 - [4] I do wish that it was possible for armour to regenerate itself (regen plates anyone?) but I can also see the problem, it's not like a family saloon automatically heals (regardless of time) when the mom accidentally pranged it when trying to park the damn thing. Balance in this sense is non-existent. But the RL aspect makes sense. There will be no survivors now that i'm around - Xorus pwnt - Immy
CivrGrrl19	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:18:00 - [5] Yeah, I guess I'm just thinking that plates/shield extenders either: - need to be looked at on an individual basis - shoudn't be boosted at all
Maghook	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:21:00 - [6] Edited by: Maghook on 22/10/2006 11:21:10 Originally by: CivrGrrl19 Edited by: CivrGrrl19 on 22/10/2006 11:17:07 But plates hurt more than just fittings. Megathron with plate? Ugh. Thorax with plate? Ugh. Not to mention the brutix! Thing is, even though sig radius is affected by the shield extenders, that doesn't really matter for the ferox or raven. Quite aside from the MASSIVE boost that passive shield tanked ships are getting from this :S My two favorite ships are completely screwed. I fly a thorax with 1600mm plate with no problems
CivrGrrl19	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:22:00 - [7] But heavy electron thorax with an 800mm plate is still the best balance of tank+gank. With this new "boost", good-bye 800mm medium gun thorax - because everyone and their sister will be flying small gun (BARF) large plate thoraxes.
Mudkest	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:35:00 - [8] Edited by: Mudkest on 22/10/2006 11:37:33 I'm more worried about how the different weapon systems are affeceted dps wise. I mean, do blasterships have cap to sustain fire for the duration it takes to kill the enemy? if not and blasters need to be turned on/off now and then how will dps over time compare to say AC that dont use cap(just eat trough ammo like theres no tomorrow) and how will artilleries fare? the heavy alpha just wont mean as much so how does arty dps get affected during combat, will theye be worth using. Will ac's casue a black hole on ones bank account? will blasterships still be effective or will their capacitor not cut it? how will pulse laser, beam cannons and railguns compare to the other stuff? yup missiles are left out, but only problem I can forsee with those are same as AC, ammo consumption, cargo bay and cost. - When talking about the itsy bitsy spider, try not to start with itchy, you'll get the second part wrong as well
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:46:00 - [9] Originally by: CivrGrrl19 It has also been recognized by someone that the 50% bonus gives a stealth super-buff to passive tank bonus ships. This person was ALSO correct, and I hope that this issue is recognized. I have to bring up a seperate issue however - one that I haven't seen addressed. What about ships whose typical setup is large numbers of shield extenders (passive shield tanks)? Doesn't this 50% bonus benefit them WAY too much? I wrote a post about this in General Discussion yesterday actually, but it doesnt matter. The fact is that passive tanking gets a big boost with this change, and Caldari benefits the most since they have shield resistance bonuses which is perfect for it. Minmatar has shield boost bonuses on some ships, which is useless for it. So this change boosts ships like the Rohk and the Ferox. How much depends on the number of extenders. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
CivrGrrl19	Posted - 2006.10.22 11:49:00 - [10] At least I'm not the only one seeing it. I feel like I should be training for drone ships or something. It looks like plated drone ships and missile ships will be the pwn-all. But I don't like drones. I like blasters! :(
Xori Ruscuv The Scope	Posted - 2006.10.22 12:59:00 - [11] The shield extenders and plates are the bigger issue, yes. And as Jim said, the passive bonuses are a problem. I'm tired of seeing "HP boost won't be the end of the world", and "adapt or die". There is a certain point where enough is enough. HP boost may NOT have been a huge issue previously, but there is reason to believe that a flat 50% HP boost will be a detriment to gameplay this time. And "adapt or die"? Easy to "adapt or die" for people who haven't put millions of skill points into some of the weapon systems/ships that will be significantly weakened by this "boost". Bleh.
CptEagle Gallente Stargate Command...	Posted - 2006.10.22 13:12:00 - [12] I wish Tuxford would work on problems that the players see as problems too, instead, he now creates a new problem.
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.22 13:21:00 - [13] Oversizing is the real issue that I have. I originally suggested a mod that boosts 50% hp. But every ship could fit it comfortably. The issue I have with plates/extenders is that some ships can fit oversized plates MUCH easier than others can and not sacrifice too much dps, while others will struggle with even appropriately sized plates. Drone boats, low grid weapons (missiles) get even better. And thats the last things we need to boost right now. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Yamaeda	Posted - 2006.10.22 13:37:00 - [14] Opposite to what many seem to think, the 50% increase in base shield+armor and extenders/plates dont change ship balance. They do however change weapon and cap efficiancy by alot, but that's another issue. If a shield/plate added 40% armor before, they'll add 40% armor now, even though the absolute number is ofcourse bigger. As shield recharge is changed to result in the same peak recharge passive tanking isn't going to change very much. You'll get a bigger buffer, just like you'll get a bigger armor buffer, but the same peak recharge. (this is slightly skewed on/by T2 ships) As all armor and shield gets +50% it's the same as if all weapons got -33% damage. It'll make the difference between tanking and ganking ships bigger, is that a bad thing? As fights get longer, missiles will be better for pvp, as the initial hit-delay-penalty is getting smaller. This might actually make us see some missile spamming shield tankers in pvp. My main concern is the cap usage of some weapons and the relative power-up of cap-less weapons. No turret mounted weapon should be cap-less. Unless cap is worthless, infinite damage/cap is overpowered. /Y
MOS DEF E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.10.22 13:40:00 - [15] This patch will break the Eos and Astarte. To make good use of their boni you rely on active tank and most even use dual repper setups. With the 50% bonus for plates the rep efficiency bonus is even poorer then it was before since you have to rep for a long time to get the same effect of a plate. Since you also have to fire longer to take down a target the ship simply cannot do both anymore wich means you have to go the plate route. Plates and blasters on an allready heavy BC is a bad combo. This example just shows again how badly thought throught Tux`s changes are. He wants ships to last longer in combat: Just slap on more hitpoints and be done with it. That`s su halfassed and badly thought through it`s not funny anymore. It`s creating imbalance left and right. Fix 1 thing while braking multiple others.
FraXy Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.10.22 13:54:00 - [16] Originally by: MOS DEF This patch will break the Eos and Astarte. To make good use of their boni you rely on active tank and most even use dual repper setups. With the 50% bonus for plates the rep efficiency bonus is even poorer then it was before since you have to rep for a long time to get the same effect of a plate. Since you also have to fire longer to take down a target the ship simply cannot do both anymore wich means you have to go the plate route. Plates and blasters on an allready heavy BC is a bad combo. This example just shows again how badly thought throught Tux`s changes are. He wants ships to last longer in combat: Just slap on more hitpoints and be done with it. That`s su halfassed and badly thought through it`s not funny anymore. It`s creating imbalance left and right. Fix 1 thing while braking multiple others. Mos, "This patch will break the..." and "Fix 1 thing while braking multiple.." SPELLING ERROR!!! This is my lazy attempt to make an uber-signature, please go away!
Kapitanleutnant Mei	Posted - 2006.10.22 14:49:00 - [17] Originally by: CivrGrrl19 But heavy electron thorax with an 800mm plate is still the best balance of tank+gank. With this new "boost", good-bye 800mm medium gun thorax - because everyone and their sister will be flying small gun (BARF) large plate thoraxes. Its actually possible to fit a 5* heavy electron and 1600mm plate setup if you switch out the dmg control for a tech2 RCU (with AWU 3) - I guess many people are going to be training up energy grid upgrades 5 after the boost
MOS DEF E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.10.22 15:36:00 - [18] Originally by: FraXy Originally by: MOS DEF This patch will break the Eos and Astarte. To make good use of their boni you rely on active tank and most even use dual repper setups. With the 50% bonus for plates the rep efficiency bonus is even poorer then it was before since you have to rep for a long time to get the same effect of a plate. Since you also have to fire longer to take down a target the ship simply cannot do both anymore wich means you have to go the plate route. Plates and blasters on an allready heavy BC is a bad combo. This example just shows again how badly thought throught Tux`s changes are. He wants ships to last longer in combat: Just slap on more hitpoints and be done with it. That`s su halfassed and badly thought through it`s not funny anymore. It`s creating imbalance left and right. Fix 1 thing while braking multiple others. Mos, "This patch will break the..." and "Fix 1 thing while braking multiple.." SPELLING ERROR!!! Eww you haunt me on eve-o allready now! Bad spelling maybe but my point stands nevertheless.
Slender Brenda Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.22 15:46:00 - [19] Originally by: MOS DEF Originally by: FraXy Originally by: MOS DEF This patch will break the Eos and Astarte. To make good use of their boni you rely on active tank and most even use dual repper setups. With the 50% bonus for plates the rep efficiency bonus is even poorer then it was before since you have to rep for a long time to get the same effect of a plate. Since you also have to fire longer to take down a target the ship simply cannot do both anymore wich means you have to go the plate route. Plates and blasters on an allready heavy BC is a bad combo. This example just shows again how badly thought throught Tux`s changes are. He wants ships to last longer in combat: Just slap on more hitpoints and be done with it. That`s su halfassed and badly thought through it`s not funny anymore. It`s creating imbalance left and right. Fix 1 thing while braking multiple others. Mos, "This patch will break the..." and "Fix 1 thing while braking multiple.." SPELLING ERROR!!! Eww you haunt me on eve-o allready now! Bad spelling maybe but my point stands nevertheless. You two just sightseeing in t3h north or ?
FraXy Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.10.22 17:44:00 - [20] Originally by: Slender Brenda Originally by: MOS DEF Originally by: FraXy Originally by: MOS DEF This patch will break the Eos and Astarte. To make good use of their boni you rely on active tank and most even use dual repper setups. With the 50% bonus for plates the rep efficiency bonus is even poorer then it was before since you have to rep for a long time to get the same effect of a plate. Since you also have to fire longer to take down a target the ship simply cannot do both anymore wich means you have to go the plate route. Plates and blasters on an allready heavy BC is a bad combo. This example just shows again how badly thought throught Tux`s changes are. He wants ships to last longer in combat: Just slap on more hitpoints and be done with it. That`s su halfassed and badly thought through it`s not funny anymore. It`s creating imbalance left and right. Fix 1 thing while braking multiple others. Mos, "This patch will break the..." and "Fix 1 thing while braking multiple.." SPELLING ERROR!!! Eww you haunt me on eve-o allready now! Bad spelling maybe but my point stands nevertheless. You two just sightseeing in t3h north or ? Noobjuice > too lazy to leave pure blind so you join iron fraxy? :D This is my lazy attempt to make an uber-signature, please go away!

Pages: 1 :: [one 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.