EVE Search - Dissapointed in T2 webs

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Dissapointed in T2 webs

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Galen Silas Gallente Mean Corp	Posted - 2007.01.26 16:03:00 - [31] A Tech2 module should Always do better than a named module (besides faction, deadspace, or officer). Isn't that the whole F'n point of training for and making Tech2 items?!?!?!?!?!
Jet Collins Dynamic Endeavors	Posted - 2007.01.26 17:06:00 - [32] Would have to agree I see no point in buying a T2 when all the named out there that are better are so easy to come by. I say give it more range, 11, 12, 12.5 maybe. Dynamic Endeavors is now Recuiting.!! Contact me in game for deatails about the corp. Mostly a PvE corp, with Jump clones avaiale in Empire and 0.0.
Bazman Caldari Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:37:00 - [33] Honestly, they should follow the same convention as most other T2 modules, Same stats as best named but harsher activation/fitting. Case in point: 90% at 10km, with higher CPU and cap use than a T1 Web. -----
Jet Collins Dynamic Endeavors	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:14:00 - [34] Originally by: Bazman Honestly, they should follow the same convention as most other T2 modules, Same stats as best named but harsher activation/fitting. Case in point: 90% at 10km, with higher CPU and cap use than a T1 Web. Isn't that Name Weapons that follow that Rule not moduales. Named Hardners in Empir are not as good a t2. T2 have better reistance. Dynamic Endeavors is now Recuiting.!! Contact me in game for deatails about the corp. Mostly a PvE corp, with Jump clones avaiale in Empire and 0.0.
Durethia Momentum. Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.26 23:41:00 - [35] Originally by: Kirtan Loor Right now it is useless. Making it into Fleeting equivalent with worse fitting and more cap usage would be best fix to this module. Incorrect. There should be an advantage to T2, a clear one at that. There are some T2 modules that don't even compare to second best named T1 modules. These I feel will be fixed in time. There are a small number of T2 modules that provide no benefit over best named T1 modules, with stiffer fitting requirements (T2 NOS for example), this too, will be fixed in time. Real T2 modules are obviously more useful than best named T1. T2 Guns vs T1 Guns, T2 ships vs T1 ships, T2 Armor Reps vs T1 Armor Reps, T2 drones vs T1 drones, T2 MWD vs T1 MWD, T2 Sensor Booster vs T1 Sensor Booster, T2 EANM vs T1 EANM, T2 Damage Ctrl vs T1 Damage Ctrl, T2 Mining Lasers vs T1 Mining Lasers, T2 ECM vs T1 ECM... The list is enourmous and ranging from Industry to PvP. T2 is better than T1 in 95% of all modules. Look at Faction/Officer/Deadspace modules, the only ones that are of exceptional value are the modules that exceed T2 stats. It's why Shadow Serpentis tank modules have little value as a Shadow Energized Reactive Membrane provides no real benefit over fitting a T2 Energized Reactive... Hardeners, et al. A T2 Webber should well exceed the stats of best named. Maybe it doesn't have to exceed the best webber in the game, officer, deadspace etc. But it should be far better than best named. Fleeting webber is 90% reduction in velocity at 10KM range. A T2 Webber should be, lets say, 95% reduction in velocity at 15KM range.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2007.01.27 15:28:00 - [36] They should be like fleeting but have higher fitting reqs. Making them have higher range would be unbalancing. - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Kerosene Caldari Fun Inc Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.27 18:05:00 - [37] To the folks asking for 95% webs... WTF?!???? You realise you're asking for a T2 webber that's 50% better than it's best named counterpart right? T2 mods are traditionally 15-20 better so you want a 91-92% webber at the most. Range should not be changed for fear of ballsing up balance with the Minmatar recons. __ Originally by: Blacklight on BoB Just to be sure everyone is clear... We use spies. We listen to your TS. We feed you false intel. We have no qualms about it whatsoever..
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.01.27 18:57:00 - [38] Webbers in general need to be redesigned. ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
Hllaxiu Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.01.27 19:29:00 - [39] Originally by: Durethia A T2 Webber should be, lets say, 95% reduction in velocity at 15KM range. mmmm, 95% webbing at 51km without gang mods on my huginn... --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson
Waut 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.29 14:20:00 - [40] Edited by: Waut on 29/01/2007 14:17:11 Originally by: Durethia Originally by: Kirtan Loor A T2 Webber should be, lets say, 95% reduction in velocity at 15KM range. Overpowered, much? Seriously, it should be something like Bazman said In Soviet EVE, roids pop YOU
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 14:35:00 - [41] I like it. T2 is already too powerfull . T2 shoudl not be 100% better. It has a better range and that is very good! I prefer to use 2 x t2 web athan 2x best named t1 web. The extra range worht a lot! If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
MrLobster Cosmic Odyssey Chorus of Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.29 15:22:00 - [42] Idea 1) My moneys on 85% at 12km, in range of med nos II (as someone already stated). Idea 2) But if only opting for a 10km range, using a new webbing skill (as someone suggested) you could have 1km per lvl on T2 only, so maximum would be 15km at 80%. Idea 3) As Idea 2... but 500 meters per level, and 1% added speed decrease per level to T2 Webs only. Basic T2 Mod would be 80% + 10km range. So on lvl 5 of "Web Handling", you would have 12.5 km range at 85% speed penalty. A nice benefit I think :) ______
Spaced Skunk Buffed Rumpuss Zit Dids	Posted - 2007.01.29 16:03:00 - [43] Does this mean that the Arazu gets a nice cheapish 24KM Disrupter and a 9KM Scram to help them. And the Huginn has to stick with fleeting? No extra range or effect. Balance?....
Yolandia	Posted - 2007.01.29 16:27:00 - [44] Originally by: Kerosene To the folks asking for 95% webs... WTF?!???? You realise you're asking for a T2 webber that's 50% better than it's best named counterpart right? T2 mods are traditionally 15-20 better so you want a 91-92% webber at the most. Range should not be changed for fear of ballsing up balance with the Minmatar recons. In fact, 95% would be 100% more effective than the best named (90%) webber. Half the speed=double the effect. So this would be a modules 100% better than the best named with 50% more range. No way this is gonna happen. I think it's more probable that the named webbers are going to be nerfed to match the T2 version. The best named currently is 150% better than the standard version...

Pages: 1 [2] :: 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.