| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Silverlancer
   |
Posted - 2004.02.28 13:59:00 -
[31]
 Quote:
EVERYONE STOP!
This guy is using Cap Power Relay, which is 10% (a basic (tech 0) modules)
If you get Cap Power Relay I's, you will notice they haven't been changed yet.
Now sit down, and think about that...
|
Cao Cao
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 14:01:00 -
[32]
Considering that enough flames have been thrown already, I need to defend the mythical nerf before it happens.
Does everyone remember when the only thing anyone equipped on their ships were damage mods? Yea, that was unbalanced. Now, the only thing anyone ever equips is cap relays in the low slots. The reason is because they give you a pure 20% bonus with no drawback whatsoever. power diags are balanced b/c they take high amounts of CPU and give you a 7.5% bonus, not a 20% bonus.
That bein said, there was a lengthy multi-page discussion on THIS VERY FORUM with input from nearly everyone, and the consensus was that there needs to be changes made to the cap power relay. Essentially the consensus was that one of two things needed to happen: shield recharge needed to be made useful so as the penalty would actually mean something, or the penalty needed to be changed to either penalize shield HPs or shield boost power.
Like, hello? it's the same deal as what happened with the damage mods. THEY ARE UNBALANCED. Personally, I prefer changing the penalty to shield boost power. 20% bonus to capacitor, 25% penalty to shield boosting using shield boosters. That nullifies the workaround of using cap power relays to take power out of your shields (via recharge) and put it right back into your shields (via boosting) which makes no sense at all.
BUT THEY NEED TO BE CHANGED IN SOME WAY, RIGHT NOW THEY ARE RETARDED CONSIDERING OTHER MODULES . . .
And in terms of people threatening to quit over a module being changed: !!! ROFLMAO !!! Slithereen, can I have your stuff? I mean, just quit now! And give me your stuff. I don't wanna mine anymore anyway, or NPC hunt so I would be better off if you gave me your stuff right now. That would make me very happy!
In fact, Slithereen, can I just have your account?
LOL!
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 14:01:00 -
[33]
Quote:
Edited by: drunkenmaster on 28/02/2004 13:56:31
OMG! Now I'm *really* laughing.
You guys kill me, sometimes.
chances are, some nimrod took the entire stack of CPR I's out of the hangar without realising. Ask a BH to respawn some.
'Puff puff, give. Puff puff, give. You're ****in' up the rotation.'
There is another reason for the 'give' part.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Alexander Rahl
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 14:17:00 -
[34]
Bugger. im always making mistakes when stating modules names. i meant the ones with -25% adn 20% recharge no the Cap power relay I's. but they are reduced now. Cap power relay I,s havent changed. My apologies for the misdirection but, hey ccp do it all the time lol
----/ / /-----<[]>-----\ \ \----
Head of House Rahl
Warleader of the Rahl Clans
"Death and Glory, Honour with Courage, Fury and Vengeance"
- Chronicles of Rahl. |
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 14:18:00 -
[35]
They *do* need to be nerfed, true. As to what form that nerf takes, we just don't know yet.
I was just pointing out the obvious flaw in the original post.
.
|
Lurk
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 14:26:00 -
[36]
In my opionion a severe change to shields (which is needed anyway IMHO) would solve the problem. Why don't give shields a regeneration rate similar or even higher than for cap ? That would make Battleships harder to kill (a common complain "BS die far too fast ...") due to their high natural shield regen rate. Next it would give modules which have +shield regen rate a purpose and of course it would make the penalty of the power relays a real penalty, rendering shield tanking which these modules obsolete, as you could do it better now, using +shield regen rate mods or other power mods +shieldboosters.
Which these change, shieldbooster would need a decrease in power need though.
|
Managalar
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 14:38:00 -
[37]
Quote:
Bugger. im always making mistakes when stating modules names. i meant the ones with -25% adn 20% recharge no the Cap power relay I's. but they are reduced now. Cap power relay I,s havent changed. My apologies for the misdirection but, hey ccp do it all the time lol
LMAO...what do you think's on the Cap Power Relay I => -25% shield recharge and +20% cap recharge.
=======Abaddon=======
=======Abaddon======= |
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 15:41:00 -
[38]
truth be told, I only noticed this poor guys error so quickly, because I made the same error myself about a week ago :)
But I double checked before I posted 
.
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 16:09:00 -
[39]
what about -25% in shield size and +20% cap recharge?
"We brake for nobody"
|
Lansfear
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 16:26:00 -
[40]
Quote:
what about -25% in shield size and +20% cap recharge?
For the love of all thats holy. No.
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 16:28:00 -
[41]
Quote:
Quote:
what about -25% in shield size and +20% cap recharge?
For the love of all thats holy. No.
why?
"We brake for nobody"
|
Lurk
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 16:32:00 -
[42]
I still prefer the idea i posted, but a -% shield HP penalty would do it too, -25% is a bit too high though.
I'd prefer -20%/+20% or -15%/+20%. Would at least make it very painful stacking these items.
|
FileCop AI
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 17:05:00 -
[43]
Lets face it - amarr ships are very very cap dependant. If you don't have a cap recharge around 200 or so, you simply can't fire your guns and use any sort of defense for very long (and you WILL run out of cap nomatter how you fit)
So you suggest taking 25% of the shield? That means an apoc with enough cap relays to be able to use it's guns will have a couple of hundred shield hp? That's even worse than what was written in the thread at first.
Amarr ships need low cap recharge rate, so if this module is to be nerfed as you all so very much wants - then the standard apoc and arm cap recharge rates has to be lowered very much.
But what's the problem? When I fight, I see a wide variety of ships used - doesn't that suggest everything is fine the way it is? Everybody is happy, all ships are being used. Then why in gods name change ANYTHING?
FileCop AI of MASS
Co-CEO |
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 17:16:00 -
[44]
the cap relays need a penalty, whatever u say cant change that. if u want a fast cap recharge rate, u need to sacrifice something, or else it would be unbalanced...
and amarr ships should not get a faster cap recharge, just lower the cap used by the lasers a little...
"We brake for nobody"
|
Kyroki Tirpellan
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 17:27:00 -
[45]
I'm with Lurk, make Shield Recharge mean something. Shield HP penalty is a bad idea imho though. Another solution could be to REALLY up the fitting reqs of the Cap Power Relay I's.
Peace through love, understanding and superior firepower.
Real men structure tank! |
Michaeleen Flynn
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 17:29:00 -
[46]
Cap Relay should be nerfed.
Many of you say "oh now people will just switch to power diagnostics and then those will be nefed" well just to toss the proverbial monkeywrench into that argument, power dianostics use 20 cpu, which quite frankly is a lot and is 5 times more CPU than cap relays use.
Considering power dianostics are not as good as cap relays, yes I do believe a nerf is in order for the cap relay, it is by far the most powerful low slot module right now and it does give battleships way too much juice when stacked, especially on the Apocolypse, which now has so much capicator recharge it's silly.
|
Doppleganger
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 17:48:00 -
[47]
Quote:
the cap relays need a penalty, whatever u say cant change that. if u want a fast cap recharge rate, u need to sacrifice something, or else it would be unbalanced...
and amarr ships should not get a faster cap recharge, just lower the cap used by the lasers a little...
The sticky on top of this forum discusses this... reduced cap usage depending on crystal type.
|
Masi
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 18:32:00 -
[48]
IMO 15% Cap Recharge Rate -15% Sheild Hit Points.
Just my opinion
-------------------------
|
Cao Cao
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 18:56:00 -
[49]
I also favor making shield recharge meaning something. In fact in a recent CSM, I believe it was Hellmar who said that shield recharge WILL in fact mean something in Shiva. Whether or not that means cap relays get fixed in Castor or wait until Shiva is up in the air, however.
If they decide that it is just too imbalancing to make shield recharge a statistic that means something, the only real solution is to make the penalty to shield boost using shield booster modules. A big penalty to shield HP is just not right, it's too harsh. The real problem, the crux of the issue, is when people use these modules to divert power from shield recharge by using the relay, only to funnel it back into their shields through a shield booster. I mean, that is the real issue, and can be addressed by a shield boost penalty instead of shield recharge.
+20% capacitor recharge rate
-25% shield boost using shield boosters
And then it is fixed. Again, however, the BEST route is to actually make shield recharge MEAN something because it would also make all those other shield modules worth something as well ;) you know, the "-10% shield HP, +15% shield recharge" and flux coils and crap. Anyway, y'all get the idea.
|
Kovak
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 19:27:00 -
[50]
Quote:
what about -25% in shield size and +20% cap recharge?
Being an armour tanking blastathon user I feel this would be a great idea ;))
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 19:40:00 -
[51]
-25% shield capacity might be a bit harsh, but as the other dude said, -15% shield capacity might be better...
now "-25% shield boost using shield boosters" would be very harsh as it would STOP all shield tanking... 7xCap Relays will what, give a xl booster like 30 shield per boost? (just a guess)
"We brake for nobody"
|
Cao Cao
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 20:29:00 -
[52]
Quote:
-25% shield capacity might be a bit harsh, but as the other dude said, -15% shield capacity might be better...
now "-25% shield boost using shield boosters" would be very harsh as it would STOP all shield tanking... 7xCap Relays will what, give a xl booster like 30 shield per boost? (just a guess)
That's the point. If u want to shield tank then use power diags. But it makes no sense for an item that is supposed to divert power from shields to be able to re-add that power back into your shields through the "back door" as you can do it now (divert power from shield recharge to just put it right back into them using shield booster). Just use power diags. It is balanced.
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 20:32:00 -
[53]
that will result in every1 armor tanking...
"We brake for nobody"
|
Cao Cao
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 20:36:00 -
[54]
Quote:
that will result in every1 armor tanking...
No it won't. Why not just use power diags? They are awesome and have no drawback except CPU. They give 7.5% cap recharge PLUS a bonus to capacitor HPs (which results in an even better recharge rate b/c of the way recharge is calculated). Sure, maybe ships with lots of low slots will choose to go the armor tanking route, such as the apocalypse and megathron and armageddon and dominix. But isn't that what is supposed to be encouraged in the first place?
Caldari and Minmatar ships who wish to shield tank will be able to effectively just by using power diags instead of cap relays. Minmatar, Gallente and Amarr ships that want to armor tank will have that option by using cap relays. Where's the problem? It won't result in everyone armor tanking, it will just result in a little more thought being put into your low slot setup.
|
Gaius Kador
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 20:39:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Gaius Kador on 28/02/2004 20:41:18
Im seriously relieved this was a 'mess up' ... ... ...
Edit: Need better reading skills!
----------------------------------------------
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 20:52:00 -
[56]
so shield tankers will use powerdiags and armor tankers will use cap relays... who gets the fastest cap recharge?
"We brake for nobody"
|
Michaeleen Flynn
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 20:59:00 -
[57]
Quote:
so shield tankers will use powerdiags and armor tankers will use cap relays... who gets the fastest cap recharge?
there are midslot cap rechargers which can be as powerful as 15% and do not have any penalties.
|
Elve Sorrow
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 21:17:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Elve Sorrow on 28/02/2004 21:21:57
Quote:
Quote:
that will result in every1 armor tanking...
No it won't. Why not just use power diags? They are awesome and have no drawback except CPU. They give 7.5% cap recharge PLUS a bonus to capacitor HPs (which results in an even better recharge rate b/c of the way recharge is calculated). Sure, maybe ships with lots of low slots will choose to go the armor tanking route, such as the apocalypse and megathron and armageddon and dominix. But isn't that what is supposed to be encouraged in the first place?
Caldari and Minmatar ships who wish to shield tank will be able to effectively just by using power diags instead of cap relays. Minmatar, Gallente and Amarr ships that want to armor tank will have that option by using cap relays. Where's the problem? It won't result in everyone armor tanking, it will just result in a little more thought being put into your low slot setup.
Well, i dont see why armour tanks sacrifice a piece of their shield...Shield tanks dont lose half their armour either do they? Besides that, armour tanking right now requires 2 Repairers to be on par with an XL shield booster.
I agree though, Cap relays need to be changed. I still think shield recharge needs to be a usefull attribute.
Edit: And Power diags have the obvious shield HP bonus etc, which Cap relays dont have either. IF this change gets through, we should atleast keep the low CPU requirements for Cap Relays.
/Elve
New Video out! Watch me!
|
Michaeleen Flynn
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 21:25:00 -
[59]
Quote:
Edited by: Elve Sorrow on 28/02/2004 21:21:57
Quote:
Quote:
that will result in every1 armor tanking...
No it won't. Why not just use power diags? They are awesome and have no drawback except CPU. They give 7.5% cap recharge PLUS a bonus to capacitor HPs (which results in an even better recharge rate b/c of the way recharge is calculated). Sure, maybe ships with lots of low slots will choose to go the armor tanking route, such as the apocalypse and megathron and armageddon and dominix. But isn't that what is supposed to be encouraged in the first place?
Caldari and Minmatar ships who wish to shield tank will be able to effectively just by using power diags instead of cap relays. Minmatar, Gallente and Amarr ships that want to armor tank will have that option by using cap relays. Where's the problem? It won't result in everyone armor tanking, it will just result in a little more thought being put into your low slot setup.
Well, i dont see why armour tanks sacrifice a piece of their shield...Shield tanks dont lose half their armour either do they? Besides that, armour tanking right now requires 2 Repairers to be on par with an XL shield booster.
I agree though, Cap relays need to be changed. I still think shield recharge needs to be a usefull attribute.
Edit: And Power diags have the obvious shield HP bonus etc, which Cap relays dont have either. IF this change gets through, we should atleast keep the low CPU requirements for Cap Relays.
however armor is naturally much more resistant to damage than shields are
|
Cao Cao
|
Posted - 2004.02.28 21:37:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Cao Cao on 28/02/2004 21:42:09
Elve,
I am agreeing with you almost 100%. Cap relays SHOULD keep very low fitting requirements, because it is DIVERTING power from one system to another. But one thing you misunderstood about what I am saying: I'm not advocating a shield HP penalty. I'm advocating (a) making shield recharge rate a useful statistic (this is my preference); or in the alternative (b) penalizing shield boost using shield booster modules.
So, (b) wouldn't involve less shield HPs in any way, it would merely involve giving say, a 25% penalty to using shield boosters if you equip a cap power relay, in order to get a 20% bonus to your capacitor recharge. THAT is the only penalty that makes sense if shield recharge rate is gonna remain stupid (see my above posts about how a cap relay which supposedly diverts power from your shields to your capacitor is actually used in a "back door" way through shield boosters).
EDIT: the point isn't to make cap relays useful for armor tanking, as has been suggested. It is to make them NOT useful for shield tanking, because it is supposed to be sacrificing shield power in order to boost capacitor power. In other words, sacrificing your shield power in order to benefit any other modules you wish to activate (ecm, eccm, turrets (esp lasers), whatever).
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |