EVE Search - I am bored of the battlecruiser nerf debate...

All Channels

Ships and Modules

I am bored of the battlecruiser nerf debate...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.11 19:28:00 - [1] Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 11/11/2007 19:28:41 The following fittings are with my skills. These are on EFT and use the following implants. KVA1000, KYA1000, PG4. I never use more than 1 active hardner on a my 'passive' shield tanks b/c i want to have some ability to run the tank for a long time and some tank even if i am cap neutralized. These are pve setups designed to last defensively in pvp for a long time while waiting on help to arrive to save your buttox. Quote: DRAKE: DEFENSE: 868 dps(avg'd dmg types) DEFENSE W/ ZERO CAP: 661 dps OFFENSE: 333 dps CAPACITOR: runs forever with smartbomb off and for 16 minutes with smartbomb running. HIGH: 7x HML II (caldari navy scourge) 1x Sm Plasma Smartbomb II (vitally important to kill attacking pvp drones) MIDS: 3x LSE II 1x Magnetic Scattering Amp II 1x Heat Dissipation Amp II 1x Invuln II LOWS: 4x Shield Power Relay RIGS: 3x Core Defense Field Purger I DRONE: 5x Hobgoblin II Quote: MYRMIDON: (pre-nerf) DEFENSE: 788 dps DEFENSE W/ ZERO CAP: 551 dps OFFENSE: 572 dps CAPACITOR: runs forever with smartbomb off, and 15 minutes with sb active. HIGHS: 5x 650mm Artillery Cannon II ( rep fleet EMP) 1x Sm Plasma Smartbomb II (v. important as defensive weapon vs. pvp drones) MIDS: 4x LSE II 1x Invulnerability Field II LOWS: 5x Shield Power Relay II RIGS: 3x Core Defense Field Purger I DRONES: 5x Ogre II Quote: HARBINGER: DEFENSE: 715 dps DEFENSE W/ ZERO CAP: 537 dps OFFENSE: 311 dps CAPACITOR: Runs for over an hour with Smartie off and for 13 minutes with Smartie active. HIGHS: 7x 650mm Artillery Cannon II 1x Sm Plasma Smartbomb II MIDS: 4x LSE II 1x Invuln II LOWS 6x Shield Power RelayII RIGS: 3x Core Defense Field Purger I DRONES: 5x Hammerhead II Quote: HURRICANE: DEFENSE: 666 dps DEFENSE W/ ZERO CAP: 501 dps OFFENSE: 340 dps CAPACITOR: Runs forever without smartie and for 14 minutes with smartive active HIGHS: 4x 720mm Howitzer Artillery II (Rep Fleet EMP) 3x 'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher I ( Caldari navy havoc missiles) (used named vs t2 b/c of cpu requirements) 1x Sm Plasma Smartbomb II MIDS: 3x LSE II 1x Invuln II LOWS: 5x Shield Power Relay II 1x Power Diagnostic II DRONES: 1x Hammerhead II 4x Hobgoblin II -- Talking in Circles is more dizzying than walking in them... Tralala
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.11 19:38:00 - [2] Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 11/11/2007 19:40:10 the problem (If there is a problem) is in how LSE II's affect Battlecruisers. If LSE II's didnt fit on battlecruisers these ships would not tank like they can. The numbers above are straight from EFT. These ships won't tackle you if you attack them. if their damage is more than yours you will be able to warp away providing you don't stick around for too long while help comes. These fittings are either bait ( don't fall for it ) or they are missioners wanting to go about their business. they don't affect dynamics of pvp in the end. also these ships cost over 100m isk to fit properly and use expensive ammo and drones to achieve what they do. They are not 35m isk ships. the insurance return on these babies is not much better than t2 ships, b/c of the rigging and high end modules needed to make them work. Draw your own conclusions from the numbers above. but don't cry for a ship nerf when in truth these ship fittings only work b/c a battleship mod's fitting requirements allow it to be used en masse with battlecruisers. Perhaps CCP wanted a cheap platform for ppl to earn isk with. Perhaps it was a loophole in design that they did not forsee. And to those of you who are losing the damage advantage ( as seen above ) that the Myrm had over the other BC passive shield tankers, I do feel for you, as i can fly myrms as well. But it will bring their damage in line with the 300+ dps that these other ships can achieve without using cap. -- Talking in Circles is more dizzying than walking in them... Tralala
Iota Belisarius Ion Corp. Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.11 22:11:00 - [3] I stopped reading about the point where you started complaining caldari BC's were better shield tankers than the other ARMOR TANKING RACES. --------------------- Your sig is inappropriate. Please read the forum rules before reposting. -Tirg Sig jacked and nerfed in one day, just my luck.
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.11.11 22:35:00 - [4] Edited by: Wrayeth on 11/11/2007 22:36:30 LSEs are needed for other ships, so a nerf to them would be a very bad idea. The huginn, rapier, and rook, for instance, generally get by on a single LSE. Take that away and they'll instantly pop the moment just about anything shoots them. P.S. WTF are you putting a shield tank on a hurricane? The ship isn't designed for it at all. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Fehnrail Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.11.11 22:36:00 - [5] Yeah, let's nerf Caldari. There is fighting, and then there is fighting: Some weapons are more useful than others, and not all battles must be won.
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:00:00 - [6] Originally by: Iota Belisarius I stopped reading about the point where you started complaining caldari BC's were better shield tankers than the other ARMOR TANKING RACES. perhaps you should read more. Only thing i'm complaining about is that people are blaming a ship for something that is caused by a module. And in fact it's not a problem for me, but it is for some. I am merely clarifying the source of their concern. -- Talking in Circles is more dizzying than walking in them... Tralala
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:03:00 - [7] Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 11/11/2007 23:05:34 obviously i overestimated the attention span of some of the posters that have responded. I don't want anything changed. I like to fly the current BC's. I can solo level 4's in my drake. I don't want to lose that. are you crazy? I don't have a problem with the way things work now. However, some people do. Their problem stems from LSE's going onto BC's in multiple numbers. I am pointing out the cause of the issue that they deem to be a problem, as most have mis-identified it as something else. Just because I don't want something doesn't mean I cannot discuss it. That isn't changed by the fact that other ships need LSE's as they are. BC's are still tanking better than BS b/c of the way LSE's work on BC. meh, if u can't be arsed to read the post then don't respond. you only make yourself look less intelligent than you are to those who did read the whole op. -- Talking in Circles is more dizzying than walking in them... Tralala
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:08:00 - [8] Originally by: Wrayeth . P.S. WTF are you putting a shield tank on a hurricane? The ship isn't designed for it at all. To make a point. As you say it isn't designed for it at all yet it still puts forth a very good passive shield tank b/c of the LSE's. -- Talking in Circles is more dizzying than walking in them... Tralala
OneSock Crown Industries	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:10:00 - [9] The "problem" is the fundamental difference between Armor and shield. If you view Shield Extenders as a HP boost in the same way as say a 800mm plate, then there is really no problem with putting a "battleship" size mod on a smaller ship (provided grid/cpu are appropriate). The problem is that the 800mm plate gives nothing to armor rep rate. While the extra HP on the LSE boosts not only max HP but also shield recharge. Armor tanks just don't compare to passive shield tanks. Anyway, nerf caldari !
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Four Rings Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:21:00 - [10] well to be honest there is one other issue... I've always hated how ccp called the recharge 'rate' a flat number of seconds. if it were a true rate that would solve alot of issues as then the LSE's would no longer cause a faster recharge rate. I dunno how to simply express a rate, however, considering they treat the shields like a capacitor in terms of a variable recharge rate. the other option is for the 'rate' of recharge to stay the same when you fit LSE's which means it would take longer to recharge shields to full with the lse's, so a 10% increase in total shields would increase recharge time by the same amount. that would, however be such a dramatic change that it would break a lot more than it would ever fix i fear. -- Talking in Circles is more dizzying than walking in them... Tralala
Ilatius	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:24:00 - [11] It's easy an easy fix, nerfarize shield power relays, who really uses these except to passive tank?
08891	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:36:00 - [12] Repeat after me: LSEs are NOT battleship sized modules. The closest thing fitting/hp wise is an 800mm plate.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:41:00 - [13] Originally by: 08891 Repeat after me: LSEs are NOT battleship sized modules. The closest thing fitting/hp wise is an 800mm plate. Heavy drones are not battleship sized weapons. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
08891	Posted - 2007.11.11 23:43:00 - [14] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Heavy drones are not battleship sized weapons. Indeed.
Luke Lor'aul	Posted - 2007.11.12 00:31:00 - [15] Originally by: Ris Dnalor the other option is for the 'rate' of recharge to stay the same when you fit LSE's which means it would take longer to recharge shields to full with the lse's, so a 10% increase in total shields would increase recharge time by the same amount. incorrect, while it would take longer to recharge, the way shields, and capacitors work, is the more cap/shields there is, the higher the recharge rat is at peak. for instance, fit a cap battery on a ship. The peak recharge actually goes UP. Having full shields is not the goal of a solid passive tank. a solid passive tank tanks at 33% and stays there.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.12 01:55:00 - [16] A couple of things to remember: 1. Mid slots are more important than low slots (provably so). 2. Shield extenders trade actual HP for shield recharge 3. Shield extenders are designed for ships that are naturally low on PG A word about stack nerfing the shield recharge attribute: There were 7 modules (3 rigs, 4 SPR II's) dedicated to lowering the shield recharge rate (essentially using the 7 slots as a single un-neutralizable shield booster). Using your first setup as the test subject: 7x HML II 3x LSE II, Invuln, EM Amp II, Thm Amp II 4x SPR II 3x CDFP I It has 16680 HP, and recharges in: 1050 * .8 * .8 * .8 * .76 * .76 * .76 * .76 = 179.4 sec 223.2 HP/sec peak, 846 tankable (peak) averaged Stack nerfing shield recharge: 1050 * ((.8 * .8 * .8 * .76 * .76 * .76 * .76) ((1.0/7.0).25)) = 354.2 sec 113.0 HP/sec peak, 428 tankable (peak) averaged Well, it's pretty silly to keep stacking those modules on there like that, so let's try this out instead: 7x HML II 3x LSE II, Heat Amp II, EM Amp II, Invuln II 3x SPR II, DCU II 3x CDFE I Currently: 25368 HP, 460.9 sec recharge, 132 HP/sec (peak), 569 tankable (peak) averaged Post-nerf: 1050 * (.76 * .76 * .76 ((1.0 / 3.0) .25)) 25368 HP, 492 sec recharge, 123 HP/sec (peak), 530 tankable (peak) averaged So, you managed to cut the 13 slot Drake's tank from 1000+ tankable to 530 (max) tankable. Ships without a resist bonus will be even more screwed, and the Ferox is just SOL as an active or passive tanker. Well hell, that's really reasonable! Except for this: That's the best tank you're going to get on a shield tanking battlecruiser. Period. That's fine, right? Not really, because you've just removed passive tanking BC's from PVP entirely. This would be come "the passive tanking PVP Drake" 7x HML II, 2x LSE II, 2x Invuln II, Web II 3x SPR II, DCU II Current: 20378 HP, 460.9 sec recharge, 106.11 HP/sec (peak), 444 average (peak) tankable Post Nerf: 20378 HP, 492 sec recharge, 99 HP/sec (peak), 415 average (peak) tankable PROBLEM: Cruisers put out 415 DPS. Consider: 4x HP II, 3x FMP II (AN Multi) 10mn MWD II, J5 Disruptor, X5 Web, Sm Cap Booster (200's) 1600 RT, DCU II, EANM II, 3x HS II 3x Trimarks 5x Hammerhead II 62k eff HP, 408 Thermal, 351 EM, 759 Total DPS The above Drake has 91k eff HP to this harbinger, and 326 DPS tankable. Time until this harbinger (solo) killed the Drake: 66852.0 / (759.0 - 326.0 * 1.7 / 2.5) + 24157.0 / 759.0 = 156 seconds Time until this Drake (solo) killed the Harbinger: 178 sec The Harbinger wasn't even in armor yet. =( Consider: 6x Heavy Ion II (CN Antimatter) 10mn MWD II, Electrochem Cap Booster (800's), Disruptor II, Web II, Sensor Booster II 2x MAR II, 3x EANM II, DCU II 2x Aux Nano Pump, 1x Accel 2 Ogre II, 2 Hammerhead II, 1x Hobgoblin II 588 DPS, the Harbinger has to engage within web range, the Myrmidon is faster and has a bigger cargo hold for cap boosters. The Myrmidon has 45k eff HP, can tank 604 DPS of the gank Harby's 725 - constantly (not just at peak). TTP = 6217.0 (shields) / 759.0 + (39060.0 (armor + hull) / (759 - 604.0)) = 260 sec Harbinger pops in: 64255.0 / 588 = 109 sec What's the moral of this story? The Drake, with already vastly substandard damage, loses its only effective tank for the sake of gankers who want to complain that it takes more than 30 seconds to gank it. The Myrmidon, which has 5 mids for ewar/tackle/propulsion takes the bait tank role from it. That said, I don't condone the use of the full passive slot tank... it's a waste and rather insulting to take into a gang. Your slots are better used for ewar/tackle and damage mods (unless you're filling the bait tank role). Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Trishan Green Men Incorporated	Posted - 2007.11.12 02:11:00 - [17] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: 08891 Repeat after me: LSEs are NOT battleship sized modules. The closest thing fitting/hp wise is an 800mm plate. Heavy drones are not battleship sized weapons. Yes, yes they are. Heavy drones ARE battle ship sized weapons.
Naomi Wildfire Amarr Stardust Heavy Industries Majesta Empire	Posted - 2007.11.12 02:47:00 - [18] Nerf Spammers, ever heard of editing posts?
DarkStar251	Posted - 2007.11.12 02:54:00 - [19] Edited by: DarkStar251 on 12/11/2007 02:54:11 Originally by: Trishan Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: 08891 Repeat after me: LSEs are NOT battleship sized modules. The closest thing fitting/hp wise is an 800mm plate. Heavy drones are not battleship sized weapons. Yes, yes they are. Heavy drones ARE battle ship sized weapons. Then capital sized drones are fighters so the moros needs to be boosted so that it uses them. I can't wait for my 5 Firbolgs with +250% dmg/hp!
Malaan Tabfassh Penguin Mining Operations and More	Posted - 2007.11.12 03:07:00 - [20] I lost a Drake in PvP yesterday, the fitting was near the one posted by the OP. I had no scrambler/webber fitted, cause I was doing some ratting for fun and it had gimped my tanking ability. Behind a gate there was a Sleipnir waiting and after a minute I made him run. When I had fitted tackling gear I don't think I had chance, cause he had eaten my shields like nothing. He got some friends and killed me an hour later. In this final fight I made a Hurricane run, but there was absolutely nothing I could do to prevent my death after this fight started. What I wanna say: Sure the drake can fit a very strong tank, but there is a price for that. So please don't complain and take a view from a larger scale.
Father Weebles	Posted - 2007.11.12 03:32:00 - [21] Originally by: Wrayeth Edited by: Wrayeth on 11/11/2007 22:36:30 LSEs are needed for other ships, so a nerf to them would be a very bad idea. The huginn, rapier, and rook, for instance, generally get by on a single LSE. Take that away and they'll instantly pop the moment just about anything shoots them. P.S. WTF are you putting a shield tank on a hurricane? The ship isn't designed for it at all. Don't forget about the vaga. Decent fitted Huginns/Rapiers/Vagas use 2 LSE IIs. "You leave anything for us?" "Just bodies."
Atsuko Ratu Caldari Advanced Logistics	Posted - 2007.11.12 04:52:00 - [22] So what's the point in trying to nerf a near useless fitting? It has no tackle gear at all, so it can't solo and lacks use in any realistic gang. It can't mwd, point, web, or anything, so it just sits there and fires its 300 dps at anything within range, assuming it isn't being perma jammed by a single ecm or just damped by 1 or 2 damps. How is this a problem again? That isn't even much of a tank, a single gank BS "with max skills" can easily kill that, and so can 2 bcs, not like the passive tanked BC is ever going to kill you...
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.11.12 06:29:00 - [23] Originally by: Father Weebles Don't forget about the vaga. Decent fitted Huginns/Rapiers/Vagas use 2 LSE IIs. D'oh! I knew I forgot something. I even (occasionally) fly my vaga, too. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Incantare Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.11.12 06:32:00 - [24] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu So what's the point in trying to nerf a near useless fitting? It has no tackle gear at all, so it can't solo and lacks use in any realistic gang. It can't mwd, point, web, or anything, so it just sits there and fires its 300 dps at anything within range, assuming it isn't being perma jammed by a single ecm or just damped by 1 or 2 damps. How is this a problem again? That isn't even much of a tank, a single gank BS "with max skills" can easily kill that, and so can 2 bcs, not like the passive tanked BC is ever going to kill you... But it doesn't die fast enough!
Pottsey Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2007.11.12 07:04:00 - [25] ôRepeat after me: LSEs are NOT battleship sized modules. The closest thing fitting/hp wise is an 800mm plate.ô They are very much battleship module and used to be battleships only. PG was lowered a little to make them work better on battelships and now BC and cruiser use them. For years LSE's where battleship only. ôI stopped reading about the point where you started complaining caldari BC's were better shield tankers than the other ARMOR TANKING RACES.ö Caldari are the active shield tankers the main passive shield tank race are Gallente. So Gallente should be best at passive tanking. Passive shield tanking guide click here
Incantare Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.11.12 07:24:00 - [26] I agree with Pottsey, LSEs are clearly battleship sized. That they had battleship level fitting reqs in the past says nothing. That they are useful on some battleship fits does not make them battleship sized.
Danjira Ryuujin Caldari	Posted - 2007.11.12 07:34:00 - [27] Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 12/11/2007 07:34:39 ôI stopped reading about the point where you started complaining caldari BC's were better shield tankers than the other ARMOR TANKING RACES.ö Caldari are the active shield tankers the main passive shield tank race are Gallente. So Gallente should be best at passive tanking. Clearly. Thats why they have shield bonuses and more shield than armor. Amarr - Annoying the Eve Community since 2005
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2007.11.12 08:05:00 - [28] Originally by: Wrayeth Edited by: Wrayeth on 11/11/2007 22:36:30 LSEs are needed for other ships, so a nerf to them would be a very bad idea. The huginn, rapier, and rook, for instance, generally get by on a single LSE. Take that away and they'll instantly pop the moment just about anything shoots them. And the Nighthawk. Preventing Command Ships from fitting LSE II would destroy its ability to passive tank. -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned.
xiao chin	Posted - 2007.11.12 10:56:00 - [29] well wtf i say if its stops people from constantly whining then nerf the bloody LSE to death..oh btw i only use 1 on my drake..all i ever needed...and lets consider nerfing the way over power elite cruisers..
Eva Reedy	Posted - 2007.11.12 11:03:00 - [30] hmm way i see it is the elite cruisers are one step above cruisers and command ships are 1 step above BC's..so why is it that elite cruiser pilots think they should be co-equals with command ships..hmmmmmmm

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.