EVE Search - Capacitor Power Relay and Capacitor Recharger changes

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Capacitor Power Relay and Capacitor Recharger changes

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
TomB	Posted - 2004.03.17 17:59:00 - [1] Low slot Capacitor Power Relay has been given Shield Boosting penality instead of Shield Recharge Rate and the medium slot Capacitor Recharger has been increased in recharge boost: Basic Capacitor Power Relay: Capacitor Recharge Bonus: +10% Shield Boosting Penality: -5% Capacitor Power Relay I: Capacitor Recharge Bonus: +20% Shield Boosting Penality: -10% Basic Cap Recharger: Capacitor Recharge Bonus: +10% (was 5%) Cap Recharger I: Capacitor Recharge Bonus: +15% (was 10%) Meta modules (named rare drop modules) have also been updated with these changes, giving the best Meta Cap Recharger 18% bonus to capacitor recharge rate. 2004.07.06 19:30:45combatTomB strikes you critically with his Nerf Bat, pwning you for -100% everything.
dalman	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:03:00 - [2] Edited by: dalman on 17/03/2004 19:32:21 hmmm This does indeed change things. Maybe too much. Looks like people will start to armor-tank very much very soon. An Apoc running 4 18% medslot rechargers, 5 armor hardeners and 2 large named repairers will be "impossible" to kill. Much harder than what a raven shield-tanked to max is today. IMO, meta cap relays needs to be upped. If the best cap relay gives 20% bonus and 10% shield boost penalty while the best cap recharger gives 18% bonus and no penalty... seems a bit unbalanced to me. With better meta cap relays it wouldn't be as much of a problem. I don't think this is what was intended... I think the biggest problem was Apocs, and to some point megas and tempests, being excellent shield tanks. Now this change will hit all shield tanks hard. These ships have the possibility to armor tank instead. Biggest "looser" is without question the raven. Seems it was a good idea that I finally trained up so I can fly more than Caldari BS. EDIT As mentioned below, reducing CPU requirement on the PDS would make these changes ok. Then there would still be a way for caldari ships to be shieldtanks, as they are meant to be. Cause the CPU doesn't allow a raven to fit PDS. Look at this: Quote: Tempest 550 tf Raven 600 tf 1400mm howitzer use 45tf 425mm railgun use 70tf Seige Launcher use 80tf Tempest usually fit 5 turrets/ 3 launchers or 4/4. Raven usually fit 3 turrets/ 5 launchers or 4/4. M.I.A. since 2004-07-30
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:10:00 - [3] Well, can't say we didn't see this coming. :) ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Serak Tur	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:14:00 - [4] At first glance I thought wow this REALLY sucks...but then I thought...hm Armor
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:16:00 - [5] it should be "- Shield HP" instead!!! "We brake for nobody"
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:23:00 - [6] Quote: it should be "- Shield HP" instead!!! If you have 5000 shields and super regen + shield boosting it's not much different than having 3500 shields + super regen + shield boosting.. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
TWD	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:23:00 - [7] Lol, this will be fun
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:29:00 - [8] Quote: Quote: it should be "- Shield HP" instead!!! If you have 5000 shields and super regen + shield boosting it's not much different than having 3500 shields + super regen + shield boosting.. exactly! "We brake for nobody"
Derran	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:31:00 - [9] Have to agree with Jim on that one. Personally, I'm glad for this change. I am not a fan of no-brainer modules and it was a no-brainer to slap a whole slew of cap rechargers in lo slots.
Devestator	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:32:00 - [10] Are these changes going into testing on Chaos or are in tomorrows patch??!?!
TomB	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:34:00 - [11] Changes were removed from Chaos because of patch tomorrow, they will be testable on Chaos after patch is out. 2004.07.06 19:30:45combatTomB strikes you critically with his Nerf Bat, pwning you for -100% everything.
Cineas	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:41:00 - [12] Can someone explain what it means by shield boosting?
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:42:00 - [13] Perhaps reducing Power Diagnostics to 15tf from 20tf would help? For shield tanks/caldari ships right now, the only viable low slot is going to be the power diagnostic, and caldari ships are generally already strapped for CPU badly because of railgun/launchers/xl shield booster, so the cap relay was really the only useful module you could fit. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:43:00 - [14] Quote: Can someone explain what it means by shield boosting? He means it reduces 10% of the effectiveness of a shield booster for every cap relay you have on your ship. So in other words, running 5 cap relays is -50% shield boosting thus a XL Shield Booster, which would give you 400 shields every 5 seconds would now give you 200 shields every 5 seconds. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:45:00 - [15] I think this was the only real way of balancing these modules. I'm not too fussed, tbh. I mostly use power diags instead of cap relays. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
GFLTorque	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:46:00 - [16] If the aim is to reduce the shield boosting ability of shield tanks, why not simply alter the shield boost Interval. Ie.. a XL that boosted every 4 seconds would be impacted 20% and boost every 5 seconds instead. Then only one module is affected. I have to agree with Jims posts so far on this subject.
Gariuys	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:50:00 - [17] Quote: Perhaps reducing Power Diagnostics to 15tf from 20tf would help? For shield tanks/caldari ships right now, the only viable low slot is going to be the power diagnostic, and caldari ships are generally already strapped for CPU badly because of railgun/launchers/xl shield booster, so the cap relay was really the only useful module you could fit. Megathrons are already strapped for cpu ( using relays ) now, and that's without the Xlarge but using a c5-l large. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:58:00 - [18] Quote: I don't think this is what was intended... I think the biggest problem was Apocs, and to some point megas and tempests, being excellent shield tanks. Now this change will hit all shield tanks hard. These ships have the possibility to armor tank instead. Biggest "looser" is without question the raven. I wouldn't say that really, Caldari ships have one equalizer that other ships generally can't afford, the shield boost amplifier. 30% increase to shield booster is basically a 30% reduction in cap for a shield booster. If armor tanking proves too powerful, I think they should nerf it. I really DONT think that armor hardeners should give a 50% boost, it should be more like 35%, because quite frankly, armor already has pretty high default resistances.. Personally, I hate the idea of armor hardening, why would ships that tank out their armor even come with shields? Shield in my opinion, should always be your primary defense, but that's just my opinion. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Ukiah	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:58:00 - [19] This change has almost no effect on me. From a pvp perspective, this change only affects cruisers (too a small degree) and battleships (to a larger degree). Since most frigate pilots in pvp DON'T use a shield booster, owing to the fact that missiles can take those tiny shields down faster than the even tinier frigate shield booster can restore them, this affects my various frigate setups in no way. Since speed is a frigate pilots best ally, most of us will continue to mount several 'recharge' modules to be able to run MWD's on autorepeat. P.S. Power Diags just inched up in value.
ProphetGuru	Posted - 2004.03.17 18:59:00 - [20] Edited by: ProphetGuru on 17/03/2004 19:06:08 ug. Agree cpu on diags gonna need to come down. Evolution..... Just when you thought you were winning.
Merdekka Radaen	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:00:00 - [21] I'm not sure about the exact balancing (that remains to be seen on chaos) but the basic premise seems fine to me. Something had to be done about relays, and this seems like a good option that still leaves a lot of possibilities open. The module remains highly viable under certain situations, but we lose the 5+ relay super shield tank setups, which is a very good thing.
Ukiah	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:05:00 - [22] Quote: Perhaps reducing Power Diagnostics to 15tf from 20tf would help? For shield tanks/caldari ships right now, the only viable low slot is going to be the power diagnostic, and caldari ships are generally already strapped for CPU badly because of railgun/launchers/xl shield booster, so the cap relay was really the only useful module you could fit. Which is weird, because don't Caldari and Gallente ships, in general, have the highest amounts of CPU?
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:09:00 - [23] Quote: Quote: Perhaps reducing Power Diagnostics to 15tf from 20tf would help? For shield tanks/caldari ships right now, the only viable low slot is going to be the power diagnostic, and caldari ships are generally already strapped for CPU badly because of railgun/launchers/xl shield booster, so the cap relay was really the only useful module you could fit. Which is weird, because don't Caldari and Gallente ships, in general, have the highest amounts of CPU? Not really. Tempest 550 CPU Typhoon 600 CPU Dominix 600 CPU Megathron 550 CPU Scoprion 750 CPU (no CPU probs ever) Raven 600 CPU Now, how much CPU does a 1400mm howitzer use? 45tf How much does a 425mm railgun use? 70tf And neutron blaster cannons? 65tf Seige Launcher? 80tf So as you can see, there isn't much of a CPU difference in these ships, yet the weapons for Gallante/Caldari use much more CPU than projectiles on a Tempest, which allows the Tempest/Typhoon to be much more flexible. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
dalman	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:24:00 - [24] Quote: If armor tanking proves too powerful, I think they should nerf it. I really DONT think that armor hardeners should give a 50% boost, it should be more like 35%, because quite frankly, armor already has pretty high default resistances. Actually, armor tanking is already VERY powerful. This and other stuff will make it even more powerful. Higher basic resistance... Hardeners use less cap... Repairers use less cap/HP restored... Shield-tanking an armageddon, megathron or apoc is just wrong. That armor tanking isn't widely used is because of 3 things: * The way damage used to leak through armor. * That cap boosts takes very much cargo space. * That people are too chicken to do it (safer with both armor and structure HP left when the enemy brakes down your tanking). But if you go ask an experienced player with a mega or arma for a 1vs1, there's no way in hell that his gonna come with a shield-tank. That an apoc is often shield-tanked is more just because "it can". With cap relays it can get enough cap recharge to both fire lasers and shieldtank. This will change now. M.I.A. since 2004-07-30
Jarl Sigurd	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:27:00 - [25] Poor raven :(
KamiCrazy	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:29:00 - [26] Dalman don't ye think it was kinda wrong than an apoc with 5+ cap relays could run its shield stuff forever AND maintain maximum dmg output by fitting lots of hybrids? I mean aren't you supposed to trade dmg if you get survivability? Shield tanking wasn't done just because it could, it could be done because it was a no brainer.
Gariuys	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:30:00 - [27] well the reason I don't use armour tanking gladly is the quite simple fact that a mod that uses a LOT of grid and taking up the room of where otherwise a RCU/PDS would be sitting has a HUGE impact on the amount of guns one can fit. The trouble of a mega, huge grid trouble armour tanking, huge cpu trouble shield tanking, getting a usable/nice/good balance is quite a challenge. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Lipton	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:32:00 - [28] Edited by: Lipton on 17/03/2004 19:35:46 Weeeeeeeeeeee!!! At last... I've been waiting for this... Another "improvement" that forces about 5000 peeps to find new setups for their ships instead of just enjoying the game... If yer going through with this, u better make the sheild recharge count... As Jim said: Not all peeps wanna go the armor tanking way... Capacitor Power Relay I: Capacitor Recharge Bonus: +20% Shield Boosting Penality: -10% This WAS the module that made the Apoc par with the others... (Yeah, It was a bit TOO good and yes, The other Races needs some fixing too)... But again... I think the nerf is a bit too harsh... I dont like the idea of Battleship Battles lasting for <1 Minute... They cost a massive amount of isk and isk is hard(ish) to come by... Aint my idea of fun loosing yer battleship that u have mined/made missions/killed rats/whatever for weeks and weeks and then loose it in a matter of minutes... Pah... Enough whining... I'm sure it'll be sorted out eventually... Pops another beer and heads of to buy a: SoonÖ T-Shirt _______________________________________________ What?
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:33:00 - [29] Here's an idea, make the midslot cap recharger reduce armor repair modules, as the low slot reduces shield tanking, make them exactly the same in stats otherwise.. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Gariuys	Posted - 2004.03.17 19:39:00 - [30] Lipton, it's been said before but if you can't afford to lose a BS don't fight in one, it's that easy. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: 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.