|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hellek
   |
Posted - 2004.04.09 00:50:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Hellek on 09/04/2004 00:51:28
I have already said it in two other threads but I repeat it here:
With the CPR nerf and the huge drawbacks armor tanking has compared to shield tanking, the Apoc will become a mining-only ship. You won't be able to do anything else with it.
I therefore hope CCP does not change CPRs until they have found a way of keeping the Apoc useful or at least they act very quick after putting the nerf into effect. Its not fair to the Amarr to make their best ship totally useless for any fighting.
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.04.09 15:30:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Hellek on 09/04/2004 15:31:38
Ithildin, I have spent hours trying armor tank setups for Apocs, talking with many other people (with all kinds of different points of view) and the things I posted are the results to which we came.
So please try to verify that the things you said are true, you will fail ... the Apoc will suck so much that you won't be able to use him for PvP any more.
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.04.09 17:16:00 -
[3]
only that armor tanking does not leave enough space for CPRs (on an armarr ship, the 4 cap recharger II aren't enough for getting the necessary cap) or a heatsink. furthermore no space for i.e. a sensor booster as you HAVE to put Cap Recharger IIs in the meds.
Furthermore armor tanking has several huge drawbacks which make it inferior to shield tanking. there is a long thread about that with the details
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.04.28 17:25:00 -
[4]
Then to make it fair, CCP would have to lower the CPU reqs of the medslot cap rechargers, add an XL armor repairer, make armor repairers not use so much grid, re-destribute the base resistances of armor as on the apoc you currently can't do with only 2 hardeners (shield-based setups can), make armor repairers repair immediately and not after ~15 seconds activation time, add a repair-enhancer that gives 30% more HP repaired per cycle, and find a way to compensate the drawback that shield-based ships have armor+structure left to stay alive while warping out while armor-based ships have only structure.
And then armor-tanking would be same as shield-tanking
So NOOOO, stop whining, stop posting crap, stop posting without knowing what you talk about.
Ships like Apoc or Megathron have it hard enough already, I'd rather look a bit at the raven if you are looking for something to change.
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.04.29 14:40:00 -
[5]
wow, I expected the first answer to be a post by Jim Raynor saying something like "Whiner, the Raven has so big difficulties already that the only change it needs is a boost" or something like that.
I am glad that there are people who agree with me
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.01 15:16:00 -
[6]
I fully agree on that.
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.03 20:00:00 -
[7]
but that together with shieldboosting would make shields far too strong
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 08:26:00 -
[8]
for several reasons which I mentioned dozens of times in other threads, armor tanking should take less cap than shield tanking, not more. but sure that could be easily changed by slightly reducing the needs of armor repairers and at the moment its the case anyway (although the difference is almost 0)
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.09 12:57:00 -
[9]
yes, currently it needs slightly less cap but read what levin proposed. and besides that, it is not 2:3 if you take amplifier into account. and as there is no XL armor rep you can do that (XL + Amp ~ 2 L reps). With amplifier its about 1:1
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.10 16:02:00 -
[10]
Ithildin: While your idea of swapping fitting reqs seems good at the first glance, the problem is that even when armor tanking, the Apoc runs into CPU problems as it has the lowest CPU of all Tier2 BS. I think a total swapping would be too much but a small decrease in grid reqs and small increase in CPU reqs on the armor reps would be good.
Furthermore I think that a XL armor rep should be introduced, or the XL SB should be removed. I see no reason why XL should exist for SBs but not for Reps. Sure, with 2 large repairers and repair systems lvl5 you can get the same amount repaired as XL + SB but besides the long training which is necessary, armor tanking has loads of drawbacks which should be evened out. Besides that, as I often said, the Apoc needs 3 armor hardeners as otherwise (with 2 hardeners) its lowest resistance would be 35% thermal which is unbearable in a fight. When using 2 shield hardeners, the lowest resistance is 40% kinetic which is not that bad. Please don't forget that base resistances vary from ship to ship and its i.e. not the same for the Megathron.
|
|
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 21:12:00 -
[11]
I guess, as the topic was unstickied, we can see the proposed change as a fact now?
|
|
|
| |
|