Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
bolo solow
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 15:41:00 -
[1]
Why would anyone use a CCC rig when a semiconductor memory cell increases amount of cap by 15% which in turn increases cap regen by 15% whereas a CCC only increase cap reg by 15%? Both same calibration and same skillset. Am I missing something here?
|
Matalino
Gallente Ki Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 15:47:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Matalino on 25/01/2008 15:48:09 CCC decreases recharge time by 15%. This increases cap recharge rate by 17.647%.
Oh, and it takes less of the same materials to build a CCC.
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 15:48:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Ogul on 25/01/2008 15:49:07 15% better capacitor regeneration rate really means 15% recharge time reduction, so 1 / 0.85 = 17.6% more recharge.
Oh, and the price tag.
--- This is a war declaration, issued from your alt corp. It is used to gank people in high sec. |
bolo solow
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 16:30:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Ogul Edited by: Ogul on 25/01/2008 15:49:07 15% better capacitor regeneration rate really means 15% recharge time reduction, so 1 / 0.85 = 17.6% more recharge.
Oh, and the price tag.
I'm not understanding the math. A 15% reduction in recharge should equal 15% more recharge. What's up with the .85 number?
|
Matalino
Gallente Ki Tech Industries
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 16:34:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Matalino on 25/01/2008 16:37:11 100 cap with 100 second recharge gives and average recharge of 1 cap/sec peak of ~2.5 cap/sec.
Now compare bonuses.
SMC 115 cap / 100 second recharge = 1.15 cap/sec average | 2.875 cap/sec peak
CCC 100 cap / 85 second recharge = 1.17647 cap/sec average | 2.9411 cap/sec peak
Now add to that the price comparision and you should see why people use the CCC.
Just incase you still haven't picked it up. 1.0 + 15% = 1.15 | 1.0 - 15% = 0.85 100 + 15% = 115 | 100 - 15% = 85
|
xyeLz
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 17:10:00 -
[6]
This works for all duration, including rate of fire.
Imagine 30% more rate of fire, or 30% more damage. The former is actually 30% less duration before you can fire again.
So if you take imaginary numbers, such as a duration/rate of fire of 10 seconds, and a damage of 100, that's 10 damage per second by doing damage / rate of fire or 100 / 10 = 10dps.
30% more rate of fire: 10 x (1 - 0.3) = 7 Where 10 is the base duration, and 1 is a base multiplier, and 0.1 is the 10% difference.
Your dmg per second (dps) is now 100 / 7 = 14.28
30% more damage is 100 x (1 + 0.3) = 110
Your dmg per second (dps) is now 130 / 10 = 13
As you can see, x % duration has a bigger change than x % ammount.
|
Derek Sigres
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 17:19:00 -
[7]
In many cases the CCC rig is the better choice because 90% of the time you won't be in the emergency "I need everything turned on at once for as long as possible" mode.
Semiconductor Memory Cells are better for those the max runtime if you often find the need to consume massive amounts of power in excess of your production (E.G. A dread taking primary from a sizable fleet will want Semiconductors to run that repairer/booster for as long as possible.)
|
Ban Shui
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 17:42:00 -
[8]
SMCs give you a better cap buffer, have a lower recharge rate and cost a lot more than CCCs.
Unless you were anticipating needing to use a lot of cap in a very short burst, the CCC is always better.
|
Meiyang Lee
Gallente Azteca Transportation Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 18:43:00 -
[9]
I'd personally only use Memory Cells for capships, where the extra buffer buys you quite a lot of time when you activate triage or siege-mode. This however would really mess up the recharge time for the jumpdrive, so its a matter of balancing that.
|
Merin Ryskin
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 20:01:00 -
[10]
SMCs are better 99% of the time, and anyone who says otherwise is just plain wrong. The only time you want to use CCCs is where you can perma-run a setup with CCCs but not with SMCs, which is very rare. Most of the time, it's one of:
1) You can sustain it with both. SMCs are better because they give you a bigger reserve of cap to deal with nos/neuts.
2) You can't sustain it with either. SMCs are better because they give you a longer time until cap-death, which is all that matters.
3) You're running an injector. CCCs are near useless because you won't be spending much time at peak recharge. SMCs give you a higher reserve of cap before needing to inject, and give you more room to avoid over-boosting.
I guess there's also the cost-effectiveness argument, if you can afford to rig the ship but not with the best rigs. But in terms of raw power, SMCs win by a large margin.
|
|
Wild Rho
Amarr GoonFleet
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 20:25:00 -
[11]
Just to add to Merins post, it's more common for people to use cap chargers over cap relays (reducing recharge time) due to easier fittings which reduce the beneficial effect of the cap recharge rigs.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 20:51:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin SMCs are better 99% of the time, and anyone who says otherwise is just plain wrong. The only time you want to use CCCs is where you can perma-run a setup with CCCs but not with SMCs, which is very rare. Most of the time, it's one of:
1) You can sustain it with both. SMCs are better because they give you a bigger reserve of cap to deal with nos/neuts.
2) You can't sustain it with either. SMCs are better because they give you a longer time until cap-death, which is all that matters.
3) You're running an injector. CCCs are near useless because you won't be spending much time at peak recharge. SMCs give you a higher reserve of cap before needing to inject, and give you more room to avoid over-boosting.
I guess there's also the cost-effectiveness argument, if you can afford to rig the ship but not with the best rigs. But in terms of raw power, SMCs win by a large margin.
SMCs are also less likely to result in you dropping below sustainability due to large chunks of cap being used at the same time. Your actual peak cap is the average cap regen during the duration of your largest capacitor using module[roughly... i think]
Because SMCs mean that a big chunk of cap is less of a percentage of your total the average recharge rate over that same capacitor drain can be higher than with CCCs.
A good way to see this is by mapping the two cap recharge graphs and taking a look at any graph over the same amount of capacitor[as long as you are above 30% cap roughly]. The SMC graph should have a slightly higher average
|
Beness
Absolutely No Retreat Synchr0nicity
|
Posted - 2008.01.25 23:52:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Goumindong
A good way to see this is by mapping the two cap recharge graphs and taking a look at any graph over the same amount of capacitor[as long as you are above 30% cap roughly]. The SMC graph should have a slightly higher average
This is absolutely incorrect, or I am misinterpreting what you are trying to say. I understand you to be saying "the SMC will provide a higher average cap recharge rate".
Going back to the original math, the CCC provides a 17.64% increase in recharge rate, while the SMC provides a 15.00% increase in recharge rate. This is at all times - whether at 2% cap or at 98% cap.
This means that using CCCs, you can fit modules that draw more cap than you can with SMCs.
Originally by: Merin Ryskin SMCs are better 99% of the time in PvP, and anyone who says otherwise is just plain wrong. The only time you want to use CCCs is where you can perma-run a setup with CCCs but not with SMCs, which is very rare.
Fixed that. In PvE, with predictable damage and opponents, CCCs are preferable since:
1) It's not 1 on 1, and damage being taken will drop off regularly throughout the mission or attack. 2) Many PvE fits are geared to be at the edge of sustainability, since targets are fairly predictability. 3) As soon as you're in the BS range, the "large chunks of cap being used" really doesn't have that much impact.
|
Merin Ryskin
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 01:43:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 26/01/2008 01:42:53
Originally by: Beness Fixed that. In PvE, with predictable damage and opponents, CCCs are preferable since:
This is true, in PvE things are a bit different. I'm more concerned with PvP here, since PvE is easy enough that even flying a badly fitted ship after drinking a case of beer probably isn't enough to give you problems. The slight difference in which rigs you fit is pretty much irrelevant, any halfway sane fitting with either will do the job.
Quote: 1) It's not 1 on 1, and damage being taken will drop off regularly throughout the mission or attack.
This is actually an argument against CCCs. For situations where you're running a huge drain and then taking time off to recharge, SMCs win again. With SMCs, you can fit a higher peak tank and use the increased cap reserve to run it for longer. In that situation, long-term regen doesn't matter because you're only concerned with making your time until cap death longer than the time it takes to finish off the group.
Quote: 3) As soon as you're in the BS range, the "large chunks of cap being used" really doesn't have that much impact.
It doesn't need to have much of an impact. Remember, the difference between SMCs and CCCs is extremely small. It doesn't take a very large chunk to put you on either side of the peak regen point.
|
Arana Tellen
Gallente The Blackguard Wolves Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 01:47:00 -
[15]
Ofc when you start playing with PDUs/Cap batteries then SMCs become very nice. ---------------------------------
Oh noes! |
Kadoes Khan
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 05:28:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin SMCs are better 99% of the time, and anyone who says otherwise is just plain wrong. The only time you want to use CCCs is where you can perma-run a setup with CCCs but not with SMCs, which is very rare. Most of the time, it's one of:
1) You can sustain it with both. SMCs are better because they give you a bigger reserve of cap to deal with nos/neuts.
2) You can't sustain it with either. SMCs are better because they give you a longer time until cap-death, which is all that matters.
3) You're running an injector. CCCs are near useless because you won't be spending much time at peak recharge. SMCs give you a higher reserve of cap before needing to inject, and give you more room to avoid over-boosting.
I guess there's also the cost-effectiveness argument, if you can afford to rig the ship but not with the best rigs. But in terms of raw power, SMCs win by a large margin.
You're argument would be correct if Cap Boosters didn't exist. -=^=- "Someday the world will recognize the genius in my insanity." |
Merin Ryskin
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 06:15:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Kadoes Khan You're argument would be correct if Cap Boosters didn't exist.
Definition of irony: quoting an argument that cap boosters make SMCs better than CCCs with a response claiming I forgot about cap boosters.
Please actually read posts before replying to them. Cap boosters make SMCs better for three reasons:
1) If you're using a cap booster, you are using an unsustainable setup. This means the relevant number is your time until your cap runs out, and the far higher cap reserve of SMCs gives you much more of it. 2) If you're boosting, your passive regen is small compared to the large amounts of cap from the injector. A tiny increase to this already small number is not worth the sacrifice of a huge improvement in total cap.
3) If you're boosting, you are spending very little time at your peak regen, and a lot of time on either side of it. With CCCs, the peak regen is a much smaller region, and 800 cap will quickly put you outside it. On the other hand, with SMCs, the absolute peak is higher, but because it's a larger region, 800 cap is more likely to land you inside a region of high regen.
|
Everyone Dies
Caldari Lucky Tampon
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 10:27:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Everyone Dies on 26/01/2008 10:27:28
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: Kadoes Khan You're argument would be correct if Cap Boosters didn't exist.
Definition of irony: quoting an argument that cap boosters make SMCs better than CCCs with a response claiming I forgot about cap boosters.
Please actually read posts before replying to them. Cap boosters make SMCs better for three reasons:
1) If you're using a cap booster, you are using an unsustainable setup. This means the relevant number is your time until your cap runs out, and the far higher cap reserve of SMCs gives you much more of it. 2) If you're boosting, your passive regen is small compared to the large amounts of cap from the injector. A tiny increase to this already small number is not worth the sacrifice of a huge improvement in total cap.
3) If you're boosting, you are spending very little time at your peak regen, and a lot of time on either side of it. With CCCs, the peak regen is a much smaller region, and 800 cap will quickly put you outside it. On the other hand, with SMCs, the absolute peak is higher, but because it's a larger region, 800 cap is more likely to land you inside a region of high regen.
This makes a lot a of sense, I used to think CCCs were always better guess I was wrong.
Anyway this is nonsense CCC > SMC always.
|
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 10:33:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Everyone Dies
This makes a lot a of sense, I used to think CCCs were always better guess I was wrong.
Anyway this is nonsense CCC > SMC always.
Wrong.
|
Meiyang Lee
Gallente Azteca Transportation Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 10:39:00 -
[20]
Isn't the fact that SMCs add a percentage of total cap also an argument against them? I mean, on a BS the added cap is pretty nice and on a capital ship its phenomenal, but on lets say a Battlecruiser or Cruiser the added cap is fairly low, even on a sub-BS T2 ship with its higher total cap the amount added is usually less than the appropriate size cap battery. (admittedly, a cap battery may be harder to fit)
|
|
Atius Tirawa
Minmatar Wreckless Abandon
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 10:42:00 -
[21]
I was under the impression that SMCs were better on Carriers and CCCs were better on Motherships (we are talking about carriers spacifically for PvP ya?)
The math becomes funkey when the cap falls below 33.3% after which CCCs start to lose their value while SMCs retain their overall effect.
But I could be wrong. -----------
|
Andre Ricard
Gallente EnTech Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 11:02:00 -
[22]
Another part of the argument that people who don't pilot capitals are missing here is that while there may be some debate between how much cap per second a SMC and a CCC provides, each CCC cuts down the actual time needed to recharge a capacitor. That is, it cuts down on the time required to reach sufficient power to jump, either to increase travel speed or to cyno out if things get pear-shaped.
For subcapitals there may be some argument as to whether or not one or the other is better. For capital pilots, only a fool would choose more capacitor over faster recharge. ----- Character back under original management. |
xyeLz
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 13:18:00 -
[23]
If you use an injector you should NEVER use a CCC rig, barely anyone does so anyway. The argument of injectors is moot as if you use an injector you probably shouldn't be using cap rigs in the first place. I've never had an injector fail to supply sufficient cap, it's biggest limiting factor is cargobay space and thus the duration you can sustain injecting. Don't use injectors and cap rigs, ugh.
That being said, CCC rigs are so great because well, they simply give more capacitor over time. MORE CAPACITOR OVER TIME, BOOYAH, PERIOD.
The cap ammount rigs will give you some extra cap for like 30 seconds more than with a CCC rig, probably even less because the higher recharge rate of the CCC would've already recharged more than the cap ammount rig, and then it's downhill with its advantage.
PvE: CCC rigs, I have missions that take 45-60 minutes, a cap ammount rig will help me for a few minutes, and then I'd be better off with a CCC rig for the rest of the hour. NOS barely happens in PvE, and I'd rather have a CCC rig sustain longer as it recharges more, than a cap ammount rig that adds extra cap I used up in the first 2 minutes, and now leaves me with less cap every second. In PvE you want long term sustainability for 30-60 minutes, CCC rigs will help best with that.
PvP: Injectors, Cap ammount rigs aren't worth the costs nor help that much, CCC rigs aren't ideal in PvP either most of the time.
CCC > SMC, fit 3 of each, compare cap recharge rate a second.
|
Jill Antaris
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 13:32:00 -
[24]
CCCs are in fact the best thing for Ships that tend to Permatank/close to it in Missisons etc. Semiconductor Cells are the Powerhorse for Ships that Burn Cap in 1-2 Minutes(Cap Booster Supperted ) like a Dualrepp Megathron or a Abaddon. The Rig gives the edge and providing far longer runtime under Cap Booster Support before the Ship drops to zero Cap in maxium Cap use Situations. Also Semiconductor Cells are twice as expensive as CCCs because they use more Rig Parts(nearly the double amount of a CCC). On a Mission Ship go for CCCs on a PVP Ship Semiconductors are way better it¦s simple like this. Nerf Lasers! Thay need far to less CPU and Grid to Fit. Still using not enught Cap and do far to mutch Damage. O wait... they allready did... =( |
The Djego
Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 14:02:00 -
[25]
Edited by: The Djego on 26/01/2008 14:05:48
Originally by: xyeLz
PvP: Injectors, Cap ammount rigs aren't worth the costs nor help that much, CCC rigs aren't ideal in PvP either most of the time.
This is plain wrong. The Rig gives on a Dualrepp Mega about 30-60 Seconds more real runtime in PVP because it slows down the Capout Process(Cap Booster Reloads, more Cap Consumation as the Booster can proviede). It is a real big advantage and beats Mega Fittings without it very easy because they will outcap before they get blown up(unalbe to perform more Dualrepping) in most of the cases. Try it, you will be supriced how this extra Points of Cap affect the PVP performance of a Dualrepp Mega.
---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Jonny JoJo
425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
|
xyeLz
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 14:10:00 -
[26]
Sure they help, but I think a heavy injector should be enough, with rigs better used elsewhere.
I didn't say they didn't help, you're just saying 'this is plain wrong, they do help' even though I never said they didn't.
I just don't think the SMC rigs are worth it, 80m or so to get just two of em? I'd rather buy a new Megathron, an injector should be able to provide enough cap.
Every rig basically helps, but for PvP I'd rather have a different rig than a cap rig especially with an injector fitted.
That being said, cap rigs can be great on a Mega, but as I said, not really ideal *most* of the time, compared to the other choises for rigs you get. You found one setup, I can name a hundred that could use different rigs over cap rigs better in PvP.
|
The Djego
Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 14:22:00 -
[27]
Edited by: The Djego on 26/01/2008 14:23:24 Edited by: The Djego on 26/01/2008 14:22:34
Originally by: xyeLz Sure they help, but I think a heavy injector should be enough, with rigs better used elsewhere.
I didn't say they didn't help, you're just saying 'this is plain wrong, they do help' even though I never said they didn't.
I just don't think the SMC rigs are worth it, 80m or so to get just two of em? I'd rather buy a new Megathron, an injector should be able to provide enough cap.
Every rig basically helps, but for PvP I'd rather have a different rig than a cap rig especially with an injector fitted.
That being said, cap rigs can be great on a Mega, but as I said, not really ideal *most* of the time, compared to the other choises for rigs you get. You found one setup, I can name a hundred that could use different rigs over cap rigs better in PvP.
It is quite a great advantage trust me or try it. They are about 50 M(but I butild mine out of own Parts). Cap on Galente/Amarr Ships is a very deacend advantage because you will lose most of your advantages(Damage, Tank, Mobility) at the point you cap out. Shure on Ships with Plates or Singelrepp they are not that good but if you go for a Dualrepp Fitting you will find yourself quite fast out of Cap. Also the Rig gives a better chance against Neuts. I mostly prefere a SMC over an extra Armor Rig because of this. Also they not slow you down or have other negative Side effects. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Jonny JoJo
425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
|
Ariel Darklight
Caldari Model Of Aggression
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 17:43:00 -
[28]
Ok, has anyone done the actual math? I mean this can't be a mystery on whether SMCs or CCCs are better for capitals and subcapitals.
According to EFT it seems that SMCs are superior to CCCs in battleships and up.
|
xyeLz
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 17:50:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Ariel Darklight Ok, has anyone done the actual math? I mean this can't be a mystery on whether SMCs or CCCs are better for capitals and subcapitals.
According to EFT it seems that SMCs are superior to CCCs in battleships and up.
What are the criteria, lasting duration, cap recharge a second?
|
Ariel Darklight
Caldari Model Of Aggression
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 18:02:00 -
[30]
Originally by: xyeLz
Originally by: Ariel Darklight Ok, has anyone done the actual math? I mean this can't be a mystery on whether SMCs or CCCs are better for capitals and subcapitals.
According to EFT it seems that SMCs are superior to CCCs in battleships and up.
What are the criteria, lasting duration, cap recharge a second?
Lasting duration...
But I figure that the extra cap pool SMCs give outweigh the benefits of the cap recharge rate of CCCs on battleships and up because it seems in most setups (425mm sniper thron, x-large booster raven) the extra cap recharge rate of CCCs isn't fast enough to replace the cap being used.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |