EVE Search - Capacitor Rigs a short lesson

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Capacitor Rigs a short lesson

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:15:00 - [1] CCC's = Poor Choice Seemiconductor Memory Cell I = the correct fitting to use Why i hear you ask.. I have a ship with 1000uF which recharges in 100secs UnRigged you have 1000uF and 1000uF/100s=10uF/s recharge rate. with 1 CCCI you have 1000uF which recharges in (100s/1.15) 85s so 1000uF/85s= 11.5uF/s with 1 Semiconductor Memory Cell I you have (1000uFx1.15) 1150uF which recharges in 100s so 1150uF/100s= 11.5uF/s so as you can see not only do you get the same recharge rate using a SemiConductor as you would using a CCC but you also get 15% extra capacity to boot. hope this will educate a few atleast, those who don't understand maths flame away
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:55:00 - [2] hehe flame taken, teach me to reach for the calculator and not guestamate. Also fair point about the no linear curve. but if both curves for CCC's and Semi's were on a graph you would see Semi's don't have a peak as high but they do hold closer to there peak cap rate for longer. Peak is around 30-35% IIRC so a CCC peaks slightly higher between 300-350uF (Using the above 1000uF ship) and a Semi peaks abit lower but between 345-402.5uF The Peak is a set point which (as corrected above) is higher for the CCC but the rate will fall off much quicker either side compared with the Semi. So if you slip lower than the 30% peak cap a CCC fitted ship will run out of cap quicker than the Semi fitted ship Also before hitting peak with CCC you need to use up ~700 cap (+ whatever recharged in that time) but with the semi you will need to use up ~805 cap ( + more recharge than the CCC because it will take longer) I just cannot see how a very small amount of extra peak recharge can outway the extra 15% Capacity. The cost I can see being an issue with some people but its like ~30mil compared to ~15mil so its not major amounts of cash.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:23:00 - [3] Edited by: Midas Man on 21/04/2008 14:25:05 Edited by: Midas Man on 21/04/2008 14:24:11 Originally by: Sokratesz When you have a shieldbooster consuming 2400 cap every 10 seconds, smartbombs, hardeners and 2 capital shield transporters sucking 300 cap/s each with a total cap (after imps) of 83.6k, you'll see why total cap doesn't matter as much as peak recharge. possibly in a Capital ship with 83.6k an extra 0.26% cap recharge might help out, dunno don't know your recharge time. Never flown a capital ship so not got involved in working out fittings. Taking a Rokh as an example base cap 6000 recharge time 1250. recharge time 4.8 (IIRC peak is about 3x this) peak is 14.4 peak recharge rate. Semi gives 6900 cap, recharge in 1250 Peak is (6900/1250)3 = 16.56 CCC gives 6000 cap, recharge in 1062.5 Peak is (6000/1062.5)3 = 16.94 so we get an extra 0.38 cap every second at peak using a CCC this im sure you can see is negligable it would take ~40 min to recharge the extra 900 cap you get from a Semi. assuming you stay at peak for the full 40 mins. editted to stop my post looking like a quote lol
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:38:00 - [4] Originally by: Lord WarATron Semi = Cap Battery in rig form CCC = Cap recharger in rig form. People use Semi because they cannot do maths, or because they expect to be neuted or have a situation where total cap matter more than recharge. Thats it folks. Do not try to reinvent the wheel. People use CCC because they don't realise that a Semi gives them virtually the same increase in Recharge ASWELL as a more capacity. Thats it folks LordWarATron knows all look at the evidence he has to prove his arguement
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:41:00 - [5] Originally by: Lord WarATron Edited by: Lord WarATron on 21/04/2008 14:37:13 Rokh + 3 x CCC = 32.6cap/sec Rokh + 3 x Semi = 30.4cap/sec Difference = 2.2cap/sec. Big difference, since the Semi user would need a 8% CAP IMPLANT to beat the 3 x CCC user. And for Battleships/Battlecruisers/Commandships running permatanks, Semi's are not very good at all. And where did these figures come from. hmm hold on I have a counter aguement Rokh + 3 x CCC = 25cap/sec Rokh + 3 x Semi = 45cap/sec so obviously CCC's are gimped or did i just make those numbers up (sarcasm for those who couldn't tell)
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:46:00 - [6] Originally by: Lalita Prestoc Originally by: Lord WarATron Rokh + 3 x CCC = 32.6cap/sec Rokh + 3 x Semi = 30.4cap/sec Difference = 2.2cap/sec. Big difference, since the Semi user would need a 8% CAP IMPLANT to beat the 3 x CCC user. And for Battleships/Battlecruisers/Commandships running permatanks, Semi's are not very good at all. Well remember you have to consider the cap increase: Rokh + 3x CCC: 7500 Cap, +32.6 cap/s @ peak. Rokh + 3x SMC: 11407 Cap, +30.4 cap/s @ peak. Takes that extra 2.2 cap/s a while to replace 3907 cap. ^^ This approximatly 30 mins assuming you stay at peak
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:58:00 - [7] Originally by: Lord WarATron Originally by: Lalita Prestoc Originally by: Lord WarATron Rokh + 3 x CCC = 32.6cap/sec Rokh + 3 x Semi = 30.4cap/sec Difference = 2.2cap/sec. Big difference, since the Semi user would need a 8% CAP IMPLANT to beat the 3 x CCC user. And for Battleships/Battlecruisers/Commandships running permatanks, Semi's are not very good at all. Well remember you have to consider the cap increase: Rokh + 3x CCC: 7500 Cap, +32.6 cap/s @ peak. Rokh + 3x SMC: 11407 Cap, +30.4 cap/s @ peak. Takes that extra 2.2 cap/s a while to replace 3907 cap. Cap Amount is irrelevant for the things more people use CCC's for. Where it is relevant, people use Semi's insted. E.G Semi's with a cap booster makes sense for pvp. But for PvE permatanks, its not better than CCC, which was the OP got wrong. LOLz where did i mention Perma tank in the OP, I simply stated Semi's were better than CCC's because you get a 15% inc to recharge and a 15% increase to Capacity Vs a CCC which only gives an increase to Recharge. It has been discussed and we can see the extra recharge gained from a CCC is negligable on all but a Capital ship maybe. Please explain how 2.2 cap/s is so important on a permatank BS unless you nees to off set that Shield hardener Oh wait they take 4 cap/s damn we are screwed even with the CCC
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 15:22:00 - [8] so SCM are better in most situations. The only time I think a CCC is useful is for capitals needing to get to a set % to jump. A situation I was ignorant of due to not using them. If someone is fitting for permatank in a BS then they have bigger problems if they require an extra 2.2cap/sec to make the permatank tight come on what is that negligable amount going to run? And then my assuption of cost is valid as the only reason to go for a CCC over a SCM is price.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 17:10:00 - [9] compound it up if it you want but 2.2 cap/s or 5.6cap/s Its still not allowing any extra cap intensive gear to be fit. CCC fit 8% extra recharge normal capacity SCM fit fantastic recharge almost 50% extra capacity Only example Ive seen so far that makes CCC seem better is the earlier mentioned Capital ship That require the fastest possible jump time. All other ship class's BS and Lower would last much longer in any Fight with SCM's fitted as opposed to CCC's. In the vast majority of cases a SCM is a much better choice. 15% recharge and 15% Capacity is a much better use of the slot than 17.6% extra recharge only. It allows much more variation of fitting. All the CCC arguements I See will only hold true for a very specific fits and i would wager that the SCM will fit fine with those specific fits too. If all you look at is peak recharge fantastic CCC's look better but put into a fight you will soon realise even the 5.6cap/s is next to useless you might find that you can run 1 extra shield hardener on the CCC fit but how long could you run one with 5000 more Capacity.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 17:18:00 - [10] Originally by: Ecky X Let me use a different example. Maelstrom: 5x cap flux, 3x CCC 4429 cap, 128.7s cap recharge > 86.7 cap/s Permaruns an XL SB, 3 hards, and a (named or faction) afterburner. ----- Maelstrom: 5x cap flux, 3x SMC 6735 cap, 208s recharge > 80.9 cap/s Caps out in 6.5 minutes with said setup. ----- You post that sometimes more cap is beneficial. However, you don't mention that if you go below peak, the CCC setup will get back up to peak (with mods off) in half the time. Not to mention you have more cap/s. Maybe its just me but I wouldn't got pvp or pve with the above mentioned fit. First I would drop a shield hardener for a Shield Booster amplifer to tank more Dmg. Also do you need to run an afterburner constantly and if you do how does it affect your tracking and DPS. And if your fitting with AC's an XL SB would struggle to tank the easiest of Lvl 4's. As in previous post I could spend all day plugging in different fits to find a situation where CCC's are better, but are those fits useful and of the few that are, they are for very specific roles. Which brings me back to SCM are more useful in the vast majority of cases.

Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 11:31:00 - [11] 1) I had already been corrected in my error on the maths but keep flaming away just proves how much of an ignorant troll you are to keep on about it. 2) I have conceded that in very limited situations a CCC is more viable. As my original post was to correct the bad advice i see given all the time. People seem to tell others they must use CCC's because they are better. I still stand by the fact they are not as useful to the majority 3) There is a lot of contradiction going on in here. I started by saying SCM are the correct fitting to use. and lots of people start flaming away how much better CCC's are without taking into account all the facts, and only seeing peak recharge as the reason for using CCC's or SCM's. Conclusions. 1) If your on a capital ship courier run or moving through hostile space and require a rapid jump time or... 2) If you fit for a permacap and in a very rare instance that a few extra cap/s is going to be the difference between permarun and not.. Then CCC's are for you. For ANY other situation where people want to fit cap mods. SCM's are by far the better choice. In simple terms (approx values taken from all answers in this thread) Ship with 3x CCC fitted gives ~ 62.6% boost to recharge rate (thats 1.1761.1761.176) and 0% boost to capacity. Ship with 3 x SCM's fitted gives ~ 52% boost to recharge rate and a 52% boost to Capacity. So anyone can see that overall discounting the two very limited set ups above, 3 SCM would be a much better choice over CCC's for any pilot. there are a few reasons everyone buys CCC's. Mis-information provided by LordaTron and similar folk and the Price difference. With a bit of luck this thread will help more people become aware that flocking like sheep to CCC's is only useful in the limited fit that it is nessecary.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 13:02:00 - [12] Originally by: Morthis Rygal It's ironic to see you calling people ignorant when pretty much every post in here but yours is about how wrong you are, with math to back it up (math that's actually right even, unlike yours!). not really I have corrected a calculation error and conseded that in a few situations CCC's would be a more viable choice. You have managed to read and post in this thread and missed all the post suggesting the same as I do ie SCM are beter in alot or most situation. therefore you sir are ignorant. And most of the CCC's rule posts in here are also ignorant believing that every ship must be fit for permacap and there CCC's are always the better choice. Originally by: Morthis Rygal In long missions, keeping your cap up over an extended period of time matters, and CCC's simply do that better than SCM's. Try doing the second pocket in mordus headhunters with full agro and tell me that sustaining cap over long periods of time doesn't matter. Try doing a mission where your Cap last allday but your taking 600 Dps and can only tank 400. How much good is your pemacap then? Yes Permacap is good. I have one running on my main for lvl 4's and I do it with OMG SCM's. BUT Perma cap is far from the only ship set up available and many don't use one. SO you can use CCC's for better Permacap but you can also permacap with SCM's. In a few very cap intensive fits where a few cap/s will break it go for CCC's. And where did I say sustaining cap for long periods doesn't matter??? I have said a few cap/s extra is pointless, and for most people it will be unless there is a tight cap fit for permacap. but Oh we have already covered that so Ignorance again. Originally by: Morthis Rygal Even if SCM's came very close to performing as well as CCC's in PvE, they're 5 mil more per, so it's still pointless. They do perform almost aswell as CCC's on Recharge alone, by a small fraction ie 17.6% compared with 15%. BUT for you extra 5mil or so you get 50% extra capacity. so if your not permacapping or you get neuted etc, etc, you will survive longer. Originally by: Morthis Rygal With a little luck, maybe we can teach even someone as dense as you that cap stability matters more than OMFG MAX CAP BIG NUMBERS SWEET in missions. Your Dence and OMFG CCC's ARE CHEAP I MUST FIT THEM (this is sarcasm if you don't realise just thought I would match your grasped from thin air consept with a similar meaningless and self imagined statement).
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 14:11:00 - [13] Originally by: Daminma2 Originally by: Midas Man CCC's = Poor Choice Seemiconductor Memory Cell I = the correct fitting to use . . . . hope this will educate a few atleast, those who don't understand maths flame away Originally by: Midas Man not really I have corrected a calculation error and conseded that in a few situations CCC's would be a more viable choice. If in your view there are situations where CCC was better then you can't call CCC a poor choice overall as you have claimed. Your original claim has therefore been smashed. Join regular ship fitting discussions where CCC rigs are suggested and see if you can improve upon them to see if your theory is correct in assuming that SMCs are more useful overall (which I disagree). As you can see from the 2 posts above. I originally called CCC's a poor choice. i miss calculated and saw them as the same 15% recharge boost as a SCM gives which leads me to think CCC's are a poor choice. From the second quote you can see i have conseded this view. I could edit the first post but then anyone else reading the thread could think i was hiding anything so i won't. The original post came before the posts which corrected the calculation error. So yes CCC's give a slightly better boost to recharge. Overall SCM's will be more beneficial to the majoity of fits if put in place of a CCC's. On any fit but the quick jumping capital or the "i'm a few cap/s short of a permacap" Fits. The 15% increase to capacity aswell as recharge is a better option than 17.6% to just recharge.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:12:00 - [14] peak recharge is active at ~31% capacitor. I would say that the larger the Capacity the longer you will remain close to peak recharge. Let us assume that you get 90% or greater of your recharge rate between 25% & 35% of you total cap (This figure is being used for illustration only exact amount is unknown to me but recharge rate falls off from peak in a curve above and below theat value) so if you have 7000 cap you will get 90% or better of your peak rate when you capacitor is between 1750 and 2450. If you increased this to 11000 cap you will get 90% or better of your peak rate when your capacitor is between 2750 and 3850.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:51:00 - [15] Originally by: Scout McAlt Edited by: Scout McAlt on 23/04/2008 15:35:29 Originally by: Midas Man Ship with 3x CCC fitted gives ~ 62.6% boost to recharge rate (thats 1.1761.1761.176) and 0% boost to capacity. Ship with 3 x SCM's fitted gives ~ 52% boost to recharge rate and a 52% boost to Capacity. Incorrect. 3 x SCM's DO NOT GIVE BOOST TO RECHAGE RATE. The Recharge rate remains unchanged as the cap takes the same amount of seconds to recharge. It only gives boost to capacity. CCC rigs are the only rigs to effect recharge rate. I dont know why someone would every use SMC rigs. No theory please, tell us a REAL setup where SMC's are better than other rigs pls. You fail, even worse than my calculation slip above. if you fit a SCM you increase you total Capacity but your recharge TIME remains unchanged. since Recharge rate = Total Capacitor/Recharge Time then SCM's DO affect recharge RATE You are exactly the people my lesson was aimed at until I made the fatal flaw of mis calculating slightly and then nothing was safe from the flames. But the 100% truth is CCC add ~ 17.6% Recharge RATE and SCM's add 15% Recharge RATE
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:02:00 - [16] Originally by: Scout McAlt Edited by: Scout McAlt on 23/04/2008 15:59:28 Originally by: Midas Man Originally by: Scout McAlt Edited by: Scout McAlt on 23/04/2008 15:35:29 Originally by: Midas Man Ship with 3x CCC fitted gives ~ 62.6% boost to recharge rate (thats 1.1761.1761.176) and 0% boost to capacity. Ship with 3 x SCM's fitted gives ~ 52% boost to recharge rate and a 52% boost to Capacity. Incorrect. 3 x SCM's DO NOT GIVE BOOST TO RECHAGE RATE. The Recharge rate remains unchanged as the cap takes the same amount of seconds to recharge. It only gives boost to capacity. CCC rigs are the only rigs to effect recharge rate. I dont know why someone would every use SMC rigs. No theory please, tell us a REAL setup where SMC's are better than other rigs pls. You fail, even worse than my calculation slip above. if you fit a SCM you increase you total Capacity but your recharge TIME remains unchanged. since Recharge rate = Total Capacitor/Recharge Time then SCM's DO affect recharge RATE You are exactly the people my lesson was aimed at until I made the fatal flaw of mis calculating slightly and then nothing was safe from the flames. But the 100% truth is CCC add ~ 17.6% Recharge RATE and SCM's add 15% Recharge RATE In addition to illogical maths, you are inventing new defenitions. Rechare rate is the rate of time it takes to recharge 100% of cap. Recharge rate increase or decrease is changes to the time. Dont take my world for it, show info on these mods in game. It clearly shows CCC does recharge rate, and SMC does capacity. Noware does it say SMC does recharge rate. Tell us all 1 single setup where someone would want to use these useless SMC's over other rigs. Just 1 single genuine real world setup. Pvpers use extenders or trimarks. PvE ers use CCC rigs. It seems only morons use SMC's LOL LOL LOL Please reread your posts and think about it. look up rate in the dictionary lol failed twice
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:46:00 - [17] Originally by: Kusha'an Originally by: Midas Man so SCM are better in most situations. The only time I think a CCC is useful is for capitals needing to get to a set % to jump. A situation I was ignorant of due to not using them. If someone is fitting for permatank in a BS then they have bigger problems if they require an extra 2.2cap/sec to make the permatank tight come on what is that negligable amount going to run? And then my assuption of cost is valid as the only reason to go for a CCC over a SCM is price. OMG the logic here is staggering... Translation: It's better to use SCMs because they ONLY recharge 2.2 cap/sec slower than CCCs, and are ONLY 5 million more isk per unit. /me yanks out my checkbook Translation: It's better to use SCMs because they ONLY recharge 2.2 cap/sec slower than CCCs, and are ONLY 5 million more isk per unit. And for that ONLY 5 million you get 15% boost to capacity. Is more what i was saying. Its quite easy to make statements about writing that don't resemble what the author intended by missing out the odd word here and there. What you did was quote a post I gave in answer to another and hence didn't see the full meaning in the logic.

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.