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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

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
Phoenicia Black Sea Industries Insurgency	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:20:00 - [2] Same reason why at a certain point cap batteries become a better choice than cap rechargers/relays. Indeed, many pilots don't seem to grasp this concept which is so very proven in the similar field of passive shield tanking.
Saietor Blackgreen The First Foundation Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:23:00 - [3] Edited by: Saietor Blackgreen on 21/04/2008 13:23:29 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 OMG! Revelation! My eyes see the truth now! Seriously, this is a well known fact for anyone with EFT and basic understanding of EVE stats. The fact that CCCs are used more often is purely because they are cheaper. Less materials needed to produce them. CCCs usually suffice.
Nomakai Delateriel Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:33:00 - [4] Now if you used correct math, then maybe you would have arrived at more balanced conclusion. Fact 1: -15% recharge time doesn't mean 100/1.15. It means 100x0.85. Which means you end up at a recharge time of 85s. Bad math, but so far you're decently correct. However 1000/85 = 11.7. A difference which is increased by the non-linear recharge rate of the capacitor. Not that Semiconductor Memory Cells don't have their advantages, but if you're just after the highest sustainable amount of cap, then CCCs are better then SMCs. And on top of that there is the matter of price. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary.
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:35:00 - [5] It appears that the peak recharge of a larger cap amount is slightly lower than that of a faster recharging one. The same goes for shields. When recharge is all you need, it appears that recharge mods are the way to go. But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Lt Angus Caldari Wicked Crew	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:36:00 - [6] Edited by: Lt Angus on 21/04/2008 13:36:37 Originally by: Midas Man 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 thats not how cap works, its a curve and CCC gets a better peak recharge CCC= best for a perma setup Shhhh, Im hunting Badgers
Inertial The Python Cartel	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:41:00 - [7] Originally by: Midas Man UnRigged you have 1000uF and 1000uF/100s=10uF/s recharge rate. Wait... Its been some time since I had my electronics classes, but isn't 1 farad = 1 volt x 1 second, and in this case is meant to measure capacitance which is the charge ammount possible on a capacitor?
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:42:00 - [8] Op is wrong, SMC give 15% increase in recharge, CCC's give 17.6%. Yes i know i spelled COAD wrong. Stop mailing me about it I refuse to read SHC
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:47:00 - [9] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 21/04/2008 13:47:30 Originally by: Midas Man with 1 CCCI you have 1000uF which recharges in (100s/1.15) 85s so 1000uF/85s= 11.5uF/s Incorrect. It recharges 11.76470 and not 11.5. Put your own sum into a calculator. 1000/85 = 11.76 Therefore your entire post fails -- Billion Isk Mission
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:49:00 - [10] CCCs = better for substainable Setups. SMCs = better for buffer Setups yust my 2 Cents. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Jonny JoJo 425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.

Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:55:00 - [11] 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.
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.21 13:57:00 - [12] Originally by: Midas Man 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. 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. Yes i know i spelled COAD wrong. Stop mailing me about it I refuse to read SHC
Nomakai Delateriel Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:06:00 - [13] 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. Well, on a capital ship (thanks to the jump mechanic and lack of capital neutralizers) the whole equation is hopelessly skewed in favor of the CCC. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:23:00 - [14] 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
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:27:00 - [15] 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. -- Billion Isk Mission
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:34:00 - [16] Originally by: Midas Man 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 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. -- Billion Isk Mission
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:38:00 - [17] 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
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:40:00 - [18] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 21/04/2008 14:41:39 Originally by: Midas Man 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 You need a 8% Cap implant for a 3 x Semi user to beat a 3 x CCC user. I did not know 8% is "almost the same". My evidence is baised on fact rather than made up assumptions. -- Billion Isk Mission
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:41:00 - [19] 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)
Lalita Prestoc	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:43:00 - [20] 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.

Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:46:00 - [21] Originally by: Midas Man 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, you are just digging a bigger hole for yourself. Every single post in this thread about teaching CCC users a "Lesson" ended up without yourself making simple mistakes. Please argue vs facts. I have given you real numbers and not made up ones. Work forward from there please. -- Billion Isk Mission
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:46:00 - [22] 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
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:52:00 - [23] 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. -- Billion Isk Mission
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 14:58:00 - [24] 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
Ciryadin FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.04.21 15:01:00 - [25] Jeez, if you just run it through EFT. Even at basic 0 skills, just put a rokh with 3xCCC and 3xSMC Basic Rokh (0 skills) + 3x CCC 7200 Cap at 19.5/peak Basic Rokh (0 skills) + 3x SMC 9125 Cap at 18.3/peak =============================== Basic Rokh (max skills) + 3x CCC I 8750 Cap at 32.6/peak Basic Rokh (max skills) + 3x CCC II 8750 Cap at 39.1/peak Basic Rokh (max skills) + 3x CCC II + 6x Large Cap Bat II 12750 Cap at 66.4/peak Basic Rokh (max skills) + 3x SMC I 11407 Cap at 30.4/peak Basic Rokh (max skills) + 3x SMC II 12960 Cap at 34.6/peak Basic Rokh (max skills) + 3x SMC II + 6x Large Cap Bat II 22032 Cap at 58.8/peak Point being, anyway you turn it. CCC > SMC
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 15:01:00 - [26] Originally by: Midas Man ^^ This approximatly 30 mins assuming you stay at peak Not really, the 3 x CCC user will always be recharging just under 8% faster than the 3 x semi user for as long as he is in the ship regardless of cap levels. If his objective is faster recharge, he uses CCC rigs. If he is a pvp pilot and has a cap booster, then Semi's are better because he has a bigger cap buffer in case of neuts before he needs to rely upon the booster. The mistake you made was assume that Semi's are better than CCC in all situations. Unfortunetly you are proven wrong. PvE permatanks rely on cap, and that is why most players use CCC for pve. It is not because they are stupid, it is because you assumed that just because something is more expensive. Capital ships rely on a certain cap percentage, and if 3 x CCC rigs help them get there just under 8% faster than Semi's, then thats what they do. It is every week that we get someone trying to reinvent the wheel. Just ask youself why people use CCC rigs in permatanks and not semi's? -- Billion Isk Mission
Fon Revedhort Aeria Gloris Inc United Legion	Posted - 2008.04.21 15:03:00 - [27] Originally by: Lord WarATron 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. It also makes a perfect sense for a PvE with a cap booster I'd say vice versa: CCC are only usefull if you need permarunning setup (for whatever reason), otherwise go for SMC. ---
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 15:22:00 - [28] 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.
Hardtail Red Dawn Empire	Posted - 2008.04.21 15:46:00 - [29] You guys are being far too nice. the op is an arrogant,presumptious fool who refuses to admit that he's wrong -_-'. If i want to afk mission run in a raven, i'll want a perma run setup. and yes. it WILL be in its peak recharge. for as long as i keep all my modules activated : ) why? because the cap balances out at 31%. note that this wouldnt work with your SMC's. This is nothing new. You're not telling us anything we dont know. CCC's give higher recharge, SMC's larger buffer. where are you educating us again, besides teaching us you'll argue the same point pointlessly for 20ish posts?
Everyone Dies Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.21 16:03:00 - [30] Edited by: Everyone Dies on 21/04/2008 16:02:56 You have no idea. Everyone buys CCCs for a reason. CCC > SMC 99.9% of the time

Kiki Arnolds Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.21 16:11:00 - [31] EFT-Blaster Mega with 1 LARII running, an inactive MWD, misc hardeners, all lvl 5 skills Base +15.2cap/s recharge, lasts 1M 54s CCCx3 +24.8cap/s peak recharge, lasts 2M 15s SMCx3 +23.1cap/s peak recharge, lasts 3M 19s You'll get more cap/s with CCC than SMC, but unless the CCC gets you to cap stability (or VERY cloese to it) the SMC wins out. There may be some setup that would cause cap injectors to change it, but gaming cap booster usage rates is too complicated for me. ç¦
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 16:15:00 - [32] Originally by: Midas Man 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. 2.2cap/sec is the same as just under a 8% Cap implant. Anyone can EFT up a setup that puts in a extra damage mod due to having more cap. Remember that some people combine Slot 6 +5% and slot 8 +5% with their CCC II's so they can run extra damage mods on permatanks (like the 4 BCU Permatank Golem setup, which would Fail with SCM II's) You assume people run permatanks on only rigs. This is wrong as they use more than just rigs due to no stacking penelty. Think of Compound intrest vs a fixed amount. Remember - Cap mods are not stacking penalised. It is not 2.2 cap, it is just under 8% of total cap recharge. For example, Abaddon. Base = 21.6/sec 3 x CCC = 34.6/sec 3 x SCM = 32.3/sec Now with 4 Cap recharger II, Base = 51.9/sec 3 x CCC = 84.5/sec 3 x SCM = 78.9/sec Now your 2.2 cap/sec gap has suddenly became 5.6 cap/sec. This gap massivly increases baised upon cap mods. T2 Cap rigs and cap implants make this gap even bigger. 2.2cap may not look useful, but just under 8% Extra cap recharge is. Thats because you are talking about a fixed amount and I am talking about a compound amount, which anyone who fits cap mods is working off. As for SCM's being more useful in more situations than CCC's, I kind of doubt this since I dont see many SCM users at all. In fact, the last SCM guy I met changed to CCC's as soon as he worked out the maths involved. Since I fly all shiptypes including caps, I thought I could use SCM's in a custom pilgrim neut fit, but then relised that ergess rigs are far better. So tell us some sensible uses for SCM's. Something like "Abaddon can fire 1 extra volley before it runs out of cap" is hardly the most valid of reasons. The average shield tank fully fitted only gains a couple of extra boosts in the first few minutes, after that, the CCC setup takes over due to the compound power of cap recharge in typical pve setups. -- Billion Isk Mission
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 16:17:00 - [33] Originally by: Kiki Arnolds EFT-Blaster Mega with 1 LARII running, an inactive MWD, misc hardeners, all lvl 5 skills Base +15.2cap/s recharge, lasts 1M 54s CCCx3 +24.8cap/s peak recharge, lasts 2M 15s SMCx3 +23.1cap/s peak recharge, lasts 3M 19s You'll get more cap/s with CCC than SMC, but unless the CCC gets you to cap stability (or VERY cloese to it) the SMC wins out. There may be some setup that would cause cap injectors to change it, but gaming cap booster usage rates is too complicated for me. Rule of thumb is..... If you use pvp, SMC's are better in setups you use cap booster with, such as pvp blaster mega or pvp Abaddon. CCC's are better in setups that you expect to be fighting for more than a few mins with. -- Billion Isk Mission
Ecky X Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.04.21 16:18:00 - [34] 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.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.21 17:10:00 - [35] 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 - [36] 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.
Rathion	Posted - 2008.04.21 18:23:00 - [37] If you use the Tech 2 Varients which give 20% each, lets use some nice round numbers to make the math easier. Total Cap 100 Recharge time 10 seconds Extra 20%$ on cap makes it 120 cap which equals 12 per second. If you increase your recharge time by 20% you end up with 100 cap recharge in 8 seconds which is 12.5 per second or a 25% increase that is a whole 5% better then the Semi's and is where the CCC's really shine for permatanks against the Semi's.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.21 19:48:00 - [38] Originally by: Midas Man 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. Sigh..... Please post SMC setup where it clearly outclasses Trimarks or CCC rigs and tell us how you plan to use the ship in such a way that the cap recharge rate increase or armour buffer( on pvp blaster ships for example) would not be better than SMC's. Its pointless debating anything else, since you appear to still not relise you were wrong in the Original post and rather than say "opps" you assume everybody else is wrong. -- Billion Isk Mission
Emperor D'Hoffryn No Quarter. Vae Victis.	Posted - 2008.04.21 20:30:00 - [39] Lesson learned from this thread: build cost of CCCs and SMCs should be swapped Originally by: Meridius Dex I could actually fit a Thorax WITH LASERS and get better DPS, better speed, better tank and - wait for it - better cap stability
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.04.21 22:10:00 - [40] I have personally always viewed the situation as if I need to maximize the amount of time I can burst my high cap drain items (like XL boosters as an example) I would go with the Semiconducter Memory Circuit. Generally however I am more concerned with how often I can use my high cap drain items and opt instead for CCC's.

ViperVenom Labteck Corporation LTD. Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2008.04.21 22:19:00 - [41] CCC are dayum near standard issue on 95% of caps in EVE. Semis are good for PVE as they are a Cap battery in a rig slot. Most Vets in Eve know that a Cap battery is better for Pve. Im not going to dump numbers. Ill speak from what i know. I have a Nid 3 CCC max cap skills Max Cap_rep skill I can run Dual Cap reppers. I can my repper for 12 min and some change.. IN fleet combat that should be good enuf.. Boo CCP!!!!
Jurgen Cartis Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration Nex Eternus	Posted - 2008.04.21 22:43:00 - [42] Originally by: Midas Man 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. Screw shield hardeners. More cap/sec = less need for CPRs = more room for Damage Mods . The Maelstrom fit above with 40 cap/sec more recharge than it needs could easily drop a flux or two for a Gyrostabs, and STILL be cap stable, while your precious SMC fit caps out gyrostabs or no. SCMs give more buffer. When you're not cap stable or neuts are in play, this is valuable. CCCs give more recharge. When this MAKES you cap stable or neuts are not in play, this is valuable. Even if neuts are in play, if you can escape you'll be back up to a useful level of capacitor much faster with CCCs. Plus, CCCs cut your uninsurable rigging costs in HALF from SCMs. Not as much of a deal on T2 ships, but that's a lot more uninsurable cost on T1 craft. SCMs rather than CCCs will not make a bad fit a good fit. CCCs rather than SCMs will not make a good fit a bad fit. Enough said. -------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth
Jhati	Posted - 2008.04.21 23:28:00 - [43] I have found that the advantage of CCC's over SCMC's depends on many factors. I beleive the premise of this post is slightly off base. Why do we need an argument over which is better? I personally use either 2x CCCs and 1x SCMC or 2x SCMCs and 1x CCC. depending on many factors including but not limited to: Number of free slots in the layout for cap recharge modules. Other capicitor fittings used. Base size of the capacitor. Cash flow at time of purchase. Cap draw of weapons fitted. Role of ship. So there is not IMO a easy "this > that" option. but it is quite true that you should look into all your options before just slapping 3x CCC's on and calling it good. Do your research, then make the best choice for the ship and role your fitting.
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2008.04.22 04:24:00 - [44] stacking penalty to cap recharge plz /me puts on hundreds of flamesuits - putting the gist back into logistics
Durzel Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.22 07:22:00 - [45] Edited by: Durzel on 22/04/2008 07:24:11 Since both CCC and SMCs work on percentages of your existing cap and cap recharge isn't the "right choice" ship dependant? In other words if you have a ship with a big cap and an already low recharge - you'd surely get more benefit from boosting (as a percentage) the total capacity than reducing (by percentage) the recharge. Some quick EFT numbers on a Nightmare (no ship fitting, no implants, all skills level 5): Base ship cap: 7422 1 x SMC II, 2 x SMC I - Total cap: 11779, Recharge time: 866.2 secs, Peak recharge: 38.2 1 x CCC II, 2 x CCC I - Total cap: 7422, Recharge time: 500.6 secs, Peak recharge: 37.1 If you have a setup which you know doesn't permatank anyway (which is presumably likely on a laser boat anyway), and don't intend to go AFK, isn't the higher buffer a better choice? A difference of 1.1/sec recharge isn't going to make a difference in either setup if your total combined cap usage/sec exceeds it. With those numbers I can't really see why CCC's are so favoured? Is it simply because "everyone else uses them therefore they must be right" or is there some higher thinking I'm missing?
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.22 07:51:00 - [46] Originally by: Durzel Edited by: Durzel on 22/04/2008 07:24:11 Since both CCC and SMCs work on percentages of your existing cap and cap recharge isn't the "right choice" ship dependant? In other words if you have a ship with a big cap and an already low recharge - you'd surely get more benefit from boosting (as a percentage) the total capacity than reducing (by percentage) the recharge. Some quick EFT numbers on a Nightmare (no ship fitting, no implants, all skills level 5): Base ship cap: 7422 1 x SMC II, 2 x SMC I - Total cap: 11779, Recharge time: 866.2 secs, Peak recharge: 38.2 1 x CCC II, 2 x CCC I - Total cap: 7422, Recharge time: 500.6 secs, Peak recharge: 37.1 If you have a setup which you know doesn't permatank anyway (which is presumably likely on a laser boat anyway), and don't intend to go AFK, isn't the higher buffer a better choice? A difference of 1.1/sec recharge isn't going to make a difference in either setup if your total combined cap usage/sec exceeds it. With those numbers I can't really see why CCC's are so favoured? Is it simply because "everyone else uses them therefore they must be right" or is there some higher thinking I'm missing? I wrote a detail list which showed your numbers wrong. However damm forums ate it up. So i am giving you the numbers approx Nightmare: H: 4 x Tach II M: XL Booster II, Amp II, 3 x Hardner II, 2 x Cap recharger II L: Heatsink II, flux II Uses 117 cap/sec approx Permatanks with 3 x CCC or 2 x CCC + 1 x CCC II. Does not permatank with SMC x 3 or SMC II/2xSMC setup. (lats around 6 mins and 20 mins respectivly) 3xCCC > 1 x SMC II + 2 x SMC 3 x CCC gives around 7-8cap/sec approx more than 3 x SMC II on above setup. 1 x CCCII + 2 x CCC gives approx 10-11 cap/sec more than SMCII/2xSMC on above setup 10-11 cap/sec more recharge with CCCI/2xCCC is not "1.1". Remember, CCC's are compound. SMC's are useful whre cap buffer matters, however most of those situations people tend to use cap booster insted and use trimarks or other rigs insted of SMC's. Now can you tell me a situation + ship where people would want to use SMC's over, say, CCC's or Trimarks or any other rigs? -- Billion Isk Mission
lord cyrez Licentia Pro Totus	Posted - 2008.04.22 09:02:00 - [47] Lord WarATron: forget about it. ignorant stays ignorant - usually. and our mister "i'll teach you all a lesson and fail in my first post" Midas SMCman may stay with his higher cap buffer. just dont care about it. you got the numbers, you got the knowledge - he's got his position and his belief. "2.2/s cap is useless" ... "5.6/s cap is useless" he surely NEVER had a REAL TIGHT peak cap recharge fitting, if he can state such. if i have 100 cap per second, and i consume 101 cap per second, it will fail. but hey, when i have 102.2 cap per second, my 101 usage setup will work... "oh noes tis must be witchcraft!! becuz 2.2 cap is useless!!11" i surely wouldnt have invested any further time for posting correct calculations after he has proven himself such an ignorant little weener - props to you, lord waratron but for now - this mind doesnt seem to be open for different wide views, so its just time to let him be ... jedi.hand.move.cmon.forget.about.him.it.makes.lordy.sad.seeing.another.lord.wasting.his.time
Gotrek Gurnisson Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.22 12:26:00 - [48] Edited by: Gotrek Gurnisson on 22/04/2008 12:31:51 Originally by: ViperVenom Most Vets in Eve know that a Cap battery is better for Pve. Im not going to dump numbers. Ill speak from what i know. I have a Nid 3 CCC max cap skills Max Cap_rep skill I can run Dual Cap reppers. SMC rigs are a double edged sword: 1) Get a nice fat cap buffer so you can run cap intensive mods for longer than CCC would support. 2) You have a lower cap recharge rate than with CCC rigs, so you are more likely to cap out using 'normal' fittings. It seems to me there is no 'best' - as occasions arise in PVE and PVP where both of these traits can be useful. E.g. My Apocalypse has 9000 cap (7500 + 20% from Energy Management IV). In order to perma-run all my mods and lasers I need to reach a peak recharge rate of 92 cap/sec with my current skills. By fitting 3 Cap Recharger II in the mids and one CPR II in the lows I find that with my current skills I still need 3 rigs in the lows to reach my target. The two different options are: 3 x SMC give me 14k cap and a peak regen of 93 cap/sec. 3 x CCC give me 9k cap and peak regen of 110 cap/sec. So on my ship both options allow me to perma-run my dual-repped megabeam setup. HOWEVER - using SMC rigs whilst initially giving me a bigger cap buffer doesnt leave anywhere near as much margin of error for cap recharge rate as the CCC rigs - especially on any missions involving NOS/NEUT ships. On the one hand the SMC rigs give me a 14k cap buffer if I do get NOS / Neuts affecting me. However if I was perma-running I would already be at 31% cap as my cap use is so close to the peak regen rate. I.e. I will have 31% of 14k = 4300 cap left. With CCC rigs my higher recharge rate means even perma running I will be sat at ~ 60% of max capacitor. 60% of 9k = 5400. So in my case I actually BENEFIT from using CCC rigs as the amount of cap left when perma running is GREATER than if I switched to SMC rigs. SMC rigs really are oriented to short bursts of max cap use - which isnt really applicable to the majority of L4 missions. Its like arguing chalk and cheese - they are both useful but in very different situations. Edit: I have a feeling my sustained cap level is actually closer to 50% remaining when perma-running using 3 x CCC rigs - but my original point still stands as the level of remaining cap in the battery is similar - but I also have a faster regen rate with CCC rigs.
Galeros Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.04.22 13:10:00 - [49] Originally by: Midas Man something like 2 cap per sec on a BS and less for anything smaller will not do anything that you couldn't do without it It is irrelevant if it's 2 cap/sec or 250 cap/sec, OP categorically stated that SMC is better and has been proven wrong. Nothing else to discuss. If he said 'in some cases' or 'sometimes' then we could go on, but since he posted a simple TRUE/FALSE statement, he failed. PS: And I thought philosophy class was a waste of time at uni.
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp	Posted - 2008.04.22 15:35:00 - [50] Originally by: Lord WarATron Semi = Cap Battery in rig form CCC = Cap recharger in rig form. Totally wrong. SMC =/= Cap Battery just because Cap Battery gives You FIXED AMOUNT of capacitor, while SMC increasing Your cap at some PERCENTAGE of Your least cap... Key word are "least", because You all discussing fittings made from thin air. "Zero skills" and nude hulls with just capacitors and rigs. Why not rig shuttles then? In real fight it is MUCH matters, if You are using: MWD, SPR, Cap Flux Coils... Things that affects capacitor in a bad way. That's why battery sometimes gives You BETTER cap recharge, than Cap Recharger in the same place. But for SMC it's not always true and need some hard match. Originally by: Ciryadin EFT anyone -.-? [snip] And there's why EFT is worse than QF... In QF You may actually see what happened to our capacitor. Then all You need is to get a stopwatch and see how long Your cap lasts and where is the problems. EFT just giving You a number... And it is very questionable number as cap problem is not that simple. I've had, for example, batge setup, that was capstable in EFT, but led me to issues in real world. Answer was simple: instant cap usage of 3 strips were way over the total amount of cap on the barge. But async run of all strips did the trick, cap was successfully recharging to the point of about 60% before each subsequent strip cycle. -- Thanks CCP for cu

Varrakk Phantom Squad Insurgency	Posted - 2008.04.22 15:51:00 - [51] Try to mix these rigs :)
Gotrek Gurnisson Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.22 15:59:00 - [52] Originally by: Tonto Auri That's why battery sometimes gives You BETTER cap recharge, than Cap Recharger in the same place. QFT. I.e. If the amount of cap added is a big enough proportion of your total cap then regen rates rise more than with a cap recharger. This is especially true of multiple cap rechargers subject to STACKING PENALTIES - as each one added is less efficient than the last. E.g. My Vengeance setup for L2 rep grinding in Empire space uses 1 cap recharger and 1 battery - since the battery boosts my regen way more then adding a second CR II. (The battery adds about 35% to my total cap - which works out better than a cap recharger and also allows longer boost from my AB on the approach to each target) However the larger cap batteries generally give a smaller percentage increase in your overall cap size by the time you are flying Battleships (especially an Apoc!), and so cap rechargers tend to predominate.
Skyr Black Plague. RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.22 16:47:00 - [53] Originally by: Gotrek Gurnisson Originally by: Tonto Auri That's why battery sometimes gives You BETTER cap recharge, than Cap Recharger in the same place. QFT. I.e. If the amount of cap added is a big enough proportion of your total cap then regen rates rise more than with a cap recharger. This is especially true of multiple cap rechargers subject to STACKING PENALTIES - as each one added is less efficient than the last. E.g. My Vengeance setup for L2 rep grinding in Empire space uses 1 cap recharger and 1 battery - since the battery boosts my regen way more then adding a second CR II. (The battery adds about 35% to my total cap - which works out better than a cap recharger and also allows longer boost from my AB on the approach to each target) However the larger cap batteries generally give a smaller percentage increase in your overall cap size by the time you are flying Battleships (especially an Apoc!), and so cap rechargers tend to predominate. Agreed, however you just brought Capacitor Batteries into the picture which have a fixed amount of cap on them whereas SMC add %. In that respect, SMC still adds a given % to a venegeance as well as Nightmare. On the post about the nightmare... I think you have you math wrong, can you, step by step, write how you got SMCs getting better recharge than CCCs? Since if CCCs ALWAYS (they do!) have that ~2% advantage over SMCs in cap/s recharge, no matter if you start with capacitor of 1 or 1,000,000 , the CCCs will still give you ~2% more recharge (per CCC). You calculated something wrong.
Tenpun M	Posted - 2008.04.22 18:49:00 - [54] Originally by: Midas Man hope this will educate a few atleast, those who don't understand maths flame away
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2008.04.22 20:25:00 - [55] There are reasons to use semiconductor memory cells. However peak recharge vs. capacitor control circuits aren't one of them. X / 0.85 > X * 1.15 for all values of X. Doesn't mean having more max cap isn't useful, but ... well, you don't ever get more regen from SMCs. I'd also point out that there's an important category where recharge time on cap is important, above and beyond 'peak cap per second' and that's when using a jumpdrive.
Chelone Stone Shadow Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.22 20:30:00 - [56] Originally by: Midas Man UnRigged you have 1000uF and 1000uF/100s=10uF/s recharge rate. Actually, your peak recharge would be 2.4 * capacity * rech. time = 24 cap/s peak recharge. Originally by: Midas Man with 1 CCCI you have 1000uF which recharges in (100s/1.15) 85s so 1000uF/85s= 11.5uF/s Incorrect. A 15% cap recharger (whether module or rig) multiplies your recharge time by (1 - 0.15) or 0.85. 24 / 0.85 = 28.235 cap/s (peak.) A capacity module or rig of +15% would multiply capacity by 1.15, 24 * 1.15 = 27.6 cap/s (peak.) Any more "maths" comments?
Chelone Stone Shadow Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.22 20:38:00 - [57] Originally by: Gotrek Gurnisson This is especially true of multiple cap rechargers subject to STACKING PENALTIES - as each one added is less efficient than the last. Cap rechargers have never had stacking penalties. Each one gives MORE cap/s than the last: 0 cap II: 10 cap/s base (example) 1 cap II: 10 / 0.8 = 12.5 cap/s (+2.5) 2 cap II: 10 / (0.8)^2 = 15.625 cap/s (+3.125) 3 cap II: 10 / (0.8)^3 = 19.53125 cap/s (+3.90625) etc...
Morthis Rygal Gallente Zero Potential	Posted - 2008.04.22 23:46:00 - [58] Originally by: Midas Man 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. Let's do some really simplified math here, I'm rounding this number off 5000 max cap vs 5cap/sec. So 1000 seconds to break even. That's like 17 minutes. The only missions that take less than 17 minutes are the ones I never even touch my booster on anyway. But hey, thank god I have that 5000 extra cap to run hardeners draining I believe 3.8 cap/sec. Man what a life saver. Quote: 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. If I needed any more proof you don't seem to have much of a clue, you're certainly providing me with it here. An XL SB struggles to tank the easiest of level 4's? A shield tank with decent skills and 4 hardeners can do half the level 4 missions (certainly all the easy ones) without boosting at all (depending on ship of course, and yes I'm talking about active tanked ships, not passive)... The OP just strikes me as a pseudointellectual trying to show off just how good he is and failing horribly. Hell, he even gave his capacitor the units of micro farads, and I have absolutely no clue why. Besides the obvious point that I'd hope spaceships use capacitors quite a bit bigger than one I could put in a damn toothbrush, the unit doesn't even make sense to describe the amount of energy contained in a capacitor (as farads is typically a static number giving you an idea of the maximum charge a capacitor can hold).
Cuebick Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.04.23 00:13:00 - [59] to you guys doing all these calcs.... BORED @ WORK? -
Lalita Prestoc	Posted - 2008.04.23 02:17:00 - [60] Originally by: Lord WarATron 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. Sort of true. Firstly you won't catch me using either on a PvP setup, poly's or tank rigs by far are better. As far as PvE goes I think it depends more on the rest of the setup the same as flux. The closer you get to perma running the better recharge is, if you can't get close then your better off with the amount and forgetting about perma running. I mean 3k cap is 7.5 LAR boosts which is 80 seconds. In that time a CCC setup wouldn't of made enough cap compared to amount rigs for 1 extra LAR boost. The difference is in how close to perma running is the amount setup compared to the CCC setup for convenience of not having to manage the cap using mods. For example my mission maelstrom uses a large t2 booster for perma running with 3 CCC and 2 flux, switch it on and forget. But if I was to use a t2 XL booster, because it would take a load of cap mods to perma run (or faction) i'd use PDS and amount rigs and just manage the XL booster so I get the extra peak tank when needed using the extra cap amount for that period.

Gotrek Gurnisson Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.23 09:41:00 - [61] Edited by: Gotrek Gurnisson on 23/04/2008 09:41:54 Originally by: Chelone Cap rechargers have never had stacking penalties. Each one gives MORE cap/s than the last Not according to my spreadsheet calculations which fairly accurately predict my total recharge time. I though the difference was stacking penalties applied to multiples of the EXACTLY THE SAME TYPE of item - and didnt affect different items stacked together? E.g. 1 x CCC + 1 x Cap Recharger II + 1 x Cap Power Relay has no stacking penalties as they are all different types of items. However, 3 x Cap Recharger gets the stacking penalties, so first is at 100% effectiveness, 2nd at 85% effectiveness, 3rd at 57% effectiveness? This would give total recharge time modifier of: (1-(0.2100%))(1-(0.285%))(1-(0.257%)) = 0.588 Whereas 3 cap rechargers without stacking penalties would give a total recharge time modifier of: (1-0.2)(1-0.2)*(1-0.2) = 0.512 With 3 cap rechargers a BS with around 6k cap and recharge time of 1000 sec will regen in: 588 sec with stacking penalties 512 sec without stacking penalties I will double check tonight - but Im fairly sure they do have stacking penalties. Easy way to tell is to add a fourth recharger as with stacking penalties it will have almost no effect - whereas you will still see a moderate reduction on recharge time if they are not affected.
Gotrek Gurnisson Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.23 10:00:00 - [62] Originally by: Lord WarATron For example, Abaddon. Base = 21.6/sec 3 x CCC = 34.6/sec 3 x SCM = 32.3/sec Now with 4 Cap recharger II, Base = 51.9/sec 3 x CCC = 84.5/sec 3 x SCM = 78.9/sec If Lord Warratrons figures are correct then the effect of 4 cap recharger II is to modify recharge time by a factor of 0.416 (21.6 / 51.9) I.e. Recharge time descreases by a factor of 0.416 so recharge rate increases by the same factor. Assuming his numbers are correct (and measured in game) then it does look like cap rechargers DONT have stacking penalties, as (0.8)^4 ~ 0.41 modifier. Anyone know a thread confirming they dont affect cap recharge rates?
Forum Warrior	Posted - 2008.04.23 11:25:00 - [63] Originally by: Gotrek Gurnisson Anyone know a thread confirming they dont affect cap recharge rates? There probably isn't one specifically proving this because it's generally assumed to be common knowledge. Also, you've got wrong assumptions about how the stacking penalty works: Originally by: Gotrek Gurnisson I though the difference was stacking penalties applied to multiples of the EXACTLY THE SAME TYPE of item - and didnt affect different items stacked together? Wrong. Stacking doesn't care from which (type) of module (or rig - with exceptions, see below) the bonus to the attribute they're modifying comes, just that it's there. Thus for example EANMs suffer penalty when there are active hardeners and/or resist rigs fitted. Same for dmg mods + rigs, etc. Capacitor is EXEMPT from this. Same for DCUs - shield/armor/hull hp % bonus too, afaik. (also optimal range rigs, which might or might not be buggy atm, I don't think there was an official answer to that yet)
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 11:31:00 - [64] 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.
Forum Warrior	Posted - 2008.04.23 11:50:00 - [65] Originally by: Midas Man 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.. That's not very rare, at all. If you are at (or near) max capacitor-influencing skills and trying to maximize DPS a very few cap/second often make or break the whole fitting - if you absolutely need perma tank at all, granted. I personally (I GUARANTEE IT! ) have flown probably at least 5 different mission fittings that were in the region of not more than about 3 cap/s over total cap stability, often less. And when do you seriously fit capacitor rigs in PVP at all, unless on capital ships? Anyway... Due to my, as unfortunately much too frequently proven, somewhat too high opinion of humanity I have no choice but to hereby congratulate you on the extraordinary quality of your trolling. Even _I_ could not resist! Keep it up!
Morthis Rygal Gallente Zero Potential	Posted - 2008.04.23 12:24:00 - [66] Originally by: Midas Man 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. 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!). In just about every PvE situation, cap stability matters more than max cap. In short missions, cap doesn't matter much at all as you'll probably fly through the mission before spending much either way. 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. 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. 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.
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp	Posted - 2008.04.23 12:52:00 - [67] Originally by: Cuebick to you guys doing all these calcs.... BORED @ WORK? No, using brain in the intended way. -- Thanks CCP for cu
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 13:02:00 - [68] 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).
Daminma2 Perkone	Posted - 2008.04.23 13:38:00 - [69] 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).
Majuan Shuo Gallente	Posted - 2008.04.23 13:59:00 - [70] t2 maths hits you perfectly, wrecking you for over ninethousand damage q-"WELL WHAT ABOUT THE PIRATE CODE!?" a-"well they're more like guidelines.."

Alowishus mUfFiN fAcToRy Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.04.23 14:07:00 - [71] Thanks for the lesson! Join The Muffin Factory
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 14:11:00 - [72] 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.
Alowishus mUfFiN fAcToRy Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.04.23 14:13:00 - [73] Dude, if you just go away the thread will eventually be forgotten. Sometimes that's best.
Durzel Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.23 14:26:00 - [74] Really struggling to get my head around this.. See below pic: Using the above unfitted Nightmare, lvl 5 skills, no implants - peak recharge on the CCC version is 37.1, peak on SMC setup is 34. Because the recharge time is so different does this basically mean that the CCC setup stays closer to the peak recharge speed for longer than the SMC setup?
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:12:00 - [75] 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.
Scout McAlt	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:34:00 - [76] 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.
Lord WarATron Amarr Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:41:00 - [77] Originally by: Gotrek Gurnisson Originally by: Lord WarATron For example, Abaddon. Base = 21.6/sec 3 x CCC = 34.6/sec 3 x SCM = 32.3/sec Now with 4 Cap recharger II, Base = 51.9/sec 3 x CCC = 84.5/sec 3 x SCM = 78.9/sec If Lord Warratrons figures are correct then the effect of 4 cap recharger II is to modify recharge time by a factor of 0.416 (21.6 / 51.9) I.e. Recharge time descreases by a factor of 0.416 so recharge rate increases by the same factor. Assuming his numbers are correct (and measured in game) then it does look like cap rechargers DONT have stacking penalties, as (0.8)^4 ~ 0.41 modifier. Anyone know a thread confirming they dont affect cap recharge rates? There is no stacking penelty on Cap mods of any type. I can confirm this and so can you by fitting multiple cap mods to ships. This means that insted of a penelty, there is a bonus due to compounding. So where stacking makes each mod worse, compounding makes each mode even better.
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:51:00 - [78] 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
Jarne Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Star Buccaneers	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:54:00 - [79] Midas Man reminds me of those Wikipedia maniacs always editing the articles according to their _belief_, again and again, without having any clue... Cause that's what you do Midas Man. You promote your belief, not facts. You even make up numbers to "prove" your point. What's wrong with you? Hey I have a nice "fact" like yours: Small Capacitor Batteries are better than Large ones because the difference in cap gain is negligible and they need waaayy less power...!?? Please lock this stupid thread.
Scout McAlt	Posted - 2008.04.23 15:58:00 - [80] Edited by: Scout McAlt on 23/04/2008 16:01:36 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/trimarks/weapon/utility rigs etc. PvE ers use CCC rigs. It seems only morons use SMC's.

Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:02:00 - [81] 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
Gotrek Gurnisson Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:13:00 - [82] Originally by: Midas Man 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. The problem with this approach is you are all quoting figures ASSUMING THAT YOUR CAP USE IS ALWAYS EQUAL TO PEAK RECHARGE RATE. This is not always the case. The example I gave on the first page for my Apoc shows that with a high enough recharge rate the amount of cap left in the battery can be HIGHER than if using SMC rigs. I.e. Because SMC rigs give lower recharge you are likely to be closer to peak recharge after any extended period of running all your mods. Whilst with CCC mods even though your cap is smaller it will hover at a much higher % of total cap. E.g. in the example I quoted my Apoc permarunning all its mods with 3 x SMC rigs will end up at the peak recharge point (31% of 14k cap ~ 4300 cap). However if I use 3 x CCC rigs I end up at 60% remaining cap (60% of 9k cap = 5400 cap). The ONLY time SMC rigs gain clear-cut benefits over CCC rigs is when both setups HAVE FULL CAP TO START WITH. As soon as you look at running mods over any significant length of time things start to swing in favor of the CCC rigs - especially as you my be able to get away running 2 CC rigs for perma-tanking where 3 SMCs would be required. SMC Rigs - Great for PVP where short bursts of large cap use may be required. A lot harder for players to Neut you - but will always be able to NOS you as you have more cap than they do. CCC rigs - Better long term cap recharge rate for missions. Easier to get Neuted and NOSsed in PVP. BTW its also very ship for missions. Ships requiring you to be constantly running all your guns and high cost mods (e.g. Amarr ships) need better perma-recharge gear than say, a Domi which doesnt always need to go all out cap-wise because of its immense potential for the drones to do damage. I still say its like comparing chalk and cheese. Two different setups - both with advantages and disadvantages.
Gotrek Gurnisson Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:16:00 - [83] Originally by: Midas Man look up rate in the dictionary lol failed twice QFT. I especially like the use of "rate of time". I dont think we need to be introducing the General Theory of Relativity into the picture, as thats the only thing I can think of that would change the 'rate at which time passes'...... Anyone got a small artificial singularity present? And no, I dont mean the test server
Kusha'an Gallente Equinox Industrial Co.	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:26:00 - [84] 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 ---- What part of "shorn't" do you not understand?
Midas Man Caldari Dzark Asylum	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:46:00 - [85] 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.
Mose Eisley Caldari Carnival of the Damned	Posted - 2008.04.23 16:59:00 - [86] All of my PvE setups are cap stable (most of them just barely) with 3 CCC rigs. Even if they were cap stable with SMC rigs, the extra cap capacity is useless to me for PvE 98% of the time. The 60 mil I save from buying 3 CCCs vs 3 SMC is useful 100% of the time (14 mil for CCC, 33 mil for SMC in Jita). As far as PvP goes, I don't use either. I think the OP is just ****ed because he put 50 SMC rigs up for sale and no one is buying them.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2008.04.23 17:07:00 - [87] At the end of the day, having extra cap is only useful in short fights. E.g. PvP. And it's useful there. But ... actually you're typically better off using a cap booster, and fitting something _other_ than cap rigs to your ship at that point. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Weeka Amarr Tetragrammaton	Posted - 2008.04.23 18:54:00 - [88] Edited by: Weeka on 23/04/2008 18:57:27 Originally by: Durzel Base ship cap: 7422 1 x SMC II, 2 x SMC I - Total cap: 11779, Recharge time: 866.2 secs, Peak recharge: 38.2 1 x CCC II, 2 x CCC I - Total cap: 7422, Recharge time: 500.6 secs, Peak recharge: 37.1 That's wrong. Total cap: 11779, Recharge time: 866.2 secs, nets 11779/866.2 base recharge : 13,6 Total cap: 7422, Recharge time: 500.6 secs, nets 7422/500.6 base recharge : 14,8 Dunno where you screwed up, but you did. On topic .. CCC >> SMC in 99.9% of the cases .. midas, just take it like a man, you are wrong here.
Scout McAlt	Posted - 2008.04.23 19:04:00 - [89] Edited by: Scout McAlt on 23/04/2008 19:04:21 Originally by: Midas Man 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. It is only 2.2 in a empty setup that is unuseable. Who flys ships with no modules and just rigs? What about the other extreme? Apoc with 7 cap relays and 4 cap rechargers generates 771 capacitor a second peak with CCC rigs. The same apoc with SMC generates 720 capacitor per second with SMC's. So it is not 2.2, if we follow your logic, its actualy 51 capacitor a second!!!!!!!!! So thanks for your logic proving ccc's do 51 capacitor a second more during peak usage. Is 51 Capacitor nothing? Secondly, can anyone give me a real setup for any ship that is better with SMC insted of other rigs? SMC's are pretty useless rigs.
Pwett Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.04.23 19:45:00 - [90] Originally by: Weeka Dunno where you screwed up, but you did. off-topic: multiply by 2.4 for optimal numbers. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony

Weeka Amarr Tetragrammaton	Posted - 2008.04.23 19:53:00 - [91] Originally by: Pwett off-topic: multiply by 2.4 for optimal numbers. on-topic : Doesn't matter, dude .. you can multiply by 2.4 or 2.5 .. or 2500 .. the higher base rate will stay the higher base rate, so what's the point?
Chelone Stone Shadow Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.23 22:00:00 - [92] Originally by: Scout McAlt 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. It's CCP that invented new (i.e. wrong) definitions. Rate is indeed cap / second. Any kind of cap mod is going to affect your recharge rate, because it is changing your cap / s. Just because CCP is stupid enough to repeatedly confuse rate with time (on cap, as well as guns and launchers etc) doesn't mean people should be blamed for getting it right. Increasing capacity increases your recharge rate. Decreasing recharge time also increases your recharge rate. And if the OP had done the math right in the first place, there wouldn't have been a problem. That said - the OP has an valid point about 15% capacity yielding 15% rate vs 0% capacity + 17.6% rate, but what hasn't been clearly pointed out is how and why capacity generally fails in comparison to rate in any kind of sustained cap-use situation. It doesn't even have to be that long a period of time, just any situation where you repping and shooting, really. Cap recharge is not linear, but based on a curve. Peak rate occurs around 30% cap, and is about 2.4 * max cap/rech time. Once you get into a mission and start using ANYTHING, or even warping there, your cap isn't going to be 100%. Let's say for general parts of the mission where you aren't repping much, your cap is stable at around 65%. 3xCCC will give you more recharge, 3xSMC will give more capacity so module activations will count for less of a percentage, so it could be more or less even in light-cap situations. But the point here is that when you start hard-running your modules, you are rarely beginning from a state of 100% capacity, but more likely somewhere in the 60%'s. In addition, once you go much past 30%, you are screwed if your tank is being pushed hard. So in reality, the full amount of extra capacity isn't going to help you. Only the region between say 65% and 30%, with a little extra buffer on either side, is going to really count in terms of extra capacity. So whatever capacity gain you think you are benefitting from, I'd say around 2/5 of it will actually be of noticeable benefit. Nevertheless, there's one more ingrained bias against SMC which may be present. We're used to cap batteries being a poor choice for 2 reasons which aren't valid here. One is that they have a static capacity which is laughable on things like battleships. The other is that they take a lot more fitting than a recharger. Neither of those is true for SMC, so that should be considered as well.
Dohkar Amarr Statler and Waldorf LLC	Posted - 2008.04.24 00:29:00 - [93] Edited by: Dohkar on 24/04/2008 00:29:04 For Pete's sake Midas, no one wants to buy your SMCs - give it up already and produce something else. ---
Scout McAlt	Posted - 2008.04.24 07:05:00 - [94] Originally by: Chelone Originally by: Scout McAlt 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. It's CCP that invented new (i.e. wrong) definitions. Rate is indeed cap / second. Any kind of cap mod is going to affect your recharge rate, because it is changing your cap / s. Just because CCP is stupid enough to repeatedly confuse rate with time (on cap, as well as guns and launchers etc) doesn't mean people should be blamed for getting it right. Increasing capacity increases your recharge rate. Decreasing recharge time also increases your recharge rate. And if the OP had done the math right in the first place, there wouldn't have been a problem. That said - the OP has an valid point about 15% capacity yielding 15% rate vs 0% capacity + 17.6% rate, but what hasn't been clearly pointed out is how and why capacity generally fails in comparison to rate in any kind of sustained cap-use situation. It doesn't even have to be that long a period of time, just any situation where you repping and shooting, really. Cap recharge is not linear, but based on a curve. Peak rate occurs around 30% cap, and is about 2.4 * max cap/rech time. Once you get into a mission and start using ANYTHING, or even warping there, your cap isn't going to be 100%. Let's say for general parts of the mission where you aren't repping much, your cap is stable at around 65%. 3xCCC will give you more recharge, 3xSMC will give more capacity so module activations will count for less of a percentage, so it could be more or less even in light-cap situations. But the point here is that when you start hard-running your modules, you are rarely beginning from a state of 100% capacity, but more likely somewhere in the 60%'s. In addition, once you go much past 30%, you are screwed if your tank is being pushed hard. So in reality, the full amount of extra capacity isn't going to help you. Only the region between say 65% and 30%, with a little extra buffer on either side, is going to really count in terms of extra capacity. So whatever capacity gain you think you are benefitting from, I'd say around 2/5 of it will actually be of noticeable benefit. Nevertheless, there's one more ingrained bias against SMC which may be present. We're used to cap batteries being a poor choice for 2 reasons which aren't valid here. One is that they have a static capacity which is laughable on things like battleships. The other is that they take a lot more fitting than a recharger. Neither of those is true for SMC, so that should be considered as well. There are three things about Cap rigs. Capacity. Rate. Cap/second. Cap rigs only do 2 of the above. Not all three like Midas man thinks SMC's do. CCC's do rate and Peak/sec. SMC's do Capacity and Peak/second. CCC's are 15% rate which results in 17.6% cap/sec. SMC's are 15% capacity which results in 15% cap/sec. Definitions are all correct, its that people want to change definitions when they lose a argument. Secondly is SMC's if they are of any point in this game. I cannot think of a SINGLE real world setup where someone would want to use SMC's. I have asked and so have others for a single SMC setup that is better than using other rigs. So far nobody is able to provide a SMC setup where SMC's are better than CCC's or other rigs. Anyone got a real world setup where SMC's are best rig choice? And by real world setup, I mean fitted ship and not some theory. Or the only lesson we learn is that SMC's are useless!
Chelone Stone Shadow Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:15:00 - [95] Originally by: Scout McAlt There are three things about Cap rigs. Capacity. Rate. Cap/second. Cap rigs only do 2 of the above. Not all three like Midas man thinks SMC's do. CCC's do rate and Peak/sec. SMC's do Capacity and Peak/second. Definitions are all correct, its that people want to change definitions when they lose a argument. Actually, that definition of rate (which CCP tends to use) is not correct at all. This now has nothing to do with SMC vs CCC, this is a general statement about the term "rate." Rate is defined as "a quantity measured with respect to another quantity." A common example of rate would be speed, for instance 60 miles / hr. The most common equation involving rate is: *distance = rate time or if we solve for rate, rate = distance / time This is directly applicable to our capacitor situation. Although cap recharge is not linear, we can choose a point (such as peak recharge) and form a linear relationship at that point: Recharge rate (peak) = 2.4 * Capacity / Recharge Time** Let's use a simple scenario. Capacity = 1000, Recharge time = 100s. Then peak recharge rate = 2.4 * 1000 / 10 = 24 cap/s. SMC increases Capacity. CCC decreases Recharge time. Both increase the Recharge rate: SMC: 2.4 * (1.15 * 1000) / 100 = 27.6 cap/s Peak Recharge Rate CCC: 2.4 * 1000 / (100 * (1 - 0.15)) = 28.23 cap/s Peak Recharge Rate Both increase rate. CCC increases rate by more. However, SMC increased capacity has ADDITIONAL benefits as a buffer, so that is the point being argued. It is similar to Armor Plate vs Resistance Mod, when armor plate can give a larger HP buffer. Although it is different since Armor Plates do not increase the effective HP/second repair rate. I tutor in math and physics, so... yeah, it bothers me when "rate" is used incorrectly. CCP makes the same mistake with launchers and turrets, last I checked, confusing "Rate of Fire" with the time between shots. Again, they aren't the same thing. "Rate of Fire" is not a time, it should have units of shots / second.
Ramthar	Posted - 2008.04.24 22:57:00 - [96] Just take this as a real example of a non perma Ravens tank fitting, on the surface it seems that the SMC will give me nearly an extra minute of cap compared to the CCC ( used Level 5 no implants as the base for the extra minute I see). Am I missing something fundamental here? I would love to know the practical answer to this. Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Caldari Navy Shield Boost Amplifier Caldari Navy Shield Boost Amplifier Heavy Capacitor Booster II,Cap Booster 800 X-Large Shield Booster II Semiconductor Memory Cell I Semiconductor Memory Cell I Semiconductor Memory Cell I
Chelone Stone Shadow Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.25 01:53:00 - [97] What we know for sure is that if you require permatank, CCC is always better in principle. For less than permatank, it's still a question mark. It would be interesting to have an equation to solve it once and for all. It would have to be a complex equation though, because of the non-linear nature of cap recharge.
Ksidyn Freelancing Corp Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2008.04.25 01:58:00 - [98] Originally by: Ramthar Just take this as a real example of a non perma Ravens tank fitting, on the surface it seems that the SMC will give me nearly an extra minute of cap compared to the CCC ( used Level 5 no implants as the base for the extra minute I see). Am I missing something fundamental here? I would love to know the practical answer to this. Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Caldari Navy Shield Boost Amplifier Caldari Navy Shield Boost Amplifier Heavy Capacitor Booster II,Cap Booster 800 X-Large Shield Booster II Semiconductor Memory Cell I Semiconductor Memory Cell I Semiconductor Memory Cell I If you look at the sustained damage efficiency in EFT you'll see that the CCC rigs will give you 697 Vs 680 with semi's. This is because you can continue to pulse (key word here) your booster for longer because of the higher recharge rate. So you can perma run for longer with semi's but you can tank better with CCC's
Mose Eisley Caldari Carnival of the Damned	Posted - 2008.04.25 03:18:00 - [99] Originally by: Ramthar Just take this as a real example of a non perma Ravens tank fitting, on the surface it seems that the SMC will give me nearly an extra minute of cap compared to the CCC ( used Level 5 no implants as the base for the extra minute I see). Am I missing something fundamental here? I would love to know the practical answer to this. Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Caldari Navy Shield Boost Amplifier Caldari Navy Shield Boost Amplifier Heavy Capacitor Booster II,Cap Booster 800 X-Large Shield Booster II Semiconductor Memory Cell I Semiconductor Memory Cell I Semiconductor Memory Cell I If you can bring the incoming DPS down to a manageable level in that first minute, then SMCs would be better. If not, then CCCs would be better (and nearly 60 mil cheaper for a full set of 3).
Praxis1452 The Hoodie Mafia Cosa Nostra.	Posted - 2008.04.25 03:51:00 - [100] Originally by: Scout McAlt Originally by: Chelone Originally by: Scout McAlt 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. It's CCP that invented new (i.e. wrong) definitions. Rate is indeed cap / second. Any kind of cap mod is going to affect your recharge rate, because it is changing your cap / s. Just because CCP is stupid enough to repeatedly confuse rate with time (on cap, as well as guns and launchers etc) doesn't mean people should be blamed for getting it right. Increasing capacity increases your recharge rate. Decreasing recharge time also increases your recharge rate. And if the OP had done the math right in the first place, there wouldn't have been a problem. That said - the OP has an valid point about 15% capacity yielding 15% rate vs 0% capacity + 17.6% rate, but what hasn't been clearly pointed out is how and why capacity generally fails in comparison to rate in any kind of sustained cap-use situation. It doesn't even have to be that long a period of time, just any situation where you repping and shooting, really. Cap recharge is not linear, but based on a curve. Peak rate occurs around 30% cap, and is about 2.4 * max cap/rech time. Once you get into a mission and start using ANYTHING, or even warping there, your cap isn't going to be 100%. Let's say for general parts of the mission where you aren't repping much, your cap is stable at around 65%. 3xCCC will give you more recharge, 3xSMC will give more capacity so module activations will count for less of a percentage, so it could be more or less even in light-cap situations. But the point here is that when you start hard-running your modules, you are rarely beginning from a state of 100% capacity, but more likely somewhere in the 60%'s. In addition, once you go much past 30%, you are screwed if your tank is being pushed hard. So in reality, the full amount of extra capacity isn't going to help you. Only the region between say 65% and 30%, with a little extra buffer on either side, is going to really count in terms of extra capacity. So whatever capacity gain you think you are benefitting from, I'd say around 2/5 of it will actually be of noticeable benefit. Nevertheless, there's one more ingrained bias against SMC which may be present. We're used to cap batteries being a poor choice for 2 reasons which aren't valid here. One is that they have a static capacity which is laughable on things like battleships. The other is that they take a lot more fitting than a recharger. Neither of those is true for SMC, so that should be considered as well. ... In Capital ship fights having more cap is a much better way to resist neuts and to not drop below your peak recharge of 30%. In capital ships such as carriers 15% boost to cap x 3 is a great amount of cap to neut and to run through. Of course jumping isn't as easy but it will make up for it. That's the extent to which people use SMC's I think. -------------------------------------------- ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it"

Weeka Amarr Tetragrammaton	Posted - 2008.04.25 15:17:00 - [101] Originally by: Ksidyn So you can perma run for longer with semi's but ... Please - there is no such thing as "longer" or "shorter" perma running a tank
Boz Well	Posted - 2008.04.25 16:42:00 - [102] Originally by: Dohkar Edited by: Dohkar on 24/04/2008 00:29:04 For Pete's sake Midas, no one wants to buy your SMCs - give it up already and produce something else. Owned. Honestly OP, if you had argued that SMC's are a viable option, no one would disagree. However, arguing that SMC's are always better than CCC's is just silly, as it really just depends on the situation. If you try and argue a blanket statement like that (especially one that is false), you have no hope of convincing anyone. Narrow your focus and argue that SMC's are a viable option depending on the circumstances, and voila, you might gain some credibility. But, no matter what you argue, you might want to read a math textbook first. The original math is laughable, especially when you invite people that don't understand math to flame you. Flame yourself maybe?


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.