| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
XFreedomX
   |
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:21:00 -
[1]
Recently, I have been trying to for active shield tank on my pvp ships. Two module consistantly gets in my way. Thats right, MWD and Cap Boosters. So I started thinking. Why are these modules mid slot items?
Cap Boosters seems like they should be a High Slot item. All other module that uses charges are high slot. Also falls inline with NOS which generates cap for your ship.
MWD (AB also) seems like they should be a low slot item. All other propulsion modules are low slot.
From the prospective of a active shield tanked pvp setup, having two required module using up the mid slot really hurt. Its the reason why no one uses active shield tank in pvp.
That is the reason why I thought these two changes would be great. But looking closer, this would help every race.
Moving MWD to low means Amarrian ship will now have the available mid slots for scram and web.
Caldari ships can now have a tank along with the MWD. Their low and one high slot are usually wasted anyhow.
Minmatarr ships now can properly active tank. Hell, I can now have Cap Inj on my vagabond.
Not sure about Gallente ships since I don't fly them, but you all can tell me :)
Anyway, I can't think of any draw back and think ccp should take a look at this.
|
XFreedomX
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:21:00 -
[2]
Recently, I have been trying to for active shield tank on my pvp ships. Two module consistantly gets in my way. Thats right, MWD and Cap Boosters. So I started thinking. Why are these modules mid slot items?
Cap Boosters seems like they should be a High Slot item. All other module that uses charges are high slot. Also falls inline with NOS which generates cap for your ship.
MWD (AB also) seems like they should be a low slot item. All other propulsion modules are low slot.
From the prospective of a active shield tanked pvp setup, having two required module using up the mid slot really hurt. Its the reason why no one uses active shield tank in pvp.
That is the reason why I thought these two changes would be great. But looking closer, this would help every race.
Moving MWD to low means Amarrian ship will now have the available mid slots for scram and web.
Caldari ships can now have a tank along with the MWD. Their low and one high slot are usually wasted anyhow.
Minmatarr ships now can properly active tank. Hell, I can now have Cap Inj on my vagabond.
Not sure about Gallente ships since I don't fly them, but you all can tell me :)
Anyway, I can't think of any draw back and think ccp should take a look at this.
|
Miranda Ceres
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:23:00 -
[3]
what about no
|
Miranda Ceres
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:23:00 -
[4]
what about no
|
XFreedomX
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:26:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Miranda Ceres
what about no
What about it?
|
XFreedomX
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:26:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Miranda Ceres
what about no
What about it?
|
Liang Nuren
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:32:00 -
[7]
The more interesting thought for you is why cap boosters are "required" at all.
IMO, most ships should be able to run a basic tank (single rep of the appropriate size), and fire its guns for at least a couple of minutes without capping out.
-Liang
--
It was an honor to participate in the Insurgency campaign in Branch. o7 to all involved. |
XFreedomX
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:37:00 -
[8]
Well, for most ships, cap booster and mwd go hand in hand. Its not just about the tank. This ties up 2 mid slot for minmatarr ship since speed is our calling. Add to that the need for scram and web and 4 slots are used up. Very little left for shield tank. And gasp, shield boost bonus for Sleipnir and Claymore.
Ofcurse its not just minmatarr. Amarr pilot has been complaining about the lack of mid slot forever and Caldari pilot usually don't fit scrams and web because they can't tank otherwise.
|
Pax Empyrean
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:40:00 -
[9]
I like the OP's suggestion. It would make shield tanking competitive with armor tanking in PvP and free up mid slots for more interesting EW options.
|
Altterra
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:51:00 -
[10]
I don't agree with the MWD, but the cap booster should definitely go in a high slot.
/half-signed
|
Sitthh
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:51:00 -
[11]
If your fights are lasting long enough that you need a cap booster then you need to get in a bigger blob. Come on, whats the points of killing someone if you cant melt them in under 20 seconds.
|
Terianna Eri
Scrutari
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:53:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
The more interesting thought for you is why cap boosters are "required" at all.
IMO, most ships should be able to run a basic tank (single rep of the appropriate size), and fire its guns for at least a couple of minutes without capping out.
-Liang
I'm inclined to agree
why is the staying power of most ships ingame determined by, of all things, their cargoholds???
__________________________________
|
Atsuko Ratu
VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:53:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Atsuko Ratu on 10/06/2008 00:55:52
I just noticed that the cap mods are primarily for armor tankers. Cap rechargers and cap injectors go in the mids, which a shield tanker would lack after a basic tank and tackle gear.
Sure, there are cap relays, but that just hurts active shield tanks, so most people go with the PDU after a full set of damage mods.
Now that I think about it, most useful modules go in the mid slots. Sensor boosters, ECCM, all ewar, tackle gear, MWDs, tracking computers...
To be honest, I never active shield tank. It is rarely useful, and generally uses up slots that I need for other modules. But I always have empty lowslots, which I tend to fill up with pdus, just because theres nothing more useful. If ECCM was moved to the lowslot, (or the lowslot equivalent wasn't half as effective), they would easily be standard fit on any of my bigger ships.
Does this all mean I want cap injectors in a high slot, and mwds in the lows? Easily not. Of course, none of my standard fits active tank, or even use an injector...
|
Lyria Skydancer
Eve Defence Force
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 00:59:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
The more interesting thought for you is why cap boosters are "required" at all.
IMO, most ships should be able to run a basic tank (single rep of the appropriate size), and fire its guns for at least a couple of minutes without capping out.
-Liang
I would like this for my ships.
|
HankMurphy
Pelennor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:01:00 -
[15]
well, there is a lot of 'balance' in the way things are done now. the game has evolved to where it is w/ regard to slot use and # and something like this certainly couldn't be considered without a HUGE across the board look at how ships are currently set up slot-wise
that said, i like the idea. i'm just not sure if it would work as good as op makes it sound
------------------------------
of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
NIght's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:07:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
The more interesting thought for you is why cap boosters are "required" at all.
IMO, most ships should be able to run a basic tank (single rep of the appropriate size), and fire its guns for at least a couple of minutes without capping out.
-Liang
This.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Atsuko Ratu
VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:09:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Liang Nuren
The more interesting thought for you is why cap boosters are "required" at all.
IMO, most ships should be able to run a basic tank (single rep of the appropriate size), and fire its guns for at least a couple of minutes without capping out.
-Liang
This.
I wish 
|
Storm Strike
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:11:00 -
[18]
Caldari (and minmatar shield tankers) would suddenly become uber as they recieved a large boost while all armor tankers were nerfed.
|
XFreedomX
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:14:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Storm Strike
Caldari (and minmatar shield tankers) would suddenly become uber as they recieved a large boost while all armor tankers were nerfed.
I can't agree with this. Right now active shield tanking is none existant in pvp. The armor tanker can simply remove a cap power relay and replace it with cap recharger instead. This is they don't use it for something better such as a webbifier or tracking disruptor.
|
Storm Strike
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 01:25:00 -
[20]
Originally by: XFreedomX
.... pvp.....cap power relay....cap recharger....
|
AKULA UrQuan
Druuge Crimson Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 02:08:00 -
[21]
Quote:
Recently, I have been trying to for active shield tank on my pvp ships. Two module consistantly gets in my way. Thats right, MWD and Cap Boosters. So I started thinking. Why are these modules mid slot items?
The web+scram get in the way as well..and why active? Slap on a few LSEIIs and maybe a invul then call it a day.
Quote:
Cap Boosters seems like they should be a High Slot item. All other module that uses charges are high slot. Also falls inline with NOS which generates cap for your ship.
Any ideas on where to stick the neut(s)? Better yet what is a hyperion/mael to do?
Quote:
MWD (AB also) seems like they should be a low slot item. All other propulsion modules are low slot.
Totaly borks over all armor tanks or ganks their damage output. Nice.
Quote:
From the prospective of a active shield tanked pvp setup, having two required module using up the mid slot really hurt. Its the reason why no one uses active shield tank in pvp.
On the flipside the active tanked ship can go full gank in the lows. Tanking through firepower. Show me an active armor tanked gallente/amarr ride that has 4x damage mods that's not fail.
Quote:
That is the reason why I thought these two changes would be great. But looking closer, this would help every race.
No it wouldn't. Whine threads about caldari get old after awhile...
Quote:
Moving MWD to low means Amarrian ship will now have the available mid slots for scram and web.
They'll just pop abit faster or more often now. They'll now have to go with less tank or less damage now.
Quote:
Caldari ships can now have a tank along with the MWD. Their low and one high slot are usually wasted anyhow.
They got that now with a nice buffer tank. Remember LSEIIs?
Quote:
Minmatarr ships now can properly active tank. Hell, I can now have Cap Inj on my vagabond.
Why are you trying to active tank a vaga?
Quote:
Not sure about Gallente ships since I don't fly them, but you all can tell me :)
Fly Gallente first then rethink this.
Quote:
Anyway, I can't think of any draw back and think ccp should take a look at this.
Happy I could help.  |
Blind Jhon
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 20:34:00 -
[22]
Originally by: AKULA UrQuan
Quote:
Recently, I have been trying to for active shield tank on my pvp ships. Two module consistantly gets in my way. Thats right, MWD and Cap Boosters. So I started thinking. Why are these modules mid slot items?
The web+scram get in the way as well..and why active? Slap on a few LSEIIs and maybe a invul then call it a day.
Quote:
Cap Boosters seems like they should be a High Slot item. All other module that uses charges are high slot. Also falls inline with NOS which generates cap for your ship.
Any ideas on where to stick the neut(s)? Better yet what is a hyperion/mael to do?
Quote:
MWD (AB also) seems like they should be a low slot item. All other propulsion modules are low slot.
Totaly borks over all armor tanks or ganks their damage output. Nice.
Quote:
From the prospective of a active shield tanked pvp setup, having two required module using up the mid slot really hurt. Its the reason why no one uses active shield tank in pvp.
On the flipside the active tanked ship can go full gank in the lows. Tanking through firepower. Show me an active armor tanked gallente/amarr ride that has 4x damage mods that's not fail.
Quote:
That is the reason why I thought these two changes would be great. But looking closer, this would help every race.
No it wouldn't. Whine threads about caldari get old after awhile...
Quote:
Moving MWD to low means Amarrian ship will now have the available mid slots for scram and web.
They'll just pop abit faster or more often now. They'll now have to go with less tank or less damage now.
Quote:
Caldari ships can now have a tank along with the MWD. Their low and one high slot are usually wasted anyhow.
They got that now with a nice buffer tank. Remember LSEIIs?
Quote:
Minmatarr ships now can properly active tank. Hell, I can now have Cap Inj on my vagabond.
Why are you trying to active tank a vaga?
Quote:
Not sure about Gallente ships since I don't fly them, but you all can tell me :)
Fly Gallente first then rethink this.
Quote:
Anyway, I can't think of any draw back and think ccp should take a look at this.
Happy I could help.
 so much quote |
Nexnecis Umbra
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 20:54:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Miranda Ceres
what about no
This... Like caldary need more mid slots for ewar..
|
xXxKatsujinxXx
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 21:17:00 -
[24]
So... the problem is - you can't fit a mwd, keep your cap running, web, scram, and pwn?
Solopwning went out with platform shoes man... GET A GANG. |
Bloody Puppy
Onorata Societa
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 21:26:00 -
[25]
any advice for a bellicose pvp set-up?... noo? hey whoot the.........
ok ok and for my auguror takler?
nothing again!!??? hey
you ugly donkeys....
 |
BABARR
PARABELUM-Project
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 22:24:00 -
[26]
Edited by: BABARR on 10/06/2008 22:25:24
Quote:
Its the reason why no one uses active shield tank in pvp.
Wrong. In pvp people use mainly passive setup in armor too cause it's more efficient and don't cost capa.
And there isen't a lot of shield tank setup in pvp cause in small gang it's A LOT more easy to fit remote armor rep than remote shield (When you see how many CPU you need for a large shield remote...). I'am SURE the day where shield remote will cost less CPU, you will see more maelstorm or raven in pvp.
...
"Si vis pacem, parabellum" |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 22:41:00 -
[27]
Active tanks are 'unfashionable' because PvP is increasingly about gangs.
Your average tank isn't enough to tank a ship the same size. At least, not indefinitely. As incoming damage increases, the amount of 'boost' you get from an active tank decreases - dying faster, means less armour repairer cycles.
Where a passive/buffer tank, is a flat amount of hitpoints, which does scale linearly - 2 ships break you twice as fast as one. You're still going to die if it's 10:1 odds, but you _will_ last longer than if you were active tanking.
Shield tanking isn't commonly used for reasons listed above, and because midslots are valauble for other things.
That doesn't mean it's bad, it's just ... not well aligned to the state of gameplay. On shield tankers, I tend to find I'm running 'buffer style' tanking, in the form of large shield extenders and harders. It's also easier to fit when I do.
But back to the OP. MWDs are mandatory because the value far outweighs anything else you could put into the slot. Injectors become mandatory, because of the MWD cap penalty, especially when combined with cap using weaponry.
And in turn, end up not fitting on most shield tankers. Just as well most shield tankers are also using capless weapons then, isn't it? A Raven or Drake works quite nicely in a 'buffer' tanked configuration. Shields regen, which is a bonus, which does tend to offset the fact that they will probably have more armour than you will.
So it goes.
Only ship I really get sad about is the nighthawk, and that's not because of slots, that's because of powergrid.
--
Crane needs more grid
249km locking? |
Thelonius Rat
MDK Syndicate
The Volition Cult
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 23:24:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Nexnecis Umbra
Originally by: Miranda Ceres
what about no
This...
This. A change like this would never be implimented because it's too big. Even if it was a good change, it would change too many ships and setups and too much balance, thus would require the devs to do some actual thinking.
- |
Gawain Hill
|
Posted - 2008.06.10 23:34:00 -
[29]
Originally by: XFreedomX
Recently, I have been trying to for active shield tank on my pvp ships. Two module consistantly gets in my way. Thats right, MWD and Cap Boosters. So I started thinking. Why are these modules mid slot items?
Cap Boosters seems like they should be a High Slot item. All other module that uses charges are high slot. Also falls inline with NOS which generates cap for your ship.
MWD (AB also) seems like they should be a low slot item. All other propulsion modules are low slot.
From the prospective of a active shield tanked pvp setup, having two required module using up the mid slot really hurt. Its the reason why no one uses active shield tank in pvp.
That is the reason why I thought these two changes would be great. But looking closer, this would help every race.
Moving MWD to low means Amarrian ship will now have the available mid slots for scram and web.
Caldari ships can now have a tank along with the MWD. Their low and one high slot are usually wasted anyhow.
Minmatarr ships now can properly active tank. Hell, I can now have Cap Inj on my vagabond.
Not sure about Gallente ships since I don't fly them, but you all can tell me :)
Anyway, I can't think of any draw back and think ccp should take a look at this.
No.
ok think of it this way
1. you only need mwd if you plan to a) run back to the gate or b) try to out run someone
if you don't mind being slow (like you're in a long range battleship and you know you're not goin to need to run back to a gate then you don't need the mwd (i know i know it help you warp faster but that's not relivent)
2) you only need a cap booster if you're goin to run out of cap but hell 1 slot isnt that bad amarr ships have to make do with 3 mid slots on alot of ships (lets count 1 mwd 1 web 1 scram 1 cap booster bugger)
active shield tanking ships don't use low slots (1 slot for damage control if you really want it) which means you don't give up any damage ability where as armor tanked ships DO give up damage to be able to field a tank AND have less mid slots for ewar eccm and other needed PvP items
shield tanked ships have it easy get over yourself.
also if you want to move the mwd to low slots then add a low slot for all armor tanking ships so that they don't HAVE to lose out on tank AND damage to be able to move faster |
XFreedomX
|
Posted - 2008.06.11 01:07:00 -
[30]
Okay, I am posting again on this topic because the first post was rushed and not complete.
Recently, in an attempt to fit a Sleipnir for PVP, it occurred to me that the fact that MWD and Cap INJ are med slot items really penalizes ships who are suppose to be shield tankers, specifically active shield tankers. Then I thought, okayą IĘve got a spare high that I donĘt use and after 3 gyro and a dc I have a low. So cool, if MWD is low and CapB goes high. IĘd have for my med, scram, web, Shield booster, Shield Amp, and a INV. The perfect setup! And look, on the Vaga Scram, Web, LSE, Tracking disruptor. And geeą Rapier, Scram, 2xWeb, 2xLSE, Sensor Booster! I want this!!!!
Now to convience the other idiots err fellow pilots to go along with thisą
Can I get the Caldari pilots to go along with this?
Well, seems like it would be easy since they are shield tankers, freeing up med slot for more ecm or tank should be even better for them. And omg, look at the falcon if Cap INJ goes high and MWD goes lową. Wow NANO ECM Jammer! Talk about over powered.
Okay, now the Amarr players. Well, my alt flies a curse and this change is sex. Scram, Web, Shield Booster, INV, Tracking disrupter and 2x Cap injector and 2 Neut 2 Nos. Turbo Cap warefare and Nano with NOS to sustain tank! And look at the Zealot, now room for Scram, Web and Sensor Booster.
I was thinking Gallente players will be the hardest opposition to this. But hey, Deimos now can have a cap injector. MWD on the low also means it can now pack Scram, Web and Tracking disruptors. Ishtar is even more bad assą Scram, Web, 2 LSE and Tracking disruptor and a Cap injector.
So hey, seems like everyone benefits.
So to address some of the concerns which have been brought up on the other thread.
1. Hurts Armor Tankers.
To which I reply, ccp gives extra low to ships with armor tank for damage mods. So adding MWD to low means you would have to sacrifice dps not tank. If you fully tank up all low slot you probably donĘt use an mwd anyways. In any case, the extra med for armor tanking ship should benefit you all more since you usually have less of them.
2. What about Maelstrum and Hyperion: Well, I fly Maelsturm and to free up two med slots for my shield tank for 1 less turret by moving the cap inj up there IĘd be happy to have. As for the hyperioną there are ships that will be adversely effected by the change for every race itĘs a matter of trade off.
3. How about the Eris, now you can have scram and web along with mwd, the biggest complain about that ship.
Bottem line, too many interesting pvp modules goes in the med slot. These change makes sense and will unlock ships which were previously locked into a set role. I am not saying it is right to make this change, just that it looks good on paper and should be taken a serious look at instead of some the knee jerk no I was getting.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |