open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Which nightmare fit?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Tenzeck
Posted - 2011.06.12 23:24:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Tenzeck on 12/06/2011 23:30:32
Quote:
There is a difference between posting a fit and forcing your own personal ideas what a good fit is.



The civil way to go about it is to explain the details that say why you feel like a fit is the best choice and offer options to be looked at if needs aren't met by the fit.

A poor way to go about it would be to say that you absolutely must fit it in a certain way and characterize other options to be considered as an attack on playstyle freedoms.

Quote:
Please re-read OP post #1 and #11 until you understand exactly what the OP was looking for.



I just went through that. You quite obviously believe the answer to his question is that it is not viable. My opinion is the opposite. Disagreeing is not misunderstanding.

Originally by: Moroccan Tourist
To sum the upgrade gives more dps , more regen (dead space booster), and less cap , with the same cost


If you're reading the first line of his post and mistaking that he's explaining the cap stability of the old fit he's leaving as his goal, then take your own advice about rereading. You can see what his "upgrade" goals are.

My fit offers yet more DPS, a stronger burst healing and a lower cost. This hits all three goals at the expense of cap, which he's clearly willing to accept to some degree as he says it directly. I don't see the disconnect you're having here.

Quote:
Can you tell me what my position was?




You've never even directly answered any detail of my posts. You just side step with insults. Your position is that of someone with no knowledge of a subject who has been hurt by someone capable of giving experienced advice and taken it very personally. If you were capable of adding something of substance I am sure you would have done so by now.

My nature is to respond because I don't want the original poster to mistakenly give any credit to what you're saying, but that is a flaw I'll need to work on as it makes me vulnerable to being trolled, apparently. If he could possibly read all of your ranting and still take you seriously then I couldn't have helped him to begin with.

Questions have been answered and I have explained my part of it as clearly as I will be able to. No one is learning anything from our looping disagreement. This discussion has gone stale.


General Atrocity
Posted - 2011.06.13 01:52:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Neamus

You simply don't need cap stability for lvl4's, as long as you know how to manage your cap then you're fine.


thats NOT always the case.

when I use my nm in missions I "HAVE" to be cap stable as i been known to drop/crash at the worst of times.
also i more often than not full room agro depending on the mission. so by the tinme everything closes in they are dead and my drones take care of frigates and in the rare case cruisers.

End of the day its what ever works for the user. yes some of them maybe fail fit liek shield tankers that use cap power relays to get cap stable and ruining thier shield boosting. but its different for shield transfers.

Judicator Saturnius
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2011.06.13 04:20:00 - [33]
 

I like Ten's fit. vOv

Sturmwolke
Posted - 2011.06.13 05:06:00 - [34]
 

Edited by: Sturmwolke on 13/06/2011 07:01:04

Originally by: Tenzeck
The civil way to go about it is to explain the details that say why you feel like a fit is the best choice and offer options to be looked at if needs aren't met by the fit.

A poor way to go about it would be to say that you absolutely must fit it in a certain way and characterize other options to be considered as an attack on playstyle freedoms.


And here you are, on page 2 missing the point yet again.
Try again, more brain effort please.

Originally by: Tenzeck
I just went through that. You quite obviously believe the answer to his question is that it is not viable. My opinion is the opposite. Disagreeing is not misunderstanding.

If you're reading the first line of his post and mistaking that he's explaining the cap stability of the old fit he's leaving as his goal, then take your own advice about rereading. You can see what his "upgrade" goals are.


"with booster off 51% cap stable" - denotes stable guns. In all likelyhood, he's already implanted with a CC8 and a Lancer G2 Beta to get that sort of stat.

"[Nightmare, 1]" - 4th T2 HS denotes an undertanding of the stacking mechanics and best bang cost considerations.

"[Nightmare, 2]" - denotes OP's (unstable) solution to the T2 tachs upgrade. Spot the T2 EDE rig.

"it isnt cap stable with the booster off so it bother me a bit and i gain around 40 dps with this" - denotes an underlying concern and reluctance on the cap change from what he was used to.

" ..with the extra cap i have i can pulse the booster and do almost all missions without having to use the cap booster " - this refers to the old Nightmare fit with faction guns and reinforces the OP's unspoken emphasis or preference for stable guns. Anyone already running stable guns on the old Nightmare knows about the pulsing and periodic syphoning of cap to boost shields in less stressful situations where a cap booster isn't always neeeded. Guess what you can do with the cap booster mid slot in those situations?

"My fit was based on the following idea : .. To sum the upgrade gives more dps , more regen (dead space booster), and less cap , with the same cost (i dont want a gank me please sort of fits )... well i think its a good trade , but im not sure if i can solo the blockade anymore " - this in most likelyhood refers to the [Nightmare, 2] summary from the addition of deadspace boosters, increased dps and cap use from T2 tachs if you follow the whole context for his post. Only the OP can confirm this.

"@Tenzeck yeah the target module is a nice idea tbh , i'll be using that ... and the 2 tracking computer not so much i prefer the safety of a cap booster" - again you can see the OP preferring cap booster on his Nightmare.

With exception to one para, what were you saying again?


.. to be cont

edit: moved extra para down for more space

Sturmwolke
Posted - 2011.06.13 05:09:00 - [35]
 

Edited by: Sturmwolke on 13/06/2011 07:45:14

... cont

Originally by: Tenzeck
My fit offers yet more DPS, a stronger burst healing and a lower cost. This hits all three goals at the expense of cap, which he's clearly willing to accept to some degree as he says it directly. I don't see the disconnect you're having here.


You're basing your claim "he's clearly willing to accept to some degree as he says it directly" on the second last para in post #11, AFTER-THE-FACT of 2 OP posts that favours cap stable guns. It's a highly debatable para which can also be interepreted as OP re-clarifying his concepts - based on the upper paras in the same post. None of the earlier OP posts are debatable in terms on his intentions. You have no ground to stand on.

I'll tell you what, to make it simple since you obviously won't leave the issue of fittings aside.
Run the math on -137 cap/s vs -68.8 cap/s. Don't concern yourself with :

1) Stable guns - because you won't achieve it.
2) Better cap efficiency for shield boost - because you won't achieve with Piths.
3) Less cap used for shield boost - because you won't achieve it with less resist.
4) Waiting more than 2-3 mins between missions to recharge your cap - because it's silly.

On the bright side, you get to play with 1 extra TC, yay, joy ... fun fun.
Now, what did the OP say about the TCs?

On top of that, this is the 3rd time and final time I'm asking, please answer this question :
"What will you lose by having a similar Nightmare fitted with 4 HS and 1 TC (in the context of the average players)?"

Originally by: Tenzeck
You've never even directly answered any detail of my posts. You just side step with insults. Your position is that of someone with no knowledge of a subject who has been hurt by someone capable of giving experienced advice and taken it very personally. If you were capable of adding something of substance I am sure you would have done so by now.


Those details have been answered. Going into an extended fittings discourse with your type of psyche is a pointless exercise which I wouldn't even bother - not out of spite or malice, simply out of irritation and exasperation that parents get when talking to rebellious teenagers (metaphorically speaking).

There's a thousand and one reasons they'll come up with to prove that pigs are capable of flight, regardless of anything.
Nitpicking, right down to microscope level.

Originally by: Tenzeck

My nature is to respond because I don't want the original poster to mistakenly give any credit to what you're saying, but that is a flaw I'll need to work on as it makes me vulnerable to being trolled, apparently. If he could possibly read all of your ranting and still take you seriously then I couldn't have helped him to begin with.

Questions have been answered and I have explained my part of it as clearly as I will be able to. No one is learning anything from our looping disagreement. This discussion has gone stale.


Oh, you mean the post #7 fit is wrong and flawed?
Therefore you took it upon yourself to educate the public (and OP) about what a good Nightmare fit should be.

tl;dr

OP: I want a chocolate icecream
You: Get a strawberry icecream, it taste better
Me: Hmm .. chocolate icrecream is more expensive, but you can get one if you run an errand.
You: No, I tell you strawberry is better ... because it's PINK!
OP: *tiny voice* I prefer a chocolate icecream.
Me: Oookaay .. no prob
You: The chocolate icecream sucks, I don't like chocolate. Go get the strawberry icecream!.
Me: *blinks*
You: Strawberry icecream is superior because of yadda yadda yadda.
Me: Uh uh ... but you're missing something important here.
You: No, I tell you strawberry is the only way to go .... yadda yadda yadda.
Me: Look buddy, do you have a medical issue? Have you taken your medications?

You're basically bullying the OP to accept your solution, regardless of the other options available.

edit:moved para, clarity, improved dialog


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only