open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Shield Transporters Need Some Luvin'
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.06 06:59:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: 26534522 on 06/06/2011 07:12:12

Let's compare remote armor repair with remote shield repair.

Large remote armor repper:

48 TF, 660 MW to fit.

Repairs at the end of cycle.

Cycle duration of 4.50 seconds.

Has an activation cost of 252 GJ.

Heat damage of 1.5HP.

HP repaired: 384.

Optimal Range: 8400m.


Now let's have a look at the Large shield transporter II:

154 TF, 192 MW to fit.

Reps at beginning of cycle.

Cycle duration of 4.50 seconds.

Activation cost of 280 GJ.

Heat damage of 0.9 HP.

Repairs 384 HP per cycle.

Reps out to 8400m.



We can see that the actual combat stats of the modules are largely the same; the major differences are that shield transporters have slightly less heat damage when overheated and repair at the beginning of their cycle rather than the end of their cycle.

However, the fitting requirements and activation costs are another story. The shield transporters hog CPU, using a whopping three times as much as their armor counterparts. Now, you're probably looking at the two modules and saying "But armor reps use up three times as much powergrid as shield transporters, so it's fair, right?"

Most battleships have around 800 CPU, tops. Most battleships also have well over 10k powergrid. That 154 CPU hurts a hell of a lot more than the 660 or so PG you're sacrificing. Therefore, an armor remote rep battleship will field a lot more repping power than will a shield repairing battleship.

I'm going to sleep now because it's 3 AM. I'll update the thread when I wake up, it's not done yet.

Loraine Gess
Posted - 2011.06.06 07:43:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: 26534522
remote rep battleship




I found your problem.

Vyper Harkonnen
Posted - 2011.06.06 09:50:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Vyper Harkonnen on 06/06/2011 09:52:04

Shields already suck for PVP, give them a break.


26534522
Posted - 2011.06.06 09:58:00 - [4]
 

I'm guessing you don't PVP much.


The fact still remains that shield transporters are worse than remote armor reps when you get down to the numbers. As Vyper already pointed out, shields are generally worse than armor for PVP. Honestly, there's no good reason why shield RR should be crappier than armor RR. If there's nothing to justify one module being better than the other, then it should be fixed, right?

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.06 11:41:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Lady Go Diveher on 06/06/2011 11:41:52
Originally by: 26534522
Honestly, there's no good reason why shield RR should be crappier than armor RR.


Yet it isn't. Consider your buffer in each case.

For armour, you have 1600 plates. They're 28TF/500MW.
For shield, you have LSEII. They're 46TF/165MW

A lot of plate leaves you tight on PW and ergo, the armour RR is hard to fit. A lot of shield leaves you tight on CPU, and ergo shield RR is hard to fit.

For their dedicated logistics ships, neither is a toughie to fit. There is no giant difference between shield and armour logistics.

ELECTR0FREAK
Eye of God
Posted - 2011.06.06 12:30:00 - [6]
 

Shields have always sacrificed efficiency in return for a rep that starts at the beginning of the cycle instead of the end. As for fitting issues, they don't really exist on the ships specialized to fit them, and the ships not specialized to fit them have to make sacrifices to fit them, so I don't really see a problem.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.06 15:03:00 - [7]
 

They both need to be nerfed.

Cuircuir Moustache
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.06 15:13:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher

For armour, you have 1600 plates. They're 28TF/500MW.
For shield, you have LSEII. They're 46TF/165MW


U MAD ?
1600 RT : 4200 hp
LSE 2 : 2625 hp

LSE II is the equivalent of the 800 plate (2100hp for the meta 4).

Professor Villinghopper
Posted - 2011.06.06 16:53:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Professor Villinghopper on 06/06/2011 16:53:29
Originally by: ELECTR0FREAK
As for fitting issues, they don't really exist on the ships specialized to fit them


Chimera and Nidhoggur would like to have a word with you.

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.06 16:59:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Cuircuir Moustache
U MAD ?
1600 RT : 4200 hp
LSE 2 : 2625 hp

You're completely forgetting the myriad of other balance issues between shield and armour in making that ill-informed comment.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.06 16:59:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
They both need to be nerfed.


Look how stupid you are.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.06 17:12:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
They both need to be nerfed.


Look how stupid you are.


Look how assumptive you are.

NoNah
Posted - 2011.06.06 17:26:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
They both need to be nerfed.


Look how stupid you are.


Look how assumptive you are.


As long as said assumptions are correct, what's the problem?

ELECTR0FREAK
Eye of God
Posted - 2011.06.06 17:33:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 06/06/2011 17:50:56
Originally by: Professor Villinghopper
Edited by: Professor Villinghopper on 06/06/2011 16:53:29
Originally by: ELECTR0FREAK
As for fitting issues, they don't really exist on the ships specialized to fit them


Chimera and Nidhoggur would like to have a word with you.


My Chimera does just fine thank you. Laughing

Capital Shield Transporter != Large Shield Transporter.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.06 17:39:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: NoNah
Originally by: Val'Dore
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
They both need to be nerfed.


Look how stupid you are.


Look how assumptive you are.


As long as said assumptions are correct, what's the problem?


It isn't correct however.

Saile Litestrider
Posted - 2011.06.06 19:03:00 - [16]
 

All the vapid trolling aside, shield transporters have another notable downside: rigs. There are remote armor rep rigs, but no shield transporter rigs.

Honestly if you ask me they need to seriously consider rebalancing all rigs from the ground up. There are some serious gaps and balance issues in the current system, and it really feels like it fails to live up to its intention in a lot of ways.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.06 19:09:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
It isn't correct however.


Yeah, you're stupid. Look at you: "Nerf teamwork because I had a **** gang composition and don't know how to deal with it!"

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.06 19:15:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
It isn't correct however.


Yeah, you're stupid. Look at you: "Nerf teamwork because I had a **** gang composition and don't know how to deal with it!"


Ad hominem is not the way to go about making a point. I did not specify anything about what a nerf to them would consist of or why, which makes your assumption both baseless and self deprecating.

I merely said they both should be nerfed and you overreacted. As usual.

Tiny Mongo
Posted - 2011.06.06 20:00:00 - [19]
 

Shields in general need a looking at as far as pvp goes. If you put shield reps at the back of the cycle a lot of shield ships will be dead as they lack the raw buffer that an armor ship can attain.

On a whim wouldn't it be nice:

If you want to keep things in line maybe you should double the rep amount for all shield RR seeing as how armor seems to get more buffer (1600 plates and slaves) and shield gets more active tanking (at least with the XL booster and crystals). Also helps with the fact that on shield ships CPU is at much more of a premium (everything on them is a CPU hog). Laughing

ELECTR0FREAK
Eye of God
Posted - 2011.06.06 20:04:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Saile Litestrider
All the vapid trolling aside, shield transporters have another notable downside: rigs. There are remote armor rep rigs, but no shield transporter rigs.

Honestly if you ask me they need to seriously consider rebalancing all rigs from the ground up. There are some serious gaps and balance issues in the current system, and it really feels like it fails to live up to its intention in a lot of ways.


This, is actually a very good point.

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.06 20:51:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
It isn't correct however.


Yeah, you're stupid. Look at you: "Nerf teamwork because I had a **** gang composition and don't know how to deal with it!"


Ad hominem is not the way to go about making a point. I did not specify anything about what a nerf to them would consist of or why, which makes your assumption both baseless and self deprecating.

I merely said they both should be nerfed and you overreacted. As usual.


Calling someone stupid isn't ad hominem if they did something stupid.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.06 20:59:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
Originally by: Val'Dore
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
It isn't correct however.


Yeah, you're stupid. Look at you: "Nerf teamwork because I had a **** gang composition and don't know how to deal with it!"


Ad hominem is not the way to go about making a point. I did not specify anything about what a nerf to them would consist of or why, which makes your assumption both baseless and self deprecating.

I merely said they both should be nerfed and you overreacted. As usual.


Calling someone stupid isn't ad hominem if they did something stupid.


You don't know what ad hominem means.

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.06 21:12:00 - [23]
 

Let's get this back on topic, please. I know this is the EVE forums, but still, guys. Come on. If you want to go for a round of verbal jousting, fine, but take it elsewhere.



26534522
Posted - 2011.06.06 21:22:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: 26534522 on 06/06/2011 21:25:05
Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
Edited by: Lady Go Diveher on 06/06/2011 11:41:52
Originally by: 26534522
Honestly, there's no good reason why shield RR should be crappier than armor RR.


Yet it isn't. Consider your buffer in each case.

For armour, you have 1600 plates. They're 28TF/500MW.
For shield, you have LSEII. They're 46TF/165MW

A lot of plate leaves you tight on PW and ergo, the armour RR is hard to fit. A lot of shield leaves you tight on CPU, and ergo shield RR is hard to fit.



I'd be more than happy to link you an armor RR domi fit that has a 161k buffer, two heavy capacitor boosters, an MWD, two ECCM modules, 6 reppers,and no need for implants of any sort.

Try getting that with a shield RR domi. Before you go into EFT, let me save you some time. You can't. The most I've been able to fit is 4 m4 large shield transporters, which requires a co-processor II and a 3% CPU implant. In theory, you could fit a full rack of shield transporters, but you'd be sacrificing so much tank that it wouldn't be worth doing.

Headerman
Minmatar
Quovis
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.06.06 21:25:00 - [25]
 

Are you serious? You want large shield transporters to have a boost?

I would suggest you go and fit up an Osprey, with a few cpu modules, some CCC rigs and 3 or 4 large shield extender meta 4's.

Now go and try to do the same with an Oneiros.

Come back when the Oneiros is just as effective

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.06 21:25:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Furb Killer on 06/06/2011 21:25:55
Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
Edited by: Lady Go Diveher on 06/06/2011 11:41:52
Originally by: 26534522
Honestly, there's no good reason why shield RR should be crappier than armor RR.


Yet it isn't. Consider your buffer in each case.

For armour, you have 1600 plates. They're 28TF/500MW.
For shield, you have LSEII. They're 46TF/165MW

A lot of plate leaves you tight on PW and ergo, the armour RR is hard to fit.


This is a troll, right? There arent many useful highslots modules for BS that are easier to fit than large RR. Meanwhile large shield transporters are very hard to fit compared to almost all other modules you could put there. If a BS has issues fitting a large RR it cant fit any other large highslot modules either.

And yeah their CPU need should be toned down.

Quote:
My Chimera does just fine thank you.

Capital Shield Transporter != Large Shield Transporter.

You do realise chimeras (and nidhoggurs + thannies) have quite some issues fitting cap shield transporters? If you dont think so, please give me a shield pantheon fitting.

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.06 21:28:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: 26534522 on 06/06/2011 21:32:18
Headerman, an Osprey fit like that will have no prop mod, and an extremely crappy rep range and amount compared to an Oneiros. Stop trolling, please.

Straight Edged
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:08:00 - [28]
 

Large shield transfers are easily fit on battlecruisers and below. While large RR does not because of the grid requirement.

Dont generalize a module just because "i cant use mod A in specific situation B for specific purpose C" and decide on that. in fact there are other situations then B and purposes then C

This is the biggest problem of mod comparison.

Dethmourne Silvermane
Gallente
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:10:00 - [29]
 

My wormhole fleets would like to disagree with you; my experience has been that in W-space, at least, shield beats armor.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:12:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Dethmourne Silvermane
My wormhole fleets would like to disagree with you; my experience has been that in W-space, at least, shield beats armor.


In W-Space... doing PVE... gotcha. Wink


Pages: [1] 2 3 4

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