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

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:15:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore

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.


Ad hominem doesn't mean that my argument is wrong. It just means I'm being a **** about arguing it. Ultimately, you are wrong because your entire argument boils down to "Nerf teamwork because I had a **** gang composition and don't know how to deal with it!"

In small gangs, it means that your gang composition is ****. In large gangs RR doesn't matter anyway.

-Liang

Dethmourne Silvermane
Gallente
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:15:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
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


Shhhhh... ugh

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:25:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Straight Edged
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.


No. Just, no.


At best, you'll only be able to fit one or two shield transfers while being able to maintain any tank worth mentioning.

Soon Shin
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:38:00 - [34]
 

Cpu doesn't seem to increase by proportion as much as powergrid when moving up in ship sizes. Which is understandable in that many mondules don't either. But shield modules have heavy cpu requirements.

The Chimera has difficulty fitting shield transfers and booster along with shield hardeners. Its either the chimera needs more fitting or the cpu requirements need to be lowered.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:42:00 - [35]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 06/06/2011 22:43:13
Originally by: Soon Shin
Cpu doesn't seem to increase by proportion as much as powergrid when moving up in ship sizes. Which is understandable in that many mondules don't either. But shield modules have heavy cpu requirements.

The Chimera has difficulty fitting shield transfers and booster along with shield hardeners. Its either the chimera needs more fitting or the cpu requirements need to be lowered.


Quite possibly both, IMO. :)

-Liang

Ed: I want very much to like the Chimera.... but I just can't. It's such a pile of garbage. I don't even consider it when talking about carriers.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.06 22:49:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore

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.


Ad hominem doesn't mean that my argument is wrong.


You didn't make an argument. Rolling Eyes

Quote:
It just means I'm being a **** about arguing it.


You got one thing correct at least.

Quote:
Ultimately, you are wrong because your entire argument boils down to "Nerf teamwork because I had a **** gang composition and don't know how to deal with it!"


You made that up, so it doesn't apply. Like I said, ASSumptions.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.06 23:02:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
You made that up, so it doesn't apply. Like I said, ASSumptions.


Ok, then why don't you go ahead and make an argument that all RR in the game needs nerfed? Preferably without sounding like a whiny douchebag that has **** gang composition and can't handle the other side having a bit of teamwork.

NoNah
Posted - 2011.06.06 23:06:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore

You made that up, so it doesn't apply. Like I said, ASSumptions.


Ok, so why do they both need to be nerfed?

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.07 00:15:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
You made that up, so it doesn't apply. Like I said, ASSumptions.


Ok, then why don't you go ahead and make an argument that all RR in the game needs nerfed? Preferably without sounding like a whiny douchebag that has **** gang composition and can't handle the other side having a bit of teamwork.


Sure, okay. As it stands now, you can RR to your hearts content and the only thing you have to be wary of is being aggroed to the person who the person you are helping is shooting. RR > DPS, but the effect of this imbalance is not felt proportionally in aggression mechanics (which are not necessarily directly attributed to 'station games' or 'gate camping') in locations where 90% of pvp happens... whether we like it or not. There is nothing to stop an RR from getting away from you through a gate for example, yet you have to wait out the aggression timer regardless of who is 'good or bad'.

RR is an indirect hostile action in most scenarios, yet is not susceptible to hostile action rulesets. Being able to shoot at or EWar an RR ship is fine and dandy, but you cannot chase them down.

That RR nerf is not a nerf to my 'enemies' (everyone is my enemy technically), but rather a nerf to improperly risk advantaged tactical and strategic warfare.

Bottom line: RR needs more accountability.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.07 00:27:00 - [40]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 07/06/2011 00:28:24
A few comments:
- You are focusing on RR, when in reality there are many holes and peculiarities in aggression mechanics.
- Aggression mechanics already unfairly penalize RR.
- You are not asking to nerf shield or armor RR. You're asking to change aggression mechanics - a wholly different topic.
- CCP has stated that the aggression mechanics aren't going to be changed anytime soon. Any wishing in one direction or another about this is pretty meaningless.
- You are effectively asking to remove the ability for logistics ships to deagress (though you will deny this vehemently). This is probably why aggression rules are written the way they are now.

Ultimately: seeing as how the conversation is about the modules and their fittings, your original comment in the thread was at best ******ed. As usual.

-Liang

Quality Poaster SEEEEE
Posted - 2011.06.07 00:38:00 - [41]
 

Check mate.

Voith
Posted - 2011.06.07 01:16:00 - [42]
 

You're totally right.

Armor tanking isn't dead enough. We need to kill it more.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.07 02:47:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Edited by: Liang Nuren on 07/06/2011 00:28:24
A few comments:
- You are focusing on RR, when in reality there are many holes and peculiarities in aggression mechanics.
- Aggression mechanics already unfairly penalize RR.
- You are not asking to nerf shield or armor RR. You're asking to change aggression mechanics - a wholly different topic.
- CCP has stated that the aggression mechanics aren't going to be changed anytime soon. Any wishing in one direction or another about this is pretty meaningless.
- You are effectively asking to remove the ability for logistics ships to deagress (though you will deny this vehemently). This is probably why aggression rules are written the way they are now.

Ultimately: seeing as how the conversation is about the modules and their fittings, your original comment in the thread was at best ******ed. As usual.

-Liang


It is still a nerf... and you wanted to know. So stuff it.

Mfume Apocal
Minmatar
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.06.07 03:41:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Voith
You're totally right.

Armor tanking isn't dead enough. We need to kill it more.


Because no one uses Abaddons or anything, right?

Quality Poaster SEEEEE
Posted - 2011.06.07 03:46:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Voith
You're totally right.

Armor tanking isn't dead enough. We need to kill it more.


Highsec bro, you need to leave it.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.07 04:40:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
It is still a nerf... and you wanted to know. So stuff it.


So you come in here and make a ******ed statement about something totally unrelated to the thread topic, and I'm the one that gets told to "stuff it". Riiiiight. Rolling Eyes

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.07 09:09:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Lady Go Diveher on 07/06/2011 09:11:59
Edited by: Lady Go Diveher on 07/06/2011 09:10:34
Originally by: 26534522
No. Just, no.


At best, you'll only be able to fit one or two shield transfers while being able to maintain any tank worth mentioning.


At some point, you're going to work out that the Meta 4 RR is pretty much standard for both, given the fitting issues apparent. You can quite easily construct a RR-Raven without a "lol gimp" fit.

(EDIT: I think I've just realised OP is trying to make a battleship to replace a logistics ship? Oh dear)

[Raven, Shield RR is Impossible]
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Damage Control II

Large Shield Extender II
Invulnerability Field II
Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets
Invulnerability Field II
Faint Warp Disruptor I
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron

'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo
'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo
'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo
'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo
'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo
'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo
Large S95a Partial Shield Transporter
Large 'Regard' I Power Projector

Large Core Defence Field Extender I
Large Core Defence Field Extender I
Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I


Hammerhead II x5


1012 DPS / 85kEHP
Fairly decent (62/63/72/74 or 3mins of 69/69/76/80) resists to make receiving RR more effective. Large energy transfer to cap-chain, gets you just under 5mins of cap life. Point is as a backup only; you can put another LSEII on for 100kEHP with a 3% cpu implant, or you can F-s9 the thing.

It's not the best fit in the world, but give me an armour battleship that doesn't lose a modicum of tank or spank to fit RR.

Mfume Apocal
Minmatar
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.06.07 09:34:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Mfume Apocal on 07/06/2011 09:49:15
Edited by: Mfume Apocal on 07/06/2011 09:48:32
Originally by: 26534522
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.


If only there was a ship with fitting bonuses for RR, **** would own.

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
(EDIT: I think I've just realised OP is trying to make a battleship to replace a logistics ship? Oh dear)

...

It's not the best fit in the world, but give me an armour battleship that doesn't lose a modicum of tank or spank to fit RR.


Yeah, pretty much, it's just that back when RRBS was actually good (approximately a million FOTMs ago) shield ships that could do well with RR had other disadvantages. And considering it was very much Amarr Online back then, no real point in trying to make shield RR work.

Also: could someone be a spacefriend and link BR for why Val'Dore is angry at logis?

Jacob Stov
Posted - 2011.06.07 14:45:00 - [49]
 

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
snip


Great, you just demonstrated why shield circle jerk sucks. No cap booster, no ECCM and crappy EHP.

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.07 15:19:00 - [50]
 

Quote:
(EDIT: I think I've just realised OP is trying to make a battleship to replace a logistics ship? Oh dear)






Of course dedicated logistics ships are better suited to their role. However, you're a fool if you fail to recognize the advantages a dedicated RR BS can provide and has over a logi cruiser. Look at Swatyy's videos on Youtube, for example. He is a testament to their usefulness.

The biggest problem is that dedicated armor RR BSs are viable, and dedicated shield RR BSs are not. To put things in perspective, if you were to bring the power grid cost of a remote armor repairer into range with the CPU costs of a shield transporter, the PG usage would be something like 3-4k PG, not the 660 it is now.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.07 15:48:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
You can quite easily construct a RR-Raven without a "lol gimp" fit.

[Raven, Shield RR is Impossible]
'Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo
Large S95a Partial Shield Transporter
Large 'Regard' I Power Projector



Ooooh, tell me another one! Laughing

Quote:
(EDIT: I think I've just realised OP is trying to make a battleship to replace a logistics ship? Oh dear)


"RR Battleship".

Quote:
It's not the best fit in the world, but give me an armour battleship that doesn't lose a modicum of tank or spank to fit RR.


While you can trivially google "RR BS", I'll provide you with a fit. Tempests, Typhoons, Domis, Geddons, Abaddons, Megathrons, Abaddons, and even Scorpions are pretty decent at it. For a long time, it was THE premier way to blob in 0.0. It eventually died out to Stealth Bomber bomb blobs and AB Zealot/Guardian gangs, but made a come back with Drakes Online. It's still a tactic that sees a lot of use.

[Tempest, RR Tempest]
1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Armor Explosive Hardener II
Gyrostabilizer II

Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
Warp Disruptor II
Stasis Webifier II

800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP L
Large 'Solace' I Remote Bulwark Reconstruction
Large 'Solace' I Remote Bulwark Reconstruction

Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I


Hammerhead II x5


Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.07 16:52:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
It is still a nerf... and you wanted to know. So stuff it.


So you come in here and make a ******ed statement about something totally unrelated to the thread topic, and I'm the one that gets told to "stuff it". Riiiiight. Rolling Eyes


You might have a smidgen of validity if you were to not be so hostile. I said something, you took it to mean I wanted to eat your firstborn, and then once you found out I didn't want to eat your firstborn, you decided to make up for it with more ad hominem.

Bottom line whether you like it or not (facts are funny like that), is that an aggression mechanics fix would be a nerf to RR. Period. Now go play, us mature adults are talking.

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.07 17:03:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Quote:
It's not the best fit in the world, but give me an armour battleship that doesn't lose a modicum of tank or spank to fit RR.

[..]
[Tempest, RR Tempest]


I especially like the parts where it has less DPS (one gyro fits FTW), poor tracking and falloff to apply it (no mods at all) and relies on two cap boosters to keep it up. You know, the two that will empty the cargo in 2minutes flat. I'm especially fond of how you took the time to make the kinetic resist low enough to make Drakes online work even better Rolling Eyes

If you're going to call me out on a fit I admitted was thrown together to make a point, do it better. Don't come and give me a "tried and tested" fit that has acres of flaws.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.07 17:29:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Val'Dore
You might have a smidgen of validity if you were to not be so hostile.


So everything someone says is invalid because you don't like the way they said it. Funny that you should talk about fats as your next topic. Rolling Eyes

Quote:

Bottom line whether you like it or not (facts are funny like that), is that an aggression mechanics fix would be a nerf to RR. Period. Now go play, us mature adults are talking.



Honestly, it's hard to say whether a near complete rewrite of the aggression mechanics would be a nerf or a buff to anything in particular. While you could say its a nerf, I might say its a buff. There's too many moving pieces in a project of that scale and it all depends on where everyone else ends up on the scale, right?

-Liang

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.07 17:36:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher

I especially like the parts where it has less DPS (one gyro fits FTW), poor tracking and falloff to apply it (no mods at all) and relies on two cap boosters to keep it up. You know, the two that will empty the cargo in 2minutes flat. I'm especially fond of how you took the time to make the kinetic resist low enough to make Drakes online work even better Rolling Eyes

If you're going to call me out on a fit I admitted was thrown together to make a point, do it better. Don't come and give me a "tried and tested" fit that has acres of flaws.


A couple of comments:
- In a realistic situation, your torps are going to do less DPS than the ACs - a lot less (yay EFT warriors!)
- Cap chaining with a Raven is ****ing hilarious. Good luck with that ****.
- I told you what to search for to find the thousands of fits related to this topic. One thing you'll notice is that they're virtually all armor fits. There's a reason for that. Shield RRs are too hard on fittings.
- Running out of cap boosters is a very real threat, but generally it works out pretty well as you can scavenge them from your fallen comrades and enemies.
- You really really need more than 100k EHP just to give your mates enough time to lock you and get the reps on.
- You obviously have no experience with RR BS gangs if you are making an issue of a 1 gyro Tempest or dual cap boosters. Typical RR BS gangs had between 0 and 2 damage mods depending on gang size... but the basic premise is that dead battleships do no damage.

Basically: more Eve Online, less Forums Online.

-Liang

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.07 18:27:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Val'Dore
You might have a smidgen of validity if you were to not be so hostile.


So everything someone says is invalid because you don't like the way they said it. Funny that you should talk about fats as your next topic. Rolling Eyes


It has nothing to do with what I like and everything to do with decency. I prefer openly hostile people, they are easier to dance circles around.

Quote:
Quote:

Bottom line whether you like it or not (facts are funny like that), is that an aggression mechanics fix would be a nerf to RR. Period. Now go play, us mature adults are talking.



Honestly, it's hard to say whether a near complete rewrite of the aggression mechanics would be a nerf or a buff to anything in particular. While you could say its a nerf, I might say its a buff. There's too many moving pieces in a project of that scale and it all depends on where everyone else ends up on the scale, right?

-Liang


True, it may or may not work out that way.

Techno Panda
Posted - 2011.06.08 02:02:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: 26534522
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.


I see nothng wrong here.

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.08 02:46:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Techno Panda
Originally by: 26534522
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.


I see nothng wrong here.


Compare the available CPU on a Hyperion, Raven, or Dominix to the available power grid on those ships. Now crunch some numbers; for the power grid usage of remote armor repairers to be in line (speaking in terms of percentage, of course) with the CPU cost of shield transporters, a large remote armor repper would have to use up around 3.5-4k MW instead of the 660 MW it uses up now.

The bottom line is that although shield transporters have very slight advantages over remote armor repairers (reps at beginning of cycle, slightly lower heat damage), the benefits are absolutely not enough to justify the sky-high CPU cost and higher capacitor consumption. As a previous poster pointed out already, the available CPU on a ship will literally be a fraction of the available power grid as you move up the line, so that 154 CPU cost hurts much, much more than the 660 MW.

I don't see what's so hard to understand here. There are practically no viable, dedicated shield RR fits outside of Basilisks because of the massive fitting requirements. Armor RR fits, on the other hand, are no problem for someone with basic fitting skills.

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.08 09:54:00 - [59]
 

Edited by: Lady Go Diveher on 08/06/2011 09:57:45
Originally by: Liang Nuren
<snip>

I'll drop it because my fit was a)a partial troll and b)designed for a very specific scenario I had in my head.
Lets say your gang is 5 of your Tempests, and mine is 5 of my Ravens. I *will* get more cap life from my lol-chain. I *will* get more DPS applied to your hulls than you mine (each has a TP or a web .. you swap it up). I have used these fits for specific scenarios before, so please don't "forums online" me... especially when I say it's largely a joke.

In general, however, you are right. Armour-RR battleships have the edge.

However, however - you have to consider the balance of shield / armour logi in the broader sense of balance.
Swap your sluggish, damage-mod light tempests for some nano-pests with basi/scimi support and all of a sudden you have a fast, mobile gank-gang with few drawbacks and a lot of pro's. 800's with a full rack of gyro's and TE's? Secksy. By contrast, armour ships need to *still* have all that crap slowing them down.
If you suddenly buff shield-logi to make it easy to fit, you then don't need the logi - you can just add more gank ships and they're a force multiplier unto themselves.

IMO - it is pretty balanced as it is. OP just needs to learn that for any given specific scenario, there is usually something that is better suited to the task. Balance is not "everything can do everything equally well" but "for each 'thing' there is an 'anti-thing' to match"

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.08 09:56:00 - [60]
 

Edited by: Lady Go Diveher on 08/06/2011 09:56:33
Originally by: 26534522
I don't see what's so hard to understand here. There are practically no viable, dedicated shield RR fits outside of Basilisks


Please clarify; are you trying to fit ONE shield transporter onto a battleship to form an RR gang, or make a logi ship out of a battleship?


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