open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Phoenix cpu problems vs other dreads
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.02 15:06:00 - [1]
 

As we all know, fitting a phoenix is a pain in the ass. Tnx to its incredibly small cpu.
I have done some math and here are some reasons why its cpu should be increased.

Phoenix cpu 1031.25
Revelation cpu 812.5
Moros cpu 937.5

After fitting a basic 3 siege launcher, siege module, capital shield booster, t2 shield booster amp you have used 792.5 cpu. Thats total 76.84% of phoenix's cpu.

For comparison a revelation with 2x capital rep, 3 dual giga beams, siege module takes 475 cpu and thats only 58.46% of ships total cpu. If you fit close range weapons then it takes even less cpu.

Moros with long range weapons uses only 55.46% of its cpu.

Before you all start screaming about powergrid let me remind you that none of capital ships has any problems with that.

Let me remind you that theres no way phoenix can sustain its shield booster forever, so plz dont start screaming about "imba" tank also. T2 shield modules, T2 BCS all take more cpu to fit than armor/turret mods.

To fix Phoenix it needs around 100 more cpu.

Tnx for reading.


putukas
Amarr
Enterprise Estonia
Cult of War
Posted - 2007.04.02 15:14:00 - [2]
 

totally agree

Ortu Konsinni
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
Posted - 2007.04.02 16:10:00 - [3]
 

I think the Phoenix's CPU is fine... however it's the CPU requirement of the Capital Shield Booster that really, really needs to be looked at. Maybe Citadel Launchers could use a little reduction, too, but I don't know. Capital Shield Boosters seem to be the big issue.
If I remember right the Chimera has comparable issues with fitting -- again, due to the capital shield booster.

Chronus26
Team Laser Explosion
Molotov Coalition
Posted - 2007.04.02 16:14:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Chronus26 on 02/04/2007 16:10:31
Have to agree, although im not a Phoenix pilot, ive spent alot of time going over setups and statistics for others (i'm a Capital Ship nut tbh) and I find myself having to resort to faction mods to get my ideal kinda fitting on. Compared to my own race (Gallente) where I have never had any fitting trouble on cap-ships at all (Thanatos can easily fit 5 reps if one so desired) it's just silly.

Same goes for the Chimera too.

Originally by: Ortu Konsinni
I think the Phoenix's CPU is fine... however it's the CPU requirement of the Capital Shield Booster that really, really needs to be looked at. Maybe Citadel Launchers could use a little reduction, too, but I don't know. Capital Shield Boosters seem to be the big issue.
If I remember right the Chimera has comparable issues with fitting -- again, due to the capital shield booster.


Ya, thats probably the best solution right there.

Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.02 17:35:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Ortu Konsinni
I think the Phoenix's CPU is fine... however it's the CPU requirement of the Capital Shield Booster that really, really needs to be looked at. Maybe Citadel Launchers could use a little reduction, too, but I don't know. Capital Shield Boosters seem to be the big issue.
If I remember right the Chimera has comparable issues with fitting -- again, due to the capital shield booster.


thats 1 possible solution.

Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.03 11:36:00 - [6]
 

so noone else thinks its a problem? Everyone should just train for gallente capital ships?

Heikki
Gallente
Erasers inc.
Controlled Chaos
Posted - 2007.04.03 11:55:00 - [7]
 

Personally I feel that cap ships are far too easy to fit; one doesn't really have to make any choices. Then again, I fly only Gallente ones.

For sake of accuracy, care to give some examples of full fittings where Phoenix runs out of CPU? Preferably ones which some other capital(s) can easily equal. Used percents of available CPU doesn't tell much.

I kind of prefer situation where one has to make choices, instead of just fitting everything he might need. So another option (instead of reducing shield booster CPU) would be reducing Gallente/Amarr powergrids..

-Lasse

Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.03 12:14:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Cookie Snatcher on 03/04/2007 12:11:20
Originally by: Heikki
Personally I feel that cap ships are far too easy to fit; one doesn't really have to make any choices. Then again, I fly only Gallente ones.

For sake of accuracy, care to give some examples of full fittings where Phoenix runs out of CPU? Preferably ones which some other capital(s) can easily equal. Used percents of available CPU doesn't tell much.

I kind of prefer situation where one has to make choices, instead of just fitting everything he might need. So another option (instead of reducing shield booster CPU) would be reducing Gallente/Amarr powergrids..

-Lasse


ok, here are some numbers:
3 capital launchers (337.5 cpu), 1 siege mod (100) = 437.5 cpu
capital booster (300), t2 boost amp (55), 2x inv II (88), EM II (44), thermal II (44), cap II (11,25) = 542,25 cpu
3 PDS II (45), 1 BCS II (40), 1 dcont II (30) = 115 cpu

total 1094.75 out of 1031.25 available

Theres still no way you can run shield booster forever, neither does it have insane damage.
For higher damage you would have to kill allmost all of your tank. BCS II 40 cpu > pds II 15 cpu.

(all calculations are done with max skills)

Cannizza Junior
Minmatar
Psykotic Meat
C0NVICTED
Posted - 2007.04.03 14:07:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Cookie Snatcher
As we all know, fitting a phoenix is a pain in the ass. Tnx to its incredibly small cpu.
I have done some math and here are some reasons why its cpu should be increased.

Phoenix cpu 1031.25
Revelation cpu 812.5
Moros cpu 937.5

After fitting a basic 3 siege launcher, siege module, capital shield booster, t2 shield booster amp you have used 792.5 cpu. Thats total 76.84% of phoenix's cpu.

For comparison a revelation with 2x capital rep, 3 dual giga beams, siege module takes 475 cpu and thats only 58.46% of ships total cpu. If you fit close range weapons then it takes even less cpu.

Moros with long range weapons uses only 55.46% of its cpu.

Before you all start screaming about powergrid let me remind you that none of capital ships has any problems with that.

Let me remind you that theres no way phoenix can sustain its shield booster forever, so plz dont start screaming about "imba" tank also. T2 shield modules, T2 BCS all take more cpu to fit than armor/turret mods.

To fix Phoenix it needs around 100 more cpu.

Tnx for reading.




I totaly agree with that. Its impossible to have a good tank and use at least 1 damage module on the Phoenix. Even with Hi-end Faction gear is dificult.

Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.05 08:13:00 - [10]
 

i wont let this thread die!

Raekone
Absolut Profit
Posted - 2007.04.05 08:24:00 - [11]
 

I'd armor tank it


Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.05 11:01:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Raekone
I'd armor tank it




then your not so smart either. 2 capital rep, dcont II, adaptive nano II, bcs II isnt much of a tank.

Raekone
Absolut Profit
Posted - 2007.04.05 11:16:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Cookie Snatcher
Originally by: Raekone
I'd armor tank it




then your not so smart either. 2 capital rep, dcont II, adaptive nano II, bcs II isnt much of a tank.
So it's smarter to struggle with a halfwit shield setup just because it's a caldari ship? I'd say 2 armor reps, one hardener, two adaptives and NO BCS would make a very nice tank. You can fill your meds with cap II's to make your tank easily sustainable and also have a sensor booster or two.

Problem with you people is you see five low slots and panic. If that's all it takes to dissuade you from using an armor tank then, well, lol


Kokoshu
Caldari
Neaga
Posted - 2007.04.05 11:26:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Kokoshu on 05/04/2007 11:22:53
So a ship which has a description of "having the most technilogically advanced shield system in existance" has to armour tank to be effective. Thats just plain silly.

Its the only dred which has fitting problems, some dreads can dual capital rep permanantly . Phoenix cant even have one on all the time. I wont start to derail the thread and talk about the Chimeria fitting problems either.

Also if we do make it so the ship can permanantly run a shield booster you have to have CPR in the lows negating the boost amplifier and also not having any damage mods.

Just imagine a moros shield tanking with no damage boost mods how annoyed would them pilots be.

Raekone
Absolut Profit
Posted - 2007.04.05 11:44:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Kokoshu
So a ship which has a description of "having the most technilogically advanced shield system in existance" has to armour tank to be effective. Thats just plain silly.
No I'd say what is silly is that you're trying to have a shield tank on a ship that's badly suited for it just because some made up storyline description says you should. As long as you don't actually get any shield amount/rep bonus/boni/bonuses/boniiiii you have no reason to shield tank over armor tank.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Phoenix cant even have one on all the time.
One what on all the time? Shield booster or armor rep? You can't mean armor reps surely, and shield boosters can almost NEVER be on permanently unless you have uber rare faction stuff, which do not exist in capital sizes anyway afaik.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Just imagine a moros shield tanking with no damage boost mods how annoyed would them pilots be.
Yeah they'd be royally ****ed. Good job they have enough lows for it then =)



babylonstew
Caldari
Caldari Scouting and Intel Group
Posted - 2007.04.05 12:36:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Raekone
Originally by: Kokoshu
So a ship which has a description of "having the most technilogically advanced shield system in existance" has to armour tank to be effective. Thats just plain silly.
No I'd say what is silly is that you're trying to have a shield tank on a ship that's badly suited for it just because some made up storyline description says you should. As long as you don't actually get any shield amount/rep bonus/boni/bonuses/boniiiii you have no reason to shield tank over armor tank.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Phoenix cant even have one on all the time.
One what on all the time? Shield booster or armor rep? You can't mean armor reps surely, and shield boosters can almost NEVER be on permanently unless you have uber rare faction stuff, which do not exist in capital sizes anyway afaik.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Just imagine a moros shield tanking with no damage boost mods how annoyed would them pilots be.
Yeah they'd be royally ****ed. Good job they have enough lows for it then =)





so your 'solution' to caldari cap ships cou issuesa is...., throw all your shield tanking skills out the window and go train all your armour tanking skills up to max and then fit an average armour tank on it and no damage mods what so ever Rolling Eyes, forgive me, but thats like telling all gal pilots to go trian projectiles becos they take less grid and no cap

TheHumanity
Posted - 2007.04.05 12:42:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Raekone
Originally by: Kokoshu
So a ship which has a description of "having the most technilogically advanced shield system in existance" has to armour tank to be effective. Thats just plain silly.
No I'd say what is silly is that you're trying to have a shield tank on a ship that's badly suited for it just because some made up storyline description says you should. As long as you don't actually get any shield amount/rep bonus/boni/bonuses/boniiiii you have no reason to shield tank over armor tank.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Phoenix cant even have one on all the time.
One what on all the time? Shield booster or armor rep? You can't mean armor reps surely, and shield boosters can almost NEVER be on permanently unless you have uber rare faction stuff, which do not exist in capital sizes anyway afaik.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Just imagine a moros shield tanking with no damage boost mods how annoyed would them pilots be.
Yeah they'd be royally ****ed. Good job they have enough lows for it then =)
So you're saying that Caldari pilots should train another skill-tree, just to have the worst tank of the bunch anyway?

LeMoose
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2007.04.05 13:54:00 - [18]
 

i first laughed at the idea of an armor tanked cald dread... but the idea of being able to fit officer webs, painters , officer scramblers and many sensor boosters is just kinda juicy

TheHumanity
Posted - 2007.04.05 14:08:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: LeMoose
i first laughed at the idea of an armor tanked cald dread... but the idea of being able to fit officer webs, painters , officer scramblers and many sensor boosters is just kinda juicy
I'm sure an armor tanked phoenix makes an awesome ******* ship, but if you want to use it for sieging POS, it is the only dread which needs either a gimp setup and/or faction mods to fit.

Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.11 12:02:00 - [20]
 

gimped armor tank 4tw? dont think so.

Ubijalec
Citizens of Atlantis
Posted - 2007.04.11 13:16:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Raekone
Originally by: Kokoshu
So a ship which has a description of "having the most technilogically advanced shield system in existance" has to armour tank to be effective. Thats just plain silly.
No I'd say what is silly is that you're trying to have a shield tank on a ship that's badly suited for it just because some made up storyline description says you should. As long as you don't actually get any shield amount/rep bonus/boni/bonuses/boniiiii you have no reason to shield tank over armor tank.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Phoenix cant even have one on all the time.
One what on all the time? Shield booster or armor rep? You can't mean armor reps surely, and shield boosters can almost NEVER be on permanently unless you have uber rare faction stuff, which do not exist in capital sizes anyway afaik.

Originally by: Kokoshu
Just imagine a moros shield tanking with no damage boost mods how annoyed would them pilots be.
Yeah they'd be royally ****ed. Good job they have enough lows for it then =)





The diffrence is also almost 100k of more shield then armor if you use PDU II.
Armor tanking a Phoenix is not an options. I use implant for reduction of CPU on launchers, and still have problem to fit Phoenix. Need to use passive or named hardeners.

iudex
Posted - 2007.04.11 14:01:00 - [22]
 

The Phoenix has enough drawbacks compared to the Moros, it should have at least enough cpu to fit a tech 2 tank. Or give the Moros serious powergrid fitting issues to keep this in line Confused

Cookie Snatcher
Gallente
Enterprise Estonia
Posted - 2007.04.12 12:33:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: iudex
The Phoenix has enough drawbacks compared to the Moros, it should have at least enough cpu to fit a tech 2 tank. Or give the Moros serious powergrid fitting issues to keep this in line Confused


exactly

Dammar
Amarr
Ephorate
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:42:00 - [24]
 

Fit projectiles.






oops did I say that out loud..? Razz

Ortu Konsinni
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
Posted - 2007.04.12 14:50:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Cookie Snatcher
Originally by: iudex
The Phoenix has enough drawbacks compared to the Moros, it should have at least enough cpu to fit a tech 2 tank. Or give the Moros serious powergrid fitting issues to keep this in line Confused


exactly


No, that's just stupid, for two main reasons:
1) There are no ways of reducing the powergrid usage of anything on a dread, whereas you can at least use modules that use less CPU on a Phoenix
2) Don't break something that works fine and is not unbalanced

Like I said in this topic and other topics, I'm fully convinced that the problem with the Phoenix is not the Phoenix itself, but capital shield boosters and how much CPU they demand. Gimping ships that are fine to bring them in line with a ship that has fitting problems NOT due to its CPU output, instead of fixing the simple issue of Capital Shield Boosters is just dumb.

I've tried fitting a Chimera for **** and giggles and seem to remember having comparable problems. I haven't tried with a Wyvern, much less a Leviathan, though.

TheEndofTheWorld
Republic Military School
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:07:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Ortu Konsinni
Originally by: Cookie Snatcher
Originally by: iudex
The Phoenix has enough drawbacks compared to the Moros, it should have at least enough cpu to fit a tech 2 tank. Or give the Moros serious powergrid fitting issues to keep this in line Confused


exactly


No, that's just stupid, for two main reasons:
1) There are no ways of reducing the powergrid usage of anything on a dread, whereas you can at least use modules that use less CPU on a Phoenix
2) Don't break something that works fine and is not unbalanced

Like I said in this topic and other topics, I'm fully convinced that the problem with the Phoenix is not the Phoenix itself, but capital shield boosters and how much CPU they demand. Gimping ships that are fine to bring them in line with a ship that has fitting problems NOT due to its CPU output, instead of fixing the simple issue of Capital Shield Boosters is just dumb.

I've tried fitting a Chimera for **** and giggles and seem to remember having comparable problems. I haven't tried with a Wyvern, much less a Leviathan, though.


1) RCU, PDS, rig!?
2) Is not unbalanced? It is about time they nerfed the drone bonus or gimped it's POS sieging ability...

mama guru
Gallente
Thundercats
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:30:00 - [27]
 

DONT even think about toutching my moros, its fine as it is.

The Revelations capacitor and the Phoenix's CPU could use some work.

Ortu Konsinni
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:33:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: TheEndofTheWorld
Originally by: Ortu Konsinni
Originally by: Cookie Snatcher
Originally by: iudex
The Phoenix has enough drawbacks compared to the Moros, it should have at least enough cpu to fit a tech 2 tank. Or give the Moros serious powergrid fitting issues to keep this in line Confused


exactly


No, that's just stupid, for two main reasons:
1) There are no ways of reducing the powergrid usage of anything on a dread, whereas you can at least use modules that use less CPU on a Phoenix
2) Don't break something that works fine and is not unbalanced

Like I said in this topic and other topics, I'm fully convinced that the problem with the Phoenix is not the Phoenix itself, but capital shield boosters and how much CPU they demand. Gimping ships that are fine to bring them in line with a ship that has fitting problems NOT due to its CPU output, instead of fixing the simple issue of Capital Shield Boosters is just dumb.

I've tried fitting a Chimera for **** and giggles and seem to remember having comparable problems. I haven't tried with a Wyvern, much less a Leviathan, though.


1) RCU, PDS, rig!?
2) Is not unbalanced? It is about time they nerfed the drone bonus or gimped it's POS sieging ability...


RCU and PDS would gimp a Moros's tank since they're low slot modules.
Rigs are not part of the discussion and they should never have to be used. We didn't have them before and we were fine, so let's not drift off-topic. This isn't about the Moros's bonuses either, it's about the Phoenix's CPU and "ease" of fitting compared to other dreads.
I stand by my statement that it's idiotic to change the fitting values of other dreads to bring them in line with the Phoenix and make them a ***** to fit requiring faction mods. It also requires a lot more thinking on CCP's part than simply DECREASING CAPITAL SHIELD BOOSTERS' CPU CONSUMPTION, which is the core of the problem and would fix the exact same problem that the Chimera has.

LUKEC
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance
Posted - 2007.04.12 15:43:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: LUKEC on 12/04/2007 15:41:29
The whole discussion is not so much different than it was blasters+gallente. In the end(after 2 years), blasters got easier fitting. Situation with blasters was ******ed (lol for fitting 3x db platings back then) and it's really same with phoenix.

Discussion about quality of tanks at this point is moot. Shield tank can be much stronger, but it really sucks in laggy environment.

James Adams
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2007.04.12 16:26:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Cookie Snatcher

Let me remind you that theres no way phoenix can sustain its shield booster forever, so plz dont start screaming about "imba" tank also. T2 shield modules, T2 BCS all take more cpu to fit than armor/turret mods.



This argument about "not beeing able to perma-tank a shield booster setup" is seriously starting to **** me off Mad

The shield tanks are more cap efficient than the armor tank, so just can it already.

Capital Shield Booster: 6400 shield / 2400 cap = 2.666 shield/cap / 0.9 (cap shield op 5) = 2.96 x 1.36 (shield boost amp II) = 4.029 (If we had used an Estamel's amp it'd be 4.294)

And for a total of 870.4 shield/s with t2, 928 shield/s with Estamels

Capital Armor Repairer: 9600 armor / 2400 = 4 armor/cap

For a total of 849 armor/s

Right, that proved Shield Tanking is more cap efficient - "But the Revelations has better cap than the Phoenix".... meh

Revelation: 71718 cap/ 3117s cap recharge = 23.008 cap/s (not counting peak here, it won't change anything)

Phoenix: 60937 cap/ 2649s = 23.003 cap/s.

So there we have it... You have a more cap efficient way of tanking which also has better peak repairing - The armor has 10% more base resists, so that goes a bit of way to cancelling it out. All in all, stop #%#& moaning about how much cap your shield tank eats, cause all it means is that you can't go bloody AFK while fighting, but have to watch the cap every once in a while and maybe turn off the booster for a bit to let it recharge.

Caldari has something that requires "skillz" w00t


Pages: [1] 2 3

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