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

Headerman
Minmatar
Quovis
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.06.08 10:16:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: 26534522
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.


Oops honest mistake, i meant an Exequror, not an oneiros. Damn names :(

But yeah. 3 cap stable shield RR's on an osprey (for pos repping or whatever), Vs 2 large armour RR's, cap unstable, also for POS repping or whatever.

Both large shield and armour RR need some attention

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.08 10:20:00 - [62]
 

Probably just 1-2 shield transporters. Yes a few ships can do that, the vast majority cant. While every BS can fit armor RR without (much) issues.


Btw in your ravens vs pests -> They release ecm drones, your cap chain dies horrible death (even if you would manage to get it working in the first place, which will be a huge PITA).

Cuircuir Moustache
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.08 11:27:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Headerman

Oops honest mistake, i meant an Exequror, not an oneiros. Damn names :(

But yeah. 3 cap stable shield RR's on an osprey (for pos repping or whatever), Vs 2 large armour RR's, cap unstable, also for POS repping or whatever.

T1 cruisers need some attention

FTFY

James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:14:00 - [64]
 

Bottom line is:
Raven:
LST uses 17% of the CPU and 1.6% of the powergrid.
LRAR uses 5% of the CPU and 5% of the powergrid.

On an Abaddon:
LST uses 22% of the CPU, and 0.8% of the powergrid.
LRAR uses 6.8% of the CPU, and 2.5% of the powergrid.


That's a disproportionately large CPU use of the LST II, however you cut it. I'm not saying it shouldn't be 'CPU expensive', but 154 CPU is a LOT for ANY ship.
660 powergrid isn't an amazingly large cost - at least, not for battleships.
You could realistically _half_ the CPU cost of a LST II and it would still be harder to fit than a LRAR II.



James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2011.06.08 14:17:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Headerman
Originally by: 26534522
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.


Oops honest mistake, i meant an Exequror, not an oneiros. Damn names :(

But yeah. 3 cap stable shield RR's on an osprey (for pos repping or whatever), Vs 2 large armour RR's, cap unstable, also for POS repping or whatever.

Both large shield and armour RR need some attention


Not sure I'd really argue T1 logistics cruisers as major balance points - they both suck somewhat.
Now talking about Logistics ships, and ... well, you'll tend to see (IME) Scimitars for fast moving shield gangs, and Guardians for slower moving armour gangs.
Basilisks are still more common than Oneiros though, simply because the Oneiros is an armour repper, with a shield tanker slot layout.

Straight Edged
Posted - 2011.06.08 15:29:00 - [66]
 

As i said. altho large RR has minimum fittings on a normal Battleship, large Shield transfer has much better fitting on a bC(Drake) compared to large RR on a binger (for example)

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.08 15:55:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: James Lyrus
Bottom line is: some figures

All of which is true.

What is not true, however, is the scenario in which the fitting requirements for the remote reps are the only difference between shield and armour tanking in PVP.

They are part of a large suite of issues which come together to make it (somewhat) balanced.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.08 16:23:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
especially when I say it's largely a joke.


I'm not known for my ability to detect jokes.

Quote:

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.



By contrast, "fast and mobile" plays hell with RR BS gangs which need to be largely static (RR range).

Quote:
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.


It just gives them a similar footing with armor RR. That is not a bad thing.

-Liang

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.08 22:43:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
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?



The latter. As I'm sure you can guess, it's not very easy to do, to put it lightly.

Mfume Apocal
Minmatar
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.06.08 23:26:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: 26534522
The latter. As I'm sure you can guess, it's not very easy to do, to put it lightly.


Oh god, whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy??????

26534522
Posted - 2011.06.09 00:14:00 - [71]
 

Edited by: 26534522 on 09/06/2011 00:14:32
Originally by: Mfume Apocal
Originally by: 26534522
The latter. As I'm sure you can guess, it's not very easy to do, to put it lightly.


Oh god, whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy??????



Ever seen Swatyy's videos? I'm faced with a lot of similar scenarios, usually me and a couple of buddies up against a lot of stuff. We primarily fly shield, a Basilisk would simply die horribly in a few seconds. Combat logistics in a battleship package is really the only viable option. Plus, it's a lot cheaper.

Mfume Apocal
Minmatar
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.06.09 01:39:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: 26534522
Ever seen Swatyy's videos?


No, link?

Quote:
I'm faced with a lot of similar scenarios, usually me and a couple of buddies up against a lot of stuff. We primarily fly shield, a Basilisk would simply die horribly in a few seconds. Combat logistics in a battleship package is really the only viable option. Plus, it's a lot cheaper.


I've found that Basis and Scimis are more survivable than the ships they support if intelligently employed (i.e. not sitting on a gate at 0 with 6 blaster Megas yellow-boxing them).

v0v

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.09 10:34:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: 26534522
Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
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?

The latter. As I'm sure you can guess, it's not very easy to do, to put it lightly.

You see, this is the exact problem in this thread. You have a single niche setup that you want to achieve, and can't due to X. You then claim "X is underpowered because Y can do this!"

What this ignores, is that X and Y are part of a larger thing, called EVE. Eve itself does not like all things being equal in all things. Again, balance =/= everything being the same.

The fact that you cannot make a dedicated logi-ship out of a battleship has NOTHING to do with the balance of armour and shield RR in general, nor does it / would it play into the larger balance between shield and armour.
Originally by: Liang Nuren
By contrast, "fast and mobile" plays hell with RR BS gangs which need to be largely static (RR range).

Here's me thinking higher speed and agility is GOOD for controlling range. Shows you what a fool I am.

You missed my point, anyway. I was saying that a shield gang with DEDICATED logi SHIPS is faster and more agile than an armour gang with the same.

All of you seem to be stuck in the "large fleet blob" mindset with your RR discussions, here. If you think shields have no place in PVP then the following ships would like a word with you:

- Sleipnir
- Cyclone
- Drake
- Hurricane
- Harbinger (yeh, it does work!)
- Machariel
- Maelstrom
- Raven
- Tempest
- Vagabond
- Onyx
- Broadsword
- Curse
- Rapier
- Tengu
- Loki
- Stabber / Fleet stabber
- Gila
- Cynabal
- Phantasm
- Caracal
- Rupture
- Thrasher
- Jaguar
- Harpy / Hawk / Worm / Merlin
- Hound
- Hookbill
- Comet
- Firetail
- Dramiel

(note how many ships here appear on "NERF THE xxx" whine threads)

In short - you're all looking at ONE SPECIFIC scenario, and crying out for a buff / nerf. In the larger scheme of things, it's all part of a larger balance.

Debrie
Posted - 2011.06.09 10:34:00 - [74]
 

do not shield transporter logi ships have a bit more survivability than armor transporter logi's when not alpha'd by the entier enemy fleet ? thus less effective ability because on paper there able to stay on field longer

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.09 11:42:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Debrie
do not shield transporter logi ships have a bit more survivability than armor transporter logi's when not alpha'd by the entier enemy fleet ? thus less effective ability because on paper there able to stay on field longer


A Scimitar is the cap-stable-possible shield logi and generally considered the most survivable (speed, etc)
A Oneiros is the cap-stable-possible armour logi and is generally considered the least effective.
A guardian is the needs-two-to-tango armour ship and is largely considered the best.
A Basilisk is the needs-two-to-tango shield ship and is pretty on-par with the Guardian.

I'd say, for the Scimitar alone, shield wins it.

Aamrr
Posted - 2011.06.09 11:56:00 - [76]
 

Would someone care to enlighten me as to the benefit of being "fast and nimble" when you're playing with an 8400m effective range?

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.09 12:18:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Aamrr
Would someone care to enlighten me as to the benefit of being "fast and nimble" when you're playing with an 8400m effective range?

Erm....

Quote:
Minmatar Cruiser Skill Bonus: 150% bonus to Tracking Link and Shield Transport range and 20% bonus to Shield Maintenance Bot transport amount per level Logistics Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Tracking Link efficiency and 15% reduction in Shield Transport capacitor use per level Role Bonus: -50% CPU need for Shield Transporters

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.09 16:53:00 - [78]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 09/06/2011 16:55:18
Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
Originally by: Aamrr
Would someone care to enlighten me as to the benefit of being "fast and nimble" when you're playing with an 8400m effective range?

Erm....

Quote:
Minmatar Cruiser Skill Bonus: 150% bonus to Tracking Link and Shield Transport range and 20% bonus to Shield Maintenance Bot transport amount per level Logistics Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Tracking Link efficiency and 15% reduction in Shield Transport capacitor use per level Role Bonus: -50% CPU need for Shield Transporters



We're complaining about RR shield gangs not being practical next to RR armor gangs. This really has **** all to do with Scims, Basis, Guardians, and Onys. Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
I'd say, for the Scimitar alone, shield wins it.


I'd say for the Guardian alone, armor wins it. Rolling Eyes

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.09 16:59:00 - [79]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 09/06/2011 17:23:58
Originally by: Lady Go Diveher

You see, this is the exact problem in this thread. You have a single niche setup that you want to achieve, and can't due to X. You then claim "X is underpowered because Y can do this!"



You're working very hard to discount RR BS gangs - yet really what we're complaining about is the ****ing massive disparity between shield and armor spider (RR BS, really) gangs.

Quote:

The fact that you cannot make a dedicated logi-ship out of a battleship has NOTHING to do with the balance of armour and shield RR in general, nor does it / would it play into the larger balance between shield and armour.



It has everything to do with shield RR being too hard to fit.

Quote:
You missed my point, anyway. I was saying that a shield gang with DEDICATED logi SHIPS is faster and more agile than an armour gang with the same.


Then what you're saying really isn't germane to the discussion.

Quote:
If you think shields have no place in PVP then the following ships would like a word with you:


And if you think that I think that, you're a moron and unable to read.

Quote:
In short - you're all looking at ONE SPECIFIC scenario, and crying out for a buff / nerf. In the larger scheme of things, it's all part of a larger balance.


And you're looking at ONE SPECIFIC scenario and saying it isn't needed. Rolling Eyes

Sol Ripper
Posted - 2011.06.09 18:00:00 - [80]
 

So, in a nutshell, what you are asking for is that shield ships be able to fill every role that armor ships can, without gimping your fit in another area.

Then again, if shield tanking gets to run RR BS gangs, without sacrificing gank in the form of lows,I think that the speed and agility penalties for plates/trimarks are far to high. I mean I can't plate up an Abaddon and nano it out so that I can not only dictate range, but also have equal to more tank than my opponents. Never mind that in order to do that I would give up any ability to fit gank.

Unlike a shield ship, which if the requirements for shield reps were lowered, a shield rr gang would be able to have the speed/agility advantage of shield tanking, while maintaining the same gank ability, as they would not have to sacrifice lows for getting tanking abilities similar to an armor rr gang.

Yeah, that seems pretty balanced.


Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.09 20:30:00 - [81]
 

Originally by: Sol Ripper
So, in a nutshell, what you are asking for is that shield ships be able to fill every role that armor ships can, without gimping your fit in another area.

Then again, if shield tanking gets to run RR BS gangs, without sacrificing gank in the form of lows,I think that the speed and agility penalties for plates/trimarks are far to high. I mean I can't plate up an Abaddon and nano it out so that I can not only dictate range, but also have equal to more tank than my opponents. Never mind that in order to do that I would give up any ability to fit gank.

Unlike a shield ship, which if the requirements for shield reps were lowered, a shield rr gang would be able to have the speed/agility advantage of shield tanking, while maintaining the same gank ability, as they would not have to sacrifice lows for getting tanking abilities similar to an armor rr gang.

Yeah, that seems pretty balanced.




Don't be stupid. What we're asking for is that it be possible and reasonable to fit shield RR. The natural outcome of shield RR would be that you're light on tackle+ewar but heavy on gank, where armor is lighter on gank (1-2 damage mods compared to 3-4) but heavy on tackle+ewar. So yes - different but roughly equivalent - as opposed to possible and awesome vs not really possible due to ******ed fittings on shield RR.

You also dramatically overestimate the utility of nano'ing a RR abaddon. Laughing

-Liang

Darth McDarth
Posted - 2011.06.09 20:33:00 - [82]
 

After having read through this thread, I think I know what the problem is.

Buff hull reps.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.09 20:49:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Darth McDarth
After having read through this thread, I think I know what the problem is.

Buff hull reps.


And then replace the fighter/fb bonus on the Thanny/Nyx with a hull rep bonus. Razz

Sol Ripper
Posted - 2011.06.10 02:36:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren


Don't be stupid. What we're asking for is that it be possible and reasonable to fit shield RR. The natural outcome of shield RR would be that you're light on tackle+ewar but heavy on gank, where armor is lighter on gank (1-2 damage mods compared to 3-4) but heavy on tackle+ewar. So yes - different but roughly equivalent - as opposed to possible and awesome vs not really possible due to ******ed fittings on shield RR.

You also dramatically overestimate the utility of nano'ing a RR abaddon. Laughing

-Liang


You seemed to have left out the advantage shield tanking has over armored bricks in mobility at the cost of sig size. So, what you are saying is that a gang that has advantages in speed/agility, gank and is on equal terms in tank is roughly equal to a gang has less speed/agility, gank, and equal tank but has non-bonused ewar and carries its own tackle? Honestly, on which side would you prefer to be?

Okay, I went a bit overboard with the Abaddon, but if a shield tanked BS can have equal tank as an armored brick while having significant advantages in mobility and maintain its gank. Why fly armor? And what are armor gangs ever going to catch with their equipped tackle?

As for ewar, what do you suggest? TD's? Hmm, useless against missiles and drones. Target painters? Shield ship sigs are already huge. Sensor damps? Those will be the game changer! Granted the armor buffered Scorpion would thrive but are un-bonused ECM modules worth the slot? Bhaalgorns and officer webs would be essential. Or are the shield gangs going to be "honorable" about it and slug it out in web range so the armored bricks can actually keep them tackled with the great equalizer, local tackle?

You are right though, in the context of pure rr'ing bs gangs, remote repping is imbalanced in favor of armor. My point is that in a larger context of non-homogenous ships, different tools for different tasks, it may be a bit more balanced.

Although, I still contend that rr shield gangs would obsolete armor rr gangs. Throw a couple of dedicated tacklers in the shield rr gang and the disparity would become even greater.


Aamrr
Posted - 2011.06.10 04:43:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: Sol Ripper

<snip>
You seemed to have left out the advantage shield tanking has over armored bricks in mobility at the cost of sig size. So, what you are saying is that a gang that has advantages in speed/agility, gank and is on equal terms in tank is roughly equal to a gang has less speed/agility, gank, and equal tank but has non-bonused ewar and carries its own tackle? Honestly, on which side would you prefer to be?
<snip>



You are completely neglecting the fact that all the speed and mobility in the world is useless if you have to stay within 8400 meters of your target. You can talk about Shield-RR Nanopests all day long, but you can't dictate range if you've got an 8.4km leash tied around your neck.

The ONLY ships which get a range bonus to remote shield repair are the Osprey, the Scythe, the Basilisk, and the Scimitar. Leaving aside the obvious issues of the T1 logistics cruisers, neither the Basilisk nor the Scimitar has ANY CPU issues whatsoever. I challenge you to find me a reasonable Scimitar fitting that struggles with CPU issues.

There are a very select few Basilisk fits that have CPU problems, but they're doing stupid crap like 5x T2 shield transporters, and they have more problems with grid than CPU.

So if RR-battleships are restricted by lack of range, and shield logistics have no problems with CPU in the first place...
...what exactly is the problem with reducing shield transporter CPU cost?

Sol Ripper
Posted - 2011.06.10 07:24:00 - [86]
 

Valid point about the difficulty of keeping a tight ball when trying to maneuver. Although, I would still prefer to be in a ship that has similar tank, better gank and better potential speed/agility vs. similar tank, less gank and less potential speed/agility but has local tackle/un-bonused ewar.

My concern is that somebody would figure out how to fly/maneuver in tight formation and having swarms of rr Machs being unstoppable. On second thought it may not be so bad. If a group of pilots was able to master maneuvering in tight formation, they should be rewarded.

Lady Go Diveher
The Independent Troll Society
Posted - 2011.06.10 09:04:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Don't be stupid. What we're asking for is that it be possible and reasonable to fit shield RR


Ah, you're right. No one has ever done this with a Tengu (you see LOADS), Loki, Drake, Hurricane ... ect.

Again, in the very specific scenario of RR-Battleships, you are right. But you are still ignoring the rest of the sodding game.

@Speed and agility: Of course speed and agility plays a part in an RR gang, using logi or simple RR. Not only is the anchor ship quicker, but the ability of the rest of the ships to stay in range and maintain some form of speed is higher.

And, once more - once you get out of your RR-BS tunnel-vision you'll see that because of their speed and mobility, shield ships + logi have a lot of pros.

If you're going to argue that "RR battleships are worse in shield" then you're right. Congrats. You're still not thinking systemically, though.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.06.10 16:44:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
No one has ever done this with a Tengu (you see LOADS), Loki, Drake, Hurricane ... ect.


I have seen ONE RR Tengu fleet, and NEVER seen any of the others (outside of alliance tournaments - which we all know is a perfect representation of TQ PVP) mounting shield transporters. Gonna go with "not common".

Really, I don't see why you're so dead set against lowering shield transporter CPU requirements. Rolling Eyes

-Liang

BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.06.10 17:30:00 - [89]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren

Really, I don't see why you're so dead set against lowering shield transporter CPU requirements. Rolling Eyes

-Liang


Because people hate seeing things buffed or changed that does not directly improve/suit their play style or the mods they use.

It's the whole 'don't nerf my shaman' tactic (an ancient WoW reference.. YEA I went there!) to stay competitive, it happens in every thread that calls for a balance change, whether it be a boost or nerf thread.

E.g. Recall: people arguing that projectiles needn't be buffed when they used to suck, people arguing that nos shouldn't be nerfed back in the day when it was very OP, and people arguing that hybrids shoudn't be boosted even though they blow chunks in the present day..And let's not forget the epic nano threads of yesteryear Shocked

Lost Greybeard
Gallente
Posted - 2011.06.10 17:56:00 - [90]
 

Originally by: 26534522
Try getting that with a shield RR domi.


This seems to be a running theme with this thread: treating the high CPU/low PG nature of the module as if it's some sort of overlooked defect and not a balancing decision.

It's not. Certain races are _supposed_ to be better suited to certain fits. The fact that Caldari is almost entirely shield-dependent and its ships are CPU-heavy on average is not an accident.


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