These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

ASB is BULL.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#321 - 2012-08-08 18:30:11 UTC
Muad 'dib wrote:
Overpowered on some ships with multiples - no question OP

However, im seeing alot of deserve trail setups on just about anything with 4 mids or more, and this experimentation makes a very nice change from the 90% change of a cookie setup every time. I dont remember the last time a new module made these sort of waves.

+1 overall


Warp Scramblers made a pretty big wave.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#322 - 2012-08-08 18:31:34 UTC
Seishi Maru wrote:
You mean something like 90% of the capacitor cost is payed by the charges and like 10% by the ship? That could work indeed...


Yeah, that was where I was going with it. Though I was leaning more towards 80/20 or 75/25. Enough that it provides a meaningful but not horrific drain on the capacitor. Something that I can prevent with neuting, really.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#323 - 2012-08-08 18:37:38 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Seishi Maru wrote:
You mean something like 90% of the capacitor cost is payed by the charges and like 10% by the ship? That could work indeed...


Yeah, that was where I was going with it. Though I was leaning more towards 80/20 or 75/25. Enough that it provides a meaningful but not horrific drain on the capacitor. Something that I can prevent with neuting, really.

-Liang



the exact ratio would need to be balanced carefully and maybe the ammount of cycles with the charges increased by 1 to compensate depending on this value. But otherwise is a fair middle ground that still enables active tankers to have a strong tank without spending a middle slot for normal charges.


The problem of being stoped or not by neuts for me ia a no problem. Normal cap charges already have this effect, jsut in a slightly different degree.
Copine Callmeknau
Dirty Vagrants
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#324 - 2012-08-08 19:03:56 UTC
These proposed changes would mean my shield boosting options are

XL Booster w/ injector
XL ASB w/ injector

Except of course, that in the second example 80% of the capacitor generated by my injector is simply feeding the enemy gangs neuts, as the tank doesn't use that cap.

Why would anybody choose the second option?

There should be a rather awesome pic here
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#325 - 2012-08-08 19:14:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
These proposed changes would mean my shield boosting options are

XL Booster w/ injector
XL ASB w/ injector

Except of course, that in the second example 80% of the capacitor generated by my injector is simply feeding the enemy gangs neuts, as the tank doesn't use that cap.

Why would anybody choose the second option?


IMO the risks should be:
- Fit the injector (with smaller charges) and have virtual immunity to neuts
- Don't fit the injector and face the possibility of being neuted out.

Either way, the booster itself is still better than the best deadspace booster. You've got ******* epic tank as long as your charges hold out.

-Liang

Ed: Also, let's just be real. What people are actually fitting is dual ASBs, oversized ASBs, and dual oversize ASBs.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#326 - 2012-08-08 19:25:09 UTC
Lets be real.. normal shield boosters were also always fitted in oversized fashion anyway on the rare ships that used them :P
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#327 - 2012-08-08 19:28:57 UTC
Seishi Maru wrote:
Lets be real.. normal shield boosters were also always fitted in oversized fashion anyway on the rare ships that used them :P


There were enough penalties to doing it that IMO it was an open question of whether or not you wanted a Large booster Cyclone, an XL Cyclone, or a buffer Cyclone. ALL of those penalties have been bypassed so strongly that the question is whether you want an XL Cyclone or a dual XL cyclone.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Copine Callmeknau
Dirty Vagrants
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#328 - 2012-08-08 19:31:10 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
These proposed changes would mean my shield boosting options are

XL Booster w/ injector
XL ASB w/ injector

Except of course, that in the second example 80% of the capacitor generated by my injector is simply feeding the enemy gangs neuts, as the tank doesn't use that cap.

Why would anybody choose the second option?


IMO the risks should be:
- Fit the injector (with smaller charges) and have virtual immunity to neuts
- Don't fit the injector and face the possibility of being neuted out.

Either way, the booster itself is still better than the best deadspace booster. You've got ******* epic tank as long as your charges hold out.

-Liang

Ed: Also, let's just be real. What people are actually fitting is dual ASBs, oversized ASBs, and dual oversize ASBs.

With the proposed changes will the booster reload faster, or will you allow them to draw 100% from the capacitor while still reloading?

That's really the only way I can see it working. If anything you are more vulnerable to neuts than a normal booster as you have to ensure two sources of capacitor are supplied instead of the traditional one, and deaspace grade boost is utterly useless when you're reloading for 60 seconds.

I am being real anyway, I know that dual ASB are the way to go, but we're talking about your proposed 'fix' here, which incorporates among other things a nerf to fitting dual/oversize ASB

There should be a rather awesome pic here
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#329 - 2012-08-08 19:37:56 UTC
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
These proposed changes would mean my shield boosting options are

XL Booster w/ injector
XL ASB w/ injector

Except of course, that in the second example 80% of the capacitor generated by my injector is simply feeding the enemy gangs neuts, as the tank doesn't use that cap.

Why would anybody choose the second option?


IMO the risks should be:
- Fit the injector (with smaller charges) and have virtual immunity to neuts
- Don't fit the injector and face the possibility of being neuted out.

Either way, the booster itself is still better than the best deadspace booster. You've got ******* epic tank as long as your charges hold out.

-Liang

Ed: Also, let's just be real. What people are actually fitting is dual ASBs, oversized ASBs, and dual oversize ASBs.

With the proposed changes will the booster reload faster, or will you allow them to draw 100% from the capacitor while still reloading?

That's really the only way I can see it working. If anything you are more vulnerable to neuts than a normal booster as you have to ensure two sources of capacitor are supplied instead of the traditional one, and deaspace grade boost is utterly useless when you're reloading for 60 seconds.

I am being real anyway, I know that dual ASB are the way to go, but we're talking about your proposed 'fix' here, which incorporates among other things a nerf to fitting dual/oversize ASB


his proposal is exaclty a way to naturally nerf oversized and multiple ASB without hard limits. ITs smart.. jus tneed some PRECISE number crusnhing so no ships that are measn to use a certain size of ASB end up unable to use all the cycles of the ASB because they have no way near that ammount of cap.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#330 - 2012-08-08 19:43:04 UTC
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
[
With the proposed changes will the booster reload faster, or will you allow them to draw 100% from the capacitor while still reloading?

That's really the only way I can see it working. If anything you are more vulnerable to neuts than a normal booster as you have to ensure two sources of capacitor are supplied instead of the traditional one, and deaspace grade boost is utterly useless when you're reloading for 60 seconds.

I am being real anyway, I know that dual ASB are the way to go, but we're talking about your proposed 'fix' here, which incorporates among other things a nerf to fitting dual/oversize ASB


The claim that you are more vulnerable to neuts than a traditional booster is just flat bogus and you know it. With regards to vulnerability to heavy neuting, there's still the one source - the cap injector. The fact that the booster is using "cap charges" is kinda irrelevant, except that you can split the charges between your booster and the injector. Furthermore, we're talking about a much lower drain amount - potentially one that's low enough you could power it off of a nos or two. I am seeing absolutely no way that you can realistically argue that there's an increased vulnerability to neuts.

Either way: yes, the deadspace grade booster is useless when you're reloading for 60 seconds... but that's the intended side effect of fitting an ASB.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#331 - 2012-08-08 21:02:08 UTC
Muad 'dib wrote:
Overpowered on some ships with multiples - no question OP

However, im seeing alot of deserve trail setups on just about anything with 4 mids or more, and this experimentation makes a very nice change from the 90% change of a cookie setup every time. I dont remember the last time a new module made these sort of waves.

+1 overall



That statement isn't really accurate. If anything, everyone is just replacing 1 or 2 shield extenders with 1 or 2 Ancillary Shield Boosters. That's all pilots are atempting to do. Come up with setups that enable them to use as many of these modules as possible.

As far as experimentation? Not sure about that. A Merlin pilot would be foolish if he didn't choose a medium Ancillary Shield Booster over a medium shield extender. You know! Unless that pilot was worried about being alpha'd...

So this whole bullsh!t about so many new setups and hwat not, isnt really true... More like substitution instead of innovation.

Ancillary Shield Boosters are essentially just a 1600mm plate for shields. It would be stupid if you fitted our current 800mm shield extenders, over these new 1600mm shield extenders...


- end of transmission

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Ginger Barbarella
#332 - 2012-08-08 21:04:57 UTC
Freezehunter wrote:
Eve ******* sucks compared to how it was in 2007 I swear, WAY more fun and player skill oriented back then.


So, you'll be quitting then and never posting here again? Good.

And no, I don't want yer stuff. It obviously has the stink of FAIL on it.

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Whar Target
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#333 - 2012-08-09 01:37:06 UTC
The people who want ASB to use capacitor obviously don't fly the main race that ASB was intended for...Minmatar. Minnie ships are often lacking mid slots, and that is the very reason you cannot be forced to fit a cap booster and an asb.

Also doubly hilarious that its "not a drawback" to have two modules using booster charges.. Maybe if you have a badger following you everywhere you go in case you plan on getting into more than one engagement.

Nerf the boost amount if you must, give it a reduced reload time if you do, but do not make it vulnerable to neuts. That negates the entire purpose of the mod.
Veryez
Hidden Agenda
Deep Space Engineering
#334 - 2012-08-09 02:03:04 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Veryez wrote:
...


Long time no see Veryez! Let me know if you need anything getting started again. :)

-Liang


Thank you and other than more time to play EvE, I'm pretty much set to go Smile, you have ever been a voice of reason here and a person who understands how to play EvE (and I have shown quite a few of our newer players your excellent videos usually starting it with "This is the way you PvP..."). Your 'absense' was EvE's low point imo.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#335 - 2012-08-09 03:30:41 UTC
Whar Target wrote:
The people who want ASB to use capacitor obviously don't fly the main race that ASB was intended for...Minmatar. Minnie ships are often lacking mid slots, and that is the very reason you cannot be forced to fit a cap booster and an asb.

Also doubly hilarious that its "not a drawback" to have two modules using booster charges.. Maybe if you have a badger following you everywhere you go in case you plan on getting into more than one engagement.

Nerf the boost amount if you must, give it a reduced reload time if you do, but do not make it vulnerable to neuts. That negates the entire purpose of the mod.


So, I do fly Minmatar, at least occasionally. Here's one night with an ASB cyclone where I was primary for the duration of every fight:
http://kb.heretic-army.biz/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=27471 (Yes, I literally felt bold enough with an ASB Cyclone to try to solo a Typhoon. Only to find the LOLFit)
http://kb.heretic-army.biz/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=27488
http://kb.heretic-army.biz/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=27489
http://kb.heretic-army.biz/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=27490
http://kb.heretic-army.biz/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=27491

Here's Liang's skill sheet: http://eveboard.com/pilot/Liang_Nuren
My main character has 84M pure Minmatar PVP SP, including Minmatar Carrier 5.

Now that we've established that I'm not talking out my ass here: I can't say that you're right. I would say that Minmatar ships are no more lacking mids than anyone else. The only race that might consistently get more mids is Caldari - and even then it's not really that big of a deal. Furthermore, people have been fitting active tank Minmatar ships (with cap boosters!) for literally years. And some of those ships are considered quite overpowered.

Frankly, your entire complaint is... mindboggling.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Squatdog
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#336 - 2012-08-09 04:30:14 UTC
Why yes, all these shield-boosting Minmatar ships sucked balls and were non-viable prior to the ASB, right?

*cough* Sleiphnir, Maelstrom *cough*

Oh, wait...
Dimitryy
Silent Knights.
LinkNet
#337 - 2012-08-09 04:31:17 UTC
Freezehunter wrote:
So, I just had a test fight on SiSi.


Stopped reading there.
Captain Nares
O3 Corporation
#338 - 2012-08-09 08:14:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Nares
Yes, currently ASB are bs. ASB need a tweak.

Also I don't understand why do we (or game) need them. You can't add any module you want just coz you want, right? Traditional SB's were enough imo, lol Smile
Captain Nares
O3 Corporation
#339 - 2012-08-09 08:15:02 UTC
double
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#340 - 2012-08-09 11:11:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Seishi Maru
Captain Nares wrote:
Yes, currently ASB are bs. ASB need a tweak.

Also I don't understand why do we (or game) need them. You can't add any module you want just coz you want, right? Traditional SB's were enough imo, lol Smile



CCP clearly stated that they felt that active tankign was udnerhelming in PVP for a LONG time and that they want minmatar and gallete to focus on active tanking. THe module Was VERY needed. The bonus is not even so large, It nEED to be stronger than a normal SB or it would be as weak as normal SB. Simple as that. That woudl defeat the whole purpose of the module.


The only thing that went down the drain is that CCP (again) underestiamted players min maxing that resulted in people using 2-3 ASB to make the drawbacks and limtis of ASB inexistant!


THAT is thwe whole problem.

I am, for my part very happy with ASB because my low sec main uses mostly arti tornados, and the reduction of buffer fits is soooo sweeeeeet :) So funny to see cycloens that rage that they can tank over 1 K dps and we must be hackers because our 3 tornados killed them so fast!

Let me make a final point. People say that armor tankign ships are usign ASB and that is proof that ASB are overpowered. Well for YEARS Cyclone hulls were fit with BUFFER tank!!! That proves that ASB are NEEDED. The issue is how to make active armor tanking as good but without being a clone.