Ships & Modules

Light web drones and a buff to cap batteries with zero drawback are crap?

Interesting line of "thinking".

But ancillary shield boosters are garbage.

Just posting my thoughts on them and seeing what people think and open them up for discussions.

It's not every year that we get new modules!

And to your point, the capacitor amount bonus of capacitor batteries are still much too weak, as
the reflection bonus is much too situational for it to have any chance of being used in a valueable
midslot.


LG

Part of the problem comes in from the facts that trickle-down mechanics are at play and that heavy webber drones were over-nerfed during the nano-nerf. Before that series of nerfs webber drones were comparable to mid-grade named webbers. Given that it took 125mb/3 to field them and that they were fairly slow this left them in a situation that was, at best, fair. Frankly, their value was a bit sub-par even then, but that's just me. Then came the nano-nerf and not only was the webber strength of heavy webber drones nerfed but it was nerfed so badly that they only yield roughly a 46% reduction in the target's velocity whereas ship-mounted webbers start at 50%.

Frankly, so far as I'm concerned the usage of heavy webber drones at that point became very niche, too niche to really be useful. With the trickle-down mechanics in play I can't help but see light and medium webbers being even more niche. Let the ishkur "heavy tackler" catch up to a faster ship so it can use a "real" webber sort of niche. I know CCP loves introducing things pre-nerfed, but when they're based off of already pre-nerfed modules that haven't been suitably buffed since it gets bad.

So on the topic of these Reactive Armor Hardeners..

I see that the statement is, "They are Crap," but I don't see why. It's not so much that I disagree with you as it is I am relatively uninformed and somewhat hesitant to fit them given the example provided in description.

It basically says some stuff about this and that in a rather ambiguous way, then gives the same resists across the board as a Tech 1 EANM at a cost of 42GJ per cycle. This is where I go, "what?" "..so does this thing change, get better, or what?" It even has the same fitting req. IIRC.

What isn't said that is supposed to make this thing better than a passive module?

If it indeed does get up to 40% resist over a cycle to a specific damage type, then I concede it may be worth it and specifically balanced for a Meta 1 module. Otherwise, it seems kind of pointless with a needless cap. chewing activation cost.

Also, the Target Spectrum Breaker is rather full of unsaid details too. But at least it's lack of attributes gives credence to its lack of details. Makes you think something is occurring anyway, and I suppose it would be a bit difficult to account for those variables when you could have 600 ships targeting you at once.

Anyway, whatever it does, I think the biggest issue with that sort of ECM is that it apparently has an instant and no lasting effect. No duration of target acquisition prevention makes it virtually useless, if it's like the ECM burst in that regard. Should scramble targeting computers for at least 3 seconds anyway Enough time to effect an escape if you are ready for it, maybe.

Aside from that, I wonder if it has range limitations?

Please can you explain why you find the Reactive Armor Ardener useful?
I'm not sarcastic.
But it really looks like crap for both pvp and pve, if you found an use for it elighten us.