These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

Normal shield boosters are basically worthless modules
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#41 - 2013-03-22 18:25:45 UTC
Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Cambarus wrote:
Angelique Duchemin wrote:

Actually the more ships you have the easier it gets to balance. Which is why Eve is balanced around fleet pvp and not solo pvp. Eve has no solo pvp balance. But on the balance Eve attempts to achieve (fleet) the balance is pretty good.

How do you figure?



Because you have more variation on either side. Ships and setups varied in the hundreds that all do what they do best against their ideal targets with plenty on either side.

I'm surprised you would even call 1 vs 1 balance easy. What 2 ships fighting against each other are even closed balanced in this game?


Blizzard has been trying to balance 1vs1 for 8 years and you call it easy?

So when you were talking about "other large MMOs" you meant WoW. That does explain a few things :)

Typically in larger fleets each side follows a certain doctrine. You don't just show up in whatever you have, there's usually one or 2 ship types that make up the bulk of the fleet, and the only time you show up in anything else is that you don't have the skills or isk for the main ship type. There isn't really much variation on either side when it's 100 carriers+support vs 100 tengus+support. You either fly what the main fleet is flying, or fly something that compliments them well.
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#42 - 2013-03-22 18:28:59 UTC
Cambarus wrote:
Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Cambarus wrote:
Angelique Duchemin wrote:

Actually the more ships you have the easier it gets to balance. Which is why Eve is balanced around fleet pvp and not solo pvp. Eve has no solo pvp balance. But on the balance Eve attempts to achieve (fleet) the balance is pretty good.

How do you figure?



Because you have more variation on either side. Ships and setups varied in the hundreds that all do what they do best against their ideal targets with plenty on either side.

I'm surprised you would even call 1 vs 1 balance easy. What 2 ships fighting against each other are even closed balanced in this game?


Blizzard has been trying to balance 1vs1 for 8 years and you call it easy?

So when you were talking about "other large MMOs" you meant WoW. That does explain a few things :)

Typically in larger fleets each side follows a certain doctrine. You don't just show up in whatever you have, there's usually one or 2 ship types that make up the bulk of the fleet, and the only time you show up in anything else is that you don't have the skills or isk for the main ship type. There isn't really much variation on either side when it's 100 carriers+support vs 100 tengus+support. You either fly what the main fleet is flying, or fly something that compliments them well.



What does that have to do with the balance?

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#43 - 2013-03-22 18:33:47 UTC
Angelique Duchemin wrote:

What does that have to do with the balance?

You said large fights are easier to balance because of increased variation, which is false, because there isn't that much variation. Fleets are built to support each other, not just thrown together, which throws a whole new level of meta-gaming into the problem of balancing. It's not just "how does A fare against B C and D?" It's "how does A fare when mixed in with K-P against literally every possible combination of fleet types?"
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#44 - 2013-03-22 19:19:59 UTC
Cambarus wrote:
Angelique Duchemin wrote:

What does that have to do with the balance?

You said large fights are easier to balance because of increased variation, which is false, because there isn't that much variation. Fleets are built to support each other, not just thrown together, which throws a whole new level of meta-gaming into the problem of balancing. It's not just "how does A fare against B C and D?" It's "how does A fare when mixed in with K-P against literally every possible combination of fleet types?"


Simple because the enemy brings A's too so it doesn't matter that much how A B C D fare against each other because both sides bring all of them.

So even if A vaporizes B at range while B can close the distance to C and destroy C. All that means is that either sides letters attack the ones they fare best against. The more ships you have in the mix the more balanced the fight as a whole becomes



Your example would only be a problem if say one side brought 100 Carriers and the other side brought 100 Dreads but that's just the 1 vs 1 formula on a larger scale. In reality either side will bring a good ratio of each whenever possible and the balance remains.

Each ship and setup has a strength and a weakness that is is represented by another ship and setup and the more ships you have the more likely it becomes that it faces a ship it fares well against and that it faces an opponent that matches its own weakness.


The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#45 - 2013-03-22 20:53:19 UTC
Angelique Duchemin wrote:

Your example would only be a problem if say one side brought 100 Carriers and the other side brought 100 Dreads but that's just the 1 vs 1 formula on a larger scale. In reality either side will bring a good ratio of each whenever possible and the balance remains.
No, they don't. If you're fielding , for example, a carrier fleet, you don't bring dreads. You bring lots of carriers, and some stuff with fast lock times to control their drones. With a dread fleet you (to my knowledge dreads aren't much used as a main fleet comp, but if they were) bring lots of dreads and some heavy tackle. Ironically the main ship type that is mostly ubiquitous in fleets (logis logis logis) aren't much use in these fleet types.

Look, for example, at titans. When CCP buffed them, they became horribly overpowered, not only because of the titans themselves, but because alongside them were scimitars/oneiros, where a handful of them could so massively bump up the tracking that titans could engage literally anything.

This also resulted a massive supercap proliferation that killed off battleship usage in fleets, and everyone switched to using drakes, which then gave birth to hellcat abbadons and arty machs, which then made maels popular, which then made tengus popular, (and then I stopped playing for a while), and then carrier fleets became popular, and I'm told PL's using gilas now too?

Point is, there are several different types of fleets that are viable, and they are absolutely NOT based on bringing a whole bunch of different ships. At most your average fleet will have 4-5 different ship types in it, and that's out of the what, 100 ships out there? And that's not even going into different fittings for said ships.

It's not a question of both fleets being ABCD, it's one fleet bringing that while the other brings SBEJ.

What I don't get though, is that how can you claim that fleet warfare is balanced, and that fleets of one particular ship type are basically just 1v1s, but then insist that 1v1s aren't balanced? (Also have you ever actually been in a fleet fight?)
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#46 - 2013-03-23 12:41:58 UTC
bloodknight2 wrote:
Not sure the reloading make much difference. What i mean is, an ancillary shield booster needs reloading after his charges are used and the shield booster can't perma run because it needs cap and to be as good as an ASB, a shield booster needs to do almost 2 cycle and can't be shut down if neuted.

Or you can simply use 2 x-large ASB.


If you can't use 2x X-L then you are better using a buffer fit. An un-bonused X-L booster adds almost as much HP before reloading as 1x Large shield extender. It also cost 350 more PG and 100 more CPU.

Long story short, i rarely use ASB's because they only suit particular situations. Dual ASB sleipnirs are one of those situations.
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#47 - 2013-03-23 16:50:56 UTC
Maeltstome wrote:
bloodknight2 wrote:
Not sure the reloading make much difference. What i mean is, an ancillary shield booster needs reloading after his charges are used and the shield booster can't perma run because it needs cap and to be as good as an ASB, a shield booster needs to do almost 2 cycle and can't be shut down if neuted.

Or you can simply use 2 x-large ASB.


If you can't use 2x X-L then you are better using a buffer fit. An un-bonused X-L booster adds almost as much HP before reloading as 1x Large shield extender. It also cost 350 more PG and 100 more CPU.

Long story short, i rarely use ASB's because they only suit particular situations. Dual ASB sleipnirs are one of those situations.

Unless I'm missing something here I see 9 cap charges X 980 shield = 8820 shield restored before reloading on my unbonused XLSB versus 2625 shield from an LSE
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#48 - 2013-03-23 18:50:18 UTC
Angelique Duchemin wrote:


Actually the more ships you have the easier it gets to balance. Which is why Eve is balanced around fleet pvp and not solo pvp. Eve has no solo pvp balance. But on the balance Eve attempts to achieve (fleet) the balance is pretty good.


This post is full of so much dumb.....


Stop trolling or stop being ********, those are your only two options.
Alexa Coates
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2013-03-23 22:24:49 UTC
hey op how bout that 60 second reload time? yeah how bout that.

That's a Templar, an Amarr fighter used by carriers.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2013-03-24 02:45:21 UTC
Angelique Duchemin wrote:
After a near decade this game is surprisingly well balanced for an RPG.

Rule of thumb is if you think something is without use then you really need to re-evaluate it and the context around its use because something huge just passed under your radar.

This goes double so for the people who currently assume that armour tanking is worthless.


Micro shield extender, what passed under my radar?

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#51 - 2013-03-24 02:57:25 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Angelique Duchemin wrote:
After a near decade this game is surprisingly well balanced for an RPG.

Rule of thumb is if you think something is without use then you really need to re-evaluate it and the context around its use because something huge just passed under your radar.

This goes double so for the people who currently assume that armour tanking is worthless.


Micro shield extender, what passed under my radar?


Your radar could not pick up the small remains of that wreck of a module that it is...
Gal'o Sengen
Doomheim
#52 - 2013-03-24 10:41:24 UTC
I don't see why you would say "Stictly speaking of PvP", i use ASB's for PvE too, they're much cheaper than deadspace, more than sufficient for Missions and much more useful against attempted ganks.Roll
Previous page123