These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Pirate Shield ships

Author
Predator BOA
Kenshin.
Fraternity.
#1 - 2014-08-06 05:12:01 UTC
I'm not sure if this is the best place to rise this question up, so if i'm in the wrong place let me know please.
I got a question with the Phantasm, don't get me wrong but i do love the ship now with the changes to the afterburner speed. My question is why does the

Cynabal 2330hp with a recharge 1250s

Orthrus 2950hp with a recharge 1250s

Gila 3200hp with a recharge 1250s

Phantasm 2700hp with a recharge of 2082s

Why does the Phantasm get a very slow recharge rate.
Wouldn't it get the same as every other shield ship in its class?

Can you let me know on what you guys and ladies think please.

Kind Regards

Predator BOA
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2 - 2014-08-06 05:24:42 UTC
Compare it to the other armour ships, also look at it's slot layout, and consider that it may not be considered a shield primary ship even though players tend to fly it that way.
HandelsPharmi
Pharmi on CharBazaar
#3 - 2014-08-06 05:40:25 UTC
Shield recharge is for passive fits... or do you think, anybody cares in PvP about your passive recharge of around 2-3 HP/s?
Edwin McAlister
Empire Hooligans
#4 - 2014-08-06 05:40:37 UTC
in all fairness to the OP... if you look at the "mastery" tabs for the Phantasm, its got "shield tanking" listed and not armor tanking

odd, i agree
Predator BOA
Kenshin.
Fraternity.
#5 - 2014-08-06 05:47:09 UTC
Yes armor fit I've seen yes i agree , but if you look at the cruiser that are armor and shield tank the recharge of shield is the same , even if its armor or shield tank at 1250s.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#6 - 2014-08-06 06:16:26 UTC
If it's slower than other armour tanking Cruisers, then yes, Petition it in case it's a bug.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#7 - 2014-08-06 06:47:19 UTC
Why does it matter? It doesn't have the native buffer or resists to make a passive fit attractive anyways.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#8 - 2014-08-06 10:18:53 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Why does it matter? It doesn't have the native buffer or resists to make a passive fit attractive anyways.

Then why do you care if it gets a slight buff to bring it in line with every other cruiser?
If things are inconsistent they should have a reason they are different. There doesn't seem to be one.
Hakan MacTrew
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#9 - 2014-08-06 10:43:46 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Compare it to the other armour ships, also look at it's slot layout, and consider that it may not be considered a shield primary ship even though players tend to fly it that way.

Sansha ships are primarily shield tanked ships the last time I checked.

That said, they are designed around 'active' tanking rather than passive.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#10 - 2014-08-06 21:54:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
Hakan MacTrew wrote:


That said, they are designed around 'active' tanking rather than passive.



This is usually the source of disparity in shield based fits.

Passive is not the ideal fit for all shield boats. Very few ships in fact have the stats to do it well. This is a potential pitfall for new players who start caldari for example. They get in that pve/pvp drake and stay there for a bit. Then wonder why their "drake tank" doesn't work so well on other boats.

Basically, see a crap recharge rate think active tank of some kind may be in order. Or run the passive buffer knowing its not going to be so great. I have af's like jaguar or even shield wolf (it be a gang fit where I rely on other peoples tackle mods....an mse II in the1 of 2 mids gets me some tank and the lows are freed up for big damage potential) that I go passive. I don't run these expecting them to recharge very well. I run these to hopefully make your ship go boom before you chew through the ehp of the shield extender(s).
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#11 - 2014-08-06 22:37:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaerakh