Player Features and Ideas Discussion

But they do have a use. I don't shield tank much myself, so I'm no expert, but I'd imagine there's a point where you've already fitted your primary shield hardeners, and any more would be hit by diminishing returns. Then there's a case to be made for the amp. When active tank, your buffer need only last long enough for your rep to cycle. Shields rep at the beginning of the cycle, so no problem there. And shield reppers cycle much faster than armor, so there's that.

I don't claim they are a universal "must-have" mod, but they do provide options and have a use that isn't mimicked by armor. Even if all they do is save capacitor, that still goes to the theme with their ancillaries and rigs.

+1 for xl shield extenders

me thinks would be GREAT!!

When will people realize Shield is best for active and Armor best for buffer tank

If you fit both to an otherwise unfitted T1 hull, you'll have roughly 120 ehp/s for 35GJ/s with an LAR II and 190ehp/s for 72GJ/s on a T2 XL-SB. That's a 55% difference. Having your tank located in the lows or mids does make a huge difference, seeing that local tanks make most sense in very small engagements unless we're talking caps, where shieldtanked triage archons are outperforming armortanked ones.

While it's easy to use up all lowslots for tank, relying on base damage+drones, doing so on a shieldship robs you all those mids you'd need for tackle and cap booster. As far as practical fits go, they're fairly even. The massive CPU-reqs for XL-boosters tend to get in the way about as often as the PG requirements for dualrep fits.

Going to BS, you find mids used with things like MJD, point, sometimes web, 1-2 cap boosters + tank, leaving even a ship like a Mael with invuln+XL-booster unless going for ASB which don't profit off links you should use for classic shieldboosting. Looking at a hyperion, you get LAR+LAAR or 2LAR, 2 eanms, RAH, DCU and a magstab, but full tackle with one or two CBs next to a prop. Before links or pills, that's a 1100dps mael with 630ehp/s tanked, or a 980dps hyperion with 1150ehp/s tanked, both using shortrange faction ammo and web+scram.

Anyways, XL-SB fits and 1/2 LAR fits tend to be well comparable. If you got free space for a SBA next to hardeners, we're most likely not talking pvp fits. Tackle, CBs and prop going into midslots just don't allow for shieldtanks to significantly outperform armorfits on subcaps.

I don't think that battleships need more buffer but I would agree that the small shield booster needs some love-making to it.

Supporting this idea, because HP bonus from Large Shield Extenders is too small too make them really effective on Battleships, and almost nobody uses passive Rattlesnakes anymore. X-Large Shield Extenders should use around 100 CPU and 500 PG, while having double the HP bonus of Large ones, and T2 version should require Shield Upgrades V.

About the need for X-Large Armor repairers, that's what current Large ones really are. A new set of repairers designed for Battlecruisers who are somewhere between Mediums and Larges and use around 500 PG could be introduced however.

Right, like gun-grouping changes a ship's DPS.


A T2-fit Merlin with no implants, boosters, or fleet boosts can rep 75 EHP/s cap stable with 1 remaining mid (for prop mod?), 1 remaining low, and anything you want in the highs. It's short on CPU but can function that way.

Small shield boosters are a bit small for comfort, and mediums are a bit large for comfort, but the small is just as efficient as any other and it fits well for making a cap stable shield boosting frigate. Maybe frigates need more capacitor regen. Maybe the small shield booster should be a slightly larger size.

Are you telling me that the weapons could not be activated between server ticks, and that it took eight server ticks to activate all the weapons?

I thought people just linked the weapons to function keys and hit all eight in the same server tick. I was always too lazy to use hotkeys but can click four per server tick, so it's not that slow with ungrouped weapons.

If we follow the current trend, we'd get something like this:
X-Large Shield Extender I
Volume: 40 m3
Powergrid: 720 MW
CPU: 56 Tf
Shield: 4500
Signature Radius: +85 m


But that's clearly way too little powergrid, and if you study the HP increase over base by a percentage, might be a bit weak as well. So let's fix the Large, then we can fix the X-Large:


Large Shield Extender I
Volume: 40 m3
Powergrid: 280 MW(up from 150)
CPU: 40 Tf
Shield: 2400(up from 1900)
Signature Radius: +25 m

X-Large Shield Extender I
Volume: 40 m3
Powergrid: 2800 MW
CPU: 56 Tf
Shield: 7200
Signature Radius: +85 m

Now the Large Shield Extender is a proper cruiser extender, even fit for battlecruisers. Before, it was more of an industrial size module, a bit small for even a Stabber. The X-Large follows suit, being something far too large for cruisers and you could barely squeeze it onto a battlecruiser but it would give you a massive tank bonus if you did. It'll be quite adequate for battleships, and carry a trade-off with that high powergrid cost.

That's capital stuff... and doesn't have much to do with the build diversity on BS.