These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ancillary Shield Booster: WTF?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#21 - 2012-07-02 15:27:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
The whole "active shield setups need crystals" isn't factually correct. While In the past I could be quoted many times as saying;

"active shield tanking is terrible without crystals" - proxyyyy

I was WRONG @ the time and you're WRONG now. I often used the Cyclone and Brutix comparatively as an example. Clearly I wasn't aware of a Cyclone with a XL shield booster and 2 capacitor booster. The aforementioned IS able to replicate the Brutix in performance, with active armor repair. @ the time I stated otherwise. Which was clearly ignorance.

I wasn't aware of the aforementioned Cyclone setup for a long time. What!? Let me explain further. Not to long ago. Something changed players perception of the Drake. I once quantified the event as the "Drake meta a priori". Players classified the Drake as useless for anything other than defense. Untill! Someone theory crafted a heavy assault missile-Drake. The ship was then viewed as superior to all other battlecruisers. Was the ship bad or was players perception of the ship incorrect? The Drake was viable since its inception. Although most were unaware of the ships most viable setups @ the time. Untill someone theory crafted an optimal setup. Which has been improved even more since the introduction of Ancillary Shield Booster.

Like most things on tranquillity. Players tend not to innovate or very few do. Most players don't like to waste time figuring out a problem...

LETS WRAP THIS UP.

Shield boosters are unique. I'm not able to put together a viable Brutix setup with a single large armor repair. Comparatively, I am able to fit a Cyclone with a XL shield booster; Same with all ships that rely on shields for denfense. The Jaguar and Harpy are capable of fitting a medium shield booster. Which replicates the preformance of using 2 armor repairs on a Ishkur, without the need of Crystals.

So no. Anyone using the whole "active shield setups need crystals" argument is ignorant and behind the times (adapt). Clearly I was. After I started using the aforementioned Cyclone setup. I never roamed in a Mrymidon again. Mainly because the Cyclone was superior to dealing with ships @ range (frigates, Vagabond) and good in balls deep range. A better ship for guerilla style warfare and roaming.


- end of transmission...

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#22 - 2012-07-02 15:56:09 UTC
This module is exactly what active tanking should be. Though standard active tanking right now is too module intensive and too hard to fit compared to buffer. To achieve the performance of this ancillary shield booster, you need your three rigs, the cap booster, and the module (two for armor). Capacitor active tank effectiveness need to be boosted.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#23 - 2012-07-02 16:14:44 UTC
Where's my anciliary armor repairer? I'm tired of wasting one or two midslots on capacitor boosters to keep the reps up on my Myrm.
Strider Hiryu
Insane Shadow Boxers
#24 - 2012-07-03 10:06:26 UTC
Paikis wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
hope we get same thing with armor reps some day, that would be simply awesome.


That would be simply silly.

That would make armor better at buffer tanking, and as good at active tanking.

Shields are better at active tanking and got cap-free active tanks with some severe downsides. Armor tanks are better at buffer tanking, so tell you what, you can have Ancilliary Armor Plates. Put cap boosters into them and your plates wont use cap.

Deal?


Worst post ever.

If you want to make stupid generalizations about the diffrences between armor and sheild tanking, well ok then.

1. Give armor a passive regen
2. Armor gets repped apon docking
3. Remote + Local armor repairers repair at start of cycle instead of end
4. Midslot Damage mods for armor tankers.

Deal?
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#25 - 2012-07-03 11:20:42 UTC
How about armor having a higher base resistance?
How about armor repairing using less capacitor?
How about armor tank free up vital medslots on most ships?
How about armor plates giving out more hitpoints than shield extenders?
How about armor having passive omni resist modules that benefits 100% from compensation skills?
How about that new hardener module that doesn't work yet but has huge potential?

no deal!!
Lili Lu
#26 - 2012-07-03 14:05:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
Paikis wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
hope we get same thing with armor reps some day, that would be simply awesome.


That would be simply silly.

That would make armor better at buffer tanking, and as good at active tanking.

Shields are better at active tanking and got cap-free active tanks with some severe downsides. Armor tanks are better at buffer tanking, so tell you what, you can have Ancilliary Armor Plates. Put cap boosters into them and your plates wont use cap.

Deal?

Roll But shield buffer and logi remote gangs are doing fine. This module was not introduced because of any shortcomings in logi supported shield gang/fleets in pvp. It was obviously meant as a support for solo/ very small gang pvp where no logi would be present and you have a ship with an active tanking bonus. Not that there weren't other methods to make use of the active tanking bonuses.

Eternal Error wrote:
Given that fitting more than one of them is banned for ATX, I would say there is an incoming nerf.

Quite possibly. It is not the same as Mfume's retorts about more than one logi and faction fits. Here they limited a specific module. Quite a different thing. However, based on past performance, and it not being a gallente ewar which of course must be nerfed into the stone age right away, I doubt the nerf whatever form it might take will come very quickly.

Pinky Denmark wrote:
How about armor having a higher base resistance?
How about armor repairing using less capacitor?
How about armor tank free up vital medslots on most ships?
How about armor plates giving out more hitpoints than shield extenders?
How about armor having passive omni resist modules that benefits 100% from compensation skills?
How about that new hardener module that doesn't work yet but has huge potential?

no deal!!

Your list is a sorry summation of a tired old argument, except for the last question in your list. The tanks and tanking are different. It appears with the introduction of the ASB and the adaptive hardener CCP was trying to give each tank a new goodie. Unfortunately they were not of equal use. Surprise? No, it's CCP. The "huge potential" which would require a buff for the new armor hardener will take as long to materialize as the nerf/tweaks on the new shield booster. Which is to say, a rather long time.Ugh
Coolsmoke
State War Academy
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-07-03 15:24:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Coolsmoke
The ASB's are certainly making a difference to my Nightmare & Mach pulse-shield mission fits.

Interestingly - in the context of pulse-boosting - while the medium ASB won't boost anything like as well as a Pithum C-Type, the Large ASB boosts exactly the same amount of shield as a Pith A-Type of the same size. And the XL version beats the XL Pith X-Type hands down.

So for pulse-shield fits it appears to make sense to switch.

I'm now using an X-L ASB on my Nightmare, with a Boost Amp & LSE's for plenty of EHP. The fit is easily 600m cheaper and gives me a 2,800 ehp boost every time I pulse..
Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#28 - 2012-07-03 15:31:45 UTC
If anything needs to be looked at it's making the size of the charges used actually matter. As it is it's just a no-brainer to use the smaller charges, using the bigger ones actually hinder you.

No sig.
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-07-03 15:55:06 UTC
Overpowered, even without the shield boost bonus you seem to be able to strap these things to any ship and improve its performance for the duration of most PVP engagements.

If nothing else they need to be changed so that they do not receive additional bonuses from other mods, implants etc.

As for Armour.

It would be nice to see a repper with the fittings between Medium and Large repairers.

Perhaps a Repper itself that provides resistance bonuses when online.

Lets face it the reactive hardener still needs an overhaul.
Dread Pirate Pete
Doomheim
#30 - 2012-07-03 16:12:20 UTC
ASB's are still vulnerable to alpha, and the larger an engagement is the worse the module gets.

That said they do seem to need a bit of adjusting. Perhaps make it so it can only be used with overheating (simulating the stress you put on the shield generator by flooding it with cap), this would not overburden the player but still make it a bit less tempting to fit.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#31 - 2012-07-03 17:43:02 UTC
How about we remove off-grid boosting and call it a day? The Mael and Rokh rep around 2500 with two X-Large A. Boosters. 1250 with one. That's alot but hardly OP. 2-3 BC should be able to force one of the above BS into having to use both boosters at the same time. Once that happens the ship's life expectancy is limited. It's only when you add off-grid boosters, crystal implants, and blue pills that the tank gets ridiculous.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#32 - 2012-07-03 20:09:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Lin-Young Borovskova
Lili Lu wrote:
Your list is a sorry summation of a tired old argument, except for the last question in your list. The tanks and tanking are different. It appears with the introduction of the ASB and the adaptive hardener CCP was trying to give each tank a new goodie. Unfortunately they were not of equal use. Surprise? No, it's CCP. The "huge potential" which would require a buff for the new armor hardener will take as long to materialize as the nerf/tweaks on the new shield booster. Which is to say, a rather long time.Ugh


I disagree with you. The problem doesn't come from CCP (at some point) but players.

Players can't understand how enormous are armor tank drawbacks, instead they actually think they're just better at pvp because they fit shield tanks on armor ships, this is the problem that has to be solved at first, and to do that you need to rework armor tanking and all drawbacks/bonus around.

You shouldn't be more penalised than a shield buffer fit that once it manages to gtfo just have to sit somewhere and wait shields to get back to be 100% active again.
Again if you want to really resists/buffer tank your armor ship this means you have 1 or even 0 dps/Te mods, you're slower than usual and radius is not even an argument because even drakes use those making their signature explode above 2Km radius

Strangely enough I can get almost 70k EHP resist profile all above 75% with a mwd drake fit and still fit point/web 1 nano 1DCU 2BCU and 500dps with a 3% implant (cheapo).
So because you use an armor fit Brutix, you should do crap dps, have an horrible tank and be unable to spit dps beyond your nose, and salso be called stupid because shield Brutix is better.

Where is the real problem here? -why can I fit an XL-ASB Talos with over 40kEHP and 1.2K dps at 40Km?
If armor is just intended for stand still bricks or immediately changed for lower EHP shield tanks but increasing ship survivability and combat abilities, then it's probably because armor tanking as a hole didn't evolved correctly with the game like shields did and so need to be changed?

Once players admit there are problems with armor tanking and those need changes isntead of just fit shield mods then CCP will probably have a much better feedback to balance armor properly. And don't bring Capitals/supers/titans crap as argument, those should just be completely removed from the game or nerf to the ground.

brb
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#33 - 2012-07-03 20:17:50 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
How about we remove off-grid boosting and call it a day? The Mael and Rokh rep around 2500 with two X-Large A. Boosters. 1250 with one. That's alot but hardly OP. 2-3 BC should be able to force one of the above BS into having to use both boosters at the same time. Once that happens the ship's life expectancy is limited. It's only when you add off-grid boosters, crystal implants, and blue pills that the tank gets ridiculous.



Therorycrafted some Tengu with 75K EHP and 2 med ASB without Crystals boosters and off grid booster, tank ability on kin thermal assuming stand still like a duck tanks for over 3200dps incoming (as long as you have booster charges)
Now add crystals combat booster off grid booster and SPEED, you get a pure ganker almost nothing can stop but the lack of cap boost charges.

The mod it self is ok mechanic what is not good is the amount of rep you get with. (need to test HAM Drake with too, have to be funny)

brb
carmelos53
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2012-07-03 20:45:50 UTC  |  Edited by: carmelos53
Short summary of my thoughts

1) Overpowered - needs tweaking.
Solution: Limit to max fit to 1 module - and to be honest... the whole it doesn't matter what size of cap charges you use makes no sense.

Example: you still get the same shield boost amount on the x-large ASB if you use 400s or 800s

2) There is no armor equivalent - I REALLY like the shield booster for shields. I opens up an entire new level of small gang fits. There needs to be something for armor.

3) Even if you limit 1 module per **** - the boost amount IS WAY TO HIGH with crystals, blue pills off grids etc. When a ship can solo tank 1600 dps without these implants..... that's not a good thing. It's way to much right now. maybe make it EQUAL to the existing boosters (while keeping the added benefit of saving a mod by storing charges directly on the booster.

Flame on forum trolls
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#35 - 2012-07-03 21:12:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
How about we remove off-grid boosting and call it a day? The Mael and Rokh rep around 2500 with two X-Large A. Boosters. 1250 with one. That's alot but hardly OP. 2-3 BC should be able to force one of the above BS into having to use both boosters at the same time. Once that happens the ship's life expectancy is limited. It's only when you add off-grid boosters, crystal implants, and blue pills that the tank gets ridiculous.



Therorycrafted some Tengu with 75K EHP and 2 med ASB without Crystals boosters and off grid booster, tank ability on kin thermal assuming stand still like a duck tanks for over 3200dps incoming (as long as you have booster charges)
Now add crystals combat booster off grid booster and SPEED, you get a pure ganker almost nothing can stop but the lack of cap boost charges.

The mod it self is ok mechanic what is not good is the amount of rep you get with. (need to test HAM Drake with too, have to be funny)



A single ancillary shield booster is OK. The issue is using multple ancillary shield boosters. I'm able to use 3 on certain ships and have (scorpion).

It's like BLOB theory. Is a single Drake with heavy missiles overpowered or are 100 Drakes with heavy missiles overpowered? Funny thing is. Why aren't 100 Brutix with blasters considered overpowered?

Limiting modules is alot easier than limiting gameplay. BLOBS happen and will always happen. Limiting a pilot to only being able to fit 1 ancillary shield booster isn't a big thing.

As far as the stuff Zarnak Wulf was on about. I don't take anything he says seriously, because of his continuous record of being wrong (Eve Search shout out). Unfornuantly for me. I tend not to write off players I know to be superfluous completely. You never know. They may say something of worth some day.

Off grid boosting is not a big deal. However, it's like flying around with a falcon in my opinion. Lame, but not a big deal. Reflects poorly on the pilot more than anything else.

However that statement in itself is objective. Not base on any fact, because there are really good pilots who never used a scout or T3 booster in the past. Are still good now and will continue to be good.

Below is something for Lin-Young Borovskova. Also, my mother tells me I don't need pills. I'm just special = /

As far as using the new module on Tengu's. Myself and a few pilots in my corporation will be using them in Caldari/Gallente faction warfare space soon enough. I already have mine.

Drake
Damage Control II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Beta Reactor Control: Diagnostic System I

Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I
Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I
Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
Large Ancillary Shield Booster, Cap Booster 150
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I

Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Scourge Rage Assault Missile
[empty high slot]

Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I


Warrior II x5

- For The STATE

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2012-07-03 22:38:39 UTC
The most annoying part of this debate is that there are two sides of the same coin:

heads: "makes so many more ships viable for active tanking!"
tails: "makes ships that are good at active tanking too good!"
Silas Shaw
Coffee Hub
#37 - 2012-07-03 22:53:48 UTC
Respectfully, the annoying part of this debate is that it isn't about the ASB. it's about armor being different from shields. Guess what guys: missiles are different from guns too!
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2012-07-03 22:56:17 UTC
Silas Shaw wrote:
Respectfully, the annoying part of this debate is that it isn't about the ASB. it's about armor being different from shields. Guess what guys: missiles are different from guns too!


That's actually a wholly different debate than "is the ASB overpowered?"

It's also dumb, since armor offers better buffer and more cap efficient active tank, generally speaking.
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#39 - 2012-07-03 23:39:08 UTC
Mfume Apocal wrote:
Silas Shaw wrote:
Respectfully, the annoying part of this debate is that it isn't about the ASB. it's about armor being different from shields. Guess what guys: missiles are different from guns too!


That's actually a wholly different debate than "is the ASB overpowered?"

It's also dumb, since armor offers better buffer and more cap efficient active tank, generally speaking.


Then why are we seeing so many threads/people asking for an armor version?

There ARE two different debates going on over this module:
1. Is it overpowered? (Probably)
2. Give ancilliary armor booster NAO! (no!)

People need to stop asking for homogenisation, and start asking for their armor module to be fixed.

Here's the changes I would make:
1. Make the cap booster sizes matter. If you can fit 400s or 800s into your ASB, then the 400s should only repair half per cycle what the 800s do.
2. Ancilliary Shield Boosters rep the same amount of shields as the T2 Shield Booster of their size.
3. Change the armor plate to have 5% less base resists than EANMs and use scripts. Make a script for two resists each.
- EM-Thermal
- EM-Kinetic
- EM-Explosive
- Thermal-Kinetic
- Thermal-Explosive
- Kinetic-Explosive
Each script will increase the two listed resists by 15% and decrease the other two down to nothing (for the module).
Scripts will have a reload time of 30 seconds out of station.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#40 - 2012-07-03 23:57:30 UTC
I might actually be insulted if the person criticizing me didn't have his own history and sound like a telegram. Stop. I've used them in combat. Stop. Both with and against. Stop.

I've killed a dual MASB Hawk and Jag individually using an Enyo that's only tank was a T2 Damage Control and Explosive Plating. They are hardly overpowered.

I took a Ferox into combat that had Ions and an X-Large ASB. I was trying to save a friend who was tackled in another system. He died as I warped in. My ship lasted for exactly a minute and died shortly after I used the booster 14 times. I managed to kill a T1 cruiser, a thrasher, scare off another thrasher in structure, and put one of the three SFI's shooting me into very deep armour before going down. It was fun but worked as intended.