These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Tech 1 Battleships - Amarr

First post First post First post
Author
Samas Sarum
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3141 - 2013-06-05 12:34:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Samas Sarum
The Djego wrote:
I never was really satisfied with the old apoc(I always considered it the low level performer for people that can't be bothered with cap management), so I was giving it a new try. All I have to say is that the overall performance actually is surprisingly solid, it is 1100 m/s fast, aligns quick, performs notable better in L4 with lots of small stuff and can hit stuff even while mwding to the next group. Best result was a 18.5m tick in a Pirate Scarlet(angle, blood and serpentis) and around 12 minutes for recon 1/3 full clear(11.3M tick), hammering down TD cruisers without any real effort and making spaced out groups, moving to gates or picking up mission loot no issue at all.

[Apocalypse Navy Issue, L4 Foxcat]
Core B-Type Large Armor Repairer
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I
Heat Sink II
Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Imperial Navy Heat Sink

Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script
Cap Recharger II
Core A-Type 100MN Microwarpdrive

Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L
Mega Pulse Laser II, Conflagration L

Large Energy Locus Coordinator II
Large Energy Discharge Elutriation II
Large Energy Discharge Elutriation I


Hobgoblin II x2
Hobgoblin II x3
Imperial Navy Curator x3

Simple question did anybody actually tried the new Apoc instead of moaning about that you can't make it cap stable with 2 slots any more? In my opinion it is a very solid ship now, what it misses in raw dps it can make up in mobility, tracking and range, while keeping the option of just hitting out to 91km optimal with scorch if you want to kill a small group without moving over or if you need to break down a TD wall. While the mach still punches out more dps, the navy Apoc is probably the closest thing you can get if you want something that plays very similar. If anything a 8. target lock slot and a bit more scan res would be nice.

The new apoc is the first time I flown a amarr BS that is not a brick(since the nano nerf), for this I want to thank you Rise. Smile


I appreciate you testing it out, but this anecdote should probably be in the Navy BS thread. I know your point has been to crap on everyone's complaint of a lack of missioning ship in the T1 line but I'm not sure how bringing in a Navy ship does that.

You're using 3 slots for cap btw and I'll have to wait for the new EFT but I doubt it's anywhere close to stable especially if you pulse the MWD as much as you seem to be. I cringe at having to use a PG mod in a pulse fit on a Navy boat, I thought one of their selling points was to ease up on fittings especially non-LR weapon ones. I doubt any other race's hulls has to do that.

I've never had problem hitting cruisers that weren't orbitting close (99% of mission cruisers) in a non-tracking bonus BS and if you wanted to get the same bonus as the ship bonus you could just load both the TC's for tracking and it would give you more while a damage bonus could be enjoyed 100% of the time (as in the navy geddon). Why the comparison with the mach? It would embarrass this ship in damage and there are plenty of other navy BS's with the same or more mobility as the Napoc.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3142 - 2013-06-05 14:10:23 UTC
Samas Sarum wrote:
I've never had problem hitting cruisers that weren't orbitting close (99% of mission cruisers) in a non-tracking bonus BS and if you wanted to get the same bonus as the ship bonus you could just load both the TC's for tracking and it would give you more while a damage bonus could be enjoyed 100% of the time (as in the navy geddon). Why the comparison with the mach? It would embarrass this ship in damage and there are plenty of other navy BS's with the same or more mobility as the Napoc.

You obviously never tried a railgun ship... Cruisers orbiting at 30km are a pain to kill, and the drones do most of the job, even with 2 TC.

The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
Mean Coalition
#3143 - 2013-06-05 20:42:48 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
Here is a little bit of fraps footage of how good the new navy Apoc(and apoc with less armor and one HS less) is:

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1306/New_NAPOC_Smuggler_Interception.mkv

If you need some mobility, a good range and got lots of sub BS targets, it will clean the field in no time and it is quite a bit better now than it was before(like a laser fitted, armor tanked mach actually, still quite a bit shorter on dps).

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread

John 1135
#3144 - 2013-06-05 21:45:48 UTC  |  Edited by: John 1135
The Djego wrote:
Here is a little bit of fraps footage of how good the new navy Apoc(and apoc with less armor and one HS less) is:

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1306/New_NAPOC_Smuggler_Interception.mkv

If you need some mobility, a good range and got lots of sub BS targets, it will clean the field in no time and it is quite a bit better now than it was before(like a laser fitted, armor tanked mach actually, still quite a bit shorter on dps).

Djego, the thing you need to do to be compelling is post up sound fits for other racial T1 PVE BS' and contrast their performance with the T1 Apoc. Otherwise people are always going to have reason to find your examples doubtful. Up to you if you want to bother, but remember that my criticism is not that pilots cannot rat in an Apoc, but that the alternatives are better: therefore new pilots wanting to PVE should avoid Amarr BS.

WRT tracking vs sig bonus BTW. The formula for applying tracking bonuses appears to be

t*(1+(0.075*b))*(1+(0.05*m))*(1+(s))

t is turret base tracking, b is Battleships skill, m is Motion Prediction skill, s is stacking penalised module bonuses. Example for a Megapulse II with lets say a single T2 TC tracking scripted and skill levels all of IV is 0.03375*1.3*1.2*1.3 = 0.068445. It kind of means the tracking bonus is also a bonus to any TC, TE, or EMA rig fitted on an Apoc hull. My view moves toward suspecting that pilots will find it a bit better of a bonus than it at first appears.
Meduza13
Silver Octopus
Infernal Octopus
#3145 - 2013-06-05 22:00:22 UTC
Apocalypse should get a bit more CPU as fitting it is pretty hard now, even with max skills.
Megathron for a change is so easy to fit even with 2 1600mm plates, full rack of neutron guns and heavy neut i still have 32 cpu left. Not mentioning megathron have much more armor, dps and tracking , only less range
Its a big imbalance in my opinion and should be adjusted.
Samas Sarum
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3146 - 2013-06-05 23:44:40 UTC
John 1135 wrote:
The Djego wrote:
Here is a little bit of fraps footage of how good the new navy Apoc(and apoc with less armor and one HS less) is:

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1306/New_NAPOC_Smuggler_Interception.mkv

If you need some mobility, a good range and got lots of sub BS targets, it will clean the field in no time and it is quite a bit better now than it was before(like a laser fitted, armor tanked mach actually, still quite a bit shorter on dps).

Djego, the thing you need to do to be compelling is post up sound fits for other racial T1 PVE BS' and contrast their performance with the T1 Apoc. Otherwise people are always going to have reason to find your examples doubtful. Up to you if you want to bother, but remember that my criticism is not that pilots cannot rat in an Apoc, but that the alternatives are better: therefore new pilots wanting to PVE should avoid Amarr BS.

WRT tracking vs sig bonus BTW. The formula for applying tracking bonuses appears to be

t*(1+(0.075*b))*(1+(0.05*m))*(1+(s))

t is turret base tracking, b is Battleships skill, m is Motion Prediction skill, s is stacking penalised module bonuses. Example for a Megapulse II with lets say a single T2 TC tracking scripted and skill levels all of IV is 0.03375*1.3*1.2*1.3 = 0.068445. It kind of means the tracking bonus is also a bonus to any TC, TE, or EMA rig fitted on an Apoc hull. My view moves toward suspecting that pilots will find it a bit better of a bonus than it at first appears.


Just because the bonuses are multiplicative doesn't mean that one bonus is a "bonus" to another.
Samas Sarum
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3147 - 2013-06-05 23:47:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Samas Sarum
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Samas Sarum wrote:
I've never had problem hitting cruisers that weren't orbitting close (99% of mission cruisers) in a non-tracking bonus BS and if you wanted to get the same bonus as the ship bonus you could just load both the TC's for tracking and it would give you more while a damage bonus could be enjoyed 100% of the time (as in the navy geddon). Why the comparison with the mach? It would embarrass this ship in damage and there are plenty of other navy BS's with the same or more mobility as the Napoc.

You obviously never tried a railgun ship... Cruisers orbiting at 30km are a pain to kill, and the drones do most of the job, even with 2 TC.



Right but this isn't a BS tracking bonus to a rail ship, it's a bonus to an almost exclusively pulse (at least until the rebalance) ship that already has good enough tracking. Unlike a damage bonus, extra tracking on top of 'good enough' is useless which is why I'd rather get that tracking from TC's when I need it and then switch out the scripts.
John 1135
#3148 - 2013-06-06 04:45:42 UTC  |  Edited by: John 1135
Samas Sarum wrote:
[quote=John 1135]Just because the bonuses are multiplicative doesn't mean that one bonus is a "bonus" to another.

I was thinking in contrast with say the resist bonus on Abaddon. Since the tracking bonuses for skill are multiplied together, a pilot with higher BS gains more tracking from adding a TC than a pilot with low BS. Whereas for the resist bonus the benefit is flat: a pilot with no Amarr BS skill leaves a 25% hole after fitting a T1 hardener, and a pilot with BS V leaves a 20% hole. Thus a flat 20% of the hole (whatever was remaining).

For a T2 TC say, a pilot with no BS and no MP gets 30% more tracking for fitting one, while a pilot with both at V gets around 52% more tracking. It's true that it's still only multiplying the former values by 30%. But whereas the value of fitting a hardener remains flat. The value of fitting the TC amplifies.

As to whether that matters. More tracking won't increase damage when the target is at rest relative to you along the transverse axis. But it will increase damage by some amount whenever the target is not at rest. A flat damage bonus would be better of course; because the amount of the increase from tracking tails off quite severely with range between you and the target, or if the target is very large or slow. Hence, it's a bonus that probably counts most against Zealots using Scorch.

Yet again the golden fleet arms itself for war against... itself. I wonder if this is some kind of subtle CCP hint about future backstory?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3149 - 2013-06-06 10:43:31 UTC
Samas Sarum wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Samas Sarum wrote:
I've never had problem hitting cruisers that weren't orbitting close (99% of mission cruisers) in a non-tracking bonus BS and if you wanted to get the same bonus as the ship bonus you could just load both the TC's for tracking and it would give you more while a damage bonus could be enjoyed 100% of the time (as in the navy geddon). Why the comparison with the mach? It would embarrass this ship in damage and there are plenty of other navy BS's with the same or more mobility as the Napoc.

You obviously never tried a railgun ship... Cruisers orbiting at 30km are a pain to kill, and the drones do most of the job, even with 2 TC.



Right but this isn't a BS tracking bonus to a rail ship, it's a bonus to an almost exclusively pulse (at least until the rebalance) ship that already has good enough tracking. Unlike a damage bonus, extra tracking on top of 'good enough' is useless which is why I'd rather get that tracking from TC's when I need it and then switch out the scripts.



If you are stubborn enough to keep your mind lock thinking the ships are alanced to PVE you might be right. But PVE IS IRRELEVANT DAMMIT! THis ship is balanced for PVP! And on PVP, being able to track even light drones with tachyons at long range is pretty amazing!!!

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3150 - 2013-06-06 11:04:54 UTC
John 1135 wrote:
Djego, the thing you need to do to be compelling is post up sound fits for other racial T1 PVE BS' and contrast their performance with the T1 Apoc. Otherwise people are always going to have reason to find your examples doubtful. Up to you if you want to bother, but remember that my criticism is not that pilots cannot rat in an Apoc, but that the alternatives are better: therefore new pilots wanting to PVE should avoid Amarr BS.

The best contender are missile ships and maybe the new Dominix, because the other have either not enough tracking or not enough dps at range unless you take a faction ship : only pulse have this much tracking AND this much dps at long range. LR weapon tracking is bad ; blasters have poor range ; and AC can hit at range, but in falloff it's nowhere near what pulse can do.

And in fact, the question can be returned to you : what ship would be better than this one for this task ? Of course there is plenty of ships with more cap life or more tank, but I think they won't have even comparable damage projection, except for the Dominix with its godlike but immobile sentries, and the cruise missiles BS (which I don't know how they will hit smaller target).
Samas Sarum
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3151 - 2013-06-06 12:35:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Samas Sarum
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Samas Sarum wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Samas Sarum wrote:
I've never had problem hitting cruisers that weren't orbitting close (99% of mission cruisers) in a non-tracking bonus BS and if you wanted to get the same bonus as the ship bonus you could just load both the TC's for tracking and it would give you more while a damage bonus could be enjoyed 100% of the time (as in the navy geddon). Why the comparison with the mach? It would embarrass this ship in damage and there are plenty of other navy BS's with the same or more mobility as the Napoc.

You obviously never tried a railgun ship... Cruisers orbiting at 30km are a pain to kill, and the drones do most of the job, even with 2 TC.



Right but this isn't a BS tracking bonus to a rail ship, it's a bonus to an almost exclusively pulse (at least until the rebalance) ship that already has good enough tracking. Unlike a damage bonus, extra tracking on top of 'good enough' is useless which is why I'd rather get that tracking from TC's when I need it and then switch out the scripts.



If you are stubborn enough to keep your mind lock thinking the ships are alanced to PVE you might be right. But PVE IS IRRELEVANT DAMMIT! THis ship is balanced for PVP! And on PVP, being able to track even light drones with tachyons at long range is pretty amazing!!!


Yea for the 5 minutes out of the week you'd spend doing it and if that tracking made that big a difference which someone in this thread has already proven it does not (destroyer sized or below you still won't hit if you weren't before, only cruisers orbiting at your optimal). Fit 1-2 TC II's with a tracking script if you need the tracking and you get more of a bonus and you can switch them back to range when not hitting light drones.

I'd rather not have my ship bonuses with that narrow a range of usefulness (even if Apoc could fit tach's to begin with). If this were the only Amarr BS with a narrow PvP-only bonus then I wouldn't complain but all 2 of 3 hulls are this way and the 3rd has huge cap issues when not in a fleet.
TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#3152 - 2013-06-06 12:42:54 UTC
@Samas

Armor HACs, ARMOR HACs, ARRRMOR HACS!!!!

My Condor costs less than that module!

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#3153 - 2013-06-06 20:42:31 UTC
When are these going be unstickied to give Page 1 back to Player Posts? Odyssey is in and the Feedback and Issues threads are active. Why not replace these with a "Link Sticky" to those two threads?

We all know how lazy we are to go clicking...wait for it...past Page 3 of this Forum section. Blink
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
Mean Coalition
#3154 - 2013-06-06 20:59:36 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
John 1135 wrote:

Djego, the thing you need to do to be compelling is post up sound fits for other racial T1 PVE BS' and contrast their performance with the T1 Apoc. Otherwise people are always going to have reason to find your examples doubtful. Up to you if you want to bother, but remember that my criticism is not that pilots cannot rat in an Apoc, but that the alternatives are better: therefore new pilots wanting to PVE should avoid Amarr BS.


The new navy apoc is very similar to the normal apoc, the difference is the extra low slot(used for a 4. HS) and the extra sentry drone what adds up to a extra 90 DPS, it is a bit faster and got better scan res and the extra 3k armor that was never utilized at any point. Overall the new Apoc and navy Apoc are pretty good if you look at the hole package instead of just being focused on the 1-2 more cap mods you need more or ineffective permarun fittings, because they combine a high speed, high tracking with her good range now. Similar things made the poor Tempest actually a impressive solo/small gang BS, while it already had the speed, they doubled the range with the projectile changes(in nano fittings with 2 TEs). A nano pest is a fairly good ratting BS, because it got ok dps at ok ranges and is fairly quick on the feet, meaning less trouble if you run into pvp(I ganked a fair amount of people with it during ratting) and can fairly well use range to deal more damage, to range tank or simply keep the hell away from warpins to avoid getting ganked there. For L4 the new speed, tracking and scan res make the Apoc and navy Apoc a very good option for all around performance(where it was before just meh compared to many good Abaddon fittings, and pointless compared to the Paladin and NM) and even creates a new niche for it where you can speed up some missions considerably, because you don't fly a brick like every other amarr BS and the NM are. I think the movie is a very good example how to utilize the speed in the same way the mach does it and just use the mwd to get within 30km in a couple of seconds, deploy sentry's, nuke the spawn and move on instead of slow boating or being unable to move if you want to use sentry's.

I played a bit with it in eft, decided what to do with the ship and thrown a bit of money on it to fit up the ship and take it for a spin(a bit over 12h in total for now) and I like what I see, a lot actually. I know I can't convince any of you that the new apoc actually is a lot better now than it was before, but I guess the changes will convince at least some people to fit her amarr BS properly and maybe in a year or so, they will actually agree that the change was for the better instead of the worse.

As explained a few page ago, the alternatives are not better at low SP levels, they are not better at high SP levels, at least if you look at the hole thing and if it is good enough for me, it should be good enough for others to.

For tracking you can study this: http://mcc3d.com/game/EVE-Online:Formulae

As you can see you have 2 therms. The second one can be ignored since it simply handles the falloff penalty and the first one is simply transversal/(range * tracking) * sig resolution gun/sig of the target. It doesn't matter if you add a simlar sized bonus(-27,3%) in the second therm or 37.5% in the first. The result will be exactly the same.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread

John 1135
#3155 - 2013-06-07 00:08:11 UTC  |  Edited by: John 1135
The Djego wrote:
the movie is a very good example how to utilize the speed in the same way the mach does it and just use the mwd to get within 30km in a couple of seconds, deploy sentry's, nuke the spawn and move on instead of slow boating or being unable to move if you want to use sentry's.

If it's sentries you want to rat with, wouldn't the Domi do a better job? Heck, even the 'geddon is probably better! And besides, how does the new bonus help sentries?

The Djego wrote:
For tracking you can study this: http://mcc3d.com/game/EVE-Online:Formulae

As you can see you have 2 terms. The second one can be ignored since it simply handles the falloff penalty and the first one is simply transversal/(range * tracking) * sig resolution gun/sig of the target. It doesn't matter if you add a simlar sized bonus(-27,3%) in the second therm or 37.5% in the first. The result will be exactly the same.

That's a useful page. But like I said, the terms of the formula were familiar to me at the outset. I can see that putting an equivalent bonus on either side of the tracking*sig term produces the same result. But the play would differ. It would shift pilot focus onto sig and that would mean more will train toward Signature Focusing and use TPs. The TP + Sig Focusing is a better module than the TC if it's the tracking*sig term you want to interact with. It is that sort of emergence that comes under ludically different. The numbers are the same, but the play changes.

So the new bonus is equal to one TP with Signature Focusing. Or a T2 TC + a TE. But that is only in the specific scenarios where it really counts. The old bonus - taking into consideration the large laser changes - is worth two cap modules. And that is ubiquitous: in a wide variety of situations less cap burn is useful.

So the ship bonus has a module equivalence. And I really do feel that module equivalence is strictly worse than the previous bonus. Perhaps future laser cap-use tweaks will make the old bonus irrelevant. In the meantime we're paying our subs and stuck with our SP choices. Hence it is fair for players to continue to gripe about the changes.
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
Mean Coalition
#3156 - 2013-06-07 01:38:38 UTC
John 1135 wrote:
The Djego wrote:
the movie is a very good example how to utilize the speed in the same way the mach does it and just use the mwd to get within 30km in a couple of seconds, deploy sentry's, nuke the spawn and move on instead of slow boating or being unable to move if you want to use sentry's.

If it's sentries you want to rat with, wouldn't the Domi do a better job? Heck, even the 'geddon is probably better! And besides, how does the new bonus help sentries?.


Speed, it is actually very simple. A slow ship has to engage from the warpin, the new apoc can actually move fairly quickly to a preferred range(while being able to apply turret dps) and go there into sentry mode(pushing dps without having the big issues with drone agro). The high tracking and massive range of the guns give you the option to put your sentry drones at big stuff while you focus on smaller hulls with the guns. In a lot of plexes and anomalies the warpin is a pretty bad place to be, not just because somebody could land right on top of you but because you will take a lot damage there, while a quick hull that can move out of this position fast has a lot less issues.

The choices you got, if you look for fairly mobile hulls that can also push out 1k+ dps at non comical ranges are fairly limited and I like what I see if I look at my navy Apoc. The domi or geddon need to go into siege mode(full stop on the movement) to deploy reasonable dps, while on the Apoc it is just a extra option, it can do good dps on the move, while using the optimal and tracking bonus(compared to non turret bonus hulls), doing the same thing as the drone BS is just another option you have.

The amarr BS line up was dominated by pure gank and tank bricks, with the new apoc it gets a surprisingly mobile option and this is actually something I, while having played amarr for years, enjoy a lot.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3157 - 2013-06-07 01:48:51 UTC
Quote:
So the new bonus is equal to one TP with Signature Focusing. Or a T2 TC + a TE. But that is only in the specific scenarios where it really counts. The old bonus - taking into consideration the large laser changes - is worth two cap modules. And that is ubiquitous: in a wide variety of situations less cap burn is useful.

So the ship bonus has a module equivalence. And I really do feel that module equivalence is strictly worse than the previous bonus. Perhaps future laser cap-use tweaks will make the old bonus irrelevant. In the meantime we're paying our subs and stuck with our SP choices. Hence it is fair for players to continue to gripe about the changes.


This is the point I've been trying to make for a while. The tracking bonus is pretty situational.

Yeah, ship hull bonuses stack without diminishing returns, I get it.

But cap use is overall a more versatile bonus. So now instead of putting TCs into the fit, I cram some more cap modules in instead. So what?

Thing is, as has been mentioned, this is a significant benefit against T3 cruisers. But I really hope we aren't balancing things around a single ship class. That's very... idk how to put it, narrow minded? It just seems like the Amarr BS line was looked at with nullsec goggles on.

My other point is, that what the Apoc was good for before, isn't what it's good for now. Anyone who used to have an Apoc used it to rat and do L4s. Those people have probably sold their Apocs, because a Abaddon is now objectively better for L4s. The people who like it now, because it does different things, yep, all good, it swats down smaller ships in PvP like flies. Those people will buy the Apoc and use it. I still intend to get more used to mine, since the new model really urges me to fly it, and I am still holding out hopes for the laser remake to not take 6 months to get to us.

But I can perfectly well understand people who are upset with the new Apoc.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3158 - 2013-06-07 12:00:57 UTC
John 1135 wrote:
That's a useful page. But like I said, the terms of the formula were familiar to me at the outset. I can see that putting an equivalent bonus on either side of the tracking*sig term produces the same result. But the play would differ. It would shift pilot focus onto sig and that would mean more will train toward Signature Focusing and use TPs. The TP + Sig Focusing is a better module than the TC if it's the tracking*sig term you want to interact with. It is that sort of emergence that comes under ludically different. The numbers are the same, but the play changes.

So the new bonus is equal to one TP with Signature Focusing. Or a T2 TC + a TE. But that is only in the specific scenarios where it really counts. The old bonus - taking into consideration the large laser changes - is worth two cap modules. And that is ubiquitous: in a wide variety of situations less cap burn is useful.

Again, if you don't care about any of the amarr strength but only care for your capacitor, fly minmatar ships. If you spent time for skills you have no use for, then you just made a mistake.

Your situational bonus theory is wrong BTW : the formula is maths, and a TP have the exact same effect of a tracking computer with higher number, but is range limited. Using a TP when your signature resolution is bonused does nothing more than using a TC if numbers were equals. Numbers are percentages, and they multiply themselves. Multiplication is associative. And percentages mean that whatever the amount, the effect is the same. The play does not change, because the game only cares about the numbers.
John 1135
#3159 - 2013-06-08 03:20:36 UTC  |  Edited by: John 1135
...
Unit757
North Point
#3160 - 2013-06-09 03:29:54 UTC
Wait, people actually think they consider how well a ship can shoot red crosses when they balance these?

lol...