These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Meta 4 Better than T2 , a mods list.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#41 - 2013-12-28 14:43:13 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Despite the fact that T2 is manufactured by players and meta gear is loot only, there is little correlation between where the items come from and price.


True most of the time, but there are exceptions. Internal force field arrays would probably be a lot cheaper if they could be looted from more than a single niche faction that everyone hates fighting even more than most pve
Niclas Solo
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2013-12-28 16:13:37 UTC
Jon Joringer wrote:
Niclas Solo wrote:
Small and medium cap boosters, large also if you don't use navy 800.
Web and short point.

There's a difference of being able to fit one more navy 400 charge in the tech II medium cap booster as opposed to the meta 4. Quite handy if you are battling against neuts and so don't want to use 800s.


Of course, thats a huge different if you have room for one more. But if you use navy 400 in small or navy 800 in medium or standard 800 in large then there is no reason to use T2.

Also one medium meta 4 with one navy 800 give more cap/sec then a medium T2 with 3 navy 400.
Niclas Solo
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2013-12-28 16:22:07 UTC
Decaneos wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
T2 stasis webifier is worst than meta 4 (by means of fitting requirements)
T2 warp scrambler is worse (by means of fitting requirements)


this may be true, but the T2 version is cheaper thus if you have fitting space you would buy the t2 version for your pvp ship.


Don't forget that they use a lot less cap also, around 20-30%.
I think that alone is worth a few isk.
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#44 - 2013-12-31 05:21:28 UTC
Add to the list::
Capacitor Power Relay II

T2 version uses more than twice CPU for the same price and benefits.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
#45 - 2013-12-31 14:51:46 UTC
Add to the list those modules that you have left out due to price. Prices fluctuate all the time, the stats don't though (until an update of course).

Also add:

Capacitor Power Relay II
(meta4 has less fittings, less shield boost penalty and the same cap recharge bonus)

EM-Thermal-Kinetic-Explosive Plating II
(meta4 gives the same while costing less and requiring the skill at I)
Ace Echo
Dirty Vagrants
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#46 - 2014-01-02 02:44:34 UTC
It appears that the t2 ECCMs can take more heat than the meta-4 ones. That's a stat advantage. Not a big advantage but might at least be worth parenthetically mentioning.

If you can milk it, it's an udder.
Niclas Solo
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2014-01-03 17:10:04 UTC
Ace Echo wrote:
It appears that the t2 ECCMs can take more heat than the meta-4 ones. That's a stat advantage. Not a big advantage but might at least be worth parenthetically mentioning.


Are you sure about that? EFT say meta 4 last 5:40 for me and T2 4:10 T2 also use 33% more cap.
Decaneos
Casalt Corp
CAStabouts
#48 - 2014-01-03 17:31:05 UTC
Ace Echo wrote:
It appears that the t2 ECCMs can take more heat than the meta-4 ones. That's a stat advantage. Not a big advantage but might at least be worth parenthetically mentioning.


I'm sorry but i do not see this, the heat damage is the same
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2014-01-13 08:31:38 UTC
I wish that you could see fit to give the T2 MWDs a special place on your second post. To say their bonus is situational is ignoring that the tiny bit of a bonus they actually give is more or less eliminated by actually usiing the module. They cost 17% of your max capacitor instead of 19%, but they cost 10% more capacitor to activate. Their heat absorption appears to be identical from the attributes list. The only other difference is they cost more powergrid.

So you pay more powergrid for a module that only saves you capacitor when it's off, and may actually cost you more when it's on. That's not what I call situational. That's a case of it's only better when you might just not want to fit a MWD at all. And that's not to mention its price is on the high end of tech 2 modules.

And speaking of price, the market price of meta 4 modules fluctuates a lot. For one, the meta 4 versions of energy neutralizers are often more expensive than the tech 2, but not always because they aren't actually an uncommon drop. They're just popular.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2014-01-13 13:24:17 UTC
Not sure if it has been mentioned, but meta 4 mining laser upgrade is better than T2 as well as meta 4 ice harvester upgrades are better than t2.

This one is kinda an odd situation. Meta 4 remote armor repairers when everything is broken down it seems that meta 4 is superior to t2.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2014-01-14 04:22:38 UTC
Meta 4 mining laser and ice harvester upgrades are indeed superior to tech 2, but they are much more expensive.

Meta 4 armor repairers repair the same amount but slower and they cost more capacitor.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2014-01-14 04:36:09 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Meta 4 armor repairers repair the same amount but slower and they cost more capacitor.

They use the same amount of cap, and have lower fitting requirements, but have about a 10% slower cycle time.

And you know cost doesnt meant anything when it comes to meta 1-4 modules.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2014-01-14 04:38:15 UTC
No, they cost more cap per cycle. That means more cap used for the same amount of armor repaired. The meta 4 repairers are both slower and less efficient.

The price of meta 4 modules matters when they are upwards of 5 million ISK and the tech 2 is barely over 1 mil.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2014-01-14 04:56:40 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
No, they cost more cap per cycle. That means more cap used for the same amount of armor repaired. The meta 4 repairers are both slower and less efficient.


Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer
600MW
32CPU
Activation Cost 252 GJ
Optimal Range 8400m
Activation Time 5s
Armor HP Repaired 384

Large Remote Armor Repairer II
660MW
48CPU
Activation Cost 252 GJ
Optimal Range 8400m
Activation Time 4.5s
Armor HP Repaired 384

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2014-01-14 17:51:24 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer
Activation Cost 252 GJ

Large Remote Armor Repairer II
Activation Cost 252 GJ

That's interesting. You check only the large, and I check only the small and medium. I stopped there because I assumed the same trend would follow to the large. Anyway, the large tech 2 has the same activation cost at the large meta 4, but the medium and small meta 4s have a higher activation cost than the tech 2.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Dkeh Weis
Digital Innovations
#56 - 2014-01-21 17:40:39 UTC
T2 cargo scans should not be on this list.
Same fitting requirement, same activation cost, cycle time is 2 seconds slower.
When using them to scan ghost sites, the extra time is definitely worth the cost.

Eve will make you work a solid month all on your own for your first cookie. Then kick you in the nuts and take that cookie, and laugh at you for thinking you could have a cookie at all.
Decaneos
Casalt Corp
CAStabouts
#57 - 2014-01-22 14:26:24 UTC
Dkeh Weis wrote:
T2 cargo scans should not be on this list.
Same fitting requirement, same activation cost, cycle time is 2 seconds slower.
When using them to scan ghost sites, the extra time is definitely worth the cost.



Sorry but that is not what i see at all, the stats for the meta 4 and the T2 are the same except for the meta 4 requiring 1 less cpu. Perhaps you were looking at the cargo scanner I which indeed has a 5 sec cycle time, how ever the meta 4 has 3 seconds just like the T2.
Dkeh Weis
Digital Innovations
#58 - 2014-01-22 16:40:18 UTC
You are entirely right, and I derped out hard >_<

Eve will make you work a solid month all on your own for your first cookie. Then kick you in the nuts and take that cookie, and laugh at you for thinking you could have a cookie at all.
Dan Rae
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2014-02-09 15:50:08 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Please do not consider price for this list. Price is set entirely buy market supply/demand and is a variable. Despite the fact that T2 is manufactured by players and meta gear is loot only, there is little correlation between where the items come from and price.

For example, at the time of this post, T2 ECM is far more expensive than meta 4. It used to be the other way around.

I'm glad to see this post get stickied. The disparity between meta 4 and T2 gear is a big black eye on equipment balancing that really needs to be addressed.



Fully agree, T2 should be superior in stats and cost more, otherwise it would be "pointless" training skills to a high enough level to equip T2 modules throughout.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#60 - 2014-02-10 19:56:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Justin Cody
Ta'krite wrote:
Regardless of how situational the t2 mwds are they do not qualify for this list as they do have a stat advantage in one area.



It is a wash with the meta...yeha they have a smaller cap penalty but are more intensive to run resulting in basically being no better. Plus they are harder to fit. So they are by any analysis of the facts...worse.

T2 should offer a more significant advantage in cap penalty reduction, as deadspace c-types start at about -8% instead of t2's -19%. Change t2 to say... -15% or -13% and we're in range of a real improvement. And make its cap use per cycle the same as the meta. Leave fittings higher as a way to 'pay' for those advantages while giving a clear reason to spend cpu/grid in that manner.