Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Just wanted to add a comment about cap efficiency. I thought I'd check.

For fun I fitted up a dual-xlasb raven with cruise (a mythical solo gate-camp, shall we say?).

The cap efficiency works as follows:

dual XLSB:
shield points restored per cycle: 980
cap used: (1 400 booster): 400
efficiency: 2.45 shield points per unit of cap

Then I refitted the same raven with xlsb and cap booster. I also fitted a T2 Core Defense Capacitor Safeguard (because let's be generous, right?)
shield points restored per cycle: 690
cap used: 306GJ (perfect skills, T2 safeguard rig)
efficiency: 2.25

So the XL-ASB fit is actually more cap efficient than the XL-SB version. It's true that the ASB version has one fewer low slots free (it requires one co-processor) but then it has one more rig slot free (no capacitor safeguard necessary). This means it can fit a cargo expander rig to compensate, while the SB version can fit a cargohold expander module.

So the total number of cap stored in charges charges are a tiny bit different. working out the numbers, converting cap booster changes to EHP over the course of the fight and applying the same resistances means we can discount resistances in the maths.

The SB raven will hold 35 navy 800 boosters in the hold and 6 in the cap booster, allowing it to recover (35+6)*800*2.25 = 73960 points of shield

The ASB version will hold 66 navy 400 boosters in the cargo hold and another 18 in the two ASB units. for a total of (66 + 18)*800*2.45 = 82320 points of shield

Thus the XLASB version of the same ship, with the same damage output will last 11% LONGER than the equivalent T2 XLSB version.

Therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to consider fitting the SB version. Therefore, the x-large shield booster is obsolete. Even before considering the potential loss of cap in the SB-fitted ship due to cap warfare.

I rest my case.

T1, non-faction frigate? I call your bluff.

You can get 312 overheated dps from a neutron blaster incursus with 3 T2 mag stabs, 2 overclocks, meta 4 DC and 1 explosive rig or transverse bulkhead. No tank though, and you have to settle for an AB. No cpu for a MWD.

The problem is not the tournament. The problem is the efficiency of the ASB. See above.

The guy has a point. i think the issues is you can fit more than one. If they were limited and you had to do what armor does to dual rep which is fit a regular rep and an ancillary rep, then the ASB's would be more balanced.

Why can you fit multiple ASB's but not multiple AAR's? the armor reppers iven take cap and can be turned off under neuts. The AAR's Tank less damage, they dont reapir instantly, require capacitor to operate, and they cannot be fit on ships that are a class under their size (med for frigs, large for crusiers). for that, they repair a pathetically small amount after the nanite paste runs out.

There is a reason why ASBs have been limited to 1 per ship in alliance tournament.

It's a game of right tools for the right job.

Some situation will want a buffer tank some an ASB and still other normal shield boosters.

You can't balance everything for every situation and there would be no point in doing that.

It's like calling that a Rifter obsoletes the Probe in 1v1 combat...

Strange. My arty thrasher killed a triple MASB hawk without much issue.

This is because alpha counters most active tanks. How many of those meta0 t1 frigs fit arty? Course then again your are playing in a confined set of rules of meta0 items and t1 frigs. in reality, a t2 fit AF, or even a LML breacher or condor would take you out. Since you have no damps to counter them at range.

Which reminds me. Dual MASB breacher is strong in brawling range, but you get out of scram range and kite (or never get there in the first place.. And itll die just the same. Just because something tanks alot, doesnt mean it has no weakness.

The difference between MASB and AAR is fitting. MASBs take up more fitting than AARs. AARs use less than a t2 equivalent, not to mention they rep more and continue repping even without paste. Once ASBs run out of charges, you wait 45s on reload and have no tank (unless you have 2). If you get attacked by ships that arent t1 and fit with meta0 modules, on a non bonused hull, you will get a very different outcome.

Of course in the test that is prevalent they would come out on top. However, I would assume a dual repped incursus with boosters would have done the same. Also Dual ASB ships are not "Prevalent" in Faction warfare. You occasionally will run into ships that run this and if you aren't prepped it can be a headache - however these ships can be easily destroyed.

Most dual asb fits - especially on frigates lack any form of dual tackle, Ie: Range dictation - they cannot web, scram and ab - where as the other target can. Their fit if often tight meaning they have smaller guns - thus less range. They lack substantial buffer meaning they easily fall under concentrated DPS unless linked / implanted and they are susceptible to alpha strikes.

ASB's will run out of charges if pressured by enough DPS. More so if you can hold that target at an optimal where they cannot retaliate or if you TD / Neut the target into submission. Because although Neuts wont shut the temporary tank down - they will indeed turn the targets prop mod off, scram and guns.

Also ASB is essentially the equivalent of a Tech 2 Module - so you should have not been using it in the fight you were having. Those limitations hardly provide reasonable skill based limitations. Tech 2 = Barrage, Null, Scorch - these are things that make a substantial and massive difference in a given fight.

Yes I hear that a lot - "it's really a T2 module" and I have some sympathy with the position (except that it's cost is almost nothing).

Have a look at my further analysis of cap efficiency in ASBs. The fact that ASBs give the same increase in shield for a half-sized cap booster means that they are more efficient than standard shield boosters. And in reality the fitting requirements for dual ASB are no more than those for fitting SB plus cap booster, which is the normal equivalent.

For this reason you would always without exception prefer dual T1 ASB over T2 SB + CAP booster.

unless you expect neuts and require cap to run your tackle and guns.

When was the last time you fought a triple xlasb (minmatar missile command ship)? It's really not that simple. I've seen these things tank multiple battleships worth of damage pretty much indefinitely.

Fastest way to fix asb problems? Reduce cargo capacity as a penalty. By like 30% per module. Also they dontt actuslly function correctly. I remember from design notes that an xlasb loaded with 400s still required 400cap per cycle from the ship to work meaning you either sported 800s and ran capless or you ran 400s and still risked veing capped out.

So in that respect I think asbs were broken on delivery for that reason alone. They have options for what size booster you load them with because they were designed around it mattering.

If not a cargo bay reduction then at least patch them to require the largest booster ammo they can fit ie xlasb take 800s only. Lasb take 400 and masb take 200. Should have been done a long time ago.