These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CPU reduction changes on capital shield modules
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#1 - 2012-01-18 18:49:10 UTC
Capital Shield Transporter I goes from 175 cpu to 140 to make it easier for shield capital to fit the tools they require.
This change is epic, however I still can't squeeze a decent Triage Nidhoggur together using a shield tank...

Here is the fit to save as much CPU but not fitting a co-processor

1 x Meta 4 Damage Control (13 cpu less than T2)
5 x Meta 4 Power Diagnostic System (15 cpu less than T2)

1 x Meta 2 Capital Shield Booster (30 cpu less than T2)
1 x T2 Shield Boost Amplifier (Triage carrier need tank)
2 x T2 Invulnerability Field (Faction is costly for a Triage Carrier)
1 x Dread Guristas Photon Scattering Field (14 cpu less than T2)

1 x T1 Triage Mod (10 cpu less than T2)
2 x Capital Shield Transporter
2 x Empty Hi-slots

CPU = 872 of 875
Remaining CPU = 3

Do we really still have to cut THIS much down on the modules and have 2 empty hi-slots to fit a shield tank while carrying 2 capital shield transporters? Those 3 meta 2 capital shield modules cost about the same as the carrier...

Plz give the Nidhoggur 80 extra base cpu or boost them on cpu in another way.

Pinky
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#2 - 2012-01-20 12:13:21 UTC
Yup Chimera now doesn't have any trouble fitting the modules it needs to perform as a shield carrier. I can't see why the Nidhoggur shouldn't have a little buff to make it a worthwhile shield carrier with enough cpu to fit it's role...

On the other hand it looks like the Nidhoggur could do with 40k less base powergrid in return... You can make fits that use everything but rarely have any reason to?
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#3 - 2012-01-20 12:33:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Dant
Switch your PDS to meta 4 CPR, use a meta 4 SBA, and you can fit it without meta cap mods. But it's tight. The capital shield booster could use the same treatment the transporter got.

Also, while you may think the shield nid has too much PG and could lose some, some will argue the armor nid has too much CPU and could lose some.

EDIT: Also, once the new deadspace invulns start showing up on the market, faction ones are likely to come down in price a lot.

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#4 - 2012-01-20 12:41:46 UTC
With the low resistance on the Nidhoggur (no bonus, fewer medslots) your tank will suffer too much from those suggestions.
And the Armor Nidhoggur while it doesn't have many cpu issues doesn't really have too much.

Nidhoggur already suffers from being a worse shield carrier than a Chimera and a worse armor carrier than an Archon. Your betterwisser advise doesn't help at all and suggests you are trolling my feedback from other circumstances than genuine interest...

Yes, the faction invuls might become cheaper - But you don't see the other carriers having to be even remotely as close to nidpick their modules to get a working fit?

Pinky
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#5 - 2012-01-20 12:54:22 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
With the low resistance on the Nidhoggur (no bonus, fewer medslots) your tank will suffer too much from those suggestions.

Your fit with PDS doesn't have the cap to even run your local tank on jump in. The CPR fit may have lower peak tank, but much better sustained. Unless my pyfa is acting up, the tank is not that far off an archon's (10k vs 12k, before links/boosters/heat).

Quote:
And the Armor Nidhoggur while it doesn't have many cpu issues doesn't really have too much.

Most nids are flown with armor fits.

Quote:
Nidhoggur already suffers from being a worse shield carrier than a Chimera and a worse armor carrier than an Archon. Your betterwisser advise doesn't help at all and suggests you are trolling my feedback from other circumstances than genuine interest...

I didn't agree 100% with you, so I'm trolling? Roll

You completely ignored my suggested solution, decreasing the CPU need of the capital shield booster. The same way the CPU for the transporter was set to the same as the inmediately lower size, you could set the booster to use only 200 CPU (same as T1 X-large).

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#6 - 2012-01-20 13:16:40 UTC
I would be happy with a reduction on cpu usage for the shield booster - or introduction of more meta shield boosters to push down prices and up the availability of named modules... I missed that suggestion, sorry

But thing is the Nidhoggur is limping far behind the chimera for cpu while requiring nearly the same modules to make a working shield fit and no doubt CCP wanted the Nidhoggur capable of both shield and armor or they are just plain evil making a sweet looking ship with twisted limitations compared to other carriers.

It's okay to disagree - but a problem with CPR on the Nidhoggur is not only the reduced tank, but also the fact it doesn't benefit from the extra shield from the power diagnostics giving it far less EHP than other carriers.
Also the Nidhoggur is most likely designed to receive som energy ♥ and hence only need to be able to run local tank or 2 transfers for 5-6 minutes in triage mode without dieing...

Pinky
Demon Azrakel
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2012-01-20 21:46:23 UTC
I am still a fan of the Nid requiring fitting a remote rep fit of one variety, and a self rep fit of the other. In fact, if you were to do this, the CPU change would have been unnecessary for the Nid. The chimera still desperately needed it.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#8 - 2012-01-21 15:37:49 UTC
Thats what people are forced to right now - unfortunately making an already very fragile carrier even more fragile...