Why is the Repair Systems skill a two-edged sword?

[Murasame_Masamune]

@Malak_Starfire

@Murasame_Masamune

Turning off the module would just lead to quick HP depletion as you would not be able to regain those extra lost HPs while the rep was off seeing as incoming DPS is slightly greater than reps.

In this scenario, you would not have enough repping power with Repair systems I, and Repair systems V would give you the OPTION of more reps. If Repair systems I had enough repping power, then your presumption of incoming DPS being slightly greater than reps is false.

Level 1: Less reps per/s but for longer time. Infinitely in a surplus situation.
Level 5: More rep/s, but for less time. Not infinite.

A small armor repairer at level 5 is not some over the top drastic improvement over Level 1. With an enduring module the difference is only 3.7 HP/s. Something like 6 HP/s damage over the level 1 skill is not going to be negated by the level 5 skill. At both levels incoming DPS is greater. The problem lies in the capacitor. If keeping the rep running at level 1 is slow enough cap drain to last to a point where you can remove enough DPS to recover, it can outperform level 5. If the capacitor is emptied due to 59s less cap time, the extra HP/s of Level 5 doesn’t matter as you have zero reps once it fails. You’re not going to be able to recover those lost HPs. When you turn it off you’ll loss HPs faster for the missed cycle and you will not be able to recover them under a HP/s deficit. The idea that it’s humanly possible to pulse the module as to precisely match the level 1 GJ/s is ludicrous. Any such attempt will lead to sub level 1 performance.

It’s a marathon, not a sprint.

If you think it’s okay that in some niche situation level 1 would work out better, that’s cool. I personally happen to think this should never be the case in a skill you have to invest into and if you disagree or simply don’t care that’s your prerogative. But to say that it’s impossible for a level 1 to ever be a better option than level 5 is another story.

[Cypherous]

@Murasame_Masamune

Again, you completely ignore the scenario presented and the actual points being made, instead arguing against your own imagined strawman narrative.

No, i’m not ignoring it, i’m pointing out that its actually a non-issue

If your rep at level 1 is able to keep up with the damage then a rep at level 5 can afford to skip a cycle as its repping faster, and if your plan is to be cap stable then thats a fitting issue and you need to improve all your skills or change the fit

Again, you’re literally the first person in 2 decades to think this is a problem

@Murasame_Masamune

Level 1: Less reps per/s but for longer time. Infinitely in a surplus situation.
Level 5: More rep/s, but for less time. Not infinite.

So, you turn the rep off for a cycle, like a normal player

[Mephiztopheleze]

We’ve asked, repeatedly for the ship fit and the mission/anom he’s referring to, he just attacks you and makes ridiculous accusations of logical fallacies.

Stop feeding the troll.

[Aiko_Danuja]

Wait until he discovers thermodynamics…

[Phaade]

@Murasame_Masamune

@Cypherous

much like me stating the fact that your argument is infact flawed for the numerous reasons pointed out in this thread

You are not addressing my point. There is no argument, per se, simply me pointing out that a skill causing a module to use more GJ/s is a drawback. You have only ever framed the conversation within the context of your own “fitting issue” strawman. This is what everyone does because they understand my point is correct, but their egos cannot let them admit it. Take a look below at your fellow compatriots.

@Phaade

The only time it is not preferable is when your piloting skill is so bad that you can’t click off a module

See how he completely ignores the scenario given, in which you would be operating at a HP/s deficit?

@Murasame_Masamune

This idea that you can just stop repping is predicated on taking little damage. If that were the case of course it wouldn’t matter. If you only need 1 rep ever 1 minute to counter incoming DPS of course it wouldn’t matter. Why would you even use that as an example? You’re effective making a strawman scenario. What happens when you cannot stop the reps because the damage is sizable, just over your HP/s recovery [even when overheated], and never lets up?

Turning off the module would just lead to quick HP depletion as you would not be able to regain those extra lost HPs while the rep was off seeing as incoming DPS is slightly greater than reps. Phaade understands this, but has to be disingenuous and pretend he can’t read. Or he has no clue what’s even being discussed, yet still feels the need to add his two cents even though he’s completely ignorant in regard to the subject.

Here is another.

@Syzygium

Don’t forget to mention that he in addtion to your statement, has to actively ignore any and all fitting progress that comes with addtional skills by unlocking more advanced modules or better fitting combinations.

Note that he ignores the point that a module requiring more GJ/s is a drawback. No matter what fits I use, what ship I’m flying or what skills I train, the fact that a higher skill level in Repair System will lead to an increase in GJ/s (i.e. the drawback) will still exist. Just like the sig radius drawbacks of medium shield extenders still exist even if you fly armor or don’t use a shield extender at all. This has nothing to do with my fits, but the fact that the skill has a drawback and there being situations where a lower level of a skill works out better than a higher level. My point is that this should never even be possible, no matter what fit you have. Unless your counter point is that a lower skill level should be better in niche circumstances, you’re arguing against your own strawman. Let’s continue.

@Syzygium

Because he could easily switch to a better fit by skilling Repair Systems higher, one that combines a better tank with an even better cap situation in which he also would never need to turn off the repper, would tank even more incoming DPS and would be a lot safer against enemy energy neutralizers. Which basically reduces any arguments in his favor to exactly zero.

We’ve been over this enough that Syz knows better.

@Murasame_Masamune

It seems you fail to understand the point of what I’m saying. The skill is a double-edged sword. It’s that simple. It’s not about any inability for me to fit a functional ship. I’m simply pointing out that we have a skill that has drawbacks as you raise the skill level. Even if I am cap stable that’s still a thing. The ship I’m using now is cap stable by the way.

Do you see, Cypherous? The IGNORance? See how you guys ignore what I say and argue from some ridiculous position you yourselves concocted? See how he’s pretending as if I’ve been asking for fitting advice and rejecting said advice? I’m literally flying with a T2 repairer right now, which requires level 3 at the minimum.

What’s funny is, even in his strawman rebuttal, the acknowledgement that he’d need to change modules to counter the increase in GJ/s is proving my point. He would be countering the drawback of a higher skill level. Because at the time I completed the mission with level 1 repair systems. And was only able to last long enough to complete it because I was level 1. If higher level was always better then there would be no reason to change any modules. He should be saying that simply upping the skill level and changing nothing else should be better in the scenario given, but he doesn’t. Therefore he is acknowledging that given the original fit, level 5 would be a negative compared to level 1. And this goes completely over his head. r/whooooooooooooooooosh

Dude, you need to spend your time elsewhere; you don’t have enough intellectual capacity to maintain this atrociously inept argument while accomplishing anything meaningful in your own life.

In all sincerity you have got to stop, for your own health. At this point these are the ramblings of a complete lunatic

[Mephiztopheleze]

@Aiko_Danuja

Wait until he discovers thermodynamics…

smile, nod, slowly back away…

[Murasame_Masamune]

@Aiko_Danuja

Wait until he discovers thermodynamics…

That’s trained to level 3. Although I’m not sure how overheating helps if the subject revolves around longevity in a fight.

@Murasame_Masamune

Again, you can simply not care about the downside, think the upside makes it an overall net gain [in most cases I agree] and/or think it’s just not anything worth changing. But that does not change the objective fact that using 6 GJ/s is preferrable than using 8 GJ/s; that 2mins of capacitor is less than 8mins of capacitor. Even with the upside of getting more armor HP restored the lack of capacitor is still an inherent negative, even if you’re still cap stable at level 5. In a similar vein to the HP/s of an Armor Repairer I being inferior to an Armor Repairer II, even if the AR1 is more than enough tank for what you’re facing (no practical difference in that moment) that doesn’t negate the inherent underlining difference. That difference doesn’t cease to exist because you found a “workaround” in fighting weaker foes, or using nanites, OVERHEATING or upping resistances. I don’t know how else to explain this.

@Murasame_Masamune

The idea that 3.7 more HP/s at lvl 5 (costing more than double the GJ/s) is going to make this huge difference is absurd and reeks of your total lack of experience. Because the next time I got that same mission, even when OVERHEATING I’d still was having health chip away. Just slower. When overloading at lvl 1 the HP/s increase is 4.09 and the GJ/s used is LESS than at lvl 5 on paper. So even at lvl 5, which would be LESS reps and more GJ/s used compared to overheating, it is not feasible.

Please try to catch up, dear.

@Mephiztopheleze

We’ve asked, repeatedly for the ship fit and the mission/anom he’s referring to

Let’s make a deal. When you can demonstrate you can actually comprehend the point being made I’ll share the fit with you. The fit ultimately does not matter. It’s completely irrelevant. If I tell you the fit with your current strawman mindset you’re just going to ignore the point and start talking about fitting options again.

@Phaade

Dude, you need to spend your time elsewhere; you don’t have enough intellectual capacity to maintain this atrociously inept argument while accomplishing anything meaningful in your own life.

What time would that be? I literally visit this forum once a day. My “argument” is so inept that you are completely inept at formulating any kind of cogent counter point. At least it’s clears you know when you’re beat. Still hilarious that you put on airs while running away tail betwixt your legs incapable fo refuting me. Cry more.

@Phaade

In all sincerity you have got to stop, for your own health. At this point these are the ramblings of a complete lunatic

And yet, here you are in the loony bin. I guess you’ve earned two L’s. One for being the loser and the other for being a loon according to your own thought process. But, please, go on begging me to stop handing you your arses. You’re in my thread. Don’t like it? Leave.

Oh, right. Your fragile ego can’t walk away. A complete glutton for punishment.

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

@Murasame_Masamune

But that does not change the objective fact that using 6 GJ/s is preferrable than using 8 GJ/s…

A preference is a statement of opinion - not fact.
Very different things.

–Helpful Gadget

[Murasame_Masamune]

@Gadget_Helmsdottir

A preference is a statement of opinion - not fact.
Very different things.

–Helpful Gadget

Using less power is objectively better than using more. Fact.

–Helpful Murasame

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

“Better” the the comparative form of “good”, which is a statement of opinion - not fact.

–Schoolmarm Gadget

[Murasame_Masamune]

“Better” is synonymous with “superior”. Relevant definitions include:

: more advantageous or effective

: improved in accuracy or performance

Again, the use of less GJ/s is better than the use of more. Objectively so. As I’m sure you are fully aware. Not an opinionated take.

–Intellectually Honest Murasame

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

Again, Better is a statement of opinion - not fact.

100 miles per gallon for a car is more efficient than 2 miles per gallon.
That’s measurable - and “efficient” has a specific definition, so this would be a factual statement.

However, while it’s most likely BETTER for the driver, it’s most likely NOT BETTER for the gas seller.
One’s view of the specific measurement being better or worse for their purposes is opinion of the observer.

–Buy GadgetCorp Gas

[Murasame_Masamune]

It depends on what you’re addressing as being better. It can be a statement of opinion depending on how it’s used. Unfortunately for your argument, we’re not talking about gas mileage nor its effects on buyers vs. sellers.

“Objectively better” is NOT a statement of opinion. The adverb “objective” is an important element you leave out. That less GJ/s used is objectively better than more GJ/s used in EVE Online is empirical fact. Flawed semantical arguments will not save you.

–Empirically Factual Murasame

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

Modifiers do not change an opinion into a fact.
It’s that simple.

“More efficient” would have been a more appropriate word choice and measurable - and therefore capable of being a factual statement.

Better is still a matter of opinion, because I WANT you to have a less efficient system. You’ll need to buy another when you get it exploded… This is ‘objectively better’ for everyone involved.

–Buy GadgetCorp Armor Repairers

[Murasame_Masamune]

@Gadget_Helmsdottir

Modifiers do not change an opinion into a fact.
It’s that simple.

No, they don’t. Especially when you intentionally misuse words. But an opinion is an opinion, and a fact is a fact. And the fact that less GJ/s being used, in and of itself, is objectively better (or “more efficient” as you’d say) than using more GJ/s was never an opinion. It is empirically factual. Your empty assertion that a fact is an opinion does not change that fact into an opinion. It’s that simple.

The very notion that “better” inherently denotes an opinion is a false premise right out of the gate. Let’s look at the definition of “better” again, since you missed it the first time, and consider the context.

Better (1) : more advantageous or effective

Better (2) : improved in accuracy or performance

Neither of these definitions denote an inherent personal bias (i.e. opinion). Especially in regard to capacitor usage in EVE Online. Let’s throw in a new one.

Obectively : in an objective rather than subjective or biased way : with a basis in observable facts rather than feelings or opinions

Something being “objectively better”, means it is factually observable to be more effective or perform better.

If you disagree, I will need you to explain how requiring less GJ/s is not objectively better than requiring more. Explain how that statement is an opinion. Give an example in the context of the actual subject matter as opposed to random unrelated topics, which is simply intellectually dishonest on your part.

@Gadget_Helmsdottir

Better is still a matter of opinion, because I WANT you to have a less efficient system. You’ll need to buy another when you get it exploded… This is ‘objectively better’ for everyone involved.

Better is a matter of opinion only when used to state an opinion. It’s not some universal truth. I can actually explain how a person having their ships explode a lot is not objectively better for them. In fact, you can do that yourself. You already have in your own head. That’s the whole point of you misusing the phrase in hopes of making some point. However, what you continue to avoid is providing an example of requiring less GJ/s, in and of itself, being inferior to requiring more – in EVE Online.

It would be like me taking the sentence, “Peter Dinklage is objectively taller than a Slinky”, and using that statement to claim another statement, “The Burj Khalifa is objectively taller than the Washington Monument” is a matter of situational subjectivity. The intentional misuse of the word “objectively” in the first statement does not negate the factualness of the second.

–Truthteller Murasame

[PixyWarrior_Ellecon]

How is this thread still going?

*also side note.
Love the statement made by Wesfahrn
“A battleship should be able to tank at least 3 destroyers fitted for maximum dps but it cant even tank 1.”
By far the smoothest smoothbrain take ive seen in a looong time.

Thanks for the entertainment

[Gadget_Helmsdottir]

@Murasame_Masamune

No, they don’t.

Incorrect.

–Gadget doesn’t have time for the rest of your screed today - we can play tomorrow

[Mephiztopheleze]

@Murasame_Masamune

And the fact that less GJ/s being used, in and of itself, is objectively better (or “more efficient” as you’d say) than using more GJ/s was never an opinion

This is absolutely a matter of opinion.
In my opinion, repairing more ehp/ second is better than repairing less.

• buy meph’corp a-type reppers

[Jonah_Gravenstein]

JonahXpress Reps; buy direct from the Sansha sweatshops.

[Vizkomaru_Togashi]

Apparently I’m dumb, I trained rep systems to V in less than my first 3 weeks.

I’m sorry, what are we complaining here? Rep systems taking too much cap?

Might as well complain about having to manually activate guns too.