Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Minm Ataris
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.02 10:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm working on a fit and would like some inspiration. Low sec / High sec war's in a small gang.
Go! |
Chessur
Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension
189
|
Posted - 2013.11.02 11:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/F7GrLsE.jpg
Get some Skirmis + Siege links, Standard Sooth Sayer + Quafe + HG snakes + 5% implants, and there you go. A mach is born. |
Minm Ataris
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.02 14:11:00 -
[3] - Quote
Thanks for that. Any more? |
Lunkwill Khashour
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
167
|
Posted - 2013.11.02 14:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Start with flying a Maelstrom with that fit. If you fly a Mach, you will! be primary and people will! try to kill you. You either need to be able to escape tackle or kill it off. In general, the Mach is not worth it if not fitting a bunch of faction stuff. |
Drake Doe
Flatulaction
296
|
Posted - 2013.11.03 15:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Wouldn't a tempest be a better starter ship for flying a mach? I know it's not in the best position as far as how good of a ship it is, but it's not a complete brick like the maelstrom. "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
Chessur
Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension
195
|
Posted - 2013.11.03 16:07:00 -
[6] - Quote
Do not use a malestrom to simulate the mach, it is nothing like it.
If you want to practice flying a mach, use a nado / pest. You can also think about buying a fleet pest, as a fleet pest does about 90% of what the mach does, with out the price tag, or the blob factor. |
Luis Alejandro Flores
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 07:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
In response to Chessur's comment about starting off in a TFI.
[Tempest Fleet Issue, Tempest Fleet Issue fit]
Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 800 Gist C-Type 100MN Microwarpdrive Large Shield Extender II Republic Fleet Warp Disruptor
800mm Repeating Artillery II, Hail L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Hail L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Hail L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Hail L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Hail L 800mm Repeating Artillery II, Hail L Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer
Large Core Defense Field Extender I Large Core Defense Field Extender I Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
I suck so I can't provide any advice on how to use this fit. I just know it works because an old 'friend' of mine likes this fit. Do stay away from FW space if you want to use this ship more than once. |
Danny John-Peter
Snuff Box
337
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 09:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Chessur wrote:http://i.imgur.com/F7GrLsE.jpg
Get some Skirmis + Siege links, Standard Sooth Sayer + Quafe + HG snakes + 5% implants, and there you go. A mach is born.
Extender Rigs /o\
That fit looks fairly standard, when I flew one I had a DCU instead of 3x Gyro but thats a choice thing, I presume the rigging is just an EFT derp but AFAIK it should be Anti-EM II/Anti-Therm II/Anti-Kin II.
XLASB looks good on paper but you really want sustained tank in a Mach because of the way its flown. |
Chessur
Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension
199
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 11:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
Danny John-Peter wrote:Chessur wrote:http://i.imgur.com/F7GrLsE.jpg
Get some Skirmis + Siege links, Standard Sooth Sayer + Quafe + HG snakes + 5% implants, and there you go. A mach is born. Extender Rigs /o\ That fit looks fairly standard, when I flew one I had a DCU instead of 3x Gyro but thats a choice thing, I presume the rigging is just an EFT derp but AFAIK it should be Anti-EM II/Anti-Therm II/Anti-Kin II. XLASB looks good on paper but you really want sustained tank in a Mach because of the way its flown.
No, the shield extender rigs are correct. Field extenders are the better choice for the mach, because I was assuming that you would be flying siege linked with a harmonizer. Because of that, you don't want the increased stacking penalty of: INvuln, resist rigs, harmonizer.
Mach with Extenders + Harmonizer:
870 DPS tanked, from unheated booster and invuln 97.7 K EHP
Mach with Resist rigs + Harmonizer:
1036 DPS tanked, form unheated booster and invuln 78.6 K EHP
So with out the extenders, you are trading about 20K ehp for 166 more DPS tank. I think that I would take the additional 20K EHP every time. Now if you were not flying with a harmonizer, then yah- resist rigs all the way. |
Viceorvirtue
The Hatchery Team Liquid
7
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 15:18:00 -
[10] - Quote
The reason it's better to use resist rigs over extenders on a mach is so that you can drop the invuln for a fed navy web. This is especially important in the current cruiser meta where the mach can be chased down more easily and needs to have a way to ensure it maintains control of the fight.
While the t2 em and therm rigs are obviously taken it is also possible to drop the t2 kinetic rig for a t2 acr. This lets you do interesting things like put an officer point or web on instead, although if that is too dauntingly expensive than a t2 metastasis rig should fit for improved tracking.
If you end up fighting things like t3 bcs, then you just stick the invuln and a dcu on instead of the third gyro and deal with the stacking penalties, because it's still better to optimize your rig choice for fitting the web because of the current meta. |
|
Chessur
Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension
199
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 16:20:00 -
[11] - Quote
Viceorvirtue wrote:The reason it's better to use resist rigs over extenders on a mach is so that you can drop the invuln for a fed navy web. This is especially important in the current cruiser meta where the mach can be chased down more easily and needs to have a way to ensure it maintains control of the fight.
While the t2 em and therm rigs are obviously taken it is also possible to drop the t2 kinetic rig for a t2 acr. This lets you do interesting things like put an officer point or web on instead, although if that is too dauntingly expensive than a t2 metastasis rig should fit for improved tracking.
If you end up fighting things like t3 bcs, then you just stick the invuln and a dcu on instead of the third gyro and deal with the stacking penalties, because it's still better to optimize your rig choice for fitting the web because of the current meta.
Should you be flying a mach with out support in the current meta anyway? I agree with your assessment 100%- but provided you have anti-support flying with you (and you should IMO) don't worry about the web. But for flying solo, web is a must. I think that bopoh was tooling around with a dual scram / longpoint AB armor mach some time ago- but this was befroe the HAC / Cruiser buff. He also did have some officer web Mach footage as well, wich was an interesting experiment.
Also I am not sure if the web is going to save you, vs a Vaga / cyna / T1 cruiser that also has links / snakes / zors / quafe running. Vaga goes scary fast- and even if you are webbing it, by the time it coasts down to webbed speed- you might be in linked scram range. One, unbonused heavy neut is not enough to stop a HAC anymore >.> |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
270
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 16:20:00 -
[12] - Quote
Chessur wrote:
No, the shield extender rigs are correct. Field extenders are the better choice for the mach, because I was assuming that you would be flying siege linked with a harmonizer. Because of that, you don't want the increased stacking penalty of: INvuln, resist rigs, harmonizer.
Mach with Extenders + Harmonizer:
870 DPS tanked, from unheated booster and invuln 97.7 K EHP
Mach with Resist rigs + Harmonizer:
1036 DPS tanked, form unheated booster and invuln 78.6 K EHP
So with out the extenders, you are trading about 20K ehp for 166 more DPS tank. I think that I would take the additional 20K EHP every time. Now if you were not flying with a harmonizer, then yah- resist rigs all the way.
ganglinks are never stacking penalized. The resist rigs are at 87% efficiency weather you have links or not. If you like extenders, then the only reason you would switch to resist rigs are if you want to hit a specific minimum threshold for DPS tanked before being concerned about EHP. |
Chessur
Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension
199
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 16:56:00 -
[13] - Quote
Batelle wrote:Chessur wrote:
No, the shield extender rigs are correct. Field extenders are the better choice for the mach, because I was assuming that you would be flying siege linked with a harmonizer. Because of that, you don't want the increased stacking penalty of: INvuln, resist rigs, harmonizer.
Mach with Extenders + Harmonizer:
870 DPS tanked, from unheated booster and invuln 97.7 K EHP
Mach with Resist rigs + Harmonizer:
1036 DPS tanked, form unheated booster and invuln 78.6 K EHP
So with out the extenders, you are trading about 20K ehp for 166 more DPS tank. I think that I would take the additional 20K EHP every time. Now if you were not flying with a harmonizer, then yah- resist rigs all the way.
ganglinks are never stacking penalized. The resist rigs are at 87% efficiency weather you have links or not. If you like extenders, then the only reason you would switch to resist rigs are if you want to hit a specific minimum threshold for DPS tanked before being concerned about EHP.
Yes, warfare links stack. You want more raw buffer if you are running links, however if you drop the Invuln- then running resitance rigs is a must. |
Danny John-Peter
Snuff Box
337
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 17:13:00 -
[14] - Quote
It Varies, I can see the CDFEs being beneficial in some circumstances but I would say that for the majority of fights the tank over time that Resists five would be better, but again I would say its preference.
As for the FN Web Armour Rep fit Machs have been effective before and allow for counter tackle, I think the difficulty is in the Meta even a Mach is *relatively* slow these days, especially if you aren't running with a full suite of links and high grade implants. |
Chessur
Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension
200
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 19:00:00 -
[15] - Quote
Danny John-Peter wrote:It Varies, I can see the CDFEs being beneficial in some circumstances but I would say that for the majority of fights the tank over time that Resists five would be better, but again I would say its preference.
As for the FN Web Armour Rep fit Machs have been effective before and allow for counter tackle, I think the difficulty is in the Meta even a Mach is *relatively* slow these days, especially if you aren't running with a full suite of links and high grade implants.
I get personal preferance, but having only an increased 160 DPS in your booster, when compared to 20K exra ehp.... To make up that difference, you would have to run that booster for a long, long time lol. At least that is the way I look at it :D |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
272
|
Posted - 2013.11.05 19:03:00 -
[16] - Quote
Chessur wrote:Batelle wrote: ganglinks are never stacking penalized. The resist rigs are at 87% efficiency weather you have links or not. If you like extenders, then the only reason you would switch to resist rigs are if you want to hit a specific minimum threshold for DPS tanked before being concerned about EHP.
Yes, warfare links stack. You want more raw buffer if you are running links, however if you drop the Invuln- then running resitance rigs is a must.
ah my bad, looks like you're right. Only source I could find besides EFT and a calculator was the eve university wiki. |
Danny John-Peter
Snuff Box
337
|
Posted - 2013.11.06 00:05:00 -
[17] - Quote
Chessur wrote:Danny John-Peter wrote:It Varies, I can see the CDFEs being beneficial in some circumstances but I would say that for the majority of fights the tank over time that Resists five would be better, but again I would say its preference.
As for the FN Web Armour Rep fit Machs have been effective before and allow for counter tackle, I think the difficulty is in the Meta even a Mach is *relatively* slow these days, especially if you aren't running with a full suite of links and high grade implants. I get personal preferance, but having only an increased 160 DPS in your booster, when compared to 20K exra ehp.... To make up that difference, you would have to run that booster for a long, long time lol. At least that is the way I look at it :D
Tbh, the last time I flew a Mach was pre link nerf, where I think the resist rigs made greater odds, these days it may not be the case. |
Viceorvirtue
The Hatchery Team Liquid
8
|
Posted - 2013.11.06 01:22:00 -
[18] - Quote
Even in a fleet situation I find it hard to come up with a reason not to have the web. Mach retains most of it's damage out to around 30k before you start seeing any noticable drop off. Faction neut to 29.5k means you generally have no reason to be within heated linked fed web range. The mach can usually be rather aggressive in most fights though because not many ships can apply significant pressure outside of 30km and the mach isn't exactly a frail ship. If you take too much damage you can retreat to 30k or so and just rep a bit while still applying most of your damage and getting a neut cycle or two off.
The impact of an additional web in a fleet is always going to be better than having an invuln with the exceptions of fighting t3bcs, ishtars, and possibly cerbs. Meanwhile with the web you are rewarded for being more agressive, even if you are just helping to peel for your other ships if they get in trouble or screen for softer ships such as oracles. Also you do see a noticable improvement in damage at heated fed web range that really cements the reasons for using a fed web over in invuln in nearly all cases in my eyes. Ofcourse if you know you'll be going into a fight where you can't be agressive or need the tank the invuln is the obvious choice. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |