EVE Search - PvE Carrier (Chimera for Anomalies)

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Missions & Complexes

PvE Carrier (Chimera for Anomalies)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.21 08:33:00 - [1] So. Dominion introduced the ability to upgrades ones system and provide steady stream of high end anomalies. And here I am thinking how reasonable would be using carrier to grind those. Ofc one could use marauder or faction battleship for those also, but the price is same, it has far bigger buffer (if something goes wrong) and it is covered considerably better by insurance than marauders or faction battleships. I am thinking Chimera with something like: H: 4x Drone Control I 1x Cap Shield transfer I M: 1x Cap Shield Booster, 1x Boost amp, 3x Invul II, 1x Sensor Booster, 1x Drone Nav computer L: 3x Beta capacitor Relay I 1x Damage Control II R: 3x CCC I Anyone already tried that (I imagine several must have) ? How do fighters do against NPC's ? Granted one could use sentries, but carrier does not seem that sensible for that as even when fielding 14 of them it's not looking that good compared to for example Dominix. Sort of reasonable ofc with max skills, but I do not have max skills for sentries. Could switch out the boost amp for drone tracking mod, as it has enough tank and then some more - does it help considerably the fighters ? I must admit I'm a bit newbish as far as proper use of drones goes as so far I have managed to get everything done with missiles or lasers only more or less regularly the light drones or logistic ones.
Qui Shon	Posted - 2009.12.21 08:59:00 - [2] Edited by: Qui Shon on 21/12/2009 09:03:21 Solo Carrier? Forget it. C6 and most likely C5 sites will chew up your drones in no time at all. 1. You need to get rid of the frigs before even trying to use fighters/sentries/heavies against larger sleepers. Lights or Mediums, I haven't given it a go, but if you feed them 100 drones maybe you can get the frigs killed. Unless it's a RR heavy cruiser wave, then you might not be able to kill the frigs at all. 2. Unless you get rid of all cruisers (except trigger of course, if it's a cruiser), before deploying fighters, you will most likely lose a few fighters. 3. For C6 anoms, you want around 4500-6000dps tank on a carrier for the initial wave, because of the Cap induced extra BS spawn. After that spawn is gone, 2500-3000dps tank is plenty, as long as you mind your triggers. Now, if you team up your carrier with a few support ships, then it works just fine, as you can deal with the frigs, and your drones will receive less aggro from bigger ships. Mind, I haven't done a C5 since May, just C6 sites since then, so I could be exaggerating the difficulties for C5's somewhat.
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.21 09:18:00 - [3] I am thinking more of the regular 0.0 anomalies. For example those top ones that L5 military upgrades grant you. They are behaving a lot nicer against drones than sleepers (and even better, they have bounties). The carrier would not be quite solo in there anyway so getting rid of frigs should not be the problem nor main concern of a carrier pilot. I am mainly interested in opinions or experience how effective is carrier compared to using the battleship instead for 0.0 anomalies. The fighters do not consume ammo, but relpacing them if some get lost can be a bit hassle in 0.0. And in that setup up there have I missed something relevant. I am in the area where lasers are reasonable so let's say compared against Armageddon, Apoc or Abbadon, or the usual PvE ship - the raven.
Shatner19	Posted - 2009.12.21 09:22:00 - [4] Originally by: Qui Shon Edited by: Qui Shon on 21/12/2009 09:03:21 Solo Carrier? Forget it. C6 and most likely C5 sites will chew up your drones in no time at all. 1. You need to get rid of the frigs before even trying to use fighters/sentries/heavies against larger sleepers. Lights or Mediums, I haven't given it a go, but if you feed them 100 drones maybe you can get the frigs killed. Unless it's a RR heavy cruiser wave, then you might not be able to kill the frigs at all. 2. Unless you get rid of all cruisers (except trigger of course, if it's a cruiser), before deploying fighters, you will most likely lose a few fighters. 3. For C6 anoms, you want around 4500-6000dps tank on a carrier for the initial wave, because of the Cap induced extra BS spawn. After that spawn is gone, 2500-3000dps tank is plenty, as long as you mind your triggers. Now, if you team up your carrier with a few support ships, then it works just fine, as you can deal with the frigs, and your drones will receive less aggro from bigger ships. Mind, I haven't done a C5 since May, just C6 sites since then, so I could be exaggerating the difficulties for C5's somewhat. i think he meant the "farmed" complexes in regular space. a carrier might do,as long as there is no gate, but i think its overkill. most of the "new-ish" complexes ive ran are filled with more sub-bs ships at an almost 10:1 ratio. i do just fine in a domi.
Qui Shon	Posted - 2009.12.21 09:23:00 - [5] Ah, apologies then. I guess I'm so used to w-space now I forgot there are k-space anoms too
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.21 09:38:00 - [6] Originally by: Shatner19 i think he meant the "farmed" complexes in regular space. a carrier might do,as long as there is no gate, but i think its overkill. most of the "new-ish" complexes ive ran are filled with more sub-bs ships at an almost 10:1 ratio. i do just fine in a domi. The top ones that spawn from L5 military upgrades have reasonable populations of battleship class rats. There is usually several waves for alltogehter to something similar to Pirate Invasion (Sansha) L4 mission and no gates. It is not deadspace either, as MWD's work in there. Ofcource there is cruisers and frigs also in the mix but there is usually HAC's or BC's also in the squads we use for farming so they should not be the main concern of carrier pilot. And there is no question that pilot with reasonable battleship skills can do them as easily as one can burn thru L4 missions. Most of the time the carrier would not be solo but has few battleships and hac's also present on the field. The carrier just seems quite reasonable platform to do damage on paper, that it can also tank 4x more than one needs for those anomalies is just a bonus. Would prefer however not to make the tank too thin as my corpmates would laugh at my lolfit far too long if I would manage to lose it to 3 HAC's that happened to stumble upon me. On paper one can get up to 1400 dps from carrier fit posted above. In reality Nightmare would be faster, but I don't want to bring Nightmare out there. It dies far too easily in PvP situations.
Pol Artreides Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.12.21 10:09:00 - [7] I think its better to use 2 titans and 5 motherships for that one... Lol comeone dude, for simple anomaly its enough of medium tanked Drake.. "An eye for an eye makes everyone blind..."
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.21 10:12:00 - [8] Originally by: Pol Artreides I think its better to use 2 titans and 5 motherships for that one... Lol comeone dude, for simple anomaly its enough of medium tanked Drake.. Hehe. Well 'enough' is not the question tho. The question is is it better ? Seeing as I will have the carrier out there anyway (for logisticks reasons) is it better platform to be used in anomalies than any of the T1 battleships with T2 fit ?
Pol Artreides Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.12.21 10:27:00 - [9] Well, the time ull gather the loot, move the carrier inside the anomaly, will be x10 more , than if ull use Tengu with clever setup and trash fit that will cost as much as carrier. If ure looking for the effective setup, then its definitely a t3 choise, with like 800 dps and 100k tank with MVD. "An eye for an eye makes everyone blind..."
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.21 10:42:00 - [10] Originally by: Pol Artreides Well, the time ull gather the loot, move the carrier inside the anomaly, will be x10 more , than if ull use Tengu with clever setup and trash fit that will cost as much as carrier. If ure looking for the effective setup, then its definitely a t3 choise, with like 800 dps and 100k tank with MVD. To be honest, when we start talking about subcapitals with that pricetag I would bring the Golem or Paladin instead of Tengu as they are more effective for that. So T3 cruiser is definately not 'definately' the most effective platform. Note however that none of those is covered by insurance to the same degree as carrier is. As there is no acceleration gates then the time to move it inside anomaly is 30 seconds it takes to accelerate + time in warp. I do not plan to loot in combat ship. There is often dedicated salvager around in ship fitted for that extra that is a lot more effective with that than trying to do a bit of everything. Should I want to loot while shooting then marauder would be again more effective for that.

Pol Artreides Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.12.21 11:24:00 - [11] Well i disagree on this one (but its about the opinions) Marauders will still have the problems with frigate class ships, they slower than tengu, although its better for salvaging thats right. "An eye for an eye makes everyone blind..."
Rashmika Clavain Gallente Shadows Of The Federation	Posted - 2009.12.21 11:26:00 - [12] The Tengu has a significantly lower sig radius too compared to a battleship. That's a major factor in terms of tanking. Removed. Please keep your EVE signature related to your EVE persona and not that of a real life politician. Navigator
Pol Artreides Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.12.21 12:07:00 - [13] Especially in AB setup u can still get like 750 m/s (non overheat) with tiny signature "An eye for an eye makes everyone blind..."
Dan Grobag Caldari French Empire Squad Yggdrasill.	Posted - 2009.12.21 13:53:00 - [14] A carrier might be a good option for the larger anomalies, it can field 1000 dps, is not necessarily that expensive if fit properly and is way more hardened than any other smaller ship. For the small anomalies you may lose time with such a bulky ship I think. Also delegating your fighters will always be welcome.
Pol Artreides Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.12.21 14:03:00 - [15] Edited by: Pol Artreides on 21/12/2009 14:03:18 Well there are ships than could be hardener than carrier :D http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v139/muaddib/KillMyTengu.png "An eye for an eye makes everyone blind..."
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.21 16:30:00 - [16] Originally by: Pol Artreides Edited by: Pol Artreides on 21/12/2009 14:03:18 Well there are ships than could be hardener than carrier :D http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v139/muaddib/KillMyTengu.png Hehe. I'm afraid that this is not 'hardened like a carrier' nor harder than a carrier. You can do approx 3000 dps sustainable tank on Chimera even with just vanilla T2 fit and T1 rigs. You could afford 2 to 3 of those chimeras for the price of one of those Estamel invuls. In reality tho some ~2000 dps sustainable tank is more than enough that you are left with if you drop shield boost amps and fit drone nav computer and omnidirectional tracking link in your midslots on the carrier.
evs Genco Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.12.21 21:45:00 - [17] set it up in a pvp fit, it will still tank any anomaly
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.21 22:59:00 - [18] Originally by: evs set it up in a pvp fit, it will still tank any anomaly But it will not be effective. I ran few hours today in it in PvE fit. Nothing really to write home about. One drone nav computer, one omnidirectional tracking link and it still takes the fighters forever to travel to the target. Was not solo so did not have to worry about smaller stuff, the battleships and cruisers drop slower than with Golem or Nightmare, that both can one volley anything under BS size and take out BS (without drone travel time) in 3-5 volleys usually. With sensor booster the lock speed is approx same as in battleship. The tank tho - it has all it needs and then some extra. Also Cap shield transfer is nice to keep your smaller support alive so that they dont need to warp out even if they draw more agro than they should. Or the salvage boat if it manages to catch up your gang while you have not finished the anomaly. Definately more effective than Drake ofc. At least in the top anomalies - Havens and Sanctums I think they are. In smaller ones it would be rather ineffective platform, as pointed out before. As rough impression I would say it's approx as effective as well flown cruise CNR with mostly T2 fit and let's say 3% hardwires as far as killing speed goes. Just does not use ammo and has 4x the tank. So it's reasonable platform to use out there but not really better than properly fit PvE battleship in the hands of competent high SP pilot.
evs Genco Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.12.22 06:28:00 - [19] use sentries :P and a pvp fit is just as effective as a pve fit, unless youre stupid enough to use dcus :P
Cheer Up	Posted - 2009.12.22 11:08:00 - [20] One of our guys is raping all the anos in one of our M5 systems with his Nyx. Those Fighter waves clear the ano in no time. Tank is uber stable. Another guy of us did in fact do 0.0 plexes in his chimera. Until someone probed him down and a ****gank warped in seconds later. So be careful.

Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.22 11:26:00 - [21] Originally by: evs use sentries :P and a pvp fit is just as effective as a pve fit, unless youre stupid enough to use dcus :P I am stupid enough to use DCU's. 4 of them even. It's not like the damn frigs come close enough to be smartbombed or that neuting the NPC's would be particularly effective way to kill them. But feel free enlighten me what would make me to kill the NPC's faster that I can fit in my high slots. Now - sentries are ofc option, but even with 4x DCU's the carrier with sentries is comparable in damage output to better T2 fit T1 battleships. Abbadon for example. Unless you start fitting the sentry drone rigs in your carrier and that is not really sensible in my opinion. And in Abbadon you can switch to faction ammo for 15% of extra punch. Then again it might be that as I am somewhat newbish in using carrier for anomalies my tackiks used is not the optimal one as of yet. I am starting to get ideas tho. For example dragging one of my L4 grinding chars out there and teaming him up with said carrier might be good idea. Teaming up with carrier would allow the guy get away with something like just 2 hardeners for tank. Hell, it can even keep armor tankers unhardened shields at 100% in Sanctum class anomalies.
evs Genco Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.12.22 21:58:00 - [22] i never said the carrier was better than a good bs, just if you are using one to waste time, use it in a pvp fit, it will do a sanctum or haven about as fast, maybe a little slower than a normal battleship but if your goal is minimum amount of time, use a battleship/marauder
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.23 07:09:00 - [23] Originally by: evs i never said the carrier was better than a good bs, just if you are using one to waste time, use it in a pvp fit, it will do a sanctum or haven about as fast, maybe a little slower than a normal battleship but if your goal is minimum amount of time, use a battleship/marauder Oh. Sorry. I misunderstood your statement then. I do fully agree to your statement that for minimum amount of time high SP pilot in well fitted battleship or marauder would be more effective. As single carrier is not the uber pwnmobile I hoped it to be in there I think double or tripleaccounting might be sensible. I currently have only my capital alt up there, but as I also have 2 high skilled chars that are specialized to doing L4 missions if I move them up then the total might be more than the parts separately. Using carrier in addition to those guys would allow them to get away with just few hardeners as their tank and fit for full gank. Then just drop sentries on the field and put them to assist one of the guys (unfortunately can't put fighters on assist or guard duty) and it's just like dualaccounting. For solo work it's still okish. Fighters kill the NPC battleships and cruisers in reasonable speed. For the frigs tho best option seems to be dropping sentries and popping them when they approach. Main problem is the fighter travel time, as even with 2 nav computers they are relatively slow and drag the killspeed down that way.
King Rothgar Imperial Slave Hunter Society	Posted - 2009.12.23 13:25:00 - [24] I can't say I have too much experience running null sec anomalies but those I have could easily be solo'd by a pve fitted carrier. As always you should carry a large variety of drones with a big emphasis on sentries. Fighters are great for killing BS's and BC's but struggle against anything smaller. As such I recommend you swap that nav computer in favor of a drone tracking mod instead. Drone upgrades don't impact fighters so the nav computer won't help you with them. On the other hand a batch of garde II's can hit basically anything out to 40km other than frigates 2km away as long as you have a drone tracking mod. -----------------------------------------------------
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.23 14:46:00 - [25] Thanx for the hint. I was not aware that drone nav computers do not affect fighters. Good to know. In that case the omnidirectional tracking links are indeed better for those situations when you use sentries.
Carniflex Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2009.12.29 21:49:00 - [26] Managed to at last ship the PvE battleships up to the system with anomalies. It's Sansha territory so used Chimera + gank Abbadon combo running approx hour of sanctums (the best anomalies). First impression is that it's not quite as good isk as L4 missions with dualaccounting in hi sec, but it's close enough. And the best part - it's all liquid isk (as the loot is as crap as missions so it's defo not worth looting in there if you kill fast enough). I expected difference of approx 15% but doing the top anomalies I think it will be more in the ballpark of 5% or even breaking even after I get used to them and find ways to improve my setups (there prolly is some room, as it's shield tanked abbadon, lol, running on remote shield and capital transfer from carrier). Ofc it's just kinda first impression. For more accurate comparison I shall need to run them long enough to get some statisticks. Stuff like frequency of faction spawns and escalations etcetc. And see how often I die so what hardwires would be cost effective.
Arclan Cirel	Posted - 2009.12.30 14:08:00 - [27] lol, a properly fitted Ishtar can easily tank * Sanctums and can easily do most 10/10 complex's with only minimal support. You don't need a carrier, unless of course you want to lose it.
Vir Mihir	Posted - 2009.12.30 18:52:00 - [28] Simply tell me the system you are planning on doing the anomalies with your carrier in and I will help you find a great fit for it!
Martimus28 Diplomatic Disruption Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2009.12.31 06:24:00 - [29] I really like this idea. In fact, I hope it becomes a fad and many people start plexing regularly in carriers.
Kanatta Jing	Posted - 2009.12.31 11:02:00 - [30] One thing about your Abaddon... I think your better off with something that looks like this... [Apocalypse, 0 Tank] Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II Tracking Enhancer II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Capacitor Power Relay II Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Cap Recharger II Cap Recharger II 'Anointed' I EM Ward Reinforcement Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Tachyon Beam Laser II, Multifrequency L Large Energy Collision Accelerator I [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] Hobgoblin II x5 Hammerhead II x5



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.