Suicide Keen
   |
Posted - 2005.04.28 08:27:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Suicide Keen on 28/04/2005 08:46:14
 Originally by: Julien Derida
Originally by: Olivin
With MWD sig penalty and gimped setup you should
be dead long before you decide what range you
should fight this time. Although for tackling purposes MWD 4tw.
Olivin
Here's a couple of facts for you:
Fact no. 1
MWD II requires 18MW and 25tf
AB II requires 13MW and 15tf
So, by using an AB over a MWD you save 5MW and 10TF. That is not enough to fit an extra damage mod or a decent armour plate. You could fit a named small armour rep, but that is going to be of minimal use in such a short fight.
The MWD does of course give you a 25% cap penalty, but interceptor fights are too short for cap to matter.
Conclusion:Running a MWD does not gimp your setup.
Fact no. 2
AB II Speed Boost = 168.75% (w/ Accel Control 5)
MWD II Speed Boost = 687.5% (w/ Accel Control 5)
MWD II Sig Penalty = 500%
Now, the ability of a gun to track a target is effected by the quantity speed/sig_radius. Therefore, we can calculate a number that tells us how hard the ship is to track. Lets call this number 'normalised speed'.
For the AB:
Normalised Speed = (Speed + 1.6875*Speed)/Sig = 2.6875 *(Speed/Sig)
i.e. the ship is 2.6875 times harder to track
For the MWD:
Normalised Speed = (Speed + 6.875*Speed)/(Sig + 5*Sig) = 1.3125* (Speed/Sig)
Therefore, in ideal circumstances a ship with AB is around twice as hard to track as one with MWD.
Now, within web range this does not matter. If both targets are webbed, gun tracking will not be an issue. At long range, the pilot with the AB has a tracking advantage. How much of a difference in DoT this makes depends on how tracking deficient the guns being used are. Ironically, the MWD pilot can negate the AB pilots small advantage at this range by simply turning off his MWD.
Conclusion: The MWD sig penalty is not as important as you imply.
If you still don't believe me, why not put your money where your mouth is? Name a time and I will fight you 1v1 in an interceptor. You run an AB and I'll run a MWD. We'll see who wins  .
Who has ceptor vs ceptor battles anyway, that's not the question? I'll take the 1mn after burner II setup in any fleet engagement over your MWD fleet engagement. If I am within 100km of a battleship fleet in the AB I am nearly unhittable.
The only ship I am then afraid of is a well trained destroyer pilot, or an assault frig. I can hold my own better against the MWD ceptor than the other ships mentioned as he is an easier target for me than I am to him. He will have to slow way down just to hit me as my signature radius is much lower, negating his MWD.
Sure, a MWD and transverse velocity cancel each other out, but that puts you back where you started with your base speed. The microwarp doesn't give you any advantage whatsoever for not getting hit as the sig radius penalty negates the added transverse speeds. The only benefit a MWD does do is give you a quicker approach to targets. Using a MWD to evade targets to long range is suicidal.
An AB II gives you ~150% boost making you 2 1/2 times less trackable, especially from long range when signature radius + transverse means life or death.
Facts: An interceptor with a mwd running is no different than an interceptor without a mwd running in terms of trackability and hit ability.
An interceptor with an AB running is more difficult to hit than an interceptor without any propulsion mods.
Plug in the numbers on this site if you do not believe me.
I've been blown up in a ceptor at 150km by a BS with a transverse of nearly 2000 m/s. I can now transverse 1000 m/s and have a better chance to avoid hits at this range. I can also approach my target, albeit slower but safer from within 100km without worry as long as I keep the transverse above 400ish.
|