| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Summersnow
   |
Posted - 2005.07.14 19:36:00 -
[1]
I'm getting to the point where I need to seriously concentrate training on a battleship.
I have all frig skills up to 3+, amar & min cruiser skills and amarr BS 2.
Its not any great training commitment at this point to fly any battleship I want.
Its the gun & missle skills that need to be concentrated. right now everything ( t1 ) is at 3 for small & medium with no large turret skills started.
I'm looking towards level 4 missions down the road and want a good battleship for that, with pvp as a secondary consideration.
I'd really prefer NOT to do the amarr thing, even though I'm amarr. ( I loathe the miniscule falloff on lasers )
I have prints for the mega and love the way it looks but I'm concerned about ammo & level 4 viability, especially against smaller ships.
I fly minmitar AF's and love the wide range on the falloff of projectiles.
I refuse to do the raven thing. I'd like to be a bit more original then that...
What I'd like is if someone can give me some feedback on the minmitar ships in level 4, mega in level 4 and yes, as much as I'd prefer not to, armageddon ( which I have ) and apoc for level 4.
|
Blind Fear
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 19:40:00 -
[2]
The falloff on lasers doesnt really matter that much since you have plenty of optimal. Go with an apoc for lvl 4 missions, and an arma is one of the best PvP gunboats there is.
|
sableye
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 19:47:00 -
[3]
I as specializing in mega I justs witched to apoc. I'm an npc hunter mainly and you just can't beat the tank of an apoc but that was'nt the main reason, the reason was that with an apoc you can carry full spread of unlimited ammo, and have instaswitching. I foudn with my megathron I could only realisticly carry oen ammo type and it was just so limiting although for pvp I would nto say this was really much of a factor as you can generally geta way with carry less ammo but for npc's your constantly shooting.
and fall off does'nt matter much when you max target range is greater than your optimal with radios :).
|
Summersnow
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 19:56:00 -
[4]
hmm, maybe I am misunderstanding falloff then.
As I understand it if a laser has an optimal of say 20K and a fallof of 5k then my effective range is 15-25K and anything oustide that band does poo-poo for damage...
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 20:09:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Vishnej on 14/07/2005 20:11:54
No.
It means that you'll have 99% accuracy at point-blank to optimal, 50% at optimal+falloff, and 1% at optimal+falloff*2. Or something along those lines.
This distance accuracy is then multiplied by a factor for tracking accuracy.
A guide:
http://www.ittensohn.ch/eve/eve-tracking.html
|
Thanit
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 20:19:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Vishnej
Edited by: Vishnej on 14/07/2005 20:11:54
No.
It means that you'll have 99% accuracy at point-blank to optimal, 50% at optimal+falloff, and 1% at optimal+falloff*2. Or something along those lines.
This distance accuracy is then multiplied by a factor for tracking accuracy.
A guide:
http://www.ittensohn.ch/eve/eve-tracking.html
Quite correct.
Also, when worrying about small ships on missions, and when knowing you are going to encounter alot of them, simply fit two large faction smartbombs. It'll cost you a bit to buy them, but with 7.5km range they'll get any orbiting NPC frigate out there. And two of tehm should kill fast enough for comfort.
|
Summersnow
|
Posted - 2005.07.14 20:22:00 -
[7]
thats how I thought it worked till it was explained differently a few weeks ago.
so the limiting factor is turret tracking speed at close range, not falloff.
maybe I need to look at amarr ships again.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |