EVE Search - Which PVE Rail BC?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Which PVE Rail BC?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Tsukino Stareine EVE University Ivy League 256	Posted - 2013.05.31 23:04:00 - [61] - Quote that seems about what I was playing around with. I can get away with about a 90 DPS tank on angel blockade but it requires a lot of manual piloting plus the cane has a lot better damage projection with arty and it's slot layout.
Shereza Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 121	Posted - 2013.06.01 03:45:00 - [62] - Quote Personally, I'd just active tank it rather than relying on the buffer. It might take longer to chew through the buffer with a pair of LSEs, but between their native signature radius boost and the MCDFPs you're going to be getting hit more often and harder even when running the AB. [Ferox, L3] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II 10MN Afterburner II Large Shield Booster II Thermic Dissipation Field II Kinetic Deflection Field II Tracking Computer II 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M 250mm Railgun II, Antimatter Charge M [empty high slot] Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I Hobgoblin II x5 The defense on that is around 203 sustained, 336 max, without the guns firing. Caps out in a mere 2.5 minutes, but eh, nothing's perfect and 2.5 minutes can be enough if you "do it right." That's especially true if you make use of the AB to speed/range tank when needed and don't have a bloated sig. radius making you easier to hit.
Augustus Risalo Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 0	Posted - 2013.06.01 15:51:00 - [63] - Quote I tried that setup, but I prefer the passive tank. I never have to worry about cap, the defense is plenty, and the DPS with the 200mm guns is nearly identical.
Onictus Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension 258	Posted - 2013.06.01 16:49:00 - [64] - Quote There is little in this game that will get me to fit medium rails
Shereza Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 122	Posted - 2013.06.02 01:16:00 - [65] - Quote So drop to 200mms and replace the TC with a cap injector if you're worried about capacitor issues. You'll suffer a bit more in range, and probably tracking as well, but the faster tracking of 200mms over 250s will help compensate for that and you shouldn't have cap issues at all unless you get in over your head or forget to restock on boosters.
Augustus Risalo Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 0	Posted - 2013.06.02 02:11:00 - [66] - Quote Yeah I could, but my shields haven't gotten below 60% once and all I need to worry about is managing transversals. Plus I don't want to waste the rigs
Shereza Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 122	Posted - 2013.06.02 04:06:00 - [67] - Quote That's perfectly understandable. Not everyone, new players especially, can look at medium rigs and go, "Pff, whatever. I can afford a dozen if I need them." FWIW I don't much care to think about much less use cap injectors on my own ships, and one of my hobbies over the years has been figuring out passive shield tanks for just about any ship that they seem remotely viable on. [Nightmare, PSt] Power Diagnostic System II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Shield Power Relay II Gist C-Type EM Ward Field Gist C-Type EM Ward Field Gist C-Type Thermic Dissipation Field Thermic Dissipation Field II Shield Recharger II Shield Recharger II Large Shield Extender II Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Multifrequency L Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Multifrequency L Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Multifrequency L Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser, Multifrequency L Heavy Diminishing Power System Drain I Heavy Diminishing Power System Drain I Large Core Defense Field Purger I Large Core Defense Field Purger I Large Core Defense Field Purger I One example. I believe I've done a dual SPR version with one heavy and one medium vampire as well, more cap issues but better tank, and one using Shield Flux Coils as a test bed of sorts to provide a scenario where they're actually at least marginally viable if not optimal. [Megathron Navy Issue, PST] Tracking Enhancer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Gist C-Type EM Ward Field Gist C-Type EM Ward Field Gist C-Type Thermic Dissipation Field Large Shield Extender II Shadow Serpentis 425mm Railgun, Antimatter Charge L Shadow Serpentis 425mm Railgun, Antimatter Charge L Shadow Serpentis 425mm Railgun, Antimatter Charge L Shadow Serpentis 425mm Railgun, Antimatter Charge L Shadow Serpentis 425mm Railgun, Antimatter Charge L Shadow Serpentis 425mm Railgun, Antimatter Charge L Shadow Serpentis 425mm Railgun, Antimatter Charge L Heavy Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Heavy Missile Large Core Defense Field Purger II Large Core Defense Field Purger II Large Core Defense Field Purger II Bouncer II x5 Another example. I went with Bouncer IIs instead of Garde IIs due to range issues without omni links and because they still manage a decent offensive punch while not, in my experience, being overly prone to nasty resistances like EM on Guristas and thermal on Angels. I think that the SS 425s are there mainly for the cap-efficiency aspect, but given the price of having seven large faction guns T1 or even best named would probably be a better option.
Augustus Risalo Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 0	Posted - 2013.06.02 04:30:00 - [68] - Quote Very cool! I also like trying to get a passive tank to work, Rokh I am talking to you!
Dato Koppla Rage of Inferno Malefic Motives 219	Posted - 2013.06.02 07:36:00 - [69] - Quote Don't passive shield tank Battleships, they're horrible at it. The fits posted by Shereza are pretty horrible and you can get far better performance for much less isk, not saying it isn't viable, but it's a bad idea.
Morrigan LeSante The Lost and Forgotten Troopers 287	Posted - 2013.06.02 09:23:00 - [70] - Quote Dato Koppla wrote: Don't passive shield tank Battleships, they're horrible at it. The fits posted by Shereza are pretty horrible and you can get far better performance for much less isk, not saying it isn't viable, but it's a bad idea. I agree, however, it would be remiss to not mention the notable exception of the rattler.
Shereza Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 122	Posted - 2013.06.02 10:00:00 - [71] - Quote Dato Koppla wrote: Don't passive shield tank Battleships, they're horrible at it. The fits posted by Shereza are pretty horrible and you can get far better performance for much less isk, not saying it isn't viable, but it's a bad idea. The hardeners are cheap. The expensive stuff is the guns, and I even pointed out that the faction railguns weren't that good of an idea. TBH I really don't know why they were there, but I was too lazy to change them out. The faction tachyons, however, are very worth the price all things considered, and I'd consider them part and parcel with any beam-based nightmare build so "much less isk" isn't necessarily going to be much better on that build. Mind you I'm not saying anyone should actually use either ship fit (style) unless they're really bored and have way more isk than they need. Morrigan LeSante wrote: I agree, however, it would be remiss to not mention the notable exception of the rattler. Scorpion Navy Issue can also do a decent job of passive tanking. IIRC there were some "discussions" awhile back where, again IIRC, Liang posted a fit or two involving passive tanking the hyperion and doing so fairly effectively as well, but I don't know how the Odyssey changes will alter that equation even if I'm not misremembering it. Post-Odyssey the dominix will do a decent job of passive tanking as well, probably comparable to the navy scorpion if not a bit better. Rattlesnake will do about 30% more tank with better damage application and otherwise similar numbers for drone DPS and range given otherwise similar setups, but the dominix won't be a slouch. I suppose you could make a case for passive tanking the rokh too, but it would probably be more like shield buffer and range tanking to be honest. Buffer to MJD out of NPC range and then let passive regen soak up what manages to ping you at 100km+ ranges. Though in all fairness if you don't mind ****-poor damage application you could do a passable "real" passive tank rokh with three MagStabs and a minimum tank in the 450 range. The 517 gun-based rDPS is a bit anemic though, and that'd be with native tracking on 425mm railguns so... I suppose that post-Odyssey it might be worth looking into passive tanking the typhoon too, at least from an educational exercise perspective.
mama guru Thundercats The Initiative. 126	Posted - 2013.06.02 11:37:00 - [72] - Quote I advise the OP not to bother with railguns right now aside from frigate sized ones. They are a terrible weaponsystem that underpreforms in every single category. Hard to fit, sucks capacitor like an energy neutralizer and do low damage. The Myrmidon has been suggested already, fit artys and use 4 sentry drones. Otherwise the arty hurricane or Missile Drake are good options. ______ EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.
Dato Koppla Rage of Inferno Malefic Motives 219	Posted - 2013.06.03 11:45:00 - [73] - Quote Even in the case of the Rattler and the SNI active tanks are far more slot efficient allowing you to get more gank out of it, however it won't be cap-stable so the only real reason I can think for passive tanking a BS is when you want a cap-stable-no-worries tank.
Shereza Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 122	Posted - 2013.06.05 01:30:00 - [74] - Quote Dato Koppla wrote: Even in the case of the Rattler and the SNI active tanks are far more slot efficient allowing you to get more gank out of it, however it won't be cap-stable so the only real reason I can think for passive tanking a BS is when you want a cap-stable-no-worries tank. Passive tanking is something of an extension of buffer tanking, and a lot of Caldari, and possibly Minmatar, players will shield buffer tank their ships as they get into L2 missions. Caldari players will then most likely work towards passive tanking due to flying drakes in L3s. By the time they can do L4s chances are their ability to passive tank will exceed their ability to active tank with shields. In that scenario it makes for a "good" reason to passive tank your battleship(s) to a degree. That doesn't mean they should continue to do so when they have the skills to active shield tank, or that they should ignore active shield tanking skills, merely that until they have those skills it makes more sense to passive tank than active tank. I personally armor tanked my raven for awhile purely because my character's skills at armor tanking were far superior to her active shield tanking skills. The fact that it caused several members of my corporation to freak out at one point when they saw its shields hitting 0 was something of a bonus.

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: 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.