EVE Search - HAC or T2 BC ?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

HAC or T2 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 - 0 post(s)
C3RN	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:16:00 - [1] In GENERAL who would 1v1 in pvp. HAC or tech 2 battlecruiser (command ships) ?
Asurix	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:19:00 - [2] Command ships, count on it
LWMaverick	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:23:00 - [3] Yup.. in most cases the T2 Bc (at least the Field command one), will tear most hac's apart. /Mav With great power, comes great responsibility.
C3RN	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:26:00 - [4] Ok, then 1 more thing... Caldari, Gallente, or amarr?? In YOUR opinion.
Asurix	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:29:00 - [5] I think the vulture (which is a fleet command but nighthawk is ******) will tear apart anything, then absolution, then Astarte. Depends on where your specialty lies I guess. Try Absolution. (Amarr)
Malthros Zenobia	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:31:00 - [6] I'm going with the HACs winning. HACs are built with high damage and strong tanking in mind. T2 BCs are not. Strong Offense and Defense is not their main job, and if they simply dominate HACs, then CCP has failed in their setup of those ships, as they are not ment to replace HACs as an offensive and defensive ship. Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu I'm probably one of the biggest Bush fanboys in Eve... This is like, Darth Vader, can't-reach-climax-without-killing-a-puppy evil.
Mina Roberts	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:33:00 - [7] Originally by: Malthros Zenobia I'm going with the HACs winning. HACs are built with high damage and strong tanking in mind. T2 BCs are not. Strong Offense and Defense is not their main job, and if they simply dominate HACs, then CCP has failed in their setup of those ships, as they are not ment to replace HACs as an offensive and defensive ship. Why dont you look at the absolution, its better than the zealot in just about every way except for speed.
Asurix	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:34:00 - [8] HAC--> CS = Cruiser-->BC check slots, PG, and armor, CS eat HAC's alive
Hal Mondo	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:38:00 - [9] Its gotta be the BC's - have you seen the shield bonuses???? ----------------------------- Play those vibes!
Indy Boy	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:46:00 - [10] I like the minmatar one, because it can shield tank like beast and deal lots of damage with 7x 720mm II artillery or with 7x 425mm II autocannos
LWMaverick	Posted - 2006.01.16 08:47:00 - [11] Edited by: LWMaverick on 16/01/2006 08:48:38 Originally by: Malthros Zenobia I'm going with the HACs winning. HACs are built with high damage and strong tanking in mind. T2 BCs are not. Strong Offense and Defense is not their main job, and if they simply dominate HACs, then CCP has failed in their setup of those ships, as they are not ment to replace HACs as an offensive and defensive ship. You sir, are clueless... Completly... Utterly totally and extremly clueless... Try look at the Absolution again... Takes it resistances, throw those extra 25% resist(with factor), its high power grid, its 25% RoF bonus, 25% damage bonus and 50% less cap usage...(at lvl 5 ofc) TELL ME.. is it not built for tanking and great damage? With great power, comes great responsibility.
FoRGyL	Posted - 2006.01.16 09:28:00 - [12] T1 BC takes HACS so guess what a T2 does? -out- ********************************************************* Pay or don't!
Jin Entres	Posted - 2006.01.16 09:34:00 - [13] Here's what I'm planning for my Astarte: 4 Heavy Neutron Blaster II 3 Heavy Ion Blaster II 1 10MN MWD II 1 Dark Blood Warp Scrambler 1 True Sansha Stasis Webifier 1 Medium Electrochemica Cap Injector 3 Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1 Medium Armor Repairer II 1 Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1 Armor Explosive Hardener II 5 Medium Drones 532.75 / 550 tf CPU 1799.56 / 1812.50 MW PG It's a mini-blasterthron, really, with less hp than one but all round enhanced everything else. I would go as far as to guess that it would rip any non-capital ship apart given that the fight starts close enough.
Grimwalius d'Antan	Posted - 2006.01.16 09:37:00 - [14] I think that in a live situation, neither would win. The HAC wouldn't be able to break the tank, and the COM wouldn't be able to hold the HAC long enough to kill it. In an arranged "fight until death" situation where tactical retreats are not allowed, the money is definately on the COM until proven otherwise.
Zarks	Posted - 2006.01.16 09:47:00 - [15] Depends on what you want to fight I guess, vs a geddon I would much rather be in a HAC then a mini-battleship. ___________________________________________________ Looking for Chelm/Draclira mega beam lasers. Also looking for cruise launcher II BPO, isk available.
Ithildin	Posted - 2006.01.16 09:52:00 - [16] It's a simple matter. The Command Ship's main weaknesses are large signature radius and slow speed. Against a cruiser sized vessel, the signature radius can be ignored as a decisive factor and the speed can be overcome by the higher amount of slots on the BC. In terms of power, the deffinite damage doer is the Absolution, unless you wish to count on the much shorter ranged Astarte with blasters. They all have their uses, I should say. Of the new lines of ships CCP released, these Command ships were actually well thought-through all over. (Gall Carrier has the most compatible/best bonus for it's role, Amarr and Gall interdictors are crap, Gall Recon are crap and the Minm Recon isn't the brightest tool) As for the question "Amarr, Caldari or Gallente?" I find myself answering "Yes". It's up to you. I would recommend Caldari AND Gallente, however. They both have admirable railgun boats, which makes for very compatible dual-racing (so to speak). The Gallentean are perhaps the most diverse of the two in that it has the Eos with drones, while the Siege Warfare modules the Vulture is perfected for is perhaps slightly more attractive than the Information Warfare modules. Never discount the Nighthawk. It might not be the most damaging out there, but it's T1 Heavy Missiles perform almost like precision heavies against smaller ships! It has +10% explosion velocity (more damage against fast opponents) from hull and -5% explosion radius (smaller the radius, the more of the damage is aplied on smaller targets) from Command Ship level. (A heavy missile with max skills will have 84.4m explosion radius, which makes it do 100% damage against non-Minm destroyers and larger ships) However, I myself, am something of a Gallente/Amarr hybrid. Religious fanatic Intaki philosopher. And MC has yet to get Gallente RMR ships... I'll train for the Amarr Command Ships, really. The stylii-domain is down. Use http://mc.kladdpapper.com/forum/ to access MC's forums.
FoRGyL	Posted - 2006.01.16 10:09:00 - [17] Edited by: FoRGyL on 16/01/2006 10:09:50 For you out there that have looked into to these new ships or have thoughts, how would the Sleipner stand to others ? Feels slow but 7 Autos feels like it would hurt but got 1 less dmgboni to the most others if I get it right? Haven't heard about any of the minnys! -out- ********************************************************* Pay or don't!
Asurix	Posted - 2006.01.16 10:25:00 - [18] Basically IMO a Command ship is a better version of a HAC, lower speed, more slots, better armor, about same bonusses. Absolution looks crazy, Astarte looks nice since I like blasters, Vulture will eat people alive
Oriana Fallaci	Posted - 2006.01.16 12:56:00 - [19] I think the roles of HACs and CSs should be more nuanced. Right now, I think the tactical role differences between them arent big enough. Sure, the CS have much more firepower and are slower, but youve got some pretty slow HACs as well, which are completely dominated by their CS counterparts. A suggestion might be to further increase the difference between shield and armor HP, but also the difference between speed, mass, agility, and signature radius. Make the HACs mainly vagabond style blitzkrieg vessels, and the CS the slow, sluggish, but incredibly tough core of the fleet. You might also want to emphasize this aspect by giving less warp speed to them than to the HACs.
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.01.16 13:15:00 - [20] Edited by: Gronsak on 16/01/2006 13:22:39 Originally by: Jin Entres Edited by: Jin Entres on 16/01/2006 09:51:16 Here's what I'm planning for my Astarte: 4 Heavy Neutron Blaster II 3 Heavy Ion Blaster II 1 10MN MWD II 1 Dark Blood Warp Scrambler 1 True Sansha Stasis Webifier 1 Medium Electrochemica Cap Injector 3 Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1 Medium Armor Repairer II 1 Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1 Armor Explosive Hardener II 5 Medium Drones 532.75 / 550 tf CPU 1799.56 / 1812.50 MW PG It's a mini-blasterthron, really, with less hp than one but all round enhanced everything else. I would go as far as to guess that it would rip any non-capital ship apart given that the fight starts close enough. edit: and to "any non-capital ship" I'll make the exclusion of ships specificly fitted to kill one, ie. mostly nos setups like the suckadomi for example. this vs a AC tempest or blasterthron would be very very interesting. ive killed a plated ishtar pretty quick in a blasterthron. it has higher resistances then you do. and had 2 energized adaptives + otehr tank. so i was hitting it at the highest resistances and he went down pretty fast. i would assume the same with this t2 BC. u have lower resistance and less HP. so i would assume vs a close range BS they would die. but it would be dam close. hitting u with t2 thermal heavys. id get 75DPS through ur armor. hitting u with 650DPS guns. 145DPS through ur armor. total of 220DPS.u rep 50 per sec. 170DPS through ur armor clean. a suprising 25sec to rip through ur armor. so id say under 60sec to pop u totally. not so uber. personally id try fit 2 med t2 reps and loose one mag stab [3rd one doesnt add much anyways] TBH no ship can tank a good gedden,blasterthron,AC tempest indefinitly. question is would u kill me before i kill you. BTW what is ur dmg output on that setup? wow would be a very close fight, just figured out that your guns would do about the same DPS as my blasterthron guns. ull have near 750DPS on that thing including droens, very nice. i get just a little over 1000DPS on my blasterthron including drones. but ur extra kin resistances make that up. so its ur 4.25k tank with med rep. vs my 10k tank with med rep :P would be a very close very interesting fights. id just hope u where webbed at 10km and slowed/stoped at 5km or higher so u do a bit less dmg.
Randuin MaraL	Posted - 2006.01.16 13:18:00 - [21] Originally by: C3RN Ok, then 1 more thing... Caldari, Gallente, or amarr?? In YOUR opinion. I have tested all of them and I vote for the caldari one. Never be in the company of anyone with whom you would not want to die. MEDUSA veteran, Khumaak Award winner http://members.aol.com/pacalbalan/TheParatwa/Randuin2.jpg
Gariuys	Posted - 2006.01.16 13:22:00 - [22] Re:Gronsak Not a alt of the guy you asked the question off, but can answer it. It puts out (using void M, which would be the optimal ammo against a battleship ) over 1000dps from guns on 2 mag fields. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.01.16 13:32:00 - [23] Originally by: Gariuys Re:Gronsak Not a alt of the guy you asked the question off, but can answer it. It puts out (using void M, which would be the optimal ammo against a battleship ) over 1000dps from guns on 2 mag fields. that is very impressive. i get the same 900DPS useing void on a blasterthron.but my drones add anotehr 250dps. so near enough the same DPS as a blasterthron. and a similar tank advantage over a blasterthron: its gona take a bit less dmg from torps [25% less dmg] its guns have higher tracking thus will hit things easier. higher resistances: less EM resistance then a blasterhtron, a little more exp resistance. a little mroe thermal resistance. a lot more kin ersistance. faster lock time disadvantage: 400mils isk. less range. slighly less dps. its definitly a nice ship. but persoanlly imo time to train skills and price tag isnt worth it. can definitly be made to kill any other ship in game. truly nice ship.
Jin Entres	Posted - 2006.01.16 13:55:00 - [24] Would indeed be interesting to see how a blaterthron matchup would turn out, assuming similar skills. A blasterthron is pretty hard to fit with t2 guns and a tank, though isn't it? It's hard to say how much a difference the medium guns' tracking will make, but I guess I'll just have to test that out when I get on the wheel. It's quite a risk, you're right, and requires more skills than a blasterthron so it's obviously not the choice for everyone. The third mag stab could always be replaced by another EANM II for better survivability. The grid is too tight to fit another repper without ditching something important. I could do that with a 6 ion 1 neutron setup, though, but that would show on damage output. I'm looking forward to this beauty very much. Quote: Battlecruisers / Rank 6 / SP: 1123013 of 1536000 +Currently training to: level 5 +Time left: 8 days, 2 hours, 25 minutes, 18 seconds
Crellion	Posted - 2006.01.16 15:10:00 - [25] Actually tech I BC powns HACs if not same res race... (proph > caldari, cyclone > gallente, brutix > minnie/ ammar) I would think... Of course, for example, killing a Deimos or a Beagle in a Brutix is a bit of an issue due to natural resists (emphasis on natural it means they dont melt away when Nosed to death). On topic: Nighthawk rulz all (inside my head anyway cause I wont have skills for that for a long time)
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.01.16 15:18:00 - [26] Originally by: Jin Entres Would indeed be interesting to see how a blaterthron matchup would turn out, assuming similar skills. A blasterthron is pretty hard to fit with t2 guns and a tank, though isn't it? It's hard to say how much a difference the medium guns' tracking will make, but I guess I'll just have to test that out when I get on the wheel. It's quite a risk, you're right, and requires more skills than a blasterthron so it's obviously not the choice for everyone. The third mag stab could always be replaced by another EANM II for better survivability. The grid is too tight to fit another repper without ditching something important. I could do that with a 6 ion 1 neutron setup, though, but that would show on damage output. I'm looking forward to this beauty very much. Quote: Battlecruisers / Rank 6 / SP: 1123013 of 1536000 +Currently training to: level 5 +Time left: 8 days, 2 hours, 25 minutes, 18 seconds a blasterthron is impossible to fit with a tank and good guns. but u can fit a rack of neutrons, a large nos/neut webber, 20km, sensor booster, med cap injecter 2dmg mods, 3 energized adaptive nanos t2, 1 tungston plate, 1 med repper. gives like 10k armor and have 5k shieds and 7.5k structure. dmg output is over 1000dps. i think you can reach 1250 useing t2 ammo.
MECHcore	Posted - 2006.01.16 15:44:00 - [27] 3 weeks to go then i can fly me Vulture I flyed me eagle for more then a year mostly for pvp use , now its time for an upgrade
Hllaxiu	Posted - 2006.01.16 16:42:00 - [28] Originally by: Jin Entres Edited by: Jin Entres on 16/01/2006 09:51:16 Here's what I'm planning for my Astarte: 4 Heavy Neutron Blaster II 3 Heavy Ion Blaster II 1 10MN MWD II 1 Dark Blood Warp Scrambler 1 True Sansha Stasis Webifier 1 Medium Electrochemica Cap Injector 3 Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1 Medium Armor Repairer II 1 Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1 Armor Explosive Hardener II 5 Medium Drones 532.75 / 550 tf CPU 1799.56 / 1812.50 MW PG Swap a MFS for a power diagnostic and you can fit 5x neutrons and 2x ions. I actually never did the math to see if that did more or less damage.... You can also fit 5x heavy neutrons and 2x medium nos 2s with a tech 1 RCU. Quote: It's a mini-blasterthron, really, with less hp than one but all round enhanced everything else. I would go as far as to guess that it would rip any non-capital ship apart given that the fight starts close enough. edit: and to "any non-capital ship" I'll make the exclusion of ships specificly fitted to kill one, ie. mostly nos setups like the suckadomi for example. Most Raven and Tempest setups will have nosses on them, because of that its very hard to fight them. Especially ravens with javelins or fury cruise missiles. Even standard torpedos will rip you apart, so tread lightly. For example: [ 2006.01.14 23:35:28 ] (combat) <color=0xffbb6600>Wrath Fury Cruise Missile belonging to USA4 hits you, doing 625.6 damage. That of course was a structure hit... [ 2006.01.14 23:34:20 ] (combat) <color=0xffbb6600>Wrath Fury Cruise Missile belonging to USA4 hits you, doing 128.5 damage. was on armor... In sparring with a corpmate, even 2x medium nosses + medium electrochems wouldn't let you survive 2x heavy noses. Since nosses are very common in short range setups, it probably isn't a good idea to engage many pvp battleships 1vs1. That said however, you can't argue with the damage output...
Dr Smacktalk	Posted - 2006.01.16 17:44:00 - [29] All nice and dandy for the price until the blob arrives. Poof 400million isk gone in less than 30 seconds.
Crellion	Posted - 2006.01.16 18:42:00 - [30] Originally by: Dr Smacktalk All nice and dandy for the price until the blob arrives. Poof 400million isk gone in less than 30 seconds. QFT (and I d rather be with the ones arriving tbh)
NoNameNewbie	Posted - 2006.01.16 18:59:00 - [31] Originally by: Dr Smacktalk All nice and dandy for the price until the blob arrives. Poof 400million isk gone in less than 30 seconds. 50 isk for u being primary and getting instapopped :S anyways QFT
Valea Silpha	Posted - 2006.01.16 19:04:00 - [32] I still don't like how the T2 BC have been implemented. The idea of 'command' to me says that they should be durable enough to stay in the conflict, but not be a step-up in damage. Since you can effectively ignore the link bonuses and just fly it as a solo pwnmobile , it stops it being a command ship, and starts being just the next one up from a HAC when you get bored of owning everything as it is. If its a command ship make it fit the role more tightly. All the other t2 ships seem to have very specific purposes and outside of that they aren't much good (deprive an inty of its speed and it becomes a big frig... catch a deimos at 50km and its not much of an obstical). I saw them much more as being like this, with other ships around them they are uber. Without them , they are toast.
Jin Entres	Posted - 2006.01.16 19:18:00 - [33] Originally by: Valea Silpha I still don't like how the T2 BC have been implemented. The idea of 'command' to me says that they should be durable enough to stay in the conflict, but not be a step-up in damage. Since you can effectively ignore the link bonuses and just fly it as a solo pwnmobile , it stops it being a command ship, and starts being just the next one up from a HAC when you get bored of owning everything as it is. If its a command ship make it fit the role more tightly. All the other t2 ships seem to have very specific purposes and outside of that they aren't much good (deprive an inty of its speed and it becomes a big frig... catch a deimos at 50km and its not much of an obstical). I saw them much more as being like this, with other ships around them they are uber. Without them , they are toast. There are two things that would help them fit the role better: 1) Squadron Command requirement back to V. 2) 2 of the skill bonuses to command modules and/or effects (could even wield a passive effect without any mods), and their bonii substantial.
Hllaxiu	Posted - 2006.01.16 19:28:00 - [34] Originally by: Jin Entres There are two things that would help them fit the role better: 1) Squadron Command requirement back to V. 2) 2 of the skill bonuses to command modules and/or effects (could even wield a passive effect without any mods), and their bonii substantial. 1. Go ahead, I already have Command Ships 4. 2. Agreed. Has anyone flown a fleet command ship yet? How is the bonus applied? I don't have an Eos to play with right now, nor have information warfare specialist (yet)... If its just a 1.08 multiplier thats kind of sad especially compared to the 5.00 multiplier from specialist 4 and the 1.4 multiplier from squadron command 4.
Malthros Zenobia	Posted - 2006.01.16 23:21:00 - [35] Originally by: LWMaverick Edited by: LWMaverick on 16/01/2006 08:48:38 Originally by: Malthros Zenobia I'm going with the HACs winning. HACs are built with high damage and strong tanking in mind. T2 BCs are not. Strong Offense and Defense is not their main job, and if they simply dominate HACs, then CCP has failed in their setup of those ships, as they are not ment to replace HACs as an offensive and defensive ship. You sir, are clueless... Completly... Utterly totally and extremly clueless... Try look at the Absolution again... Takes it resistances, throw those extra 25% resist(with factor), its high power grid, its 25% RoF bonus, 25% damage bonus and 50% less cap usage...(at lvl 5 ofc) TELL ME.. is it not built for tanking and great damage? Actually, I was looking at the nighthawk, and thinking how it simply won't touch a Cerb that can move faster than it, because it'll just hit it from outside the BC's range. Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu I'm probably one of the biggest Bush fanboys in Eve... This is like, Darth Vader, can't-reach-climax-without-killing-a-puppy evil.
Sarmaul	Posted - 2006.01.16 23:30:00 - [36] Originally by: Valea Silpha I still don't like how the T2 BC have been implemented. The idea of 'command' to me says that they should be durable enough to stay in the conflict, but not be a step-up in damage. Since you can effectively ignore the link bonuses and just fly it as a solo pwnmobile , it stops it being a command ship, and starts being just the next one up from a HAC when you get bored of owning everything as it is. If its a command ship make it fit the role more tightly. All the other t2 ships seem to have very specific purposes and outside of that they aren't much good (deprive an inty of its speed and it becomes a big frig... catch a deimos at 50km and its not much of an obstical). I saw them much more as being like this, with other ships around them they are uber. Without them , they are toast. there are two types of command ships - field command and fleet command field command are essentially the next step up in damage dealing - the have high resistances and a **** load of damage bonuses. however, their main weakness is that they are slow and sluggish compared to a HAC. field command ships can also use one gang warfare link at a time. fleet command ships are designed for tank and boost. They have higher resists than field command ships and can run 3 gang modules at a time. instead of extra damage bonuses, they get bonuses to the effectivness of the gang assist modules.
Dash Ripcock	Posted - 2006.01.17 05:23:00 - [37] What are their capacitors like however? Running multiple Neutrons and Ions on a slow battery is going to run you flat very quickly. Movie Trailer
Haniblecter Teg	Posted - 2006.01.17 05:46:00 - [38] Command ships have a massive radius. HAC's really in part on their small radius and speed. Command ships may have more armor, but they'll take alot more hits than the HAC would, and would prolly drop quicker against a BS. ---------------------------------------- Friends Forever
Jin Entres	Posted - 2006.01.17 07:33:00 - [39] Originally by: Dash Ripcock What are their capacitors like however? Running multiple Neutrons and Ions on a slow battery is going to run you flat very quickly. Base capacitor on an astarte is 2250 per 500 sec. With a MWD, Energy Systems Operation V and Energy Management IV, that comes to 2137,50 per 375 sec, peak recharge rate (at 2.4 factor) being 13,7 cap / sec.
RogerWilco	Posted - 2006.01.17 10:17:00 - [40] as it is now, BC eats HACS if u just put your mind to it, the BC t2 aka Command ships will wtfpwn HACS without the shadow of a doubt. cant wait to get into one...
Temerlyn	Posted - 2006.01.17 10:45:00 - [41] the trend i am seeing is ccp are trying in some way to make minmater shield tankers. The claymore as an example has a 7.5% shield boosting bonus per level of Battlecruiser, consdiering you need battlecruiser 5 to fly command ships thats a 37.5% bonus for free. if i put 4 of the old school low slot cap rechargers i get an overall shield boost of -2.5% and 80% cap recharge. Minmater get a natural em resistance so its at 75% and thermal is 50%, 6 mid slots as well. in short a **** hot shield tank.
Admiral Goberius	Posted - 2006.01.17 11:00:00 - [42] nos, ecm's... tech I pride ftw :p
Gariuys	Posted - 2006.01.17 11:00:00 - [43] Originally by: Temerlyn the trend i am seeing is ccp are trying in some way to make minmater shield tankers. Lol, no kidding, but ehm they've been half if not more shield tank based for as long as the game is around. ( not counting the times that armor tanking didn't even exist ) ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Justice Bringer	Posted - 2006.01.17 17:37:00 - [44] Originally by: Jin Entres Edited by: Jin Entres on 16/01/2006 09:51:16 Here's what I'm planning for my Astarte: 4 Heavy Neutron Blaster II 3 Heavy Ion Blaster II 1 10MN MWD II 1 Dark Blood Warp Scrambler 1 True Sansha Stasis Webifier 1 Medium Electrochemica Cap Injector 3 Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1 Medium Armor Repairer II 1 Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1 Armor Explosive Hardener II 5 Medium Drones 532.75 / 550 tf CPU 1799.56 / 1812.50 MW PG It's a mini-blasterthron, really, with less hp than one but all round enhanced everything else. I would go as far as to guess that it would rip any non-capital ship apart given that the fight starts close enough. edit: and to "any non-capital ship" I'll make the exclusion of ships specificly fitted to kill one, ie. mostly nos setups like the suckadomi for example. My choice of fit on the Astarte is as follows: High: 7 x Neutron II/7 x 250 II Med: MWD II, Cap Injector II, Fleeting Web, Target Painter II/Tracking Computer II Low 1: Med Repper II, 800 Tungsten plate, RCU II, 1 x NanoII, 2 x Mag Stab II Low 2: Med repper II, Small Repper II, Explosive II, Nano II, 2 x Mag Stab II Low 3: Med Repper II, Explosive II, 2 x Nano, 2 x Mag Stab II Low 4: Choose your own variation, 6 slots is more than enough on this beast to keep it alive and dish outh the damage. Justice With the RCU II you should get 2175 max pg and with Advanced weapons upgrades the guns should take up 1493.277 pg (7 x 236) x (0.98 x 0.98 x 0.98 x 0.98 x 0.98) = 1652 x 0.9039 = 1493.277 pg This leaves plenty for a Cap Injector, MWD and Repper and you should have about 7 pg to spare for the other mods that use 1/2 pg each. Swap out the MWD for an AB II and you've got 100 more pg there. Sweet Justice
Naskaya	Posted - 2006.01.17 19:04:00 - [45] Edited by: Naskaya on 17/01/2006 19:07:36 Edited by: Naskaya on 17/01/2006 19:06:59 Caldari CS will be very dangerous, as you get the 25% bonus in all shield resistance due to Ferox base and BC skill V... So Vulture and Nighthawk could easily get up to 90% (or more ) in all shield resistance with some hardener in EW. Impressive in fact. I like the way the vulture is designed because as a command ship, it can stay far from battle and hit from a LONG range, thus maintaining a global vision of the battlefield and helping teammates...
Kyle Caldrel	Posted - 2006.01.17 19:28:00 - [46] Originally by: LWMaverick Edited by: LWMaverick on 16/01/2006 08:48:38 Originally by: Malthros Zenobia I'm going with the HACs winning. HACs are built with high damage and strong tanking in mind. T2 BCs are not. Strong Offense and Defense is not their main job, and if they simply dominate HACs, then CCP has failed in their setup of those ships, as they are not ment to replace HACs as an offensive and defensive ship. You sir, are clueless... Completly... Utterly totally and extremly clueless... Try look at the Absolution again... Takes it resistances, throw those extra 25% resist(with factor), its high power grid, its 25% RoF bonus, 25% damage bonus and 50% less cap usage...(at lvl 5 ofc) TELL ME.. is it not built for tanking and great damage? i'm pritty sure that ishtar can take most of this tech II BC .... ******************************************************* What ya gonna do, when I come for you!?
Crellion	Posted - 2006.01.17 22:46:00 - [47] Originally by: Kyle Caldrel Originally by: LWMaverick Edited by: LWMaverick on 16/01/2006 08:48:38 Originally by: Malthros Zenobia I'm going with the HACs winning. HACs are built with high damage and strong tanking in mind. T2 BCs are not. Strong Offense and Defense is not their main job, and if they simply dominate HACs, then CCP has failed in their setup of those ships, as they are not ment to replace HACs as an offensive and defensive ship. You sir, are clueless... Completly... Utterly totally and extremly clueless... Try look at the Absolution again... Takes it resistances, throw those extra 25% resist(with factor), its high power grid, its 25% RoF bonus, 25% damage bonus and 50% less cap usage...(at lvl 5 ofc) TELL ME.. is it not built for tanking and great damage? i'm pritty sure that ishtar can take most of this tech II BC .... Can it take a techI Cyclone or Prophecy fitting to kill HACs? (Honest question I cant fly Cyclone or Prophecy) I am pretty sure an Ion/Electron Brutix with dual rep and cap booster would kill Sacrilege, Zealot, Vagabond, Munnin, more likely than not. Cerb, Deimos, Ishtar and even eagle might prevail simply because of their natural kinetic and thermal resists.
keepiru	Posted - 2006.01.17 22:47:00 - [48] Originally by: Crellion Can it take a techI Cyclone or Prophecy fitting to kill HACs? (Honest question I cant fly Cyclone or Prophecy) Cyclone/Blasterix > most hacs atm. ------------- Please fix the EW stacking bug, it's a disgrace!
Sarmaul	Posted - 2006.01.17 22:49:00 - [49] most t1 cyclones fitted to kill hacs do it through 2 nos, one neut and a bloody huge shield tank. the ishtar will not only nos back, but if setup correctly will jam the hell out of you and unleash it's drones. even if not jamming, nosing it won't kill it's tank as it will be draining yours just as fast, and drones don't need cap to do damage.
Kyle Caldrel	Posted - 2006.01.18 05:52:00 - [50] Originally by: Crellion Originally by: Kyle Caldrel Originally by: LWMaverick Edited by: LWMaverick on 16/01/2006 08:48:38 Originally by: Malthros Zenobia I'm going with the HACs winning. HACs are built with high damage and strong tanking in mind. T2 BCs are not. Strong Offense and Defense is not their main job, and if they simply dominate HACs, then CCP has failed in their setup of those ships, as they are not ment to replace HACs as an offensive and defensive ship. You sir, are clueless... Completly... Utterly totally and extremly clueless... Try look at the Absolution again... Takes it resistances, throw those extra 25% resist(with factor), its high power grid, its 25% RoF bonus, 25% damage bonus and 50% less cap usage...(at lvl 5 ofc) TELL ME.. is it not built for tanking and great damage? i'm pritty sure that ishtar can take most of this tech II BC .... Can it take a techI Cyclone or Prophecy fitting to kill HACs? (Honest question I cant fly Cyclone or Prophecy) I am pretty sure an Ion/Electron Brutix with dual rep and cap booster would kill Sacrilege, Zealot, Vagabond, Munnin, more likely than not. Cerb, Deimos, Ishtar and even eagle might prevail simply because of their natural kinetic and thermal resists. ehm, they would need to get in range 1st, and I tend to fit MWD on hacs, plus 2x multi jammers on ishtar...I'll just orbit you at 26km and let drones do the job ******************************************************* What ya gonna do, when I come for you!?
Jin Entres	Posted - 2006.01.18 08:19:00 - [51] Speaking of drones - Eos has a dronebay of 250 m3 (CS IV). With that, it's higher natural resistances and the ability to fit 4 neutrons and 3 command mods with a huge tank (or fit similar to the Astarte with 7 guns and compensate for the missing damage bonus with the drones), it turns out to be quite a nasty ship, too, I reckon
Justice Bringer	Posted - 2006.01.18 10:40:00 - [52] Originally by: Jin Entres Speaking of drones - Eos has a dronebay of 250 m3 (CS IV). With that, it's higher natural resistances and the ability to fit 4 neutrons and 3 command mods with a huge tank (or fit similar to the Astarte with 7 guns and compensate for the missing damage bonus with the drones), it turns out to be quite a nasty ship, too, I reckon Well as it is the Fleet Command ship it might be a good idea to be using the extra drone bay to carry lots of repair drones to heal your squad members from distance. 'From great distance, comes great repairability' Hehehe Justice
Serj Darek	Posted - 2006.01.18 11:01:00 - [53] Originally by: FoRGyL T1 BC takes HACS so guess what a T2 does? -out- I have NEVER been killed by a BC when im in my HAC. Must be a crappy HAC pilot if he gets killed by BC. This is what happened to Bunny: Removed due to inappropriate content - Laqum
FoRGyL	Posted - 2006.01.18 11:13:00 - [54] Originally by: Serj Darek Originally by: FoRGyL T1 BC takes HACS so guess what a T2 does? -out- I have NEVER been killed by a BC when im in my HAC. Must be a crappy HAC pilot if he gets killed by BC. WEll not a 100% as always when it comes to ships but I haven't lost to a Hac yet so here we are ;)(disregard testing). And I will add I haven't encounterd all of em yet, so I will be pwent soon don't worry But we can test if u ever can trust my word on a clean fight, but I don't like EW ;) Mail me ingame for a 1 vs 1 if intrested. -out- ********************************************************* Pay or don't!
TerrorWOLF	Posted - 2006.01.18 12:13:00 - [55] For info Absolutions RoF bonus is buged . Wonders what other T2 BCs are buged. May Your Death Be Slow And Painful
LWMaverick	Posted - 2006.01.18 12:15:00 - [56] Originally by: TerrorWOLF For info Absolutions RoF bonus is buged . Wonders what other T2 BCs are buged. w00t?.. How is it bugged?.. care to explain ?.. im geting mine the 27th january, so i would like to know really. /Mav With great power, comes great responsibility.
TerrorWOLF	Posted - 2006.01.18 12:35:00 - [57] RoF on Prophecy 3.55 with 1x Heat Sink RoF on Absolution 3.73 with 1x Heat Sink and lvl1 Command Ship skill. Im geting lvl2 Command Ship in 30 min ill update with lvl2 then May Your Death Be Slow And Painful
Serj Darek	Posted - 2006.01.18 14:57:00 - [58] Originally by: FoRGyL Originally by: Serj Darek Originally by: FoRGyL T1 BC takes HACS so guess what a T2 does? -out- I have NEVER been killed by a BC when im in my HAC. Must be a crappy HAC pilot if he gets killed by BC. WEll not a 100% as always when it comes to ships but I haven't lost to a Hac yet so here we are ;)(disregard testing). And I will add I haven't encounterd all of em yet, so I will be pwent soon don't worry But we can test if u ever can trust my word on a clean fight, but I don't like EW ;) Mail me ingame for a 1 vs 1 if intrested. -out- Hehe, I might, if my wallet alows it This is what happened to Bunny: Removed due to inappropriate content - Laqum
Hllaxiu	Posted - 2006.01.18 15:36:00 - [59] Originally by: TerrorWOLF For info Absolutions RoF bonus is buged . Wonders what other T2 BCs are buged. The Astarte is slightly bugged too; it has the same falloff bonus of the Deimos - 10%, instead of 5% as per ship description. I'm assuming that the description is wrong - does ship in game have a 5% range bonus?
Auke Wester	Posted - 2006.01.19 17:50:00 - [60] I fly both an Eagle and a Vulture. They are basically the same resisancewise since I use a EM Hardener II and Invulnerability Field II on both. They are basically the same damagewise too since the Eagle has a 25% dmg bonus and the Vulture a 5th gunslot. Tanking however, the Eagle is allready amazing but the Vulture just absolutely rocks. I have in my Vulture med and lowslots: 1x Large Shield Booster II 1x Shield Boost Amplifier 1x EM Hardener II 1x Invulnerability Field II 2x Cap Recharger II 1x Magstab II 3x PDSII This tank will run forever and I had no problems yet tanking missions against whatever race. The big difference between these ships are speed. I'll fit a 50MN ABII instead of the Amp once they get those in the game but I saw no point yet. If fighting each other neither would win since they would both just sustain tank. The Vulture would just sustain even better :)

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.