| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Darpz
   |
Posted - 2006.03.29 00:51:00 -
[1]
they can be beat down by BCs and BS, they insanely expensive. to me i'd rather fly a tech 2 fitted cruiser and lose it 10 times over and still getting many more quality kills than I could get in a hac. or fly a BC and be able to kill any hac I come across.
Hacs were a cool tool back when they were 80M and BCs suck but now it just seems stupid
The only good fix is a DEAD fix |
Cummilla
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 00:57:00 -
[2]
There is a "fun" factor in flying them that adds to the attractiveness. And really, alot of people fly them just because, for them, they can afford it.
I basically agree with you 100% largely because of the issue with nosses in Eve atm.
But it's all about variation and understanding that people get enjoyment out of different things for reasons totally unrelated to the "efficeincy" of a given alternative.
|
Khiamara
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 00:57:00 -
[3]
You speak like its an automatic that a BC is going to own a HAC evertime. We all know thats not the case and its probably not even the case 25% of the time if the HAC pilot has a clue.
HAC prices will stay where they are until people refuse to pay that much, then the producers will adjust, just like with every other ship class thats been introduced.
|
Commander Thrawn
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 00:57:00 -
[4]
i fail to see how a properly fitted hac pilot will loose against a BC.
|
Khiamara
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:00:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Cummilla
There is a "fun" factor in flying them that adds to the attractiveness. And really, alot of people fly them just because, for them, they can afford it.
I basically agree with you 100% largely because of the issue with nosses in Eve atm.
But it's all about variation and understanding that people get enjoyment out of different things for reasons totally unrelated to the "efficeincy" of a given alternative.
and whats with all this crying about Nos all of a sudden? If youre scared of falling victim to Nos, fit them yourself or stay out of range. I dont see any problem with Nos in its current form.
|
Commander Thrawn
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:00:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Commander Thrawn on 29/03/2006 01:00:45
seriously, if it wasen't for the state of nos atm, even BS would have a hell of a time with hac's
BC imo don't stand a chance unless the Hac pilot really poorly fits it or makes a serious pilot mistake
of course were assuming good skills here
|
Commander Thrawn
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:03:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Khiamara
Originally by: Cummilla
There is a "fun" factor in flying them that adds to the attractiveness. And really, alot of people fly them just because, for them, they can afford it.
I basically agree with you 100% largely because of the issue with nosses in Eve atm.
But it's all about variation and understanding that people get enjoyment out of different things for reasons totally unrelated to the "efficeincy" of a given alternative.
and whats with all this crying about Nos all of a sudden? If youre scared of falling victim to Nos, fit them yourself or stay out of range. I dont see any problem with Nos in its current form.
yeah this is the real option of course, and its not impossible with a 28km scrambler. however it does make it alot harder to down the BS. not a huge issue.
but BC owning a HAC, i've heard this alot of late but really i haven't seen it in practice lol
|
Cummilla
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:04:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Khiamara
Originally by: Cummilla
There is a "fun" factor in flying them that adds to the attractiveness. And really, alot of people fly them just because, for them, they can afford it.
I basically agree with you 100% largely because of the issue with nosses in Eve atm.
But it's all about variation and understanding that people get enjoyment out of different things for reasons totally unrelated to the "efficeincy" of a given alternative.
and whats with all this crying about Nos all of a sudden? If youre scared of falling victim to Nos, fit them yourself or stay out of range. I dont see any problem with Nos in its current form.
There's only been at least three or more huge threads on the boards regarding nosses. Read up a little and you'll catch on to what people are finding fault with.
|
4 LOM
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:05:00 -
[9]
They are worth what ever you pay for them, so hac prices will be insane as long as people are willing to pay that for them. Honestly i probably wont replace my cerberus if it dies right now. play with another i can afford to replace it but i cant justify makeing someone else unbeleivably rich. just because they were lucky in the bpo lottery, until one of my 10 R&D agents puts out i am against those evil bpo owners.
|
pardux
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:25:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Commander Thrawn
i fail to see how a properly fitted hac pilot will loose against a BC.
any properly fitted bc should pwn a hac easily ;|
|
LaCoHa
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:51:00 -
[11]
I agree. HACs are basically for the elite (cash wise) players of EVE.
For some reason 80m seems acceptable, but 140 mil - thats ridiculous! I wish CCP would focus on making the necasary componets easier to obtain and therefore the HACS themselves cheaper.
|
Talthrus
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 01:58:00 -
[12]
Originally by: LaCoHa
I agree. HACs are basically for the elite (cash wise) players of EVE.
For some reason 80m seems acceptable, but 140 mil - thats ridiculous! I wish CCP would focus on making the necasary componets easier to obtain and therefore the HACS themselves cheaper.
140mil? I'd love it if I could get the HACs I fly for 140 mil now. Try 200 
----------------------
|
Tetovo
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 02:03:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Talthrus
Originally by: LaCoHa
I agree. HACs are basically for the elite (cash wise) players of EVE.
For some reason 80m seems acceptable, but 140 mil - thats ridiculous! I wish CCP would focus on making the necasary componets easier to obtain and therefore the HACS themselves cheaper.
140mil? I'd love it if I could get the HACs I fly for 140 mil now. Try 200
Muninns, eagles and sacs are all 110-120ish. Judging by your sig, you must be a zealot pilot and I feel for you, they are starting to break 200 but there are some somewhat reasonable sellers and they keep it at 180. Cerbs are out of control. Over 300 mill in the forge this weekend.
And HACs for the rich? You realize a BS is 100 for the tier 2, HACs aren't that expensive it just requires a safe 0.0 system for income.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 02:06:00 -
[14]
Originally by: LaCoHa
I agree. HACs are basically for the elite (cash wise) players of EVE.
For some reason 80m seems acceptable, but 140 mil - thats ridiculous! I wish CCP would focus on making the necasary componets easier to obtain and therefore the HACS themselves cheaper.
That wouldn't decrease the price, just increase profits for those selling them. They can choose to stay at the current price if they want.
The only thing that will lower the prices is a more widespread distribution of production capability. And I don't mean more BPOs, I mean BPCs availible through 0.0 hacking complexes, when 0.0 cosmos comes in.
Eve-Tanking.com - For the ultimate tanking spreadsheet and resources. |
xenorx
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 02:16:00 -
[15]
Originally by: LaCoHa
I agree. HACs are basically for the elite (cash wise) players of EVE.
For some reason 80m seems acceptable, but 140 mil - thats ridiculous! I wish CCP would focus on making the necasary componets easier to obtain and therefore the HACS themselves cheaper.
That is really only part of the problem. I have heard that there are only 20 bpo's for each HAC and it takes something like 36 hours to build each one.
That means that someone with a bpo can only produce 4.6 ships per week assuming that they are running 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Thats not many ships available when you consider that there are probably 20,000 players on at any given time and growing.
Compounding the problem are resellers who buy a ship cheap and double the price if a builder markets it at a resonable price.
No one can hear you scream in space, so STFU and die already. |
Darpz
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 02:30:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Darpz on 29/03/2006 02:34:36
the only hacs I fear in my brutix are cerbs and ishtars, and both those are still beatable the majority of the time, and are pretty easy to beat in a well setup cyclone or proph, I just have issues with there no cap weapon systems and natural resists to my main damage type. a vaga might not die since its faster than me but I won't die to it. the rest are goo.
and if you don't agree with me come by agil tonight or tommrow and i'll show you by releaving you of your hac
The only good fix is a DEAD fix |
twit brent
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 12:50:00 -
[17]
Well setup battlecruiser shoule beat most HACS. The 2 hardest HAC's for a battlecruiser to beat are the ishtar and cerb.
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 13:05:00 -
[18]
Previously HACs weren't neccessarily better than BSes, just an alternative, and in many cases, Battleships were better anyway. And for fleet ops, battleships have always reigned supreme. But at the moment specifically due to price, HACs are not a viable alternative to Battleships.
Dominix is a better drone carrier than an Ishtar.
Raven is better than both Cerberus and Eagle at blowing things up and surviving.
Geddon is better than a Zealot at blowing stuff up. Both Amarr BS tank better and do more damage than a Sacri.
Tempest is a better nuke platform than a Muninn.
The only HACs that aren't bettered by a same-race BS are the Deimos and the Vagabond. Deimos pilots say their HAC sucks, and I don't fly one to be able to argue. That leaves the Vagabond as the only HAC that does anything you can't essentially do with a racial battleship.
Vagabonds are worth flying, if you can afford them. The rest are toys.
Testy's Eve Blog!
|
Malken
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 13:15:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Commander Thrawn
i fail to see how a properly fitted hac pilot will loose against a BC.
ask podruski to post the setup of the zealot he killed with his BC, it was pretty pimped.
|
Lord WarATron
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 13:21:00 -
[20]
Given current prices, Command Ships are becoming more cheaper than HAC's!
But if you have a HAC BPO, you sell at what the market is willing to pay.
---
Slot 10 Akemons Modified 'Noble'Zet 5000 implant +8% Armour
FREE |
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 13:36:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Given current prices, Command Ships are becoming more cheaper than HAC's!
But if you have a HAC BPO, you sell at what the market is willing to pay.
Thats a skills and supply and demand issue, not many people can fly the T2 BC's making them less in demand, i love my zealot its fast and can kill ships fairly easily you just need to pick your fights carefully..
Author of "The Apoc Guide" |
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 13:45:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Commander Thrawn
Edited by: Commander Thrawn on 29/03/2006 01:00:45
seriously, if it wasen't for the state of nos atm, even BS would have a hell of a time with hac's
BC imo don't stand a chance unless the Hac pilot really poorly fits it or makes a serious pilot mistake
of course were assuming good skills here
Assuming good skills on both parts, BCs can give HACs a run for their money happily. Look at the similarities:
HACs tank better due to good stats and good resistances | BCs tank better due to their innate tanking bonuses and even higher base stats
HACs do more damage via their multiple bonuses | BCs can generally fit more weapons as they have higher fittings and more hislots
HACs have an advantage in that they're smaller and faster, and do generally output a little more damage. However, BCs aren't a far cry from being similar to a HAC in power level, and for 1/6 the cost or less, and fully insurable, I'd be careful about writing them off if I were you.
Testy's Eve Blog!
|
Hinik
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 13:51:00 -
[23]
I've never liked BCs... but now the T2 versions are out... I'll have to train them up 
its a hard life, and a BC... in most cases I'd say cannot take a HAC... a well fitted HAC can tank more damage over time than any BC can. so if both are setup for tanking with roughly the same damage output, the HAC will win every time (barring EW)
LOVES CHARITY REGARD |
Hel Kali
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 13:57:00 -
[24]
HAC's are very dangerous when proeperly fitted and can own any BC's or BS, Very good tank, very good dps/rof. Maybe a full ew scorp can beat a HAC :p
---------------------------------------------------------------
CEO of ens0ph corporation : http://www.linutx.be
Ferrets Breeding : http://www.alfdm.com |
HUGO DRAX
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 14:06:00 -
[25]
Ishtars are mean ships. To really fly one well you should have Drone Interfacing V, Medium and Large combat drones to 5, T2 drones and a bunch of assorted skills up there. If you are really used to using drones in actual pvp (solo or mixed fleet), have the investment in skillpoints, know how to fit one for PvP it will really do well for you. It is a better value than the Deimos which sells for more.
Dont just complain, do something. Channel macrointel meet with likeminded folks, spottings,intel |
Ripline
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 14:30:00 -
[26]
At the end of the day HACs are still pretty fun ships to fly. Or in a word, pack a lot of firepower and tanking into a reasonably fast ship with a cruiser size sig radius. Which is very nice indeed. Nothing wrong with BCs of course, just slower and with painfully large sig radius (at least when you're dealing with BS).
|
Viktor Fyretracker
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 14:38:00 -
[27]
id still say the BS and BC are still far better when you talk versitility just due to having more CPU, more grid and more slots.
im personally a ferox fan because its an awsome looking ship.
|
Testy Mctest
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 14:39:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Ripline
At the end of the day HACs are still pretty fun ships to fly. Or in a word, pack a lot of firepower and tanking into a reasonably fast ship with a cruiser size sig radius. Which is very nice indeed. Nothing wrong with BCs of course, just slower and with painfully large sig radius (at least when you're dealing with BS).
Pain with a capital P - but that's the price you pay for losing 10mil when your fully fitted BC dies as opposed to 160mil+ when your fully fitted HAC dies :P
Testy's Eve Blog!
|
Leandro Salazar
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 14:57:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 29/03/2006 15:01:34
Also keep in mind that there IS an eve besides PvP combat, and some HACs make great mission runners much better than battleships due to their resists and quad of bonuses, and NOS is pretty much a non-issue there. So mission runners will probably always pay a premium for HACs...
___________________________________
Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? |
Praxxus Dentor
|
Posted - 2006.03.29 15:19:00 -
[30]
Why risk a HAC in mission running when a BS with a couple of good hardeners works just as well (if not better), plus has more high slots for damage?
A faction BS I could see, as not a lot of NPC's are going to make you lose it. But a normal T1 BS pwns any mission level 3 or less, as well as most 4's without a lot of risk to the pilot.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |