| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ferocious FeAr
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
   |
Posted - 2007.09.17 02:38:00 -
[91]
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 02:39:23
Right. You know what my ships can and can't do. Say, can you give me the lottery numbers for tomorrow?  
Don't hate me, learn to love me |
Weeka
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 03:22:00 -
[92]
 Originally by: Allestin Villimar
Yeah, but that's the thing, you can't tank 1000 dps. You're only barely able to tank half of it.
Don't forget that he possibly benefits from crystal implants when you do the maths.
I myself have a passive tank, 82/87/88/91 resists, 3 BCS and a max recharge of 115 hp/s - so it's about the same as his active fitting - without crystals
|
Evenfall Phoenix
The Arrow Project
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 06:44:00 -
[93]
Why not run a semi-passive. You both bring up good points... well.. for people that have billions to toss around. fit 3 shield extenders, invul, active em hardener, 3 BCU and 2 PDS. Rig it up with a Core Defense and a missile damage, or range, or whatever missile rig you want.
Running a cap injector on a Tech 2 Missile Spewing ship seems absolutely ********. So does putting tons of faction equipment on a ship that costs 170mil. Save those faction mods for a carrier where it makes more sense. In a fleet fight your tank is going to die faster than your shield reps can activate, that's where the passive is a bit better because of the additional shields, you get the time to warp out while the lag monster is eating you up.
Another thing, if you fly a command ship you should be... oh I dunno... maybe doing some sort of leading. Even if it is just a squad commander. Which means you should have leadership skills in effect adding to your overall stats. You'd be a fool not to take advantage of the leadership skills. Hell you already had to get Leadership 5 to fly the thing. Just continue on.
In the end I favor a semi passive. I have the shields to sustain damage, the resists and recharge to tank, as well as the ability to still kick out some very nice dps. This way you are not sacrificing one thing for the other, you are balanced. Besides, if you are soloing with this ship you're going to die anyway.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 08:40:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
6 - Heavy Missile Launcher II (Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile, Caldari Navy Havoc Heavy Missile)
1 - 150mm Railgun II (Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S)
1 - Dread Guristas Large Shield Booster
1 - Dark Blood Medium Capacitor Booster
1 - Dread Guristas Magnetic Scattering Amplifier (got em shield comp 5)
2 - Invunerability II
1 - Power Diagnostic System II
3 - Ballistic Control System II
1 - Damage Control II
2 - Core Defence Field Extender I
5 - Hobgoblin II
Puts out 617 DPS (should be more soon Warhead Upgrades 5 finishing in a week). Can tank 1000 DPS.
Uhh... if that is an example how active tanking is better on a NH it fails.
DG LSB is 75 shield/sec and has 3 harderner slots which a passive setup will have as well. It has in addition a DC, though, which gives it compared to the passive setup a boost to 85 shield/sec.
A passive setup with 2 purgers, 2 LSE2 and 2 SPR2 - leaving 3 meds free for harderners and 3 lows for BCUs just like in your setup - does 81 shield/sec. And, since it is a gang setup it should get at least 8% to the shield amount from gang skills which boosts its regeneration rate to 87 shield/sec.
|
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 09:09:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
6 - Heavy Missile Launcher II (Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile, Caldari Navy Havoc Heavy Missile)
1 - 150mm Railgun II (Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S)
1 - Dread Guristas Large Shield Booster
1 - Dark Blood Medium Capacitor Booster
1 - Dread Guristas Magnetic Scattering Amplifier (got em shield comp 5)
2 - Invunerability II
1 - Power Diagnostic System II
3 - Ballistic Control System II
1 - Damage Control II
2 - Core Defence Field Extender I
5 - Hobgoblin II
Puts out 617 DPS (should be more soon Warhead Upgrades 5 finishing in a week). Can tank 1000 DPS.
Uhh... if that is an example how active tanking is better on a NH it fails.
DG LSB is 75 shield/sec and has 3 harderner slots which a passive setup will have as well. It has in addition a DC, though, which gives it compared to the passive setup a boost to 85 shield/sec.
A passive setup with 2 purgers, 2 LSE2 and 2 SPR2 - leaving 3 meds free for harderners and 3 lows for BCUs just like in your setup - does 81 shield/sec. And, since it is a gang setup it should get at least 8% to the shield amount from gang skills which boosts its regeneration rate to 87 shield/sec.
But then again, you can use drugs and vulture gang and suddenly instead of 75 you have 120hp/s. Oh and there are crystals as well...
|
SpinkTon
Caldari
Stronghold corp
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 09:19:00 -
[96]
Edited by: SpinkTon on 17/09/2007 09:23:17
Edited by: SpinkTon on 17/09/2007 09:20:39
as far as Semipassive (w/active hardners) or active im torn between which one to use.. now i dont use faction stuff cause i pvp.
I tried the active tank cause of the insanely large cargo bay. 700m3 fits a ton of cap charges
Active (all t2) no faction
6 hml
1 SBA
1 LSB
1 med cap inj w/800's
1 em
1 inv
3 BCU
1 Damage C
1 PDU
rigs: havent decided (opinions anyone?)
SemiPassive (active hardners) (all t2)
6 hml
2 LSE
1 em
2 inv (or 1 inv and 1 shield recharger) havent decided whats better
3 BCU and 2 spr or
2 Bcu and 3 spr
Rigs: 2 purgers
now i cant decide what one is better thats my dilema Dps is about the same. With the active one with rof and damage rigs sure the dps is a bit higher but really who are we kidding. sure the nighthawk is a nice ship but really wasnt designed to be a dps machine. so really id take a greater tank than a bit more dps i guess again depending on the situation ofc
|
Lars Lodar
Caldari
Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 09:41:00 -
[97]
I'd go with the passive setup since you get more HP, about the same regen, and you don't have to worry about cap. Also, a Nighthawk with 3 Ballistic Control Systems has the same DPS of a Cruise Missile Raven but it can kill smaller enemies way faster.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 10:16:00 -
[98]
Originally by: LUKEC
But then again, you can use drugs and vulture gang and suddenly instead of 75 you have 120hp/s. Oh and there are crystals as well...
And there are gist and pithum boosters, too. But that is all if, if, if.
If you have drugs (and are in 0.0), and if you have a vulture with gangmods (in which case you could as well have a logistic ship which is for a gang IMO more effective), if you spend 500mil+ on faction mods.
|
Allestin Villimar
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 12:43:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 02:39:23
Right. You know what my ships can and can't do.
In this case, yes. I do. If someone comes up and does 1000 kinetic damage to that tank, you'll die. Because shields in this game are set numbers that don't change. I think you're seeing 1000 dps that they're capable of dishing out given perfect conditions, but you never get perfect conditions in this game.
|
alesta
Legions of the Praetorian
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 13:45:00 -
[100]
6x navy heavy launcher II ,TB
1 pith x type photon, 2x navy invuln, 2x large shield extender II
3x navy bcu, 2x spr II
2x core defence field purger
works wonders
NeoTech Incorporated |
Ferocious FeAr
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 17:29:00 -
[101]
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 17:35:05
Originally by: Allestin Villimar
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 02:39:23
Right. You know what my ships can and can't do.
In this case, yes. I do. If someone comes up and does 1000 kinetic damage to that tank, you'll die. Because shields in this game are set numbers that don't change. I think you're seeing 1000 dps that they're capable of dishing out given perfect conditions, but you never get perfect conditions in this game.
I've tested my tank throughly. Again, I will tell you that you are wrong. I have a crystals set, forgot to mention that. As for the MM guy complaining about faction stuff being expensive and not worth it. Those items aren't that expensive. In fact I've ran bait plenty times up north (previous contract), never had a gang break my tank once.
You guys can sit here all day and say how the passive Nighthawk is better. We all know that you can get a incredibly impressive tank on the drake (passive), you would also be spending A LOT less ISK. You want to run passive, fly a vulture or a drake. My mind is setup on the Nighthawk being an active tank. I've ran both setups. I think I know which is more effective.
Say Allestin, what kind of experience do you have with the Nighthawk? Seeing how you are a 2007 player I can't see how your setup would be even remotely effective. You shouldn't even be thinking about command ships at your characters age. You should still be in the Drake honing your support and missile skills. There seems to be a boatload of 'expert critics' here with stats out the yingyang. Stats can only go so far, its all situational in game. Not saying passive tanks don't work. I'm claiming that active tanks are just as good, most of the times better on the Nighthawk.
I swear I feel like I'm rehashing the same amount of information every time I reply. Obviously you guys aren't going to be sold on active tanks (could care less if you were or weren't), why would you? You are spoiled sitting and just having to press f1-f6 and having no micromanagement issues whatsoever. I call it lazy pvp. Leave the passive tanks to the people who undock from Kisogo (did I mention I hate passive tanks?).
Don't hate me, learn to love me |
Gypsio III
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 17:57:00 -
[102]
Personally, I prefer an active setup on the Drake. After fitting HAMs and BCS you don't really have the PG for a useful passive setup. When I eventually get a NH I imagine I'll try to fit it similarly...
|
Ferocious FeAr
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 18:17:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 18:18:45
Yeah same here, if I were to fly a drake (which I wouldn't) I would fly it active. Same with the vulture. I just wish heavy assault missiles powergrid requirements were a bit more favorable. I love my heavy missiles though, got the spec to 5. It has served me well so far. 
Don't hate me, learn to love me |
Evenfall Phoenix
The Arrow Project
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 18:44:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 17:35:05
Originally by: Allestin Villimar
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 02:39:23
Right. You know what my ships can and can't do.
In this case, yes. I do. If someone comes up and does 1000 kinetic damage to that tank, you'll die. Because shields in this game are set numbers that don't change. I think you're seeing 1000 dps that they're capable of dishing out given perfect conditions, but you never get perfect conditions in this game.
I've tested my tank throughly. Again, I will tell you that you are wrong. I have a crystals set, forgot to mention that. As for the MM guy complaining about faction stuff being expensive and not worth it. Those items aren't that expensive. In fact I've ran bait plenty times up north (previous contract), never had a gang break my tank once.
Don't kid yourself. We all know about that previous contract, and who you fought. In fleet battle today your so called tank is worthless. Second, those items do cost. On top of which you are probably running crystals, as well as drugs. You know the rest of the world doesn't have nice cushy contracts that give us enough money to fit everything and be able to lose everything without a worry.
That is the real difference here. If you have the money to just toss around, sure, an active tank like his would work very well. However, not everyone can do that. For those of us that don't have the resources the passive tank ensures that you can A: Keep your 170mil ship alive and B: Still be useful in a gang fight. Again need I say that in a command ship you should have gang skills. Which means you should be giving bonuses to your gang, and those bonuses are what can give you a fairly significant edge over your opponent. Therefore it is your duty to stay alive, and your duty to keep the gang in order. The passive setup gives you the best ability to do this.
|
Ferocious FeAr
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 18:48:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 18:49:15
I don't believe I ever mentioned using drugs. We aren't taking about fleet setups, wake up and smell the coffee.
Don't hate me, learn to love me |
Eardianm
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 18:53:00 -
[106]
Edited by: Eardianm on 17/09/2007 18:55:58
Edited by: Eardianm on 17/09/2007 18:55:28
I'm personally saving up for a faction NH myself atm.
That aside, Ferocious FeAr, either you're adding factors not mentioned in your setup (gang mods, drugs), or you're letting anecdotal evidence blind your judgment. You did mention a crystal set, but I'm not sure if that was listed in your setup's numbers.
Both raw tanking numbers and dps have been shown in this post to be close enough to equal to be a non-factor(using your active setup versus the 2 LSE, 2 SPR, 2 purger rig passive). Both have 3 BCUs, and according to the numbers listed, are repping in the mid 80 shield per second with equal resists. You'll have more time in structure due to DCU II, and a better cap capability, albeit nothing to use it on. The passive will benefit from better alpha protection.
If you're adding in crystals, shield gang mods, and or drugs, then yes, all those push the balance in favor of the active setup. Far in favor when all those are added in. I've no doubt that your NH has performed well for you. But the numbers don't lie. You would have performed just as well in those situations in a passive NH, as unsexy an option as it is currently, *assuming* none of the unmentioned factors were actually in place.
If you were high on drugs and had a vulture in system, then yes, your active tank probably survived where a passive would have been dropped 
*edit* and now I see no drugs. shield gang mods usually present then for your setup?
I am aiming for active because the high end potential is huge, using faction gear. With a pith x large, DG amp, DB cap booster, and Gist/Pith em + DG invul field, I can still fit 3 bcus and contribute some dps. To match that passively, I'd have to sacrifice the entire fit to it, losing those BCUs to SPRs, and deal with the annoyance of cap that takes 10 years to recharge.
Now, give us some more PG so I can fit that gang mod, and we can push it more in favor of your active fit, since the passive version would have cap issues keeping it running
--------------
|
Ferocious FeAr
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 18:59:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 18:59:11
Yeah I probably should have included the crystal set along with gang bonuses on the initial post. <3 MC bonuses!
Don't hate me, learn to love me |
Eardianm
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 19:04:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 18:59:11
Yeah I probably should have included the crystal set along with gang bonuses on the initial post. <3 MC bonuses!
There we go 
In that situation, active ftw.
Maybe I'll let Gyp spend the isk on a sexy active NH and I'll put mine towards my Vulture to boost him.
--------------
|
Klavayne
Free Mercenaries Union
FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 19:54:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Klavayne on 17/09/2007 19:55:52
I've flown a nighthawk for a while and have used both active and passive setups. Both obviously have their benefits and downfalls so theres no point arguing that ones is "better" than the other, its down to a preference. I will say however, that had i the isk to start using a NH in pvp i would go with an active setup.
I made two similar fittings on EFT to compare them.
Active:
6x Heavy Missile Launcher
Large T2 Shield Booster
T2 Shield Boost Amp
Medium Cap booster (w/800s)
T2 Invulnerability Field
T2 EM Hardener
3x T2 BCUs
T2 DCU
Beta PDS (to fit CPU-wise)
Resists Are:
EM Exp Kin Therm
78 81.5 83 86
'Defense Efficiency' = 538 - maintainable as long as cap boosters last.
Passive:
6x Heavy Missile Launcher
2x Large T2 Shield Extender
2x Invulnerability Fields
1x T2 EM Hardener
3x T2 BCUs
2x T2 SPRs
2x Shield Recharge Rigs
Resists Are:
EM Exp Kin Therm
79 84.5 85.4 88.4
'Defense Efficiency' of 467 - cap stable.
Both of these setups do an identical 485dps with my skills using CN Scourge and 5 T2 Hobgoblins. My shield operations skill is only at level 4, but even that would not make up the difference in tanks. These also do not take into account any implants whether standard passive ones or crystals. The obvious difference between the two is also that the passive one requires rigs to get anywhere near the active tank.
To match the damage of an active setup, passive setups have weaker tanks. Not only that, with an active tank you can keep putting money in to improve it, the more isk you have the better it gets. With passive tanks there is always a limit as to how good it can be while maintaining a decent amount of damage.
Edit: Forgot to mention any improvement which could be gained from gang skills/links. More specifically, that the shield amount bonus can easily be matched by the gang modules for boosters.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 20:30:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
You guys can sit here all day and say how the passive Nighthawk is better. We all know that you can get a incredibly impressive tank on the drake (passive), you would also be spending A LOT less ISK. You want to run passive, fly a vulture or a drake. My mind is setup on the Nighthawk being an active tank. I've ran both setups. I think I know which is more effective.
Passive is more effective if you are on the t2 lvl. No ifs and buts there really. Cold hard fact.
Active is more effective if you are on the faction lvl (this includes implants). But that is not that surprising considering there are no faction mods which help passive tanking.
|
Klavayne
Free Mercenaries Union
FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 20:39:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Aramendel
Passive is more effective if you are on the t2 lvl. No ifs and buts there really. Cold hard fact.
Hardly a cold hard fact. Yes, purely using t2 mods and no implants passive tanks are the best. But using equal slots for tanking, it is by no means definately more effective.
|
Ferocious FeAr
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.17 20:43:00 -
[112]
I wouldn't say "more effective" because now you are putting DPS into the picture amoung other things. Passive tanks are good for tanking, that is about it. You're quite flexible with active tanks, you have room to accomplish more.
Don't hate me, learn to love me |
Allestin Villimar
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 01:43:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
Edited by: Ferocious FeAr on 17/09/2007 20:46:35
I wouldn't say "more effective" because now you are putting DPS into the picture amoung other things. Passive tanks are good for tanking, that is about it. Active tanks are a lot more flexible, you have room to accomplish more.
Again, how is your set up "more flexible". What are you doing (aside from slightly more damage) that's any different from passive set ups? Does damage = flexibility all of a sudden? I would think the ship that was immune to capacitor drain and had a larger buffer to eat through would be more flexible than the one who's only good for more damage (Which other ships do far better). The only way I can see your active set up as being more flexible is that you always have the same hits restored, so at very low and very high shield health they're slightly better. Of course, letting up on a passive tank for even a brief while (say to reload) and you have to eat through a huge buffer again, where as you won't have nearly as much health restored in the interim.
Drakes actually make worse passive tanks because they lack the innate resists. With the rof bonus on nighthawks, you do more damage as well. Yes, drakes can get higher regen per second, but their resists aren't nearly as good. (Unless you're going to dump 1.2 bil in t2 rigs, then the drake would be a better tank)
You evidently didn't read my post critiquing your tank, either. I included 5% shield hp, 5% shield recharge, and 5% shield booster amount for implants. No gang modules or bonuses, but I really doubt you'd ever be able to tank 1000 EM/Kinetic damage with that set up unless you were ganged with a L5 titan pilot or something similar. Even then, it's not like those bonuses don't help a passive tank even more. 10% shield bonus for 16k shields as opposed to a 10% shield bonus for 13k shields. Shield harmonizing modules will give more resists since mine are lower, making them more useful to me.
So far in this thread all you've done is point to anecdotal evidence and continually introduce more stuff that makes your tank better, and it still doesn't do what you said it could. You can tank 3 ships? Great, were you moving? Then their DPS isn't at optimal. Were they in optimal range the entire time? Their dps drops even more. Were they using large guns? Another dps drop. Did they have maxed out skills? Suddenly it doesn't seem very likely you know the exact dps you were tanking.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 07:55:00 -
[114]
Edited by: Aramendel on 18/09/2007 07:55:25
Originally by: Klavayne
Hardly a cold hard fact. Yes, purely using t2 mods and no implants passive tanks are the best. But using equal slots for tanking, it is by no means definately more effective.
Originally by: Ferocious FeAr
I wouldn't say "more effective" because now you are putting DPS into the picture amoung other things. Passive tanks are good for tanking, that is about it. Active tanks are a lot more flexible, you have room to accomplish more.
You can do dps and passive tank without problems. Who forces you to fit 5 SPR2s? Noone.
You need (need need need) FACTION equipment (including implants, nonfaction implants do not halp active tanks more than passive tanks, to the contrary) to get a superior active tank. No ifs or buts. I showed that already.
Copy-paste:
With 2 SPR2, 2 LSE2 and 2 t1 purgers you get 80 shield/sec recharge. And 3 active harderners. Sustainable.
Which active setup can get an sustainable 80 shield/sec regeneration rate with 2 med and 2 low slots used?
A pithum a-type medium booster + SBA2 can get 103 regen and is sustainable with only 1 PDU2, but thats 2 bil down the drain.
A gist c-type large booster + SBA2 gives you 91 regen and is sustainable with 2 PDU2 and will cost you 500 mil.
Or crystal sets (and spending 0.5-2 bil for them and gimping your skill training speed).
If you go unsustainable you could use a pith x-type large shield booster, fit 2 boost cycle time rigs and a SBA2 and get almost 200 shield/sec and are able to sustain it with 1 med cap booster with 800 charges. Decent for PvP I guess..but again also a 750mil investment.
A t2 large shield booster will give you 81 shield/sec, about the same as the passive setup. Cap-booster dependant and with a far smaller HP buffer. And only 2 med slots left for harderners compared to 3 with the passive setup. 2 more low slots left though.
Feel free to give me any t2 setup which is more effective and has room for 3 BCUs without using faction stuff. As far as I can see there is none.
|
SpinkTon
Caldari
Stronghold corp
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 09:23:00 -
[115]
with a large shield booster 2 a shield amp 2 and a cap injuector w/800's 1 em t2 1 inv t2 and a damage controll (rocks for PVP) the resists are pretty descent, em is like 78.?% and the rest over 80 %
Now maybe my math here is wrong but 240 shields / 4 seconds on the booster x 1.36 for the boost amp is 326 shields per 4 seconds
81.50 shields per second there plus the measly 15ish shields per second that we get on our passive regen 96.5 shields per second and you have your low slots to do what you want to wiht plus you dont have to put purgers in the rig slots..
maybe my math may be wrong but i will be doing more testing to see what one i prefer.
|
Klavayne
Free Mercenaries Union
FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 10:17:00 -
[116]
Aramandel, youve pretty much pointed out that they are pretty equal. Aside from the fact that one requires cap boosters and one requires rigs with each improvable quite easily. So again, its down to preference as to which people want to fly. Your preference is for passive which is fair enough, that doesnt mean that people who choose active are "wrong".
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Coreli Corporation
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 10:38:00 -
[117]
They are wrong if they claim that they are superior. Which they aren't. You need faction equipment to achieve that.
|
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 11:19:00 -
[118]
Edited by: LUKEC on 18/09/2007 11:20:08
Originally by: Aramendel
They are wrong if they claim that they are superior. Which they aren't. You need faction equipment to achieve that.
And warping back to fight with 1/3 shield is very bright.
Active tanks have some advantages that can't exactly be included in quickfit.
Arguing about pure numbers ... t2 with gang is better than passive, t2 with drugs is better than passive. What does passive have again? Apart from 2x bigger ship and more buffer that won't really save you anymore?
|
Allestin Villimar
|
Posted - 2007.09.18 13:01:00 -
[119]
Ok, with no rigs the 2nd set up I posted still gets 130 shields per second at max regen, which is still 15/s better than what fear posted. Only leaves 2 slots for resists but with maxed EM shield comp and a DG invuln you can still pull almost 75% to em and the others at 80%+. But if you fitted a launcher rig and a missile damage rig your damage would be almost identical to his active set up and still pull more tanking.
So:
6x T2 Heavies, 1x whatever fits
2x LSE T2, 1x Shield Recharger T2, 1x Dread Guristas Invuln, 1x Dread Guristas Magnetic Scattering Amplifier
4x Shield Power Relay T2, 1x Ballistic Control Unit T2
Rigs: Warhead Calefaction Catalyst, Bay Loading Accelerator
With rapid launch 5, heavy missile spec at 4, command ships 5, and a 5% implant, you wind up with about a 4.85 second rate of fire, EM resist around 74.8%, and other resists are above 80%. Peak shield regen is around 130/s. This has the added benefit of not using shield rigs, so your signature radius is only aboout 330 or so.
|
Jack Auger
|
Posted - 2007.09.20 16:33:00 -
[120]
I really like Allestin's style and analysis. My cashflow is low enough that survivability is more the issue with the occassional kill just sauce for the goose.
As I setup my first NH, I'm using EFT to weigh these ideas but am not seeing the peak shield regen rates being described by many and am wondering what is different, or more likely what I am doing wrong. My regen rates are consistently lower than advertised with the same gear. My skills relative to regen are maxed, unless I've missed something, and I even added a %5 regen implant.
Comparing Allestin's previous post above from the 18th, matching the hadware exactly and with no shield rigs my max regen is
106.64%. That is with a +5% shield regen implant, Shield Op/Mgmt both at 5, 4 x SPR II's and 1 x Shield Recharger II.
Not sure what I am missing. Can you list, or tell me what skills/levels and implants you include in your analysis and also what tool? I'm wondering if EFT (which I love) might be inaccurate if you are using a different tool. or, if I have made a blatant skill omission could someone please smack me?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |