EVE Search - Tier 2 BC's vs HAC's

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Tier 2 BC's vs HAC's

» 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 - 11 post(s)
Zar Dim Minmatar Anus Horriblis	Posted - 2006.12.13 11:50:00 - [61] Originally by: MOCC3 Not always Tru. i smoked a Tempest with my Hurricane.. Tracking disruptors are nasty VS a Teampest bad tracking guns. the new BC will pwn most ship hands down with correct skill a good pilot. Well there are always corner cases. But say had tempest 2 webbers you'd be dead, or it was not tempest but some other ship, or it had tracking comp or whatsoever. But generally speaking big sig is a serious issue, 'casue BCs are not on par with BSs, dps wise, and the difference is quite big and BS sized guns do almost as much damage as to other BS. Please tell my how the new BCs will pwn a Raven? Unless the pilot (in a Raven) a complete noob or Dominix or Phoon or correctly fited Mega? BSs always win unless there are some freak incedent (like lots of tracking disruptors) and no fitting on the target ship to counter it.
DiggerGraves	Posted - 2006.12.13 12:02:00 - [62] After testing the new Teir 2 BC'S i must admit to looking at the wallet adn thinking more deeply. My zealot was faster but at a wallet busting 160 million for the ship alone the new BC'S are making more sense for fleet engagments. Only yesterday i took the Harb into a 30 man fight and it tanked superb also a corp member in a drake found that he was tanking very well. They are slower but they can take just as much damage and give out the same dps but save 100 million. Thumbs up on the new ships from this player they are what the teir 1's were missing and with some luch HAC prices should start to come down as a result of player going screw that and heading for the Bc's.
Gyro DuAquin1 Tri Optimum Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.12.13 12:26:00 - [63] well ccp has annouced a while ago that hac prices will fall, with the bc all hac pilots got an option... And id guess hacs will still be expensive but not that ridicicoulies and they used to be a few months/weeks ago.
Pottsey Gallente Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2006.12.13 13:02:00 - [64] ôTier 2 BC's, not Tech 2. ö Pottsey, the discussion is about tier 2 BC's, not tech 2 BC's.ö ôe.c.t.ö I am away of that. The thread started with ôwhy on earth would anyone buy a rediculously priced HAC?ö I was pointing out nothing changed HACÆs have not been the best ship for a long time due to command ships. So why worry about Tier 2 BCÆs. Also I think it should be T2 ships compared to T2 ships. SO HAC to Command and crusier to Battlecrusier. öPlease dare to tell me the sleipnir has better or even the same resistances as a vaga?ö I did say Half the command ships the Sleipnir falls in the other half with worse resistance. Still The Sleipnir only has a tiny bit less resistance so use that extra slot to boost resistance to more then a Vaga or use shield gang assist for another 22.5% putting it above the vaga resistance or use both methods. On top of that the Sleipnir has a 37.5% to shield booster amount. My main point was HACS are over rated as Command ships tank better, deal more DPS along with doing tier jobs better all the while being cheaper to buy then HACS. A lot of people seem to be upset that HACS are no longer the best none capital ship due to BC Tier 2. Those people seem to be unaware HACS have not been the best for a long time and if you really want a PvP ship based on high resistance go for a command ship with higher base resistance then HACÆs. Passive shield tanking guide click here
Terrance O'Conner	Posted - 2006.12.13 13:19:00 - [65] Originally by: Wega Noir Originally by: Shadarle I wonder how many people in this thread have actually flown all the ships in question. As a Caldari I have flown the Cerberus, which is considered one of the better HACS. It is one of the most expensive for sure. The Drake completely dominates the Cerb in almost every way. Anyone flying a Cerb for PvE is foolish imo, the Drake will perform 95% of missions faster and the other 5% will be a toss up. And in PVP the Cerb is just too much money to use it over a drake. Even if they were equal in cost I'd take a Drake in every single instance. The Drake out-tanks the Cerb, it Outdamages the Cerb and it has lots more fittings so it is more versatile. To top things off, the drake has drones and the Cerb doesn't... The Cerberus is now a worthless ship. I can't understand why its price hasn't dropped substantially yet, perhaps people just havn't realized how out-classed it is yet. I'm saying all this as someone who has flown the Cerb on over 50 missions and the drake on about that many as well now. The drake is plenty fast/maneuverable with the new upgrades to BC agility they put in... so unless you absolutely need that 70m/sec for some reason you are insane to sacrifice so much DPS/Tanking/ISK. As the original poster, I couldn't have said a better reply. As to all those people in this thread that said you can't compare a Tier 2 BC to a HAC, well, your retarded. Both are cruisers, both are designed for direct enemy action. One type just happens to do 95% of mission profiles better and yet cost 1/4 the isk. But taken the cerb for instance as a backup to BSs I'd like to see any of you lay waste on enemies at 150km with the drake, or MWD at 25km using HAMs, new approaches are to be taken on the HAC's, but they still fill out roles not even the tier2 BC can. Perspnally I'd hammer a Drake anyday in my cerb given we have about similar setups, drake wont ever hit me... In general i say this, - you guys need to see opportunities in the HACs, not focus what the tier2 BCs do better, but on what the HACs can do which the BCs cant.
Felio	Posted - 2006.12.13 13:33:00 - [66] Edited by: Felio on 13/12/2006 13:39:05 Personally I recently chose a Harbinger over a Zealot. There are still a deal of things the zealot has over the harbinger, those things mainly being agility and range. I find that with the extra DPS from the drone bay my harbinger is performing just as well as my old zealots but at a much reduced pace. I have yet to try my Harbinger in a Lvl 4 but with dual MAR IIs, 7x focused medium beam IIs and 5x hammerhead IIs with drone interfacing at V I'm guessing it'll do what my zealot could do but like I said, at a much slower pace. I'm for the Harbinger, finally a powerful but economical enough medium-sized ship. I also have battelships at V and T2 large lasers and I must say with the state of amarr battleships/large weapons at the moment these are completely worthless, our only really good options are medium sized ships and with the harbinger we can now perform well enough in both PvE and PvP without the high costs of T2 ships. For those worried that harbingers will make zealots obsolete(Those being zealot BPO holders), zealots are still much better because of agility and range, now they're just not the only option out there. Those who can't afford zealots can now still be an effective pilot. My alt is becoming an effective industry character(she is now near 10mil SP all based in industry) and as my first BPO I plan on getting her a Harbinger Blueprint because this ship is more or less one of the few if not ONLY worthwhile T1 ship. Although I'll be hopping in an absolution soon enough, I still see myself using the harbinger in alot of situations.
Wega Noir Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2006.12.13 19:55:00 - [67] Originally by: OrangeAfroMan Originally by: Wega Noir As the original poster, I couldn't have said a better reply. As to all those people in this thread that said you can't compare a Tier 2 BC to a HAC, well, your retarded. Both are cruisers, both are designed for direct enemy action. One type just happens to do 95% of mission profiles better and yet cost 1/4 the isk. No they are NOT both cruisers!! Are you high?!?! Battlecruiser, just because it has cruiser in the name, does NOT mean its a cruiser! wtf......... Uhh, I am not high, your just retarded... A battlecruiser is just a up-armored and up weaponed cruiser, but it is a cruiser sized vessel none the less. Just compare the weight and volume of a BC versus a cruiser in game. I will save you some time, gasp, they are about the same! *I am become death, the destroyer of worlds...*
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.13 20:42:00 - [68] Originally by: Pottsey ôTier 2 BC's, not Tech 2. ö Pottsey, the discussion is about tier 2 BC's, not tech 2 BC's.ö ôe.c.t.ö I am away of that. The thread started with ôwhy on earth would anyone buy a rediculously priced HAC?ö I was pointing out nothing changed HACÆs have not been the best ship for a long time due to command ships. So why worry about Tier 2 BCÆs. Actually your second post in this thread says otherwise. You clearly confused the 2 there. Wherever you went - here you are.
Angus McLean Gallente Divinity Trials	Posted - 2006.12.13 22:39:00 - [69] For all HAC BPO owners...I really pray that Tier 2 BC's screw over your Hac market. After the prices youve been selling T2 ships, its time you guys stop getting rich.
Phantom Harlock Gallente Righteous-Indignation Imperium Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.13 23:57:00 - [70] Originally by: Pottsey ôTier 2 BC's, not Tech 2. ö Pottsey, the discussion is about tier 2 BC's, not tech 2 BC's.ö ôe.c.t.ö I am away of that. The thread started with ôwhy on earth would anyone buy a rediculously priced HAC?ö I was pointing out nothing changed HACÆs have not been the best ship for a long time due to command ships. So why worry about Tier 2 BCÆs. Also I think it should be T2 ships compared to T2 ships. SO HAC to Command and crusier to Battlecrusier. öPlease dare to tell me the sleipnir has better or even the same resistances as a vaga?ö I did say Half the command ships the Sleipnir falls in the other half with worse resistance. Still The Sleipnir only has a tiny bit less resistance so use that extra slot to boost resistance to more then a Vaga or use shield gang assist for another 22.5% putting it above the vaga resistance or use both methods. On top of that the Sleipnir has a 37.5% to shield booster amount. My main point was HACS are over rated as Command ships tank better, deal more DPS along with doing tier jobs better all the while being cheaper to buy then HACS. A lot of people seem to be upset that HACS are no longer the best none capital ship due to BC Tier 2. Those people seem to be unaware HACS have not been the best for a long time and if you really want a PvP ship based on high resistance go for a command ship with higher base resistance then HACÆs. QFT, again you state the obvious. Comparing HACs to Command ships again is ridiculous. Obviously a Command Ship is gonna tank more, resist more, and do more dps. It just takes ALOT longer to learn. People want to play with HACs, not wait a helluva lot longer for a Command Ship.
HyJek	Posted - 2006.12.14 00:57:00 - [71] Edited by: HyJek on 14/12/2006 00:58:21 Originally by: Wega Noir Originally by: Shadarle I wonder how many people in this thread have actually flown all the ships in question. As a Caldari I have flown the Cerberus, which is considered one of the better HACS. It is one of the most expensive for sure. The Drake completely dominates the Cerb in almost every way. Anyone flying a Cerb for PvE is foolish imo, the Drake will perform 95% of missions faster and the other 5% will be a toss up. And in PVP the Cerb is just too much money to use it over a drake. Even if they were equal in cost I'd take a Drake in every single instance. The Drake out-tanks the Cerb, it Outdamages the Cerb and it has lots more fittings so it is more versatile. To top things off, the drake has drones and the Cerb doesn't... The Cerberus is now a worthless ship. I can't understand why its price hasn't dropped substantially yet, perhaps people just havn't realized how out-classed it is yet. I'm saying all this as someone who has flown the Cerb on over 50 missions and the drake on about that many as well now. The drake is plenty fast/maneuverable with the new upgrades to BC agility they put in... so unless you absolutely need that 70m/sec for some reason you are insane to sacrifice so much DPS/Tanking/ISK. As the original poster, I couldn't have said a better reply. As to all those people in this thread that said you can't compare a Tier 2 BC to a HAC, well, your retarded. Both are cruisers, both are designed for direct enemy action. One type just happens to do 95% of mission profiles better and yet cost 1/4 the isk. How you can compare the DPS of a Cerb and a Drake I'm not sure, it has been proven the Cerb out damages the Drake already. Also, you will be using more slots on the Drake to raise resists, where as on the Cerb you already start out with much higher resists which means you can use those slots for other things. EDIT: Forgot to mention that these are two different ship classes, so they aren't really meant to be compared anyways. I have to say though I would take a HAC over a BC any day.
Tibrius Archer hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.12.14 01:57:00 - [72] Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 14/12/2006 02:01:19 Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 14/12/2006 01:59:41 I hate to say this but I hear a lot of BC fanboy-ism. Yep the new ones are great.... People forget they are too close to the ultra cheap tier 1 BSs available at mineral cost everywhere. A domi with un-named tech 1 cruiser class joke fittings will murder a tier 2 BC fact no argument. I mean that, nobody argue that point! I understand the price/performance argument against the HAC but I then I find it hard to see why these same bang for buck people would not rather fit cruiser guns on most lower tier BSes for PvP and use the extra grid for like 3 Large accom....(espcially vs the new gallante BC with no hybrid damage bonus and a smaller bay than the domi!) No drake or whatever you will quote will beat that sort of fitted tier 1 BS. I hear a lot of.. I can take down that HAC in my BC blah blah. I am sorry but last time I tried I found that most BC's where rather soft in my thoraxà. But I will concede the point that vs each other BC = HAC maybe greater if you know what your doing. This is where it gets interesting though. How many of you would like to go up against a blasterthron/autopest Megapulse geddon these very common setups will murder you. When a BS is setup like this with its close range less sig dependant weapons the worst thing you can be in is a BC the WORST. Deimos, zealot, cerberus, Vaga, ishtar can out transverse these setups or at least outrun them. Facing any of these in a BC is a certain loss provided youÆre not fighting a UTTER FOOL (someone who left home without BS level 3? No drone level 5?) Though if I could tell you how many rail megathrons and pulse geddons and NPCing Ravens with torps I have seen killed in cruiser sized ships due to sig and tracking its unreal so imagine what a screwed on HAC pilot can do. Again I ask the bang per buck people to consider why they donÆt fly a thorax 1600mm/ or medium gun rax vs flying BCÆs if max performance vs isk is what you want. Feel free to come back on what I have said with a passion i love smack ***************************************** "Get in my way and I will burn your fleet from stem to stern"
CherniyVolk	Posted - 2006.12.14 03:19:00 - [73] I embrace this fanboyism for the BCs. My HACs are getting cheaper! Tier 2 BCs can own any HAC easily! Seriously, this has been tried and tested on the test server time and time again. Tier 2 BCs, pwning Ishtars, Vagabonds, Cerberuses, no HAC has a chance! HACs can't out damage the BCs! Can barely outdamage a T1 cruiser! They are only marginally better than T1 cruisers... a Thorax is better than a Deimos, a T2 fitted caracal is head to head to a Cerberus... the Sacrilege can't tank any better than a Maller and the Omen has lasers! zap zap! If we need anything better, we can fly a battleship! Much cheaper! Has insurance! It's bigger! T1 battleship gun hits harder than T2 cruiser gun! HACs are too expensive, easy to train up too, provide marginally better performance than their T2 counterparts! This is either truth, or resentment spawned from jealousy, or perhaps crowd cheering from those enjoying a new ship. Doesn't matter. HACs are obsolete now, and HACs were never supposed to destroy anything but a T1 cruiser! Becuase they are cruisers too, they aren't supposed to survive against a BC, battleship or even a Iteron V. Though I did not know this, I'm going along with it. My Deimos used to cost around 200 million, and I found them as low as 165 now. KEEP IT GOING! YES! I hope to accumulate a small fleet of my favorite HAC by the time the stupid people acquire the necessary skill points to realize they suck! Even in a Tier 2 BC or Tier 3 Battleship! \o/
Mighty Baz HUSARIA	Posted - 2006.12.14 10:17:00 - [74] Edited by: Mighty Baz on 14/12/2006 10:19:55 i agree with you, After patch all HACs are a piece of junk, there is not worth a high price. ______________________________________________ Husaria recruits based on legendary XVI century Polish winged calvary
HyJek	Posted - 2006.12.15 02:25:00 - [75] All the people trying to say that a Battlecruiser is better than a HAC are so, so confused....
Megadon Caldari Deathshead Inc.	Posted - 2006.12.15 03:04:00 - [76] Edited by: Megadon on 15/12/2006 03:05:20 There is absolutely no doubt in my mind... that Bruce Lee would kick Chuck Norris's ass and that's what this is really all about isn't it? Sure it is. Bruce Lee would pwn.
Phantom Harlock Gallente Righteous-Indignation Imperium Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.15 07:47:00 - [77] Originally by: Megadon Edited by: Megadon on 15/12/2006 03:05:20 There is absolutely no doubt in my mind... that Bruce Lee would kick Chuck Norris's ass and that's what this is really all about isn't it? Sure it is. Bruce Lee would pwn. Steven Seagal is so lonely.....
Seishomaru	Posted - 2006.12.15 09:31:00 - [78] even old BC could do a hell of fight against a HAC after the recent boost in HP. last time i kileld a deimos ian cyclone.. 5 180MM 3 named nos Large booster etc etc.. 3 gyro 1Nano. He could not kill me before i nosed him dry(37% on shield boost is not to be ignored) .. and he is dead. toast...
EPSILON DELTA	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:22:00 - [79] With the BC insurance, a lost BC means at max 20mil lost Compared to the 150mil cost when you lose a HAC for A LOT of people, that 130mil difference means A LOT more the few things HACs do better than BC. assuming both are fully t2 equiped, which cancels out the module prices that is.
Dread Phantom Caldari Project-Chaos	Posted - 2006.12.15 11:38:00 - [80] Originally by: Wega Noir Originally by: OrangeAfroMan Originally by: Wega Noir As the original poster, I couldn't have said a better reply. As to all those people in this thread that said you can't compare a Tier 2 BC to a HAC, well, your retarded. Both are cruisers, both are designed for direct enemy action. One type just happens to do 95% of mission profiles better and yet cost 1/4 the isk. No they are NOT both cruisers!! Are you high?!?! Battlecruiser, just because it has cruiser in the name, does NOT mean its a cruiser! wtf......... Uhh, I am not high, your just retarded... A battlecruiser is just a up-armored and up weaponed cruiser, but it is a cruiser sized vessel none the less. Just compare the weight and volume of a BC versus a cruiser in game. I will save you some time, gasp, they are about the same! have you ever flown a BC
nomistseb Gallente Myster0ns	Posted - 2006.12.15 13:10:00 - [81] Edited by: nomistseb on 15/12/2006 13:12:21 i love my deimos and ishtar but i also love my mymirdon the cost is the main reason for flying tier 2 b/c's over hacs The drake isn't an I WIN BUTTON, I have beaten 3 in my mymirdon and it pawns i love gettint Arbalest Heavy launchers they sell soooo well AND COST SOOOO MUCH

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.