| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Wega Noir
Rampage Eternal
Ka-Tet
   |
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:25:00 -
[1]
With the new Tier 2 BC's, why on earth would anyone buy a rediculously priced HAC? Am I missing something here? I compared the stats of the Drake vs Cerberus and the Harbinger vs Zealot. Both Tier 2 BC's are overall better yet I can fully T2 fit one of those BC's and save 50-100 mil on the cost of the HAC ship ALONE!
Anyone else seeing what I am seeing? HAC prices simply have to get about a 75% price cut unless people out there are stupid enough to buy them at those absurd prices with the new BC's out.
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds... |
Aeaus
Tabula Rasa Systems
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:28:00 -
[2]
They're mo mobile, they're more fun, I still would prefer a HAC over a BC for normal fighting.
|
Aterna
Minmatar
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:37:00 -
[3]
HACs are faster. HACs have built in resistances. HACs have better overall grid, which allows them to fit higher tier weaponry without sacrificing tankability. HACs have 4 bonuses, which give them more potential.
Their downside is the overhead in losing one. 160mil for a Deimos+T2 fittings, and only like 40mil return from insurance, vs Myrmidon's cost (about 35m for me), and T2 fittings, means I lose less.
- - -
|
Benglada
Finite Horizon
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:50:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Aterna
HACs are faster. HACs have built in resistances. HACs have better overall grid, which allows them to fit higher tier weaponry without sacrificing tankability. HACs have 4 bonuses, which give them more potential.
Their downside is the overhead in losing one. 160mil for a Deimos+T2 fittings, and only like 40mil return from insurance, vs Myrmidon's cost (about 35m for me), and T2 fittings, means I lose less.
Hac insurance is about seven mill, lol.
---------------------------
Originally by: Arkanor
0.0 is the Final Frontier. Bring money and friends.
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari
Worms Corp
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:06:00 -
[5]
HACs are not better then BCs, id take my drake over a HAC tbh. it insures better, has an awsome tank, great DPS and much higher Versitility.
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Imperium Technologies
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:07:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
HACs are not better then BCs, id take my drake over a HAC tbh. it insures better, has an awsome tank, great DPS and much higher Versitility.
That's because the Drake is an I-Win button. 
-[23] Member-
Awesome new space games site, from the editor of E-ON! |
Infinitynexus
Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:13:00 -
[7]
Well, if i know what kind of ship im fighting, i fit 4 racial ECM's and ECM drones :P
|
Tisanta
Amarr
Privateers
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:15:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
HACs are not better then BCs, id take my drake over a HAC tbh. it insures better, has an awsome tank, great DPS and much higher Versitility.
That's because the Drake is an I-Win button.
Thats not what the other 4 people said after i solo pwned them in my pilgrim..
---
Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:18:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Wega Noir
With the new Tier 2 BC's, why on earth would anyone buy a rediculously priced HAC? Am I missing something here? I compared the stats of the Drake vs Cerberus and the Harbinger vs Zealot. Both Tier 2 BC's are overall better yet I can fully T2 fit one of those BC's and save 50-100 mil on the cost of the HAC ship ALONE!
Anyone else seeing what I am seeing? HAC prices simply have to get about a 75% price cut unless people out there are stupid enough to buy them at those absurd prices with the new BC's out.
If the teir 2 BC's become that valuable compared to HAC's the prices of HAC's will drop significantly due to demand drop off.
However, even though HAC's do less damage, they are much easier to tank, faster, more manuvereable and easier to fit big guns onto.
|
Infinitynexus
Astrodynamic Innovations
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:19:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Infinitynexus on 11/12/2006 02:19:46
that much is true, and im still more afraid of HACs than the new BC's.. habit of thought, hehe
But I wonder, what was the original intended role for HACs?
|
Tisanta
Amarr
Privateers
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:20:00 -
[11]
i think people need to stop pitching them against one and other cus HACs and BCs are designed for individual roles.. like BC is fleet command (noob one) and HAC is support vessel for BS
---
Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:26:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Infinitynexus
Edited by: Infinitynexus on 11/12/2006 02:19:46
that much is true, and im still more afraid of HACs than the new BC's.. habit of thought, hehe
But I wonder, what was the original intended role for HACs?
If only because BC's are very easy to get into and HAC's are not. The 20 days for Cruiser 5 can buy you a host of other skills, and its not until all those other skills get boosted up that Cruiser 5 is undertaken as they provide a larger boost than getting into a HAC you cant fly well.
I.E. it makes sense from a strength gain/time perspective to train HAC's later and train gunnery/support first, so the people you do see in HAC's will have plenty of training.
|
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:47:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Tisanta
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
HACs are not better then BCs, id take my drake over a HAC tbh. it insures better, has an awsome tank, great DPS and much higher Versitility.
That's because the Drake is an I-Win button.
Thats not what the other 4 people said after i solo pwned them in my pilgrim..
The fact they didn't shoot down your drones is what shows they were complete idiots..
|
Felix Dzerzhinsky
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:08:00 -
[14]
Hacs are still more powerful imo for the same reasons previously mentioned:
1) skills - a Hac pilot with very few exceptions will fit a full T2 setup or better and have the complementary skills trained to max or near max potential. This makes Hac pilots fantastic cruiser pilots and very dangerous in a Hac. These skills also mean that most Hac pilots are familiar with their ships and are not afraid to use them in combat.
2) Resistances - this is a big deal and oftain under-estimated even in PvP - the passive resitances of hacs are simply out of this world good and very easy to boost to phenomenal levels. To think that a Hac is 'just a cruiser' is to ignore their amazing damage and tanking abuility.
3) speed - I find that as I get older, I look for smaller ships that can perform more. Like many pilots, I went streight for the Raven because of its massive damage potential and soon found it lacking. Of course, with missle skills and t2 torps being trained to high levels, the Raven or any other BB that I chose to fly is still massive - but I am slow. The Hac will hit harder then a noob BB and still maintain its high speed and tactical advantage - and these are very good in small gang engadgments. Speed is not a luxery anymore, it is a survival tool - and hacs bring speed and power together.
--
The price is prohibitive, but the advantages of using one - especcially hacs with unique roles such as he Vega, or those that can really dish out the damge like the Ish or the Zelot will always remain in high demand and add a lot of potential to a group. I wish T2 BPOs would get seeded like all other BPOs though, then we could all enjoy these ships without being too worried about losing them - they are afterall, simply a cruiser 
|
Father Weebles
Wreckless Abandon
The UnAssociated
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 05:16:00 -
[15]
latest ishtar (jita) 180m
latest deimos (jita) 140m
"Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control." |
Prabms
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 07:59:00 -
[16]
It's like ass frigs versus t1 cruisers 
|
Kiyano
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 09:07:00 -
[17]
I dont' see the problem here. "If" the tier 2 BC's make for cheaper and equivilent if not better alternatives to the HAC's the price of HAC's will drop if demand drops, making the price of HAC's easier to live with and then you might want to use them instead of the BC's for whatever reasons.
|
Seishomaru
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 09:33:00 -
[18]
Isk for isk no one doubts a BC is better.. but the HACs are still better solo ships. In fact the new BC are not THAt better than the old ones (at least our minmatar one :( ... give our damm 7th tturret back!!!)
Who would like to field a single HAC against 4 BC? yeahh you can win.. but you have a LARGE chance of being vaporized
|
Kehmor
Caldari
PAK
Shroud Of Darkness
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 10:29:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Prabms
It's like ass frigs versus t1 cruisers
took the words right out of my mouth. Niether ship is better, they are different. If you can't spot the uses of a HAC then its probably a good thing you arn't in one and more over means you probably can't afford one. Stick to the more obvious ships like the drake until you realise the full potential behind eve's more specialised ships.
|
Gyro DuAquin1
Tri Optimum
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 11:54:00 -
[20]
well even before the bc have been a good hac alternative.
Taking a ferox (which is not a missle boat) vs an eagle in long range anti support fleet combat ;)
ive only tested it once in a real pvp fleet situation but wasnt that bad at all, u have on more gun, good power grid and whatnot, which means in other words at least the ferox has been alternative for hacs.
The brutix was probally as good as a deimos with 7 blasters.
The cycloone was like a good rupture.
BC where just to slow and not that good for running for the hills. But before the patch it was an option but normaly bc get treaten like a noobie ship ;)
|
Ione Hunt
Celestial Fleet
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 12:05:00 -
[21]
Sold my Ishtar...Myrmidon ftw!
________________________________________________
|
Kalek Astroth
Amarr
The Electrocuted
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 12:11:00 -
[22]
even Tier1 Bc can pwn an Hac...
|
Yar0
Rage of Angels
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 12:17:00 -
[23]
BC lvl5, med blaster spec lvl 4...brutix will rip apart most hacs...exept vagabond, cause it can run away
|
K1K1R1K1
Team Machine Incorporated
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 12:24:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Kalek Astroth
even Tier1 Bc can pwn an Hac...
What he said... the new Tier 2 bc's change nothing in terms of the bc/hac relationship.
_______________________________________
Don't worry aboutit. |
Pottsey
Gallente
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 12:42:00 -
[25]
ô2) Resistances - this is a big deal and oftain under-estimated even in PvP - the passive resitances of hacs are simply out of this world good and very easy to boost to phenomenal levels.ö
I wonder how many peoples realise command ships can have even better resistance then HACS without useing mid or low slots while having better tanks and being a lot cheaper while doing more damage?
HACS are over rated.
öIsk for isk no one doubts a BC is better.. but the HACs are still better solo ships.ö
Command ships are much better solo ships then HACS. ShouldnÆt it be HACS to Command ships as well as its T2 vT2.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
infraX
Caldari
Finite Horizon
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 13:01:00 -
[26]
Tier 2 BC's vs. HACs
Tier 2 BC:
Pro:
Cheap.
Insurable.
Easy to obtain.
Easy to get into skillpoints wise.
Much more hitpoints after the recent changes.
More cap. (takes longer to NOS down).
Con:
Larger sig radius.
Less agile.
Slower.
HAC
Pro:
Smaller sig radius.
More agile.
Faster.
Con:
Stupidly overpriced.
Not insurable for anything meaningful.
Not always readily available.
Requires more training to fly.
Just to add - HAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now. So really the pro's of flying a HAC is all about sig radius, speed and agility. It's up to you whether you think the cons are worth it.
|
Pottsey
Gallente
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 13:20:00 -
[27]
ôHAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now.ö
HACS donÆt have better resistance. Command ships have the same base resistance as a HAC only half of them have +25% resistance as a bonus and another 22.5% or more from gang assist.
Add on the right gang assit and they can be pretty fast as well. Command ships also got a large boost to the agile spec.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
slothe
Caldari
Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 13:23:00 -
[28]
Edited by: slothe on 11/12/2006 13:27:54
The ship is only as good as its pilot. A lot of the people here who say BC are better than HAC's im fairly sure have only tried them in missions.
Ireckon i could beat their bc in my hac, then beat their hac in my bc, but enough of that.
Tier 1 bc are really good never mind tier 2. with the right fittings t1 bc > hac. but same the other way round. half the time the decisive factor can be luck/ and who keeps their nerve, and most importantly tactics.
oh and to move onto the OP's point ...
"With the new Tier 2 BC's, why on earth would anyone buy a rediculously priced HAC? Am I missing something here? I compared the stats of the Drake vs Cerberus and the Harbinger vs Zealot. Both Tier 2 BC's are overall better yet I can fully T2 fit one of those BC's and save 50-100 mil on the cost of the HAC ship ALONE!
Anyone else seeing what I am seeing? HAC prices simply have to get about a 75% price cut unless people out there are stupid enough to buy them at those absurd prices with the new BC's out."
what you dont factor into this is that some people, unlike you, can afford to lose expensive ships. They maybe absurd prices to you, but to players that have been in the game for years, and who have accumulated isk, they can afford to lose one every few weeks no problem, even with fittings that cost twice as much as the ship.
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
HACs are not better then BCs, id take my drake over a HAC tbh. it insures better, has an awsome tank, great DPS and much higher Versitility.
would be interseting v an ishtar tbh. i think that would be a close call.
Before complaining about any ship try flying Minmatar |
Leuko Uratne
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 13:27:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Pottsey
“HAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now.”
HACS don’t have better resistance. Command ships have the same base resistance as a HAC only half of them have +25% resistance as a bonus and another 22.5% or more from gang assist.
Add on the right gang assit and they can be pretty fast as well. Command ships also got a large boost to the agile spec.
But then again there is after all a difference between Tier 2 BC (Drake, Myrmidon, Hurrican, Harbinger) and the command ships, so the argument is still true.
|
Fodderrr
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 13:33:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Yar0
BC lvl5, med blaster spec lvl 4...brutix will rip apart most hacs...exept vagabond, cause it can run away
Nope it will do what any other minmatar ship with barrage ammo would do and just kite ya
|
slothe
Caldari
Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 13:39:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Fodderrr
Originally by: Yar0
BC lvl5, med blaster spec lvl 4...brutix will rip apart most hacs...exept vagabond, cause it can run away
Nope it will do what any other minmatar ship with barrage ammo would do and just kite ya
ive killed a vaga with a brutix using electron blasters. they can try and kite you, wont always work tho
Before complaining about any ship try flying Minmatar |
DeadDuck
Omega Enterprises
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 13:40:00 -
[32]
The last advantage of the HAc is the average speed and smaller sig radius. In the end they are more fun to fly around, BUT the fact that tier2 BC can make almost the same role at a fraction of the HAC price plus the fact that the Tier2 BC can handle in the big majority a HAC on is own will driven this ships to be a rare seen, at least with the prices at current levels.
On a side note I am pleased to see a lot of HAC prices starting to fall and good amounts of supply in the market, at least for the ones that I can fly (Amarr).
I'm not seeing my self buying one HAC on a near future, but already bought 2 Harbingers 
|
infraX
Caldari
Finite Horizon
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 14:34:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôHAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now.ö
HACS donÆt have better resistance. Command ships have the same base resistance as a HAC only half of them have +25% resistance as a bonus and another 22.5% or more from gang assist.
Add on the right gang assit and they can be pretty fast as well. Command ships also got a large boost to the agile spec.
TIER 2 != TECH 2
This thread is not about command ships.
|
Imhotep Khem
Total Mayhem.
Maelstrom Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 19:19:00 -
[34]
I have not owned a HAC in a long time. I fly Minmatar. Vagabond is too expensive for what it does. Muninn does not do much.
Tier 2 BC gives me even less reason to purchace a HAC. I doubt I will ever buy a HAC unless they do something special with the Muninn.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Christopher Dalran
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 20:20:00 -
[35]
Well the first thing we need to realize is that HAC's do not cost anywhere near what people are selling them for to build, not even close. HAC's cost 150m+ because the people making them have decided that is simply what they are going to sell them for and if they are getting bought at 150mill then there is no incentive for anyone to lower prices now is there?.
tier 2 BC's are awsome, they are meant to fill the gap between tier 1 BC's and BS's so it only makes sense they are signifigantly better than the tier 1 BC's. With the appearance of tier 2 Battlecruisers alot more people that would have spent 150 mill on a HAC will instead choose to spend their money on a much cheaper tier 2 BC which is not quite as strong as a HAC but its Cost/power ratio is MUCH lower than that of a HAC.
Because tier 2 BC's are not tech 2 (so bps are seeded) alot of people will be making them so the prices will be extremely reasonable and with many people buying them instead of the horribly overpriced hac's (you all know your selling them for way too much) it will drive the prices of HAC down to a reasonable level (about bloody time too).
|
Cupdeez
Vengeance of the Fallen
Imperium Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 20:26:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky
Hacs are still more powerful imo for the same reasons previously mentioned:
1) skills - a Hac pilot with very few exceptions will fit a full T2 setup or better and have the complementary skills trained to max or near max potential. This makes Hac pilots fantastic cruiser pilots and very dangerous in a Hac. These skills also mean that most Hac pilots are familiar with their ships and are not afraid to use them in combat.
2) Resistances - this is a big deal and oftain under-estimated even in PvP - the passive resitances of hacs are simply out of this world good and very easy to boost to phenomenal levels. To think that a Hac is 'just a cruiser' is to ignore their amazing damage and tanking abuility.
3) speed - I find that as I get older, I look for smaller ships that can perform more. Like many pilots, I went streight for the Raven because of its massive damage potential and soon found it lacking. Of course, with missle skills and t2 torps being trained to high levels, the Raven or any other BB that I chose to fly is still massive - but I am slow. The Hac will hit harder then a noob BB and still maintain its high speed and tactical advantage - and these are very good in small gang engadgments. Speed is not a luxery anymore, it is a survival tool - and hacs bring speed and power together.
--
The price is prohibitive, but the advantages of using one - especcially hacs with unique roles such as he Vega, or those that can really dish out the damge like the Ish or the Zelot will always remain in high demand and add a lot of potential to a group. I wish T2 BPOs would get seeded like all other BPOs though, then we could all enjoy these ships without being too worried about losing them - they are afterall, simply a cruiser
Come down to 0.0 and I'll fight you 1v1 you in the Hac and me in a BC.
I got 500m that says I will win. In my tier 1 BC i coult take most hacs down. In the tier 2 BC's I can take all hac's down 1v1. (saying no EW)
Signature filesize exceeds max limit of 24000 bytes. Mail us if you have questions -Eldo Davip |
Megadon
Caldari
Deathshead Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.12.11 20:41:00 -
[37]
HAC's and BC's are different things. I used to hate BC's but since they got a 20% agility boost, they're bearable. I fly amarr and caldari hacs. I have a Drake, don't have a Harbinger yet, but I hear good things about it. The Eagle is in a class by itself, no BC can do what it does. Cerb, Sac, Zealot... maybe a BC can do what they do in a different way.
To me, you can't really say a BC is better than a HAC or visa versa, theyre just different tools. I like HACs better, but I think saying one is just better than the other in general terms is like saying a hammer is better than a screwdriver.
I think usually a HAC pilot will kill a BC pilot but that is just because a lot of HAC pilots are older players. Lots of 3 month old players in BC's these days.
|
Phantom Harlock
Gallente
Righteous-Indignation
Imperium Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 02:44:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôHAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now.ö
HACS donÆt have better resistance. Command ships have the same base resistance as a HAC only half of them have +25% resistance as a bonus and another 22.5% or more from gang assist.
Add on the right gang assit and they can be pretty fast as well. Command ships also got a large boost to the agile spec.
Get your wording right. There's a big difference between BCs and Command Ships(Elite BCs) and HACs. If you're trying to compare HACs to Command Ships, that's an obvious big difference.
|
Viktor Fyretracker
Caldari
Worms Corp
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 02:53:00 -
[39]
for missions i definatly say go with the BC just due to cost. the teir 1 or teir 2 BC cost less and insure for full value. though a full T2 launcher drake is about 60mil in HML IIs.
|
Rockbox
Amarr
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 03:04:00 -
[40]
Put it this way, my Harbinger has never lost a fight between me and my corpies Zealot. Let me add by stating my corpie, has lvl 5 in all his Gunnery support and he may have hac 5 but if not it is 4, I have my support skills to 4/5 and BC 4
The Harbinger is the pwnage, no doubt 
|
Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 03:14:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Pottsey
öIsk for isk no one doubts a BC is better.. but the HACs are still better solo ships.ö
Command ships are much better solo ships then HACS. ShouldnÆt it be HACS to Command ships as well as its T2 vT2.
You cannot directly compare HACs to command ships because even the Field Commandships are not pure heavy combat ships like AFs and HACs. If they were, they'd have all four bonuses geared towards gank and tank like the AF and HAC bonus sets. They'd possibly have extra weapon hardpoints/dronebays(well Gallente do have this one).
They're similiar, but not a direct upgrade like AF to HAC.
Originally by: kieron
The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
|
Altterra
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 10:38:00 -
[42]
I've never been the proud owner of the isk-sink that is HAC's, but i've flown a brutix for a long time now and killed 3 different HACs in it, i can only imagine what i could do in the myrmidon since my skills are leaning more towards drones than gunnery...
I still have no desire to purchase a HAC and definitly not with the new delicious ships out, yum yum!
|
Waagaa Ktlehr
Amarr
Body Count Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 11:12:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Rockbox
Put it this way, my Harbinger has never lost a fight between me and my corpies Zealot. Let me add by stating my corpie, has lvl 5 in all his Gunnery support and he may have hac 5 but if not it is 4, I have my support skills to 4/5 and BC 4
The Harbinger is the pwnage, no doubt
A Zealout outranges AND outruns a Harbinger.. You should not be hitting him tbh. :)
-
-
One ship to jam them all, one ship to damp them.
One ship to suck them dry and in the dark void gank them. |
NeoGeist
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 12:15:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Tisanta
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
HACs are not better then BCs, id take my drake over a HAC tbh. it insures better, has an awsome tank, great DPS and much higher Versitility.
That's because the Drake is an I-Win button.
Thats not what the other 4 people said after i solo pwned them in my pilgrim..
Well, a pilgrim isn't really a HAC now is it ? Btw, I <3 pilgrims and curses .
Oh, and to add in my 2 cents for HAC's vs. t2 BC's, Ishtar imo is the only hac that's actually worth it's price. It like an uber myrmidon on steroids. Oh, and the ishtar can actually field 5x heavies w/ backup/meds or lights.
|
Imaos
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 17:43:00 -
[45]
Originally by: NeoGeist
Oh, and to add in my 2 cents for HAC's vs. t2 BC's, Ishtar imo is the only hac that's actually worth it's price. It like an uber myrmidon on steroids. Oh, and the ishtar can actually field 5x heavies w/ backup/meds or lights.
With Revelations I prefer the BC repper bonus and the new hp over the dronehold bonus of the Ishtar. Especially some missions deal too much damage to the Ishtar now where a bc has enough timw to pop some enemies until he can rep more than he takes.
|
Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
EVE Animal Control
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 18:01:00 -
[46]
I got Hac5 and minnie cruiser 5 plus heavy/interfacing drones to 5.
Yet, instead of going for gallente cruiser 5 and an ishtar, Im going for bc5 because the Myrmidon with t2 tank RULEZ!
Im sick of paying tremendous prices for a BC replacement. Throw an intertia stab and/or nano on the low and your tier2 BC is approaching the manueverability and survivability of a HAC.(t2 tank with 2x med repprs on a Mrymidon is SICK)
----------------------------------------
Friends Forever
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 19:18:00 -
[47]
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.
**********************************************
Tank Rankings - Ships & Fittings Compared!
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=386174 |
NIkis
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 19:37:00 -
[48]
What i can say for myself is i'm happy things go this way , and the isk printing machines that were HAC BPOs will lose some of their value. All this ranting is really unnecessary, wait till the new tech2 BC come out and you will see the same useless comparisons again. As someone said, every ship got its role. Cerb can still hit at an insane range and imo thats its main advantage not resists or whatever else. Things in Eve evolve (both the player-driven ones like alliances and POS, and the CCP-driven ones), and thats what I like most about it :)
|
Brother Tycho
Amarr
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 19:50:00 -
[49]
Harbinger with tech 2 Tank and 2 MAR II with its drone space pwns Sacralige and Zelot nuff said (hint drone bays aint only for attack drones).
|
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2006.12.12 22:11:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôHAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now.ö
HACS donÆt have better resistance. Command ships have the same base resistance as a HAC only half of them have +25% resistance as a bonus and another 22.5% or more from gang assist.
Add on the right gang assit and they can be pretty fast as well. Command ships also got a large boost to the agile spec.
dude, first of all we're talking about tier 2 BC's not about command ships
second of all how do command ship all have same or better resistances? Please dare to tell me the sleipnir has better or even the same resistances as a vaga?
|
Wega Noir
Rampage Eternal
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 06:32:00 -
[51]
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.
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds... |
OrangeAfroMan
Minmatar
Suffoco Noctis
Atrocitas
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 06:50:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Rockbox
Put it this way, my Harbinger has never lost a fight between me and my corpies Zealot. Let me add by stating my corpie, has lvl 5 in all his Gunnery support and he may have hac 5 but if not it is 4, I have my support skills to 4/5 and BC 4
The Harbinger is the pwnage, no doubt
This may be true but he would (should) have been able to just go out of scram range and warp if things got bad -> he doesnt die -> he didn't lose.
Also, you can think of your 1v1 with his Zealot when you jump through a gate, only to be met by 5 camping battleships who lock, scram, and ream your BC, where his Zealot would have reached warp fast enough or been able to outrun them and warp away.
|
OrangeAfroMan
Minmatar
Suffoco Noctis
Atrocitas
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 06:54:00 -
[53]
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.........
|
Sari Yanma
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 07:55:00 -
[54]
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.........
Ok, it's not a *cruiser*. So what? It's just a name. What counts is combat behaviour, efficiency and cost to get said efficiency.
What are HACs for ? Basically, pwning anything cruiser and below. BCs do that quite decently for a fraction of the price. They're both challenged by the same ships (BS for start), and BCs behave quite well against HACs by themselves.
So we have two classes of ships whose place in the eve food chain seems seriously comparable, and one cost 30-40% of the price of the other, while being nicely refunded with insurance and more readily available due to no need of T2 BPO ? Tough choice...
|
dabster
Minmatar
Celestial Apocalypse
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 08:06:00 -
[55]
Hurricane for the mother-effing WIN when it comes to solo'ing.
Im NEVER paying more than 50 mil for a Vagabond again, thats for sure.
___________________________
Brutors Rule!
My Eve-vids; Click. |
Sorela
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 08:24:00 -
[56]
Please go compare interceptors to tier 1 BC's while you are at it. I want to read that thread too since I'm pretty bored.
|
Reiisha
Satal's Legion
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 08:31:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôHAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now.ö
HACS donÆt have better resistance. Command ships have the same base resistance as a HAC only half of them have +25% resistance as a bonus and another 22.5% or more from gang assist.
Add on the right gang assit and they can be pretty fast as well. Command ships also got a large boost to the agile spec.
Pottsey, the discussion is about tier 2 BC's, not tech 2 BC's.
EVE History Wiki - Help us fill it!
|
NeoGeist
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 08:36:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Imaos
Originally by: NeoGeist
Oh, and to add in my 2 cents for HAC's vs. t2 BC's, Ishtar imo is the only hac that's actually worth it's price. It like an uber myrmidon on steroids. Oh, and the ishtar can actually field 5x heavies w/ backup/meds or lights.
With Revelations I prefer the BC repper bonus and the new hp over the dronehold bonus of the Ishtar. Especially some missions deal too much damage to the Ishtar now where a bc has enough timw to pop some enemies until he can rep more than he takes.
Well, missions are quite different from pvp. Also, w/ the resists for the ishtar, you shouldn't have much problems w/ missions. The myrm only has a 125m drone bay, which is only good for 4x heavies and 5x lights. You absolutely need 5x lights for the webber frigs in missions, thus, the ishtar does more dps and is more versatile since it can field 5x lights and 5x heavies. It might not tank as well as the myrm, but if you're doing a serp/mordus mission, it's smooth sailing.
|
MOCC3
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 11:12:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Zar Dim
BCs have huge sig radius. And thus will be wtfbbq-ed by BS. But apart from that they are more cost effective compared to HAC.
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.
|
Yamaeda
|
Posted - 2006.12.13 11:41:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Pottsey
ôHAC's have the better resists but Tier2 BC's have a lot more base hitpoints now.ö
HACS donÆt have better resistance. Command ships have the same base resistance as a HAC only half of them have +25% resistance as a bonus and another 22.5% or more from gang assist.
Tier 2 BC's, not Tech 2.
Tier - approx. version
Tech - Technological level
Harbringer - Tier 2
Absolution - Tech 2
/Y
----------
It's great being Amarr, ain't it? |
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] |