EVE Search - navy raven - passive shield tank

All Channels

Ships and Modules

navy raven - passive shield tank - will it be enough??

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
DEFF DSP	Posted - 2007.08.16 02:41:00 - [1] Raven Navy Issue 7x cruise or torp launchers 3x Shield Recharger II 2x Large Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II (or faction) 3x Shield Power Relay II 2x Ballistic Control System II Rigs : 3x Core Defence Field Purger II 21656 shield, 267.25/s, E/T/K/Ex=30/43/57/71 11953 armor, E/T/K/Ex=59/44/25/10 6640.625 cap, +7.63/s, -3.2/s 144.0 m/s KVA200 & KYA2000 implants so - what do u say - will this setup be enough for l4 mission running?
king jks Exanimo Inc Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.08.16 02:50:00 - [2] On those resists? No.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.08.16 03:51:00 - [3] 3 LSE II, 3 mission-specific resists, 3 SPR and 2 BCU, 3 purger I (doubt you want to spend the ISK for T2 purgers when you could go faction-booster active with that). Worse peak DPS tanked as yours, but a much higher actual damage buffer, giving you enough time to reduce the incoming damage below the "dangerous" treshold, and a decent tanked DPS afterward. Needs good capacitor skills to perma-run the hardners, but I don't think that should be a problem. Should be barely enough for most L4s, wouldn't try the really hairy ones without backup solo though. No "semi-AFK missioning" either, you get in over your head, you're dead. Also, it's slower in mission completion as an active-tank Raven, because you either have to use mostly cruise missiles, or work with non-full-strength torpedoes due to lack of painter(s), and 2 (or even just one) instead of 3 BCUs. _ Complaint vs whine \| Char creation guide \| Stacknerfs explained
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.16 05:04:00 - [4] Passive CNR's and Rattlesnakes make baby jesus cry. You may be able to tank most lvl 4's, but with roughly 400 DPS will spend 2 - 3x as long as normal finishing them.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.08.16 05:22:00 - [5] Why do you always assume a passive-tanked ship has to have no damage mods, especially since the OP's post clearly uses 2 damage mods already. You don't get that much extra DPS out of a 3rd damage mod as you get out of the 7th launcher compared to a regular Raven, and especially not something impressive out of a 4th one. Sure, it's not a perfectly safe tank for all L4 missions, it might even need a jump-out every now and then (or even be unable to safely complete some of the missions solo), but it will handle just fine in others. Heck, people say you shouldn't fit anything except XLarge boosters and Sieges on Ravens in missions, yet there's a lot that manage to run L4s just fine with Large boosters or Cruise missiles too. So, ok, you might want a faction perma-running active-tank for extra safety, you might want a CN/DG siege/BCU CNR for extra speed, but none of them are MANDATORY to run L4s. This goes double nowadays, when a XL faction booster costs as much as a Rattlensake, and as much as two CNRs. _ Complaint vs whine \| Char creation guide \| Stacknerfs explained
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.16 05:36:00 - [6] Well, simply put, if you want a passive tank to hold all lvl 4 missions you can have no damnage mods. Warping in/out kind of defies the point of a passive tank (to hold indefinetly).
Sargeraes Caldari THC LTD	Posted - 2007.08.16 05:40:00 - [7] Edited by: Sargeraes on 16/08/2007 05:42:45 You may get this topic beaten past death like an overworked horse, but I'm going to add my voice to the crowd. No. L2ActiveTank. I'm not belittling you, I'm just being succinct. The Raven is an active shield-tank ship, it's not an armor tanker anymore, it's not a passive tanker, it's a shield tanker that spews missiles like nobody's business. That brings up another point... Kids, don't put guns on your Raven. It burns us. "Vae victus" ~ Julius Caesar "Woe to the Vanquished"
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.08.16 06:15:00 - [8] Edited by: Akita T on 16/08/2007 06:23:23 Edited by: Akita T on 16/08/2007 06:22:15 Well, no offense, but that's just your side of the story on the passive tanks A passive shield tank has the benefits of not needing micromanagement (most of the time anyway) and a high damage buffer before you go poof. So even if your "peak recharge" ain't especially hot, all you need to do is reduce incoming damage fast enough so it goes below your tankable treshold before the buffer runs out. ___ Personally, I look at passive tanks much the same way as active tanks that run on cap booster charges... with the difference being that with a passive shiledtank, you have the boosted equivalent already "built in" and self-replenishing. 10335 shield hitpoints from 3 LSE (L5 shield management, 5% gnome implant) are basically the same as 12-13 cycles of XLarge shield booster II with a SBAmp-II (9792 HP for 12 cycles, 10608 HP for 13 cycles). The difference ? You use up 4320 (or 4680) capacitor and need 60 (or 65) seconds to turn that capacitor into shield, at an average rate of 163.2 shield/second... while the shield buffer in the LSE scenario is already there to begin with, wether you still have that capacitor available or not. A XL booster will use up 72 cap/second to function to supply you with those 163.2 shield/second, alongside the 6 cap/second needed to run 3 hardners which I only assume you have running non-stop, so that's 78 cap/sec usage at max skills. A max-skills Raven with 3 CCC-I rigs barely can supply a peak recharge rate of 31.2 cap/second, so in order to run the booster indefinetely you'd need a lot of extra capacitor modules, or you'd have to use a different (faction) booster and less capacitor-recharging modules... or rely on booster charges for some extra capacitor when needed (but also sacrifice a midslot for the booster in the first place). The 3-LSE-II, 3-Purger-I, 3-SPR-II Raven will passively regenerate up to 156 shield per second at peak, compared to the (roughly) 190 = (aprox) 28 recharged + 162 boosted per second of an active Raven. Overall, the LSE-raven will outlast a booster-raven in the first minute of an encounter NO MATTER WHAT due to the increased shield buffer, which is usually enough to down at least one enemy NPC battleship. Even after that first minute, the active Raven only gets that 22% better "tankage" for as long as it can afford to run the booster, cap-wise... while the passive Raven gets it whenever shields not too low. Originally by: Sargeraes The Raven is an active shield-tank ship Yes, a RAVEN. But not a Caldari Navy Raven. A CNR has 1.4 LSE-IIs "built in" compared to a regular Raven, a +50% base shield recharge rate. With a 3xLSE-II fit, a CNR still has a 24.4% better passive recharge rate as a regular Raven. As for the rest of the numbers, look at them yourself. 163/sec boost plus some minimal passive recharge, vs a 156/sec peak recharge for CNR and merely 125/sec peak recharge for a Raven (with identical passive fits vs a typical T2 active fit)... and an extra buffer to outlast a minute of full T2 XL+amp boosting. _ Complaint vs whine \| Char creation guide \| Stacknerfs explained
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2007.08.16 07:01:00 - [9] It would be cheaper to get a Nighthawk. I it will have a better tank (mine can handle about 150dps after 90% resists) and the damage output is adequate for almost any L4 mission. With good skills it can handle any L4. -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] *This is not* a signature**
DEFF DSP	Posted - 2007.08.16 07:03:00 - [10] question is: how to find max balance between shield resistance and shield recharge rate?
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.08.16 07:04:00 - [11] With half-decent skills, a Drake can handle L4 missions. But that wasn't the point. _ Complaint vs whine \| Char creation guide \| Stacknerfs explained
Kainite M'alachi	Posted - 2007.08.16 09:35:00 - [12] just one question, why passive tank a navy raven ? its not like it has cap issues or fitting problems with t2 mods (but it should be fitted with faction to really to do it justice). just seems like a pointless thing to do in my op.... but if you can get it to work for you and ure happy to waste your time doing it then have fun :)
port22 Royal Crimson Lancers	Posted - 2007.08.16 10:12:00 - [13] Why use a raven/cnr passive tank when a nighthawk will go through lvl 4 missions just as fast and have a better passive tank. ?!? And yes with the missile skills, it will go through just as fast. Originally by: Temp Boi Port FTMFW Period. 'We dont fight fair' -Fall Out Boy
Hayward Cyprus Caldari Exiled.	Posted - 2007.08.16 10:29:00 - [14] no. passive tanking a BS is not good mkay? you get better results out of an active tanked BS, quit trying and live with it. Hayward Cyprus
Mudkest MetaForge Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.08.16 10:51:00 - [15] perhaps some faction sb will work for a passive/active tank? depend on cap regen to run sb indefinetly so you get good shield regen and resists? dunno if there's a large faction sb that you can permarun on raven without gimping setup though, and not sure of med sb will cut it. ----- GIEV custom ship paint jobs! I want my hello-kitty-kessie!
Passin Through	Posted - 2007.08.16 11:22:00 - [16] Edited by: Passin Through on 16/08/2007 11:24:20 Raven Navy Issue Domination Siege Missile Launcher Domination Siege Missile Launcher Domination Siege Missile Launcher Domination Siege Missile Launcher Domination Siege Missile Launcher Domination Siege Missile Launcher Domination Siege Missile Launcher Turret Slot Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Pith X-Type Photon Scattering Field Pith X-Type Heat Dissipation Field Pith X-Type Ballistic Deflection Field Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Rigs : Core Defence Field Purger II \ Core Defence Field Purger II \ Core Defence Field Purger II \ 25101 shield, 329.35/s, E/T/K/Ex=64/60/78/71 11953 armor, E/T/K/Ex=59/44/25/10 6640.625 cap, +4.19/s, -5.0/s With two implants: 5% to shield size and 5% to shield recharge rate. Nothing will break this tank.
Pottsey Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2007.08.16 11:24:00 - [17] ôWell, simply put, if you want a passive tank to hold all lvl 4 missions you can have no damnage mods.ö YouÆre living in the past. You know we could tank all mission before T2 SPRÆs or rigs came out. Now those are out you can fit damage mods and have just as strong a tank as before. I donÆt understand people who think rigs are out but we still have to use every slot up to tank. T2 SPR come out, we still need to use up every slot to tank for PvE. If your tank triples in power like passive tanks have this year you can free up slots for none tanking stuff. ôPassive CNR's and Rattlesnakes make baby jesus cry.ö A T2 active tank is weaker and does the same if not less damage on a Rattlesnake. Passive shield tanking guide click here
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2007.08.16 14:09:00 - [18] Originally by: port22 Why use a raven/cnr passive tank when a nighthawk will go through lvl 4 missions just as fast and have a better passive tank. ?!? And yes with the missile skills, it will go through just as fast. Much as I love my NH I can't accept that statement. My skills are just about maxed but I have to concede that I still seem to be around 20% slower than my friend with his CNR. Of course it varies by mission but overall I think the NH is slightly slower than the CNR. Where it is better (and the reason I like it) is that its tank is safer. A passive tanked (well..not boosted) NH has a tank which is slightly stronger than the CNR and which can run 23/7. It can probably even survive a damn good NOS. But for speed? Not the NH. I don't even think it's the fastest of the command ships. -- (Battle hardened industrialist) [Brackley, UK] *This is not* a signature**
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.16 14:53:00 - [19] Originally by: Pottsey ôPassive CNR's and Rattlesnakes make baby jesus cry.ö A T2 active tank is weaker and does the same if not less damage on a Rattlesnake. May be true but last time i tanked a CNR it wasn't using T2 stuff for the tank. (Back when gist boosters were actually affordable). A faction booster is the point where active tanks start outperforming the passive ones by a huge margin with the room to reach that 800DPS to melt through the npc's. (4x bcu = win)
Weeka Amarr Krieger des Lichts	Posted - 2007.08.16 15:22:00 - [20] Originally by: Sokratesz Well, simply put, if you want a passive tank to hold all lvl 4 missions you can have no damnage mods. Its rather easy to overtank - passiv Nighthawk with 2-3 damage mods can still tank every lvl 4 without a care in the world.
Pottsey Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2007.08.16 15:37:00 - [21] ôA faction booster is the point where active tanks start outperforming the passive ones by a huge margin with the room to reach that 800DPS to melt through the npc's. (4x bcu = win)ö Could you post some setups for comparison? Passive shield tanking guide click here
Sokratesz Paradox v2.0 Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.16 15:46:00 - [22] Edited by: Sokratesz on 16/08/2007 15:48:23 Originally by: Pottsey ôA faction booster is the point where active tanks start outperforming the passive ones by a huge margin with the room to reach that 800DPS to melt through the npc's. (4x bcu = win)ö Could you post some setups for comparison? Uhm..please keep in mind this is a few months old... 7x siege launcher (faction for the PG reduction) 3x faction hardeners (mission specific) 1x gist x-type large booster (yes..NOT x-l), 1x SBA-II, 1x target painter 4x BCU (needs one faction for the CPU saving) 1x PDU-II 2x CCC-II, 1x CCC-I permaruns, tanks all. With 5x T2 medium drones with close to max skills = 800 DPS May be able to go for a slightly modified fit with the new implants for grid and CPU but havent tinkered with it for a long time.
Pottsey Enheduanni Foundation	Posted - 2007.08.16 16:16:00 - [23] Edited by: Pottsey on 16/08/2007 16:15:55 ôUhm..please keep in mind this is a few months old...ö Fair enough. I work your setup out as 140.3125 HP regen A passive tank with the same BCUÆs and none tanking modules would be 118.9HP/s for T2+mindlink So your right faction setup is better. Though if youÆre using T2 passive is better. All comes down to how much money you want to spend. Passive shield tanking guide click here
xenodia Gallente Shadowrun Company	Posted - 2007.08.16 20:44:00 - [24] Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 16/08/2007 06:23:23 Edited by: Akita T on 16/08/2007 06:22:15 Well, no offense, but that's just your side of the story on the passive tanks A passive shield tank has the benefits of not needing micromanagement (most of the time anyway) and a high damage buffer before you go poof. So even if your "peak recharge" ain't especially hot, all you need to do is reduce incoming damage fast enough so it goes below your tankable treshold before the buffer runs out. My active tank navy raven boosts 438 shields every 3 seconds, and I can perma run it, and it has resists in the mid 80s (Kin/Therm) to mid 90s (exp). Thats running 3 BCUs, and 7 siege launchers. In other words, way overkill for any lvl 4 mission. Bottom line, if youre going to spend the isk on a faction battleship, spend the isk to fit the damn thing out decently. Forget the passive tank crap. It works great on certain ships, but not BS and Carriers. If you cant be bothered to remember to turn your active tank on and off, spend the isk to get the mods that allow you to permarun it, then you dont have to be troubled.
xenodia Gallente Shadowrun Company	Posted - 2007.08.16 20:52:00 - [25] Originally by: Pottsey ôA faction booster is the point where active tanks start outperforming the passive ones by a huge margin with the room to reach that 800DPS to melt through the npc's. (4x bcu = win)ö Could you post some setups for comparison? 7 siege launchers, 1 tractor beam Gist A type or X type large booster (not Xtra large), boost amp, 4 x hardener (or 3 hardeners and 1 target painter) 3 x BCU, 2 x PDU 3 x Cap rigs Even with tech2 PDU and tech 1 cap rigs, it can permarun the tank. And the gist shield boosters you get almost as much shield per second as an XL, but a fraction of the cap use. My setup (granted with officer boost amp, but only the Gist A type shield booster), boosts 438 shields every 3 seconds, for something like 90 cap every 3 seconds. And the resists will be mid 80s to mid 90s. And with 7 siege launchers and halfway decent missile skills (im gallente spec so still working on missile skills), it 4 volleys most battleships, and 2 volleys battlecruisers & mission sentry guns. With better skills, I could probably 1 volley the BCs and sentries.
Ryysa Caldari	Posted - 2007.08.16 20:55:00 - [26] Especially since, all you need to do is click the booster once after undocking and just leave it on. I don't see what's hard about it... EW Guide - KB Tool - PVP Event
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.08.16 22:39:00 - [27] Originally by: xenodia My active tank navy raven boosts 438 shields every 3 seconds, and I can perma run it [...] Bottom line, if youre going to spend the isk on a faction battleship, spend the isk to fit the damn thing out decently. Your setup perma-boost 146 per second, plus 25-ish per second peak recharge for a 170-ish per second total max repair. The 3-BCU passive tank has a better buffer and regens up to 156 at peak (or 179 with a mindlinked commander in fleet). First off, I see absolutely no reason to chose YOUR active-tank in favor of the presented passive tank. Second, your setup has the same amount of BCUs, but either slightly better resists or a target painter. So, ok, granted, you will either tank a bit better (LONG-TERM) or will deal slightly more damage... but how much more do you have to shell out for the active setup compared to the passive one ? The active setup works exactly as good on a regular Raven as it does on a CNRaven, so you might have "inherited" it from your "regular Raven" days... but then again, other people just go for the CNR instead of the faction booster, and CAN'T AFFORD to shell out that kind of extra cash. Besides, a passive tank CNR leaves no significant valued items in the wreck, but an active-tank one just might. Also, an active-tank Raven is easier to gank, a passive one it takes a bit longer, which might actually mean the difference between life and death... that is, if the attackers were stupid enough to NOT check the fact you're not dropping anything of value anyway. Also, a passive-tanked Raven is a lot less susceptible to "NOS/neut attacks", because the only drain is the hardners (which, even if offlined, still provide some protection to a skilled pilot) and the shield recharge "goes on forever", whereas the active one relies almost exclusively on capacitor to tank, and if it runs out, it's out both of recharge AND resists. In closing, is it bad to use a passive-tanked CNR ? Maybe yes, in a perfect world. But in this one, passive works just fine too. Suboptimal for raw mission performance, sure... but just fine for the wallet. _ Complaint vs whine \| Char creation guide \| Stacknerfs explained
Neo Providence	Posted - 2007.08.17 02:14:00 - [28] no, honestly, i don't think passive a bs would do any good. I mean the amount of regent is not good enought to passive anything. Do active instead.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.08.17 02:15:00 - [29] Originally by: Neo Providence no, honestly, i don't think passive a bs would do any good. I mean the amount of regent is not good enought to passive anything. Do active instead. reading the thread and comparing numbers before posting a silly reply would be good _ Complaint vs whine \| Char creation guide \| Stacknerfs explained
DEFF DSP	Posted - 2007.08.17 08:34:00 - [30] passive regens better - resistances are the problem :(

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.