| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
champinoman
Caldari
Yub Yub
   |
Posted - 2008.01.29 15:32:00 -
[1]
Just a quick question about the raven. I notice that there are almost no passive raven setups. why is the raven considered a better active than passive tanker?
i perfer the passive tank so was wondering why its not used that way.
thanks
|
AnKahn
Caldari
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 15:37:00 -
[2]
Wait for Pottsey to show up and explain why passive tanking a BS is wrong. Then wait for LLang to show up and explain that you fit the LSE and extention rigs for the HP buffer not for the regen. Then someone like me will say they prefer XL booster + Amp + Hardeners.
Then your head explodes.
|
MalVortex
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 15:49:00 -
[3]
Battleships have terrible shield recharge times, so its nearly impossible to get a shield regeneration rate that will tank anything meaningful. At the same time, that tank will kill your dps and utility, making you doubly worthless.
A raven is generally XLSB+BA tanked; its got plenty of grid and nice cap, and those XLSBs can put out quite a lot of shield, esp. once you've got a cap injector going. Alternatively, you could definetley buffer tank it, but I'd personally prefer to active tank my ravens.
|
Xsag
Caldari
SPECTRE Ops
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 16:17:00 -
[4]
i must say i prefer shields amps over hardeners but i always get screamed at for doing that too.
i currently have a raven and i must say i fkn hate it,
(for mission running) 6 cruise launchers a tractor and salvager, 2 large shield extenders (t2) 3 slots for sheild amps (t2) and 1 XLSB, in the lows 2 pdu's 2 bcu's (all t2) and a signal amplifier (t2)
Ive been fiddling with a pvp setup which has yet to be tested (which i am not mentioning here as i will probably get boo'ed off the forums)
id be interested in alternate setups for mission running as i currently run most lvl4's with my drake but would be nice to be able to use my raven.
~n00b of all trades~
~if im posting on here its cos im in work~
~Now with a face!~
|
Janu Hull
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 17:41:00 -
[5]
Cripes...Just fit a hardener tank. 2x tech II of the two major damages your NPC targets offer and a decent DCU in a low slot. An LSB II alone should keep you ahead of the curve in tight spots if you pulse it.
In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device. |
Trevor Warps
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 17:46:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: AnKahn
Wait for Pottsey to show up and explain why passive tanking a BS is wrong. Then wait for LLang to show up and explain that you fit the LSE and extention rigs for the HP buffer not for the regen. Then someone like me will say they prefer XL booster + Amp + Hardeners.
Then your head explodes.
lol, yep.
I'd say active tank also. If you are too lazy to manage your shields, then its the drake. I have heard some faction BS can be passive tanked not too bad tho, like the Rattlesnake.
|
Si Delane
Sector 7
Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 17:50:00 -
[7]
I think the rattlesnake still active tanks better. Since if you're buying a pirate BS you might as well put some pretty good modules on it (gist-a XL anyone?).
Ravens (and most BS) fail at passive tanking due to very slow natural regen.
THAT being said, the gallente BS can put up pretty decent passive tanks due to sufficient mids for resists and loads of lows for SPRs and PDSs.
-------------------------
Actually this IS my main. |
Derek Sigres
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 17:51:00 -
[8]
Originally by: champinoman
Just a quick question about the raven. I notice that there are almost no passive raven setups. why is the raven considered a better active than passive tanker?
i perfer the passive tank so was wondering why its not used that way.
thanks
It boils down to a number of factors:
1) Ravens are front line combat/dps support ships. As such they are expected to sling a fair amount of pain, which necisitates the use of at least a few ballistic control systems.
2) Ravens, like any ship that ever wants to survive long in PvP, requires giving up at least one, and in all likelyhood 2 mid slots to PvP gear (MWD at a minimum, Painter if you want to spare a second)
3) Passive tanking a ship of any sort requires sacrificing all of your mid and low slots for tank, thus depriving you of any nasty tricks, surprises or any semblance of an edge over your opponent.
4) Because of the Raven's recharge rate, the Drake fits a sturdier passive tank at half the cost, and without BCU's and whatnot you don't achieve a significant improvement in DPS.
5) XL Booster + amp and a few hardners gives you a very respectable sustainable tank with a very high burst DPS repair rate, exceeding two large armor repairers on average. It also leaves your low slots free to place DPS boosting gear, and whatever else you see fit to install.
Basically, it boils down to utility - battleships are used because they can do just about any job pretty well, especially one that involves contests of pure firepower and tanking ability. A passive tank sacrifices much of it's utility in order to achieve in this case a fairly sturdy passive tank. Yes it requires far more work to manage your cap with the XL booster, but at the end of the day you can achieve a ship that is superior to the drake in terms of its ability to generate isk or generate killmails in most situations.
|
AnKahn
Caldari
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 20:18:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Derek Sigres
Originally by: champinoman
Just a quick question about the raven. I notice that there are almost no passive raven setups. why is the raven considered a better active than passive tanker?
i perfer the passive tank so was wondering why its not used that way.
thanks
It boils down to a number of factors:
1) Ravens are front line combat/dps support ships. As such they are expected to sling a fair amount of pain, which necisitates the use of at least a few ballistic control systems.
2) Ravens, like any ship that ever wants to survive long in PvP, requires giving up at least one, and in all likelyhood 2 mid slots to PvP gear (MWD at a minimum, Painter if you want to spare a second)
3) Passive tanking a ship of any sort requires sacrificing all of your mid and low slots for tank, thus depriving you of any nasty tricks, surprises or any semblance of an edge over your opponent.
4) Because of the Raven's recharge rate, the Drake fits a sturdier passive tank at half the cost, and without BCU's and whatnot you don't achieve a significant improvement in DPS.
5) XL Booster + amp and a few hardners gives you a very respectable sustainable tank with a very high burst DPS repair rate, exceeding two large armor repairers on average. It also leaves your low slots free to place DPS boosting gear, and whatever else you see fit to install.
Basically, it boils down to utility - battleships are used because they can do just about any job pretty well, especially one that involves contests of pure firepower and tanking ability. A passive tank sacrifices much of it's utility in order to achieve in this case a fairly sturdy passive tank. Yes it requires far more work to manage your cap with the XL booster, but at the end of the day you can achieve a ship that is superior to the drake in terms of its ability to generate isk or generate killmails in most situations.
Amen
|
Perfect Diamond
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 20:36:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Perfect Diamond on 29/01/2008 20:37:14
Originally by: Derek Sigres
1) Ravens are front line combat/dps support ships. As such they are expected to sling a fair amount of pain, which necisitates the use of at least a few ballistic control systems.
And to think, the only thing they did a couple months ago was pos sieging and sniping. Wonder why everyone's not whinning any more. 
Cause it's totally awesome.
|
Vyllana
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 20:39:00 -
[11]
You can't effectively passive tank a raven. Even if you fit 3 shield recharge rigs, 5 shield power relays, and a bunch of shield extenders/rechargers/hardeners, you'll end up with a much lower dps tank than a drake. Now, if they added XL shield extenders that gave about +10000 shield hp each, than it'd work.
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 07:59:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Pottsey on 01/02/2008 08:00:17
"Wait for Pottsey to show up and explain why passive tanking a BS is wrong."
What? I always passive tank BS's sometimes its better then active tanks. Used my passive tank Kronos in a lvl 4 mission last night no problem. The Raven on the other hand might be better active but it works fine passive as well.
Passive shield tanking guide click here |
Karyuudo Tydraad
Caldari
Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 09:13:00 -
[13]
You can get a pretty decent shield buffer on a torp raven. Not as much as a trimark'd battleship, but you'll spew more dps and you're more mobile.
|
Phoenicia
Black Sea Industries
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 09:50:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Phoenicia on 01/02/2008 09:51:33
Toying around in EFT gets me the following:
HI:
6x Siege Launcher II (Faction torps)
2x Electron Blaster Cannon II (Null ammo)
MID:
1x Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets
1x Invul Field II
4x Large F-S9 Regolth Shield Induction
LOW:
4x PDU II
1x Shield Power Relay
RIGS:
1x Anti-EM
1x Anti-Thermal
1x Anti-Kinetic
Results in a healthy buffer of 24k shields, with 48/58/69/72 resists. 650 DPS over 15km including medium T2 drones. 140 shield recharge.
-edit-
Result:
An active tank has higher DPS (mine has 950-1000ish) and a better tank. The active tank dies quite fast to neuting though....
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:26:00 -
[15]
For PVP i prefer the buffer option.
6x Arbalest siege launcher, 2x medium remote armor rep
1x MWD, 1x sensorbooster or painter, 2x invul, 2x extender
4x bcu, 1x damage control
3x extender rigs
26k shield with decent resist and omgdps at good range.
|
Gypsio III
Darkness Inc.
Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:29:00 -
[16]
What Soc said. Although some prefer smarties as drone defence, and a sensor backup array rather than a 4th BCS (only 5% DPS boost from the 4th) will help against ECM.
|
Xsag
Caldari
SPECTRE Ops
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 13:33:00 -
[17]
mmm the last 2 raven setups look kinda funky think i might give them a try tonight :)
~n00b of all trades~
~if im posting on here its cos im in work~
~Now with a face!~
|
Gorefacer
Caldari
Resurrection
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:57:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Gorefacer on 01/02/2008 18:58:43
I like Sok's fit too. I use Large neut in utility slot for nano ship defense. Also my lows are 3x BCU 1x PDU 1x DC II based on hearing many times that the usefulness of a 4th BCU is questionable. A fourth BCU may be better than a PDU II though.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Avery Fatwallet
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 19:07:00 -
[19]
battlecruisers and cruisers are (giggles) cruiser sized. who would have guessed.
if you look at the ship classes, shield recharge time (ofc as well as max hp) decreases with ship size. ie. frigate sized ships shields regenerate much much faster than battleship shields.
and now here comes the trick: when you put LSE on a cruier/bc you move their HP in the battleship region, while retaining the lower recharge rate of the smaller craft (which you can lower even more...)
problem is.. when you reach battleship size, there is nothing to move the hp into the capship region you will always have bs hp and bs recharge. the passive tank will always be sub par.
the drake btw is just sick :) it has bs hp and frig recharge when you fully tank it
|
Ehranavaar
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 20:29:00 -
[20]
Originally by: MalVortex
A raven is generally XLSB+BA tanked; its got plenty of grid and nice cap, and those XLSBs can put out quite a lot of shield, esp. once you've got a cap injector going. Alternatively, you could definetley buffer tank it, but I'd personally prefer to active tank my ravens.
12 ravens and 3 navy ravens later i've finally had to admit MalVortex is correct about that
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |