EVE Search - Pros and Cons:HAC's vs BC's

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Pros and Cons:HAC's vs BC'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 - 0 post(s)
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings	Posted - 2008.07.20 06:12:00 - [61] Originally by: BiggestT says the guy who trols bout eagles when he cant even fly them MEGA NOOB sorry edited my last post for clarity. _______________ CCP Atropos > I pod people because there's money to be made in selling tears.
Kenji Kikuta	Posted - 2008.07.20 06:16:00 - [62] Edited by: Kenji Kikuta on 20/07/2008 06:20:08 Originally by: Boz Well I'd have to disagree Cerb outperforms the drake. Cerb has no drones and does less damage with same number of BCU's fitted. It also costs more and requires a lot more training. Drake is going to have a passive lazy man's tank (honestly the only reason to fly drake/nighthawk in PVE is the passive tank, that lets you afk when need be and not pop). Contrast with your cap boosted PVE cerb (). Drake also tends to have one of the strongest tanks around, even counting BS's. Meh. I wouldn't fly either ship, or a nighthawk for that matter, but if I had to, I'd definitely not fly the Cerb in pvp. PVE is a little different. Why would you fit them with exactly the same number of ballistic controls? They are two different ships which require two different fits. A passive fitted Drake leaves room for what, 1-2 ballistic controls? In contrast, the Cerb allows you to fit nothing but ballistic controls in lows. That is, 1-2 compared to 4. In addition, the Cerb's ships bonus' allows you to fit fury ammo and still outrange the Drake. Umm, I'd say the Cerb wins. Not to mention the Cerb's awesome resists. Regarding that HACs need much more training than BCs, that statement is somewhat wrong, at least when it comes to the Cerb vs Drake. In order for the Drake to match up the Cerbs DPS you need to train drone skills. That will cost you some 3-4 weeks of training. Since the Cerb does not have room for any drones, it's better to spend that time training for the HAC.
BiggestT Caldari Fun Inc	Posted - 2008.07.20 06:22:00 - [63] Edited by: BiggestT on 20/07/2008 06:22:36 Originally by: DubanFP Edited by: DubanFP on 20/07/2008 06:17:24 Originally by: BiggestT it was rather an off-topic post about how uzless insurance was. lol, newb. Keep going and the gap gets bigger and bigger. Each ship costs you 14 million more then the insured. By your logic Insured: "40 mil + 8 mil per replacement" Ship 1: 30+ insurance cost = 40 mil. Ship 2: 48 mil Ship 3: 56 mil Ship 4: 64 mil Ship 5: 72 mil Ship 6: 80 mil Uninsured: "30 mil start, 22 mil replacement" Ship 1: 30 mil Ship 2: 52 mil Ship 3: 74 mil Ship 4: 96 mil Ship 5: 118 mil Ship 6: 140 mil that sounds good on paper but look at it realistically if u lose 6 drakes in less than three months than ur a bit of a tool. i dont lose ships v often and dont bother insuring unless im about to go into a fleet fight, ur pen/paper maths needs a case study! edit* also the cost to insure is not 8 mill and u dont get 40 mill back ffs poudly annoying fc's since 2007
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings	Posted - 2008.07.20 06:29:00 - [64] Edited by: DubanFP on 20/07/2008 06:31:18 Originally by: BiggestT that sounds good on paper but look at it realistically if u lose 6 drakes in less than three months than ur a bit of a tool. i dont lose ships v often and dont bother insuring unless im about to go into a fleet fight, ur pen/paper maths needs a case study! edit* also the cost to insure is not 8 mill and u dont get 40 mill back ffs You don't need to lose 6 ships in 3 months. Each ship resets the timer, duh. You need to lose one every 3 months for 6 months. Which if you're PVPing is going to be quite easy. Also you don't need to lose 6 ships. It's already pays itself back after your first replacement. After that the gap just gets wider and wider. True it doesn't cost 8 mil to insure a drake. Notice the base cost is 30 + 10. However you recover 2 million more then the buy price. So after the first ship you make 32 mil, spend 30. Hence 8 mil cost after that. Most T1 ships are like that actually. The scorpion is notoriously cheap because of the low cost vs insurance coverage. _______________ CCP Atropos > I pod people because there's money to be made in selling tears.
BiggestT Caldari Fun Inc	Posted - 2008.07.20 06:33:00 - [65] Originally by: DubanFP Edited by: DubanFP on 20/07/2008 06:31:18 Originally by: BiggestT that sounds good on paper but look at it realistically if u lose 6 drakes in less than three months than ur a bit of a tool. i dont lose ships v often and dont bother insuring unless im about to go into a fleet fight, ur pen/paper maths needs a case study! edit* also the cost to insure is not 8 mill and u dont get 40 mill back ffs You don't need to lose 6 ships in 3 months. Each ship resets the timer, duh. You need to lose one every 3 months for 6 months. Which if you're PVPing is going to be quite easy. Also you don't need to lose 6 ships. It's already pays itself back after your first replacement. After that the gap just gets wider and wider. True it doesn't cost 8 mil to insure a drake. Notice the base cost is 30 + 10. However you recover 2 million more then the buy price. So after the first ship you make 32 mil, spend 30. Hence 8 mil cost after that. Most T1 ships are like that actually. The scorpion is notoriously cheap because of the low cost vs insurance coverage. well i spsoe u win there but i still will never fly a boring old drake compared to a hac poudly annoying fc's since 2007
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings	Posted - 2008.07.20 07:12:00 - [66] Edited by: DubanFP on 20/07/2008 07:28:24 Originally by: BiggestT well i spsoe u win there but i still will never fly a boring old drake compared to a hac Well I don't personally care for the drake either, but it was more about your thoughts on insurance being useless then anything else. Which I think it's clearly anything but. I usually prefer to think about just one ship "ship cost + insurance cost - insurance payout" but I find your thoughts on how insurance loops into the next ship interesting. The main problem with it is that it assumes you will always replace the lost ship with the same ship. The thing is it breaks down when you decide to put that isk toward a different ship because now you're directly up the insured isk. Lets say you lose the ship but don't replace it or use the isk to fund a different ship. all of a sudden it becomes Insured: Ship 6: 80 mil Stop, full insurance recovered: 48 mil Uninsured: "30 mil start, 22 mil replacement" Ship 6: 140 mil Stop, basic coverage: 132 mil Now all of a sudden you now have an extra 84 million isk for your new ship over uninsured. _______________ CCP Atropos > I pod people because there's money to be made in selling tears.

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.