| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Perador
Final Conflict UK
   |
Posted - 2008.07.29 11:39:00 -
[1]
Can anyone tell me what they think is the best ship for solo lvl4's?
Iv always used a Raven and got on ok except for some of the harder lvl 4's i cant quite do solo.
I was tempted to try the Rokh due to its sheild resist bonus but im also tempted by the Navy Raven, which would be best?
|
Jambone
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 15:34:00 -
[2]
CNR
|
Wannabehero
Caldari
Absolutely No Retreat
|
Posted - 2008.07.29 15:37:00 -
[3]
Golem or Paladin/Nightmare
--
Don't harsh my mellow |
Aimel
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 09:38:00 -
[4]
Raven Navy Issue > Golem > Raven > Dominix > Drake
|
Blue Mantis
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 10:39:00 -
[5]
Rattlesnake, if you have style and money. I prefer passive, but use sometimes active permaboost too.
Blue
|
Vhiskey
Caldari
Imperial Forces
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 12:39:00 -
[6]
whats the best passive tanked for lv4?
|
Mizear
Minmatar
Republic University
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 14:27:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Vhiskey
whats the best passive tanked for lv4?
Nighthawk
|
Vhiskey
Caldari
Imperial Forces
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 14:48:00 -
[8]
nighthawk? why that? only because of the shield resistances?
not sure if i want to fly that ship. there are so many things my drake is better at.
is there a passive tanked ship "after" the drake and "before" ships like the nighthawk?
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 16:54:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Andrue on 30/07/2008 16:55:52
Originally by: Vhiskey
nighthawk? why that? only because of the shield resistances?
not sure if i want to fly that ship. there are so many things my drake is better at.
No there isn't.
The only things the Drake is better than the Nighthawk at are:
* Skill requirement.
* Price.
In terms actual ship performance a Nighthawk is considerably better than a Drake..as you would expect for something that costs a lot more and takes longer to train.
..and for the record in my experience the Nighthawk comes only slightly below the CNR/Golem for mission running speed. The tests I have conducted suggest that it's around 10% slower on average but actually faster on one or two missions.
--
(Sarcastic mission running veteran, 4+ years)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:24:00 -
[10]
For missions, Nighthawk is ideally suited. Not so much for PvP, sadly.
Advantages the NH has over Drake :
* easier to fully T2-fit with heavy missiles (for the Drake you need a CPU implant in the optimal L4 mission T2 fit)
* at least 16.6% higher base missile damage at same skill levels (8 effective vs 7 raw launchers, same kin bonus but on diff skill)
* easily fits one extra BCU compared to the Drake, you usually go with 1 or 2 on Drake, 2 or 3 on the NH
* precision bonus is a GODSEND against pesky small enemies present in some missions
Disadvantages NH has compared to a Drake :
* skill requirements and pricetag
* one less midslot making solo PvP fits hard to manage
* lousy grid for HAML usage in PvP fits (Drake barely manages too, but it's still slightly better off)
* LESS overall peak tanking power assuming similar fits (slightly better against thermal, about on par on kinetic, much worse against EM and explosive)
For missions ? The Drake tank is overkill for most L4s (so you don't really care about that disadvantage of the NH), you DON'T want to use HAMLs in missions so you fit HMLs anyway (so you get the overall fiting advantage), and every bit of additional damage you can get in missions matters a lot (so NH wins again here too, on several counts).
For PVP, the combination of grid issues, significantly reduced overall tank power, the high pricetag and the critical lack of midslots makes the Drake a far better choice.
_
THE APPRENTICE || mineral balance || nanofix
|
Aiko Intaki
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 17:30:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Perador
Can anyone tell me what they think is the best ship for solo lvl4's?
Iv always used a Raven and got on ok except for some of the harder lvl 4's i cant quite do solo.
I was tempted to try the Rokh due to its sheild resist bonus but im also tempted by the Navy Raven, which would be best?
Golem, but it takes awhile to skill into.
- Selectable damage types.
- Solid tank.
- 40km, 1000km/s tractor beams.
- Big cargo bay.
|
Artemis Rose
Eleckrostatik
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 18:08:00 -
[12]
I'll assume you want to:
a) stick Caldari
b) are not running Amarr missions (which pit you against EM weak enemies)
If you like Torps in missions, the Golem is very good with torps.
If you prefer cruise, the CNR is the way to go.
The Rokh has (relatively) terrible damage output, so its not usually considered a good ship to mission in.
__________________________________________________
Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space
Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine. WTB Purple Nerf Bat. |
Aiko Intaki
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 19:19:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Artemis Rose
I'll assume you want to:
a) stick Caldari
b) are not running Amarr missions (which pit you against EM weak enemies)
If you like Torps in missions, the Golem is very good with torps.
If you prefer cruise, the CNR is the way to go.
The Rokh has (relatively) terrible damage output, so its not usually considered a good ship to mission in.
Out of curiosity, why do some prefer the CNR to Golem for cruise missiles... and please don't say "NPC defender spam". It's a genuine question, because I've been using a cruise Golem for a month or so now and can't imagine choosing the CNR (and resultant lack of 40km tractor beams) over it.
|
Zeerover
Caldari
DeadSpace Exploration and Investigations
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 19:47:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Aiko Intaki
Out of curiosity, why do some prefer the CNR to Golem for cruise missiles... and please don't say "NPC defender spam". It's a genuine question, because I've been using a cruise Golem for a month or so now and can't imagine choosing the CNR (and resultant lack of 40km tractor beams) over it.
Because they haven't tried the easy and effective mission running with a cruise Golem (I'll not go away from it either) and only rely on EFT to form their opinions.
|
Disco Flint
The Flaming Sideburn's
Blackguard Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:07:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Zeerover
Originally by: Aiko Intaki
Out of curiosity, why do some prefer the CNR to Golem for cruise missiles... and please don't say "NPC defender spam". It's a genuine question, because I've been using a cruise Golem for a month or so now and can't imagine choosing the CNR (and resultant lack of 40km tractor beams) over it.
Because they haven't tried the easy and effective mission running with a cruise Golem (I'll not go away from it either) and only rely on EFT to form their opinions.
Cruise CNR has higher dps than a Golem without any dmg mods and can fit an additional BCU, so the there's little difference in their alpha either. The theoretically increased tank on the Golem doesn't matter, as a cruise Raven of any kind has ample fittings for tankage.
The Torp Golem on the other hand is superior to a Torp Raven/CNR because of the painter bonus and the additional slot for a painter, and the increased tank. If you slap T2 Torps on a CNR you're left with what, enough grid & CPU for a 40W lightbulb?
So yeah, either take the Torp-Golem and sling Javelins out to 60k, downside is increased micromanagement as you need to use your painter and drones a lot, or take the Cruise-CNR and sleepwalk through missions albeit at a slightly slower rate than the Torp-Golem.
Oh, and if you really want to salvage with a Battleship hull during a lvl4... then any good argument is lost on you. Please do use the Golem.
|
Carniflex
Caldari
StarHunt
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:26:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Disco Flint
Originally by: Zeerover
Originally by: Aiko Intaki
Out of curiosity, why do some prefer the CNR to Golem for cruise missiles... and please don't say "NPC defender spam". It's a genuine question, because I've been using a cruise Golem for a month or so now and can't imagine choosing the CNR (and resultant lack of 40km tractor beams) over it.
Because they haven't tried the easy and effective mission running with a cruise Golem (I'll not go away from it either) and only rely on EFT to form their opinions.
Cruise CNR has higher dps than a Golem without any dmg mods and can fit an additional BCU, so the there's little difference in their alpha either. The theoretically increased tank on the Golem doesn't matter, as a cruise Raven of any kind has ample fittings for tankage.
The Torp Golem on the other hand is superior to a Torp Raven/CNR because of the painter bonus and the additional slot for a painter, and the increased tank. If you slap T2 Torps on a CNR you're left with what, enough grid & CPU for a 40W lightbulb?
So yeah, either take the Torp-Golem and sling Javelins out to 60k, downside is increased micromanagement as you need to use your painter and drones a lot, or take the Cruise-CNR and sleepwalk through missions albeit at a slightly slower rate than the Torp-Golem.
Oh, and if you really want to salvage with a Battleship hull during a lvl4... then any good argument is lost on you. Please do use the Golem.
CNR is usually used by people who either can't fly yet golems or are after every bit of missionrunning speed money can buy them. For permatanking Golem is superior while for gank fit CNR is superior.
As far as torps go Golem is easier, as one can do full T2 fit, to pull it off on CNR (with 3 missile rigs) one needs some extra 300 - 400 mil in fittings to pull it off (mid range officer RCU + cheaper faction gadgeds in midslots to get enough CPU/Grid) without sacrificing it's tanking abilities.
|
Aiko Intaki
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:41:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Disco Flint
Oh, and if you really want to salvage with a Battleship hull during a lvl4... then any good argument is lost on you. Please do use the Golem.
It'll tickle you to no end then to hear that I actually use TWO battleship hulls simultaneously to salvage my L4 missions... seriously.
Even without two boxing missions and salvaging in real "mission-running time", I'd think it would save time to come back with your salvaging ship and find 80% of the wrecks lumped into a pile less than 5km across. It's been a while since I've used a dedicated after-mission salvaging ship though, so I could be completely off on thinking so.
|
Vhiskey
Caldari
Imperial Forces
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 21:00:00 -
[18]
CNR? gank?
and why should the raven be fitted active not passive? iŠve read several fitting threads...but most comments are just comparing ***** and not explaining why in detail.
what i am looking for is my next step (next ship) for lv4. on a t2 drake now...even the blockade and extravaganza are just boring. in kidnappers strike my shield never went below 75 %. iŠve half of the lv4 agents available but dont know if i should do it with my drake since i dont know the sthrength of the bs there and everybody says it just takes too long (lack of dps).
the golem is far far away for me. the raven will be available tomorrow but i need several days to skill for cruise missiles.
with the blockade lv3 i make about 10+ mio isk (reward, bonus, loot, salvage, bounty).
so what should i do? stay at lv3 till i got pretty good skills for a bs (and its weapons) of my choice or are the rewards so much higher at lv4 that i should do them the slow way with my drake?
|
Disco Flint
The Flaming Sideburn's
Blackguard Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:08:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Vhiskey
and why should the raven be fitted active not passive? iŠve read several fitting threads...but most comments are just comparing ***** and not explaining why in detail.
Battlecruisers have relatively high shield HP with a low recharge time, this means they got a high passive shield recharge rate. Battleships however have high shield HP with a much longer recharge time, this means they can recharge much less HP/sec on a passive fit. Hence, Drakes are usually best as a passive tanker, while the Raven, which has the cap (and the grid for a cap booster) is best as an active tanker.
There are of course exceptions, the Rattlesnake can be passive tanked e.g.
Generally, for lvl4 missions you don't need a tank that could tank the worst lvl4s permanently. You'll want only as much tank as you need to survive but as much gank as possible to reduce incoming dps (and finish the mission) as fast as possible.
Should you "upgrade" to a Raven? Well, I don't know. With even mediocre skills a Raven is much much faster in lvl4s than a Drake could ever hope to be, but with low skills you can also easily lose it. You can try it out on an easier mission, if you're doing fine, then stay in it, if you still got problems, put it in your hangar until you got some BS support skills up.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:46:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Akita T on 30/07/2008 22:54:31
Originally by: Disco Flint
With even mediocre skills a Raven is much much faster in lvl4s than a Drake could ever hope to be
False.
With mediocre skills and metalevel 3 gear (for cheapness, meta 4 gear is insanely expensive IMO), a Raven is noticeably slower than a top-notch skills metalevel 5 gear (which IS dirt cheap) Drake, ESPECIALLY on Guristas missions.
My skills for a Raven are slightly above average, but when flying it (as opposed to my regular-fit Drake) you can feel the difference... and when compared to flying the Nighthawk, the Raven at my skills is still outclassed both in tank power and mission completion speed.
I get a grand total of 400-ish DPS out of the Drake, 480-ish DPS out of the Nighthawk (with better missile explosion radius too), but I'd only get around 460-ish DPS out of a triple T2-BCU, XT-9000 Cruise Launcher Raven with kinetic T1 missiles and T2 gallente drones (small on Drake/NH, meds on Raven), but the Raven has serious trouble hitting the smaller stuff, so USUALLY the Drake outperforms it clearly, and it out-tanks it by far too.
Yeah, I do have L4 Heavy missile spec, but only L3 in both Cruise missiles and Torpedoes... still, L4 in both command ships and caldari battleship, so normally you'd think it's not THAT bad... but... well, it is.
Torp Ravens are basically useless unless you can T2 fit them, so my only option is a Cruise Raven.
Passive tanking a regular Raven is out of the question (barely the same tank power as I could get from a LSB Raven, but less firepower) and the time extra time it takes to handle the "the small stuff" (even with T2 med drones) easily drags down the saved-up time for the larger ones.
Sure, if I would be running mostly anti-Sansha or anti-Blood missions full of battleships and sparse in smaller craft, the Raven would come out on top clearly... but right now, on average, and against mostly Guristas missions ? No way. Nighthawk all the way, and Drake would be AT LEAST on par on average with a Raven.
A CNR, maybe about on par with the NH, but a CNR hull alone is more than twice the full price of my NH (hull, rigs and all modules together), let alone the cost of fiting it... or more than 4 times the price of my Drake (same here)... and for what, a NEGLIGIBLE increase in mission running speed, a serious decrease in tanking power, IF I splurge out for meta-4 gear AND bring up the relevant skills some more ? NO, THANKS !
_
THE APPRENTICE || mineral balance || nanofix
|
Disco Flint
The Flaming Sideburn's
Blackguard Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 00:11:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Disco Flint on 31/07/2008 00:12:06
Originally by: Akita T
False.
With mediocre skills and metalevel 3 gear (for cheapness, meta 4 gear is insanely expensive IMO), a Raven is noticeably slower than a top-notch skills metalevel 5 gear (which IS dirt cheap) Drake, ESPECIALLY on Guristas missions.
Arbalest Cruise are only what, 3 mil a pop? For anyone doing more than 3 missions in their life that's a joke. So, really, cost is a non-factor here.
Originally by: Akita T
My skills for a Raven are slightly above average, but when flying it (as opposed to my regular-fit Drake) you can feel the difference...
I get a grand total of 400-ish DPS out of the Drake, but I'd only get around 460-ish DPS out of a triple T2-BCU, XT-9000 Cruise Launcher Raven (I'd only get 485 DPS with Arbalest anyway) with kinetic T1 missiles and T2 gallente drones (small on Drake/NH, meds on Raven), but the Raven has serious trouble hitting the smaller stuff, so USUALLY the Drake outperforms it clearly, and it out-tanks it by far too.
Snipped out the Nighthawk stuff.
With my skills I also get around 410 DPS out of my Drake with T2 Hobgobs, kinetic ammo and 2 T2 BCUs. I have no idea how many SPRs a Drake needs for a lvl4, I assumed 2. With every other damage type I get 345 DPS.
A Raven with BS4 and every missile skill (except Missile Launcher Operation obviously) at 3, the drone damage skills at 3 and 4 T2 BCUs does 422 DPS with every damage type. The Raven can easily afford to "waste" 4 lows for BCUs if you go with a Heavy Cap injector.
The tank is 555 sustained DPS with 1x T1 named EM (cpu :( ), 2x T2 Invul and 3 purger rigs on the Drake, and 431 with 1x T2 EM, 2x T2 Invul for 8 minutes with throroughly mediocre/bad tanking & cap skills and no rigs on the Raven.
Originally by: Akita T
Torp Ravens are basically useless unless you can T2 fit them, so my only option is a Cruise Raven.
Ya, Torp Ravens are probably the most skill intensive variant out of the bunch.
Originally by: Akita T
Passive tanking a regular Raven is out of the question (barely the same tank power as I could get from a LSB Raven, but less firepower) and the time extra time it takes to handle the "the small stuff" (even with T2 med drones) easily drags down the saved-up time for the larger ones.
Even when I had really really bad skills and went missioning in my Raven the "small stuff" popped fast. Unless you haven't trained guided missile precision or forgot your hammerheads/hobgobs frigates & ceptors aren't a problem. There's also the DeadEye ZMA1000, needs only cybernetics 4 and reduces sigradius of missiles by an additional 5%.
Again, money shouldn't be an issue. The faster you go through missions, the faster you make more money.
Originally by: Akita T
Sure, if I would be running mostly anti-Sansha or anti-Blood missions full of battleships and sparse in smaller craft, the Raven would come out on top clearly... but right now, on average, and against mostly Guristas missions ? No way. Nighthawk all the way, and Drake would be AT LEAST on par on average with a Raven.
Nighthawk again? I didn't even mention that ship! :)
But yeah, with really mediocre, I'd call it bad, skills on the Raven the Drake comes on par with Gurista missions and falls behind on everything else. With missile relevant skills to only 4 (no T2 yet) the Raven pulls ahead further. In practise it's probably not THAT bad for the Drake as its missiles have a lower sig, but the Raven has the advantage of a muhh higher alpha, even with bad skills, and a larger drone bay.
The tank on my test-Raven seems to be abysmally bad for some reason, even though I used this very fitting with about the same skills with great success (read: no warpouts if mission was pulled correctly), so it'll take you through some high damage aggro waves of The Blockade or whatever.
**continued**
|
Disco Flint
The Flaming Sideburn's
Blackguard Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 00:13:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Disco Flint on 31/07/2008 00:19:24
Originally by: Akita T
A CNR, maybe about on par with the NH, but a CNR hull alone is more than twice the full price of my NH (hull, rigs and all modules together), let alone the cost of fiting it... or more than 4 times the price of my Drake (same here)... and for what, a NEGLIGIBLE increase in SOME mission running speed (the non-Guristas ones), a serious decrease in sustainable tanking power (compared to both the NH and the Drake) and effective HP, and that only IF I splurge out for meta-4 gear AND bring up the relevant skills some more ? NO, THANKS !
Yeah... but if you go max skills for the CNR and shell out some money for decent equipment it will annihilate the Drake when it comes to mission running. It's not even funny. With decent gear and implants the CNR can get about 650+ DPS before drones with an (compared to the Drake) ungodly alpha that simply one or two volleys sub-BS things.
For people who don't mission run 24/7 but only do it as a means to make money as fast as possible, that's definitively worth every investment. I can run missions for maybe a week or two, then I get sick of it. If I can make THRICE the ISK during that time, then that's worth it. And faction launchers & BCUs are really affordable since the LP store, and without any gist or pith equipment you also don't run the risk of being suicided.
Even faster (by a slight margin) would be a pimped out Torp-Golem, but that's too much target painting and drone hassle for me to fly :)
|
Vhiskey
Caldari
Imperial Forces
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 07:03:00 -
[23]
so what is meant by gank and CNR?
|
Cudaya Ebsldes
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 07:56:00 -
[24]
Haven't tried the Golem. I'd say cruise CNR; Cerberus is good fun for many missions especially those with lots of frigs. The problem with ravens is they are skill intensive (you end up training just about everything relating to missiles, cap, shields, etc.) and have fitting problems, but fitting problems almost disappear with the lp store Caldari items.
And missions have changed. There was a time when you went into most missions in a raven with an ab and sensor booster, drove out 140+ km and just spammed everything into oblivion and never took any real damage. Can still do that on the beginning of WC but those missioning days are gone. Then you didn't need as many skills as now.
Keyboard error or no keyboard present. Press F1 to continue. |
Carniflex
Caldari
StarHunt
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 14:07:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Vhiskey
so what is meant by gank and CNR?
4x BCU's and missile signature (cruise) rigs or missile range (torpedo) rigs and target painter (if you use torps). In a nutshell 'gank' missionrunning ship is ship fitted for as fast as possible mission completion time by fitting just enough tank to last thru mission without warpout and dedicating all remaining slots to do more damage.
For example my 'gank' cruise CNR has 4x bcu's, 3x missile signature rigs (giving my cruise missiles signature of 145 m) and domination afterburner (as CCP seems to like long travel distances between gates). Needless to say with all that it is not a ship to tank any missions from downtime to downtime. It runs on cap injector. Approx 4 minutes if booster is needed to run nonstop.
And ofc full head of proper hardwires. They are not that expencive if you have separate clone for missionrunning as propability of losing them is very low that way.
|
desintox
Square Dimensions
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 15:44:00 -
[26]
A Drake has a very good tank wich can probably tank all lvl 4 missions without much trouble, but I never liked the damage output of this ship.
Nighthawk is similar to drake and can tank almost the same as a Drake, but the damage of a Nighthawk is much higher than on a Drake.
I prefer Nighthawk for all lvl 4 missions, and having the ship passive tanked is much more relaxing too 
|
Lesivio
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 16:00:00 -
[27]
I'm about to start running level 4's in a Nighthawk, but I wanted to see what people thought the "best" setup was. I was thinking along the lines of this.
Highs
6 T2 Heavy Missile Launchers
Mids
2 T2 Large Shield Extenders
1 T2 Invun Field
2 T2 Hardeners
Lows
3 T2 Shield Power Relays
2 T2 BCU's
Rigs
2 Core Defence Field Purgers
Obviously I could look at going towards faction gear for the ship, but for now I want to make a mission boat that's bulletproof as I go afk a fair bit due to my family. Any else use something similar or completely different? I would love to hear your thoughts on this setup.
|
Vhiskey
Caldari
Imperial Forces
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 16:03:00 -
[28]
mmh... i still dont know what the word gank means. is it a artificial word? is it opposite to tank? or a special tank?
and ncr is a short term for? caldari navy raven?
|
Bufo8o2
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 16:17:00 -
[29]
Are vultures (the other caldari command ship) any good? They seem to fit a slightly better tank and have loads of power grid for fitting. Can the hybrid turrets compete with missiles?
|
Aiko Intaki
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 16:20:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Vhiskey
mmh... i still dont know what the word gank means. is it a artificial word? is it opposite to tank? or a special tank?
and ncr is a short term for? caldari navy raven?
First time I heard "gank" used in an MMO was with UO - usually to mean that a large group of players killed a single character or much smaller group of characters in a highly asymmetric conflict.
I may be wrong, but in EvE I think "gank" is used to mean high DPS, and occasionally a high alpha strike specifically. That is, you can fit your CNR for "gank" (DPS/offense) or "tank" (HP/defense), but rarely both.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |