These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Tank: Drake vs Raven
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Asmodai Xodai
#1 - 2016-10-30 07:16:23 UTC
I've read several times that the tank on the Drake is stellar, awesome, whatever, and that it is better than the Raven's tank.

Can anyone explain why this is so both from 1) some kind of theoretical or gameplay perspective (why it makes sense, why it is desirable, why it would be designed that way), and also from 2) a mechanical or 'nuts and bolts' perspective (number of slots, powergrid, etc)?

From the theoretical or gameplay perspective, it 'makes sense' to me that the Raven's tank should outclass the Drake's. It is a combat ship (not special ops, ewar, etc) plus higher up on the food chain (battleship). From a mechanical or 'nuts and bolts' perspective, while I have not checked, I would assume that things like slots and powergrid should also be higher on a Raven, and that also makes sense to me. So I'd like these two perspectives explained, if possible.

Thanks.
Nikea Tiber
Backwater Enterprises RD
#2 - 2016-10-30 08:51:51 UTC
The drake got nerfed from what it used to be, but the tl;dr for someone who armor tanks is shields regenerate, and a drake can fit for higher resists + take advantage of the faster shield regen time that a bc hull has, and fit large shield extenders, flux coils, and hp rigs to tank a respectable amount of dps through regen alone.

my other nano is a polycarb
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#3 - 2016-10-30 09:00:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Do Little
It's a question of hull bonuses and shield regeneration. This fit:

[Drake, Drake]
Damage Control II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II

Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Range Script
10MN Afterburner II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II

Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile
Drone Link Augmentor I

Medium Core Defense Field Purger II
Medium Core Defense Field Purger II
Medium Core Defense Field Purger II

Hobgoblin II x5

Can tank 681 dps for 10 minutes with level 5 skills - more than long enough for missions. You can make it cap stable by fitting mission specific shield resistance amplifiers instead of the invulnerability fields. This means it can repair 681 hitpoints/second.

A comparable Raven fit - same tanking modules & rigs, can tank 348 dps with level 5 skills. That's not to say you should fit a Raven the same way but, if you do the Drake will have a relatively stronger tank.

Edit: I don't want to imply that you should fit your ship this way - a ballistic control or 2 likely make more sense than going for maximum tank - for illustration only!
Asmodai Xodai
#4 - 2016-10-30 10:06:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Asmodai Xodai
Do Little wrote:
It's a question of hull bonuses and shield regeneration. This fit:


You are saying that the Drake has such bonuses to hull and shield regeneration that it makes that much of a difference over the Raven, even when the Raven has more slots to fit more shield extenders and resists, more power grid, more this, and more that? I looked at the bonuses the Drake has, and while I didn't crunch numbers by any means whatsoever, I wouldn't have thought it could make that much of a difference.

Do all battlecruisers of all races have this sort of superior tanking (or other ability) over the next hull up in the line (the battleship), or is this a shortcoming of the Raven in particular (e.g. is Raven in need of a buff)? It just seems counter-intuitive and weird to me is all. Just seems natural that the next ship up in the line - the battleship - should be better in areas of tank and gank than battlecruisers (not better in other things of course like size, speed, etc).
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#5 - 2016-10-30 11:37:23 UTC
I think I've discovered a bug in EFT. I was wondering why the shield regen numbers were so much higher for the Drake than other ships so I logged into SISI over downtime to test the fit using the new fitting simulator which imported my EFT fit painlessly from the clipboard. Shield regen dropped from 681 dps to 184 dps - not nearly as impressive! My character only has Caldari Battlecruiser 4 so the resists will be a bit lower than the all 5 EFT numbers.

Interestingly, this fit has enough fitting room for a burst module though I haven't figured out a way to see what impact it has on my tank.

[Drake, Simulated Drake]
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Damage Control II

Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
10MN Afterburner II
Missile Guidance Computer II

Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Shield Command Burst I

Medium Core Defense Field Purger II
Medium Core Defense Field Purger II
Medium Core Defense Field Purger II



Shield Extension Charge x300
Scourge Fury Heavy Missile x200

This is an awesome tool - goodbye EFT, well done CCP!

The Amarr Prophecy can fit a massive armor tank - largely for the same reason, a hull bonus to resists.

Cyclone and Myrmidon have active tanking hull bonuses. The other battlecruiser bonuses focus on offence rather than defense.
Ion Kirst
KIRSTONE ALLIANCE
#6 - 2016-10-30 14:16:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Ion Kirst
I don't see anything wrong with EFT.

I pulled the Drake fit into EFT, and not to dispute your numbers, but more to clarify them.

Under "Defense" the number shown is 655/655. That is the effective hit points per second. Ok, np.

But there is another number to consider. Hover the mouse over the shields, and you'll see self recharge of 172hp/s. for the same fit. This number has always been what I go by, it seems more realistic. This fit has a shield recharge time of 197 sec.

The Drake and Raven are (obviously) two different ships. The Drake is made for passive tanking. It has a shield recharge time of 1050 sec. The recharge time for the Raven shields is 1875 sec.

For a similar fit, a passive Raven, will only get a self recharge of 109hp/s, and a recharge time of 347 sec.

The Raven with an XL Pith X SB gets a shield boost of 1256 every 4 sec. Under "Defense" the number is 902/1138 (using cap boosters), and it's shield recharge is 12hp/s.

So passive fit the Drake, and active tank the Raven.

I don't know if this helped or muddied the issue.

-Kirst

Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#7 - 2016-10-30 20:41:08 UTC
The generic Raven can fling cruise missiles an immense distance; that has to be factored in to its tank. That is, if you can't hit it, it is de facto tanked.

Having said that, the Drake does have a pretty impressive tank. It can't do much else, but it can tank. The Raven can at least do a bit of damage even if application is lacking somewhat.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#8 - 2016-10-31 08:21:35 UTC
Ah! CCP is raw hp/sec while EFT is ehp/sec with resistances factored in!

Should have realized that but the Drake "active defense" is so extreme it didn't occur to me.

Thank you.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#9 - 2016-10-31 08:40:21 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
The generic Raven can fling cruise missiles an immense distance; that has to be factored in to its tank. That is, if you can't hit it, it is de facto tanked.

Having said that, the Drake does have a pretty impressive tank. It can't do much else, but it can tank. The Raven can at least do a bit of damage even if application is lacking somewhat.



This basically. PVe wise range tank only has issues with gurista. They fire missiles too. Rest, cruise chuckers like raven or rattlesnake can get by on smaller tanks really. I call gurista a karma check....they screw you over like you screw over the turret based rats lol.

A downside to the usual passive 3 purger (or extender) rig setup is no space for rigor rig(s). And you only get a TP/MGC in mids if that. We can make the comment it needs to tank because its not hitting well to drop targets fast. Ye old tank by gank.

Vice raven with 2-3 rigors + paint is normal and the brave skip the foreplay of t1 or precision and go straight to fury ammo. Fury that hits cruisers decent by some reports.
Ion Kirst
KIRSTONE ALLIANCE
#10 - 2016-11-01 01:36:47 UTC
It is something to think about, the longer you stay in the mission, the better tank you need.

If you build up the Drake for tank, then it's dps drops dramatically.

A happy medium for the Drake might give about 475dps with about 3000 volley, and getting a shield recharge of about 100 hp/s.

The Raven sacrificing nothing, still has a good tank, and then can dish out about 950dps with about 6000 volley. It doesn't stay in the mission as long as the Drake, and the shield booster can be pulsed when needed.

Early on as a very young pilot, I got into a Raven too fast. I was struggling. In some missions I went back to a Drake with a good tank to take care of the pesky little stuff. Then I went and got the Raven to finish off the BS. It was a learning process. (Wow, that was a long time ago.)

-Kirst

Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.
Andrew Indy
Cleaning Crew
#11 - 2016-11-02 08:44:14 UTC
Well tank is abit subjective. The raven can get more EHP total just not more Regen.

Any way, some specs to take into account .(Lvl 5 unfitted)

Drake Shield pool - 6875
Drake Regen time - 1050 secs

Raven Shield pool - 8750
Raven Reg time - 1875 Secs

Regen rate is based on the total pool and regen time mapped out over a bell curve with a peak at around 30% (I'll work with Raw/full values for ease of calculation but they can be extrapolated out to Peak) . So the greater the pool and the lower the time the better. Given a full regn cycle a drake gets 6.5HP/sec while a Raven gets 4.7 giving the Drake a 38% advantage over the Raven.

Then you have to take Mods into account. The main 2 being Extenders and recharges/relays. The Drake and Raven can both Fit Large Extenders so the Raven has no advantage other than more slots (only 1 Mid extra). Each extender adds 2600 HP (using the full cycle regen rates) that gives you 2.5 Extra regen for the Drake and 1.4 for the Raven, so assuming the Drake fits 3 and the Raven 4 that gives the Drake 7.5 extra and The Raven 5.6.

Regen Mods, these affect the Base Regen time, and while they affect both ships equally the Drake already low time is still a big advantage. With 4 Relay the drake gets a regen time of 332 for a total of 20.7 while the raven gets 444sec with 5 for a base of 19.7 regen (no other fittings), the 5 Relay Raven can barely run 1.5 Invuls so that fit is pretty crippling.

Then you add the drakes Resistance bonus which further exacerbates the situation.
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#12 - 2016-11-03 05:22:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Zhilia Mann
Andrew Indy wrote:
Regen rate is based on the total pool and regen time mapped out over a bell curve with a peak at around 30%


I'm going to be an ass here but getting this sort of math wrong just aggravates.

It's not a bell curve. At all. Bell curves are symmetrical and given by some variation of y=e^(-x^2). If we were to center a bell curve around 30%, the recharge at 0% and at 60% would be the same (hence, you know, symmetry).

Instead, we see the recharge rate at 0% is the same as the recharge rate at 81%. I've gone ahead and plotted the math available here. As you can clearly see, peak recharge is just a hair under 25% shield with a steep dropoff in recharge rate under 10% and a shallow dropoff that you really start to notice above 50%.

For reference, I also included a bell curve on the second sheet of that spreadsheet. Notice (broken record) the symmetry that we just don't see on the actual recharge chart. Also note that at 100% on the bell curve the shield is still recharging.

So no. It's not a bell curve. It's a somewhat classic solution to a pretty common family of differential equations with a sink at 0.

/end rant
Sheeth Athonille
Rabid Dogz Mining
#13 - 2016-11-03 11:00:24 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Snip


The eve uni link you shared was for capacitor, are the numbers the same for shield recharge, and/or did you use the shield recharge numbers for your actual calculations?
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#14 - 2016-11-03 20:41:07 UTC
Sheeth Athonille wrote:
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Snip


The eve uni link you shared was for capacitor, are the numbers the same for shield recharge, and/or did you use the shield recharge numbers for your actual calculations?


The patterns are the same (that is, the shape of the curve is the same). I scaled the chart based on percentage on purpose to make sure that wasn't lost. If you wanted actual numbers you could play with the spreadsheet a bit and get them.
Estuary Algaert
Petulant Luddite GmbH
#15 - 2016-11-03 21:21:27 UTC
As far as pure tank goes... Flawed concept, but I think it works...

The Raven is a punching bag, properly fit it can take a beating and not show too much wear, but every hit is noticed. It has depth of tank to handle the big blows but is rather easy to hit (compared to the Drake). As long as you have shield to take the blows, you are fine.

A well fit Drake on the other hand is more like a paint bucket. Some hits basically wont matter (that passive regen), they will land and make some noise but really didn't leave a scratch. Big hits though can punch holes thru you and ruin your day, these are an issue. How big a hit it can take is based on the fit but once the peak regen mark for your ship has come and gone, you better be too, holes in your bucket are bad.
Estuary Algaert
Petulant Luddite GmbH
#16 - 2016-11-03 21:23:09 UTC
Also, yes, to confirm what others have said. The formulas used for calculating passive shield regen and cap regen are the same.
pushdogg
relocation LLC.
#17 - 2016-11-04 05:42:50 UTC
This is getting a little complicated, especially when the answer is very simple.

The Drake is very good as a passive platform, and the Raven shines as an active platform. While I'm very limited in my recent experience as I'm on subbed hiatus, from a pvp standpoint, the two are very different.

Comparing them is like apples to oranges. You can swap the styles of the two, but they will be very lackluster in opposing settings.