These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

T2 Beams

First post
Author
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2013-07-29 17:13:42 UTC
Strictly from a PvE perspective it's my opinion that there's no reason to fit T2 beams unless you're cheap and/or want to engage in MJD combat. You only get 3.7%-5.7% increase in damage over faction guns (large beam spec. 4 versus 5) in exchange for nearly 33% more capacitor usage, and conflagration in pulse lasers stomp all over gleam in beams like Godzilla on Tokyo when it comes to short range damage.

Faction beams are much more expensive, but unless you're kinda stupid about how you do missions they're more of a capital investment than a gank risk.

Also:
Lady Naween wrote:
T2 beams are godly! Who cares about a little bit of extra cap when amarr ships should have a cap booster anyway.


If you need a cap injector to power T2 beams but you can run faction beams without one you've just freed up a mid slot for either more tank or more gank thereby making you "safer" and/or more "efficient." Amarr ships should only fit injectors when it's a performance bonus for them, and in most situations I've seen, especially with regards to the TC's nightmare (which I don't think was mentioned at the time of your post), a tracking computer will pretty much always trump 3.7%-5.7% more raw damage.
Valleria Darkmoon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2013-07-29 19:55:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Valleria Darkmoon
Whitehound wrote:
Valleria Darkmoon wrote:
I agree that Large beams getting a 10% tracking reduction would make them pretty bad.

It is so far only being discussed and for medium sized turrets only. One should add to the thread in F&ID if one has got an opinion on it.

Personally do I think it is not that bad, because one gets more damage for the reduction in tracking. One can sit further out to compensate for the tracking loss, but the damage increase is really just nice.


What concerns me is that in the gate sniping situation I described earlier there are generally two decisions pilots make when they jump in and see me ~200 km away. They either assume they can align out fast enough, I can't hit them or something like this and try to warp. Because aligning from a dead stop doesn't cause you to move very much they usually take the hit and explode. The other reaction is people who burn back for the gate and that shot rarely has the damage to be lethal with only low EHP frigates like medium ASB fits ever being killed this way and about 50% of the time will miss completely even with 3 tracking enhancers fitted. The tracking is already bad enough that even very minor movements can cause a miss (even the aligning frigates would live or be missed some of the time) so I'd be pretty concerned about any reduction on this front. Now granted this is all fire directed at frigates so sig radius and resolution is a significant factor here, I never had any problems hitting industrials, destroyers and anything larger but this is also from an average range between about 190-210 km. It's pretty hard to get a firing spot much farther away than that to compensate for poor tracking, my spots were always one of several bookmarks off the gate and so was kind of a set piece and therefore pretty much useless in an engagement off the gate.

Additionally on the Oracle at least I'm already using as many sebos as I have mid slots, 1 low (sig amp) and also some of my rigs for both scan res and lock range as well as 3 lows for optimal, falloff and tracking and my skills are full level 5s for anything relevant to any of this. It's not really practical to even get the ship to be physically capable of firing much farther than that, about the only thing you could do is go nuts on implants. Since I don't do this type of sniping often anymore (too many bomber pilots have too many of my bookmarks), I'm certainly not willing to spend that kind of money on sniping.

Reality has an almost infinite capacity to resist oversimplification.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#23 - 2013-07-30 12:26:25 UTC
AFAIK there is no proposal to change large beam (or rails or arty) in the same way that mediums are being changed.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2013-07-30 12:52:00 UTC
Shereza wrote:
Strictly from a PvE perspective it's my opinion that there's no reason to fit T2 beams unless you're cheap and/or want to engage in MJD combat. You only get 3.7%-5.7% increase in damage over faction guns (large beam spec. 4 versus 5) in exchange for nearly 33% more capacitor usage, and conflagration in pulse lasers stomp all over gleam in beams like Godzilla on Tokyo when it comes to short range damage.

Faction beams are much more expensive, but unless you're kinda stupid about how you do missions they're more of a capital investment than a gank risk.

Also:
Lady Naween wrote:
T2 beams are godly! Who cares about a little bit of extra cap when amarr ships should have a cap booster anyway.


If you need a cap injector to power T2 beams but you can run faction beams without one you've just freed up a mid slot for either more tank or more gank thereby making you "safer" and/or more "efficient." Amarr ships should only fit injectors when it's a performance bonus for them, and in most situations I've seen, especially with regards to the TC's nightmare (which I don't think was mentioned at the time of your post), a tracking computer will pretty much always trump 3.7%-5.7% more raw damage.


Sorry, but that 3rd TC doesn't add much for Nightmare.
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2013-07-30 18:13:08 UTC
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Sorry, but that 3rd TC doesn't add much for Nightmare.


I won't argue that the raw bonuses provided by a third TC over two (scripted) TCs and a TE isn't much, but then neither is the raw bonus provided by switching to T2 guns. Either way it's still an increase of 4.28% optimal range, 8.56% falloff range, and 10.07% tracking speed which I'll take over 4.7% raw damage and another module to manage.

Of course in all fairness a painter or webber would likely be a better choice for more proactive mission runners, and swapping out the TE for a DDA would certainly help kill off any tacklers that actually make it into tackle range a bit faster so there are considerations for other modules than just a tracking computer. They are also, in my opinion, better options than fitting T2 guns and a cap injector unless, as I (more or less) suggested, you're poor or very paranoid about being ganked.
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2013-07-30 18:41:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobias Hareka
What is so important about that cap usage? You're cap stable with T2 Tachyons, hardeners/TCs running. And you have around 1m20s of cap if running everything.
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#27 - 2013-07-30 20:29:58 UTC
Zhu Dark wrote:
Is there any reason to actually train for t2 beams? Here's how the faction tachs and t2 tachs compare:

These numbers assume perfect gunnery, 5% implants, faction sinks, and 2 TCs (tracking) on a nightmare:

4 x Imperial Navy Tach (Imp Multi)
Range: 33/25
Tracking: 0.04117
Cap Usage: 25.6/s
RoF: 6.67693 seconds
DPS: 1020

4 x Tach II (Imp Multi)
Range: 33/25
Tracking: 0.04117
Cap Usage: 34.1/s (+33.2%)
RoF: 6.67693 seconds
DPS: 1077 (+5.6%)


You answered your own question... 5.6 % increase in damage. Why wouldn't you want more damage? Cap isn't an issue in level 4's since everything should be dead long before you run out of cap.

I only use Gleam if somethings really close up so that's just a slight extra benefit of T2
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2013-07-30 20:40:31 UTC
Also:
Tachyon Beam Laser II: 4,375 million
Imperial Navy Tachyon Beam Laser: 80 million (Hek); 83 million (Jita)
Rain6638
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2013-07-30 23:04:54 UTC
bleh. maybe T2 tachys are ok for low-risk missions against sansha at range.

focusing on a turret type and size limits the ship selection, so without knowing the application I'd rather not spend time thinking about this.

T2 beams are at the end of my 120m sp vanity training plan

[ 2013.06.21 09:52:05 ] (notify) For initiating combat your security status has been adjusted by -0.1337

Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2013-07-31 03:31:41 UTC
received this in an incursion channel on my way through:

"ISN HQ SECONDARY"

High power
1x Large Shield Transporter II
4x Tachyon Beam Laser II
1x Large Energy Transfer Array II
Medium power
1x Sensor Booster II
1x Large Shield Extender II
3x Tracking Computer II
1x Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
1x Gist X-Type 100MN Microwarpdrive
Low power
1x Damage Control II
4x Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Rig Slot
1x Large Core Defense Field Extender II
1x Large Energy Discharge Elutriation II
1x Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II
Drones
5x Warrior II
5x Hammerhead II
xPredat0rz
Project.Nova
The Initiative.
#31 - 2013-07-31 09:31:55 UTC
THats for HQ sites. Basically its a sniper fit for engaging targets at 120km away.

THe nightmare can be fit either way. Most of the ones i saw were pulse fit.
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2013-07-31 15:25:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Verity Sovereign
Shereza wrote:
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Sorry, but that 3rd TC doesn't add much for Nightmare.


I won't argue that the raw bonuses provided by a third TC over two (scripted) TCs and a TE isn't much, but then neither is the raw bonus provided by switching to T2 guns. Either way it's still an increase of 4.28% optimal range, 8.56% falloff range, and 10.07% tracking speed which I'll take over 4.7% raw damage and another module to manage.


Umm... You don't script your TCs?

I run Shadow Serp/Fed Navy TCs, 4 of them...

The 3rd mod is 57.1% effective

For a range scripted TC, that means:
8.57% more optimal
17.1% more falloff

For a range scripted faction TC that means
9.14% more optimal
18.3% more falloff


For speed scripted
17.1% more speed for T2
20.0% more tracking speed for a faction TC

For the 4th one, speed scripted, it still adds 10% to tracking speed

How can you say that isn't adding much?


xPredat0rz wrote:
Thats for HQ sites. Basically its a sniper fit for engaging targets at 120km away.

THe nightmare can be fit either way. Most of the ones i saw were pulse fit.


No, its not a sniper fit, its a "mid range" fit. The Machs do most of the "sniping", while the NMs use mostly multi and gleam with a little gamma and X ray, and rarely engage over 70km.
Of course... it could... range script for the sebos and TCs, plus aurora, and you can do much more than 120... but what is the point?



How I'd modify that ISN secondary fit:

1x Large Shield Transporter II
4x Tachyon Beam Laser II
1x Faction Large Energy Transfer Array II (Its pretty cheap, use it)

Medium power
1x Faction Sensor Booster II
4x Faction Tracking Computer II
1x Pithum C->A or Gist B->A Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
1x Core or Gist X-Type 100MN Microwarpdrive (yes, in this case I'm saying something cheaper is fine)

Low power
1x Damage Control II
4x Imperial Navy Heat Sink

Rig Slot
1x Large Core Defense Field Extender II
1x Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II
1x Large Energy Locus Coordinator II (With the large laser changes, you don't need the elutriation if you've got good skills and implants)
Drones
5x Warrior II
5x Hammerhead II

Implants:
6% Large turret damage
6% Large energy turret Damage
6% Tracking speed
6% Cap capacity
6% Cap recharge
Genolution set
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2013-07-31 18:34:25 UTC
Tobias Hareka wrote:
What is so important about that cap usage?


Some people like their ships to be efficient? Plus if they're running a laser boat, and a beam-armed one that's not using an MJD build at that, they might not care to "waste" money on cap boosters since they aren't also doing so on ammo?

Tobias Hareka wrote:
You're cap stable with T2 Tachyons, hardeners/TCs running. And you have around 1m20s of cap if running everything.


That's your setup, not mine, and you cited your numbers without any sort of supporting data such as what said setup actually is.

That said cap usage is important when you're not using a booster simply because the less you use the more you have for when the crap hits the fan, and it will hit the fan.

Verity Sovereign wrote:
Umm... You don't script your TCs?


Actually I do. I run one tracking enhancer, one unscripted tracking computer, and one tracking computer per script.

Verity Sovereign wrote:
I run Shadow Serp/Fed Navy TCs, 4 of them...

The 3rd mod is 57.1% effective

For a range scripted TC, that means:
8.57% more optimal
17.1% more falloff

(etc.)


I use T2 and using a range script in the third TC means:
-9.15% tracking speed
+5.42% optimal
+10.23% falloff

If I use a tracking script that's:
-4.1% optimal
-7.9% falloff
+11.55% tracking speed

I'll settle for leaving the third TC unscripted rather than worry about juggling scripts in the middle of combat.

Verity Sovereign wrote:
How can you say that isn't adding much?


I didn't, and if you're going to ask someone that you should ask the person I quoted. When you ask them that you shouldn't also quote my post as well.
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2013-07-31 19:03:38 UTC
Shereza wrote:
That's your setup, not mine, and you cited your numbers without any sort of supporting data such as what said setup actually is.


[Nightmare, L4 Nightmare]

Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Imperial Navy Heat Sink
Tracking Enhancer II

Pith B-Type X-Large Shield Booster
EM Ward Field II
EM Ward Field II
Thermic Dissipation Field II
Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Script
Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Script
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800

Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L
Tachyon Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency L

Large Energy Discharge Elutriation II
Large Energy Discharge Elutriation I
Large Energy Discharge Elutriation I
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2013-07-31 19:43:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
//edit. said something about 4th TCs but it sounded as if I would do it.
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-08-01 03:46:58 UTC
Shereza wrote:
Tobias Hareka wrote:
What is so important about that cap usage?


Some people like their ships to be efficient? Plus if they're running a laser boat, and a beam-armed one that's not using an MJD build at that, they might not care to "waste" money on cap boosters since they aren't also doing so on ammo?


I guess after spending a few billion ISK buying and fitting Nightmare with faction guns they didn't want to "waste" ISK on cap boosters and faction crystals...

This is completely understandable... I'm glad to see people not throwing ISK away on such frivolous things!

Mos7Wan7ed
Hardcore Industries
#37 - 2013-08-01 04:10:56 UTC
Tachs over Beams... Gotta love the volley damage...
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#38 - 2013-08-01 04:13:47 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
AFAIK there is no proposal to change large beam (or rails or arty) in the same way that mediums are being changed.


awww but +25% damage to tachys would be fun Big smile

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Adacia Calla
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#39 - 2013-08-01 04:30:11 UTC
Nightmare. That's why you train beams.

Test signature....forum not applying settings :(

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#40 - 2013-08-01 14:05:52 UTC
Since Pulse+scorch is so stupidly good not ready to train beams anywhere soon.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Previous page123Next page