These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

LVL 4 insanity?

Author
Capn Orgasmo
Dmacks Minnions
#41 - 2011-09-09 11:20:37 UTC
Shawn even the Worlds collide is doable solo in a Tengu and its not even that hard.
Shawnm339
Ardent Industrial
#42 - 2011-09-09 11:28:44 UTC
What's the one with the bonus pocket that you need the diamond tag for? I enjoy doing Worlds Collide with someone else just cos it takes an age in a BS
Capn Orgasmo
Dmacks Minnions
#43 - 2011-09-09 11:42:15 UTC
Shawnm339 wrote:
What's the one with the bonus pocket that you need the diamond tag for? I enjoy doing Worlds Collide with someone else just cos it takes an age in a BS



Angel ex and Guristas ex
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#44 - 2011-09-09 13:50:16 UTC
Firebolt145 wrote:
No. Just no.
Oh really? Anyway, yes.
Firebolt145
The Hatchery
#45 - 2011-09-09 14:52:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Firebolt145
Tippia wrote:
Firebolt145 wrote:
No. Just no.
Oh really? Anyway, yes.

I was referring to the Mach comment btw. I have not flown a Nightmare and will not pretend to be an expert on it.

DPS-wise, a Mach uses autocannons and can simply switch ammo to EMP to do the exact same damage amount, so you can't have been talking about DPS with that statement. The only reason why one would consider a Mach strong against Angels and weak against Sansha etc is its tank being shield - thus it is slightly 'weaker' against EM/therm unless you plug it up, on paper.

However, 99% of missioners vastly overtank their missioning ships anyway. I get by with a shield booster and two general invulnerability field II's on my Mach for all missions and that total of 3 tank-related mod is enough to keep my mach above 75% shields and capacity for all missions including Sansha etc without sweat. This means tanking is no longer a limiting factor towards my missioning efficiency.

So that leaves DPS and speed - two things the Mach has plenty of irrespectively of what I'm attacking.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#46 - 2011-09-09 15:06:32 UTC
Firebolt145 wrote:
DPS-wise, a Mach uses autocannons and can simply switch ammo to EMP to do the exact same damage amount, so you can't have been talking about DPS with that statement.
…which also cuts the range down something fierce which isn't something you generally want against Sansha. That's why the NM is so outstanding against them: it delivers the right damage at the right (and beyond) the right range.

Again, that's the whole point of the Ravenkind: they get their versatility from being able to deliver any kind of damage at any kind of range without any kind of modification.

Tanking, as you point out, isn't really a factor since these ships DPS tank anyway, and unless you want to severely hamper their killing ability, they're all shield tanked so the resists are largely the same as well and you have to plug the same holes. Instead, it's all about damage delivery, and while the other two definitely excel at that area, they do so with restrictions. The Ravens do not, but instead get slightly lower damage.
Firebolt145
The Hatchery
#47 - 2011-09-09 15:53:16 UTC
EMP doesn't cut down the range at all - you should be using either EMP, PP or Fusion, all of which have the same range already.

If you mission in Amarr space, then yes you should be using a nightmare because I'd imagine you get a lot more Sansha missions where you need that range. But in Minmatar space, the only Sansha missions you get are the Slave Traders pair. In both of those you start at <30km and kill the necessary ships before they burn out of range.

If you're going to argue that Nightmare and Mach have their places in the universe of EVE location-wise then yes I agree. Golems and CNRs etc can probably work everywhere due to missiles whereas the Nightmare is better suited in Amarr and the Mach is better suited in Minmatar. But saying the Mach and Nightmare are only for special uses and that it is better to switch ship depending on the mission because the Mach isn't good for super-duper long distance is just ridiculous.
Flakey Foont
#48 - 2011-09-09 17:28:43 UTC
I suspect this is a case of guy bought toon thinking he will be l33t but finds it is not that easy.
Capn Orgasmo
Dmacks Minnions
#49 - 2011-09-09 17:34:30 UTC
Flakey Foont wrote:
I suspect this is a case of guy bought toon thinking he will be l33t but finds it is not that easy.

Me too
Lady Go Diveher
Doomheim
#50 - 2011-09-09 19:00:05 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Firebolt145 wrote:
DPS-wise, a Mach uses autocannons and can simply switch ammo to EMP to do the exact same damage amount, so you can't have been talking about DPS with that statement.
…which also cuts the range down something fierce which isn't something you generally want against Sansha. That's why the NM is so outstanding against them: it delivers the right damage at the right (and beyond) the right range.


I agree with 99% of things you say, but on this, no.

It matters not one tiny bit that your OPTIMAL range on AUTOCANNONS is reduced. The only thing that matters is how far into falloff the target is. At optimal plus one falloff my Mach is STILL doing more DPS than a Raven.

That falloff is 70km. There are few to no missions where the rats are outside of 70km ... or can't be readily reached with the mach's 1500m/s ...

The nightmare beats the mach hands down for EM/Therm rats.... for everything else the answer is "Machariel."

A CNR may be able to shoot out to 250km ranges .. but c'mon ... how many times is that useful? In all real scenario's it's DPS is substandard in relation to the pirate battleships.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#51 - 2011-09-09 19:53:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Firebolt145 wrote:
EMP doesn't cut down the range at all - you should be using either EMP, PP or Fusion, all of which have the same range already.
It cuts down range because it has no falloff bonus.

Lady Go Diveher wrote:
It matters not one tiny bit that your OPTIMAL range on AUTOCANNONS is reduced. The only thing that matters is how far into falloff the target is. At optimal plus one falloff my Mach is STILL doing more DPS than a Raven.
Riiiight… You do know that at 1× falloff, your DPS is down to 40%, right? That would mean that the base DPS of that Mach would have to be some 2.5× of the Ravenkind you're comparing to, and that won't be the case.

If we're talking half falloff (~80% DPS, then maybe), but now we're down to 40km, and there are plenty of missions where you need more engagement range than that.
Quote:
A CNR may be able to shoot out to 250km ranges .. but c'mon ... how many times is that useful? In all real scenario's it's DPS is substandard in relation to the pirate battleships.
That would be a stupid fit if you made it do that. Instead, it can deliver near-massive damage (as in far more than the 40% of a Mach's damage you're talking about) to anything within 120km or so. That is enough to make it the jack-of-all-trades king.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#52 - 2011-09-09 20:03:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Tippia wrote:
Firebolt145 wrote:
DPS-wise, a Mach uses autocannons and can simply switch ammo to EMP to do the exact same damage amount, so you can't have been talking about DPS with that statement.
…which also cuts the range down something fierce which isn't something you generally want against Sansha...


Actually, ACs on a Mach work excellently vs Sansha. The Sansha TDs don't reduce the effective range of the AC Mach's turrets in any noticeable way, and the tracking issue is easily overcome by active piloting.

EDIT: OFC a Nightmare works well too, but also requires active piloting and you may take a DPS hit having to switch to LR ammo. But Tachs with 2 TEs have a pretty good falloff anyway.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lady Go Diveher
Doomheim
#53 - 2011-09-09 20:17:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Go Diveher
Tippia wrote:
If we're talking half falloff (~80% DPS, then maybe), but now we're down to 40km, and there are plenty of missions where you need more engagement range than that.
When comparing a max-skilled Mach to a max-skilled CNR, the exact tipping point is 45km. Anything outside of 45km takes less damage from the mach, anything inside of that, more.
Case in point: http://i56.tinypic.com/2i6dx78.png

You need to ask yourself the following question: how long, realistically, are the rats going to spend outside of 45km when I can do 1500m/s? It's not a question of where they spawn, it's a simple question of maintaining the range you want to be at.

For most missions, you spend some 30 seconds MWDing into range, then the rest of the mission at near-enough point blank ranges. At a conservative estimate, you're then doing at least 75% more damage than the CNR. That is very significant.

The Gollem does even less damage, and it's tank bonus is tied to the x10 Marauders skill, meaning few but the most hardcore mission bears will train this, and probably not even the pre-requisites in short order What?

They're great "low SP mission ships" but they are not optimal to the task. The only reason they're great at the first task, is that you can maintain a huge range and ergo can tank the damage easily enough. Once you're skilled, you really owe it to yourself to switch out to turret DPS and get in their face.
Firebolt145
The Hatchery
#54 - 2011-09-09 20:33:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Firebolt145
Tippia, are you actually saying that the Raven does more dps than a Mach overall in some missions? Have you actually flown a Mach? We haven't even talked about the fact that the Raven can't damage frigates for **** while a Mach 1 shots each of them from 70km away every 3 seconds.

edit: just did some efting of my own.

http://i.imgur.com/DAjHD.png

Top lines are attacking a mach and second is attacking a cynabal (just random examples of attacking a battleship or a cruiser). According to this a Raven outdpses a mach on a battleship at 70km and on a cruiser at around 105km (lol).

For the raven I used this fit which I stole from Battleclinic. Ignoring the hull cost, it is about the same range of 'pimp' as my Mach fit.

[Raven, Lv4 Mission Raven]
Capacitor Flux Coil II
Capacitor Flux Coil II
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

Photon Scattering Field II
Photon Scattering Field II
Heat Dissipation Field II
Gist B-Type Large Shield Booster
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Shield Boost Amplifier II

Cruise Missile Launcher II
Cruise Missile Launcher II
Cruise Missile Launcher II
Cruise Missile Launcher II
Cruise Missile Launcher II
Cruise Missile Launcher II
Small Tractor Beam I
Salvager I

Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I


Hammerhead II
Hobgoblin II

---

Comparing my mach fit to this raven (ignoring dps) we get about the same tank and I have an mwd which makes me go at 1.5kmps. Even if you take out a tank mod (thus making it worst than the mach at taking lol) and putting in an mwd the Raven still only gets 800mps.

I have no idea where you are getting the idea that the Raven is better than the Mach in ANY situation.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#55 - 2011-09-09 20:52:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Lady Go Diveher wrote:
You need to ask yourself the following question: how long, realistically, are the rats going to spend outside of 45km when I can do 1500m/s? It's not a question of where they spawn, it's a simple question of maintaining the range you want to be at.
Long enough, since you actually have to travel between them instead of switching targets instantly. Most missions with any amount of ships will have multiple spawn points and/or multiple waves, and the ships will try to spread out while you go after one of them. So those 30s come into play more than once, and each of those equates to roughly one “free” ship kill for a ship that doesn't have to make that trip.
Quote:
The Gollem does even less damage
Than what? And in what scenario?
Quote:
The only reason they're great at the first task, is that you can maintain a huge range and ergo can tank the damage easily enough.
…and delivering any kind of damage at any kind of range at any kind of target. In other words, they're far better as jack-of-all-trade ships.
Firebolt145 wrote:
Tippia, are you actually saying that the Raven does more dps than a Mach overall in some missions?
Ravenkind, not Raven. As in CNR/Golem. And yes, definitely, from the simple fact that as a turret ship, the Mach's damage is capped by the range.
Quote:
Comparing my mach fit to this raven (ignoring dps) we get about the same tank and I have an mwd which makes me go at 1.5kmps. Even if you take out a tank mod (thus making it worst than the mach at taking lol) and putting in an mwd it still only gets 800mps.
For one, that is a horrid fit. For another, I take it that's a normal Raven, not a CNR or Golem? And thirdly, why would you put an MWD on it? That's the whole point: you don't need it because you get full engagement range from the get-go and can deliver any type of damage at that range.

Just to make it clear: that fit is missing the ammo you'll be using, it's missing at least one BCU, it's missing target painters (which, btw, will make your DPS graph look a bit wierd since they are only applied out to the TP optimal, but in reality, you can safely extend that damage plateau out to 90km or so), and its rigs are only half right. A properly fit CNR should deliver some 600+ damage to a naked Cynabal at <60km; 500 or so at <90km. The numbers in your graph are ⅔ too low…
Firebolt145
The Hatchery
#56 - 2011-09-09 20:54:25 UTC
Edited my post to insert some new data just as you posted Tippia. And saying AC range is limited is understandable when looking at some ships, but not when looking at the Mach.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#57 - 2011-09-09 20:56:22 UTC
Firebolt145 wrote:
Edited my post to insert some new data just as you posted Tippia. And saying AC range is limited is understandable when looking at some ships, but not when looking at the Mach.
It's limited for the Mach as well. The tracking formula combined with the fact that it's range entirely comes in the form of falloff makes sure of that.
Firebolt145
The Hatchery
#58 - 2011-09-09 21:08:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Firebolt145
If you look at the EFT graph I linked, I'm considering worst case scenario already for tracking (going in complete opposite directions).

edit: Tippia I'm not using guesses or random gut estimations when I give information. I have numbers to back me up everywhere. If you can show me a graph where a Raven outdpses a Mach in a realistic situation within a reasonable range then I'll admit you are right and there is a situation where the Mach loses to the Raven. Until then, it's just empty words.

edit2: Just saw your own edit, this is getting confusing lol.

You're right, I had forgotten we were debating a CNR. Gimme a sec.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#59 - 2011-09-09 21:19:02 UTC
Firebolt145 wrote:
Tippia I'm not using guesses or random gut estimations when I give information. I have numbers to back me up everywhere. If you can show me a graph where a Raven outdpses a Mach in a realistic situation within a reasonable range then I'll admit you are right and there is a situation where the Mach loses to the Raven. Until then, it's just empty words.
Sure. Post a Mach fit (including ammo).
Firebolt145
The Hatchery
#60 - 2011-09-09 21:31:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Firebolt145
http://i.imgur.com/0Kom0.png

Much better numbers for the CNR, but still doesn't win it. Mach will always out-dps the CNR up till 53km on battleships regardless of transversal.

WRT Cruiser dps, this graph is already assuming worst case scenario for the Mach. Once I set transversal to 0 (which is much more likely with rats racing towards you) the Mach outdpses on the Cruiser until 73km (I have taken the TP into account).

Saying speed doesn't matter is being ignorant. Many missions require you to zoom zoom here or zoom zoom there. Who cares if you can kill everything if it takes you longer to get to the next pocket's gate?

Anyway, here are fits. Once again I've stolen the best-rated CNR fit on Battleclinic. Once again tank numbers are about the same, and obviously speed differences are same as stated for the Raven.

[Raven Navy Issue, Raven Navy Issue: Proper CNR mission fit]
Power Diagnostic System II
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System

Cap Recharger II
Caldari Navy Shield Boost Amplifier
Caldari Navy Invulnerability Field
Caldari Navy Invulnerability Field
Pithum A-Type Medium Shield Booster
Republic Fleet Target Painter

Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher, Paradise Cruise Missile
Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher, Paradise Cruise Missile
Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher, Paradise Cruise Missile
Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher, Paradise Cruise Missile
Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher, Paradise Cruise Missile
Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher, Paradise Cruise Missile
Caldari Navy Cruise Missile Launcher, Paradise Cruise Missile
Drone Link Augmentor I

Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II



---

[Machariel, Ideal Mach]
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer
Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer

Gist C-Type 100MN MicroWarpdrive
Gist C-Type X-Large Shield Booster
Invulnerability Field II
Invulnerability Field II
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range

800mm Repeating Artillery II, EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, EMP L
800mm Repeating Artillery II, EMP L
Small Tractor Beam I

Large Core Defence Capacitor Safeguard I
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I


Warrior II x10
Warrior II x5

---

I am using Paradise Cruise Missiles for the CNR as I assume they are somewhat the equivalent of cheap non-faction ammo (like EMP). I have not taken drones into account in any of these comparisons. Also, the CNR fit I have linked is so ridiculously pimped I am laughing, that would be huge SG-bait. I am not sure how you'd bring up the DPS on that thing short of getting rid of a tank mod and putting on another TP. Please don't make me EFT that as well.