These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Is anything _significantly_ faster than my Golem for L4 isk-making?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#121 - 2015-12-28 22:55:16 UTC
The Bigpuns wrote:
I do use a golem, usually fit with 4 tp's instead of mgc's but depending on mission. It's easy, but it's probably my least favourite of the marauders, and only ahead of mach and rs due to its ewar immunity.


Don't bother with the TPs.. Even with the on hull bonus, they suffer from range limitations.
Also, with 4 TP's, the 4th is worth nothing and an MGC would perform better.

Having said that, the MGC uses less cap and reduces target swapping caused by still online TPs.

Also, with the current buff to MGCs, things have gotten a good bit better.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#122 - 2015-12-29 02:46:46 UTC
What's the ideal non-TP Golem setup now? A T2 rigor/flare and three precision-scripted MCGs?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#123 - 2015-12-29 04:15:26 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
What's the ideal non-TP Golem setup now? A T2 rigor/flare and three precision-scripted MCGs?


Nope...

3 MGCs - t2 cruise missile damage rig and t2 anti-em rig.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#124 - 2015-12-29 04:46:52 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
The Bigpuns wrote:
I do use a golem, usually fit with 4 tp's instead of mgc's but depending on mission. It's easy, but it's probably my least favourite of the marauders, and only ahead of mach and rs due to its ewar immunity.


Don't bother with the TPs.. Even with the on hull bonus, they suffer from range limitations.
Also, with 4 TP's, the 4th is worth nothing and an MGC would perform better.

Having said that, the MGC uses less cap and reduces target swapping caused by still online TPs.

Also, with the current buff to MGCs, things have gotten a good bit better.


Like I said before, CCP needs to change that TP bonus on the Golem for a Missile Precision or Explosion Radius bonus instead. It would fall in line with the other Marauders application bonuses.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#125 - 2015-12-29 04:52:47 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
The Bigpuns wrote:
I do use a golem, usually fit with 4 tp's instead of mgc's but depending on mission. It's easy, but it's probably my least favourite of the marauders, and only ahead of mach and rs due to its ewar immunity.


Don't bother with the TPs.. Even with the on hull bonus, they suffer from range limitations.
Also, with 4 TP's, the 4th is worth nothing and an MGC would perform better.

Having said that, the MGC uses less cap and reduces target swapping caused by still online TPs.

Also, with the current buff to MGCs, things have gotten a good bit better.


Like I said before, CCP needs to change that TP bonus on the Golem for a Missile Precision or Explosion Radius bonus instead. It would fall in line with the other Marauders application bonuses.


I think CCP treated the TP bonus as an application bonus.
Unfortunately, it got tied to a module...

Though, with the MGCs, the bonus is a bit redundant.
Definitely needs a better bonus... Don't care if it's application or something else, but anything decent would be nice.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#126 - 2015-12-29 05:43:11 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
I think CCP treated the TP bonus as an application bonus.
Unfortunately, it got tied to a module...

Though, with the MGCs, the bonus is a bit redundant.
Definitely needs a better bonus... Don't care if it's application or something else, but anything decent would be nice.

From what I recall during the Golem rebalance discussion, there were a lot of proponents for keeping the TP bonus. I believe this was primarily due to the Golem's role in applying TP bonuses for use in wormhole space.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#127 - 2015-12-29 05:59:23 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
I think CCP treated the TP bonus as an application bonus.
Unfortunately, it got tied to a module...

Though, with the MGCs, the bonus is a bit redundant.
Definitely needs a better bonus... Don't care if it's application or something else, but anything decent would be nice.

From what I recall during the Golem rebalance discussion, there were a lot of proponents for keeping the TP bonus. I believe this was primarily due to the Golem's role in applying TP bonuses for use in wormhole space.


Who knows anymore..
Missile boats seem to be a hodge podge of crap that won't work without Rapids...
The Bigpuns
United Standings Improvement Agency
#128 - 2015-12-29 09:01:56 UTC
You all be like crazy and stuff.

Tp bonus on a golem is way strong. Why the hell are you having range issues in a marauder? Sit there and face tank all the things. Usually in tp optimal, if not, mjd or mwd closer. Like with any other marauder.

The bonused tp's provide such a big bonus that it's usually viable to have at least 3 of them. Missile application formula is weighted towards the radius side, only time the velocity is more useful is when shooting frigs. Which drones should be doing.

3 tp's and an mgc, or 2 and 2, is fine although with missions that have ewar immune npc's (Zor, some epic arc bosses) mgc's are you're best option. And I can see the quality of life with not having to reapply painters to every target when going with mgc's, but with the reduced cycle times, it's never actually an issue.

Tldr, the application and aggro holding of tp's is still better.

Golem can spare so many mids for application that rigs are mostly redundant anyway. With tp's, I usually go with a flare and a calefaction just cos nothing else is needed, although astronautic rigs may be worth a shot.
Estella Osoka
Cranky Bitches Who PMS
#129 - 2015-12-29 14:37:45 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
I think CCP treated the TP bonus as an application bonus.
Unfortunately, it got tied to a module...

Though, with the MGCs, the bonus is a bit redundant.
Definitely needs a better bonus... Don't care if it's application or something else, but anything decent would be nice.

From what I recall during the Golem rebalance discussion, there were a lot of proponents for keeping the TP bonus. I believe this was primarily due to the Golem's role in applying TP bonuses for use in wormhole space.


It shouldn't have been kept. It was a slap in the face to the Paladin and Kronos, who used to have bonuses to webs.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#130 - 2015-12-29 16:40:07 UTC
Estella Osoka wrote:
It shouldn't have been kept. It was a slap in the face to the Paladin and Kronos, who used to have bonuses to webs.

I personally would've preferred an explosion radius bonus (in addition to explosion velocity).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#131 - 2015-12-29 18:33:33 UTC
The Bigpuns wrote:
You all be like crazy and stuff.

Tp bonus on a golem is way strong. Why the hell are you having range issues in a marauder? Sit there and face tank all the things. Usually in tp optimal, if not, mjd or mwd closer. Like with any other marauder.

The bonused tp's provide such a big bonus that it's usually viable to have at least 3 of them. Missile application formula is weighted towards the radius side, only time the velocity is more useful is when shooting frigs. Which drones should be doing.

3 tp's and an mgc, or 2 and 2, is fine although with missions that have ewar immune npc's (Zor, some epic arc bosses) mgc's are you're best option. And I can see the quality of life with not having to reapply painters to every target when going with mgc's, but with the reduced cycle times, it's never actually an issue.

Tldr, the application and aggro holding of tp's is still better.

Golem can spare so many mids for application that rigs are mostly redundant anyway. With tp's, I usually go with a flare and a calefaction just cos nothing else is needed, although astronautic rigs may be worth a shot.


TPs are good for torps.
However, for cruise missiles, you're better off with MGC's, as you can engage at any range.

Honestly, if you're using torps on a Golem, you're doing it wrong.
Sure, you get 200 more dps, but that's within 35km range.. Outside of that range, you're getting a minimum of 100dps less, and can only reach out to 80km, and that's with MGCs, which means you're losing application.

Trust me, if you're flying a Golem, use cruise missiles and MGC's.
I have my Golem fitted with 3 and only use precision scripts.
I can nail anything within targeting range.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#132 - 2015-12-30 00:34:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Joe Risalo wrote:
Honestly, if you're using torps on a Golem, you're doing it wrong.
Sure, you get 200 more dps, but that's within 35km range.. Outside of that range, you're getting a minimum of 100dps less, and can only reach out to 80km, and that's with MGCs, which means you're losing application.

Polarized torpedo Golem is interesting, if a tad on the squishy side. I agree that range is definitely an issue, though. Even with hydraulic rigs, Javelins and Bastion you're still looking at around 70-80km max for not much more DPS than Fury cruise missiles. What you do gain is a much faster rate of fire - which is quite an improvement over cruise launchers.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#133 - 2015-12-30 00:52:19 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

Polarized torpedo Golem is interesting, if a tad on the squishy side. I agree that range is definitely an issue, though. Even with hydraulic rigs, Javelins and Bastion you're still looking at around 70-80km max for not much more DPS than Fury cruise missiles. What you do gain is a much faster rate of fire - which is quite an improvement over cruise launchers.


You're looking at 80km with 2 T2 range rigs.
You can boost that up to about 106km by putting range scripts in 3 MGC 2's, but you lose a TON of application in doing so.

Mind you, this is also with Javelin cruise, which at all skills 5, you're losing around 200 dps in doing so.
In order to get top damage, with good application, you're looking at 44km range.

However, you must also consider that torps are SOOOOO SLOW... And this effects their acceleration, which means you're getting at least 5km less than on paper.

Lastly, you're also paying more in fitting costs, so you get less functionality and/or tank within your fit.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#134 - 2015-12-30 01:09:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Joe Risalo wrote:
You're looking at 80km with 2 T2 range rigs.
You can boost that up to about 106km by putting range scripts in 3 MGC 2's, but you lose a TON of application in doing so.

Mind you, this is also with Javelin cruise, which at all skills 5, you're losing around 200 dps in doing so.
In order to get top damage, with good application, you're looking at 44km range.

However, you must also consider that torps are SOOOOO SLOW... And this effects their acceleration, which means you're getting at least 5km less than on paper.

Lastly, you're also paying more in fitting costs, so you get less functionality and/or tank within your fit.

Sounds about right. With a Polarized setup you really can't afford to allocate 2 slots to range as well because you have zero tank. With +5 implants you have an 84.2km range in Bastion and 1033 DPS; 56.1km and 1319 DPS with Faction torpedoes. Fury torpedoes are almost pointless to utilize because the damage application and speed is abysmal. The other problem with torpedoes is that they're ridiculously expensive - more than twice the cost for both T2 and Faction.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#135 - 2015-12-30 01:15:00 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

Sounds about right. With a Polarized setup you really can't afford to allocate 2 slots to range as well because you have zero tank. With +5 implants you have an 84.2km range in Bastion and 1033 DPS; 56.1km and 1319 DPS with Faction torpedoes. Fury torpedoes are almost pointless to utilize because the damage application and speed is abysmal. The other problem with torpedoes is that they're ridiculously expensive - more than twice the cost for both T2 and Faction.


I can say that at least they recently reduced the m3 of torps, so you can carry and load more, but it doesn't make up for the pitfalls of using them.

It's also insane to seen that even Polarized torps do less damage than cruise missiles at max range...
.. And to be honest, if you're in PVP, there's no point in using either over rapid heavies, unless you're in the alliance tournament..

Having said that, is it just me or do all missile systems seem to be balanced around the AT?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#136 - 2015-12-30 01:31:50 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
I can say that at least they recently reduced the m3 of torps, so you can carry and load more, but it doesn't make up for the pitfalls of using them.

It's also insane to seen that even Polarized torps do less damage than cruise missiles at max range...
.. And to be honest, if you're in PVP, there's no point in using either over rapid heavies, unless you're in the alliance tournament..

Having said that, is it just me or do all missile systems seem to be balanced around the AT?

Yes, the size reduction for torpedoes was good - but they left the damage application worse than cruise missiles. Part of the problem is that torpedoes are closely tied to Stealth Bombers, so... From what I recall with the last AT, almost everything used RHMLs.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.