These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Combat Recons
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#1 - 2015-10-13 13:06:10 UTC
One of the main reasons big fleets fly shield and not armor is because of the lack of higher EHP long point and long web variants of the combat recons.

There should be armor variants of the Lachesis and Huginn.

Not today spaghetti.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2 - 2015-10-13 14:33:55 UTC
Sexy Cakes wrote:
One of the main reasons big fleets fly shield and not armor is because of the lack of higher EHP long point and long web variants of the combat recons.

There should be armor variants of the Lachesis and Huginn.


You can armor tank both of these ships and they will still be viable. Not saying whether or not they will be better than shield variants.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#3 - 2015-10-13 14:42:37 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Sexy Cakes wrote:
One of the main reasons big fleets fly shield and not armor is because of the lack of higher EHP long point and long web variants of the combat recons.

There should be armor variants of the Lachesis and Huginn.


You can armor tank both of these ships and they will still be viable. Not saying whether or not they will be better than shield variants.


That's an impressive level of insight. Thanks. Roll

Not today spaghetti.
Nafensoriel
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2015-10-13 14:50:48 UTC
Um.. hate to burst your bubble but lach is perfectly capable of armor tanking. In fact it gets higher EHP in many cases. Ditto for hug. Both get tons more mids to play with when they go armor too..

At what point did you make the mistake of assuming a ship magically has to be fit one way?
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2015-10-13 14:58:41 UTC
Sexy Cakes wrote:
One of the main reasons big fleets fly shield and not armor is because of the lack of higher EHP long point and long web variants of the combat recons.

There should be armor variants of the Lachesis and Huginn.


How much EHP do you really need?
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#6 - 2015-10-13 15:01:08 UTC
Nafensoriel wrote:
Um.. hate to burst your bubble but lach is perfectly capable of armor tanking. In fact it gets higher EHP in many cases. Ditto for hug. Both get tons more mids to play with when they go armor too..

At what point did you make the mistake of assuming a ship magically has to be fit one way?


Ya no it doesn't get higher EHP in any cases.

4 slots for armor tank or 5-6 for shields on the Lachesis.

4 slots for armor tank and 4-5 on the Huginn.

They need another set of combat recons that fill the armor role better. Just because CCP removed the skill and name differences doesn't mean they actually solved anything.

Not today spaghetti.
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#7 - 2015-10-13 15:02:18 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Sexy Cakes wrote:
One of the main reasons big fleets fly shield and not armor is because of the lack of higher EHP long point and long web variants of the combat recons.

There should be armor variants of the Lachesis and Huginn.


How much EHP do you really need?


The same in armor as in shield. The Huginn and Lachesis shield fit EHP numbers should be easily attainable with an armor fit.

Not today spaghetti.
May Arethusa
Junction Systems
#8 - 2015-10-13 15:23:32 UTC
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Sexy Cakes wrote:
One of the main reasons big fleets fly shield and not armor is because of the lack of higher EHP long point and long web variants of the combat recons.

There should be armor variants of the Lachesis and Huginn.


How much EHP do you really need?


The same in armor as in shield. The Huginn and Lachesis shield fit EHP numbers should be easily attainable with an armor fit.


This just in: They are easily attainable, with fewer mods and with the added benefit of leaving all of your mid slots free to actually perform the role they're supposed to.
Haatakan Reppola
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#9 - 2015-10-13 15:28:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Haatakan Reppola
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Nafensoriel wrote:
Um.. hate to burst your bubble but lach is perfectly capable of armor tanking. In fact it gets higher EHP in many cases. Ditto for hug. Both get tons more mids to play with when they go armor too..

At what point did you make the mistake of assuming a ship magically has to be fit one way?


Ya no it doesn't get higher EHP in any cases.

4 slots for armor tank or 5-6 for shields on the Lachesis.

4 slots for armor tank and 4-5 on the Huginn.

They need another set of combat recons that fill the armor role better. Just because CCP removed the skill and name differences doesn't mean they actually solved anything.


Lachesis have 7 mid so you using 1-2 scrambler/disruptor/remote sensor damp/prop mod
Huginn have 6 mid so you using 1-2 web/TP/prop mod

Bouth of these are likely balanced around using more than 1 or 2 slots for their role

When was the last time you used a Rook with 1-2 slots for ECM, or a Pilgrim Curse with 1-2 slots for TD+Neut/Nos ?

EDIT: changed Pilgrim to Curse, made a small misstake there :P
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#10 - 2015-10-13 15:41:12 UTC
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Soldarius wrote:
Sexy Cakes wrote:
One of the main reasons big fleets fly shield and not armor is because of the lack of higher EHP long point and long web variants of the combat recons.

There should be armor variants of the Lachesis and Huginn.


You can armor tank both of these ships and they will still be viable. Not saying whether or not they will be better than shield variants.


That's an impressive level of insight. Thanks. Roll



I think he's trying to relate on an equal level. That, and what he says is true. Re read the instrucions provided with your eve playset. There is some fine print at the bottom about the need to make various choices that have pros and cons. It strongly implies you can't have it all.

Hope this helps!
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#11 - 2015-10-13 15:41:50 UTC
A Shieldlach can get around 115k ehp. Then it's left with the point and the mwd and whatever you want in those highslots.
An armortanked one will get some 88-90k, and can only fit an AB unless you drop your ehp below that point to get an MWD running. You get 5 new EWAR-mids though, but when it comes to tanking and pointing, shields are waaaaay superior.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#12 - 2015-10-13 15:43:26 UTC
Haatakan Reppola wrote:
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Nafensoriel wrote:
Um.. hate to burst your bubble but lach is perfectly capable of armor tanking. In fact it gets higher EHP in many cases. Ditto for hug. Both get tons more mids to play with when they go armor too..

At what point did you make the mistake of assuming a ship magically has to be fit one way?


Ya no it doesn't get higher EHP in any cases.

4 slots for armor tank or 5-6 for shields on the Lachesis.

4 slots for armor tank and 4-5 on the Huginn.

They need another set of combat recons that fill the armor role better. Just because CCP removed the skill and name differences doesn't mean they actually solved anything.


Lachesis have 7 mid so you using 1-2 scrambler/disruptor/remote sensor damp/prop mod
Huginn have 6 mid so you using 1-2 web/TP/prop mod

Bouth of these are likely balanced around using more than 1 or 2 slots for their role

When was the last time you used a Rook with 1-2 slots for ECM, or a Pilgrim with 1-2 slots for TD+Neut/Nos ?


I fly my pilgrims with the NOS in the midslots to free up high slots for autocannons. Doesn't everyone do this?
Haatakan Reppola
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#13 - 2015-10-13 15:51:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Haatakan Reppola
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Haatakan Reppola wrote:
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Nafensoriel wrote:
Um.. hate to burst your bubble but lach is perfectly capable of armor tanking. In fact it gets higher EHP in many cases. Ditto for hug. Both get tons more mids to play with when they go armor too..

At what point did you make the mistake of assuming a ship magically has to be fit one way?


Ya no it doesn't get higher EHP in any cases.

4 slots for armor tank or 5-6 for shields on the Lachesis.

4 slots for armor tank and 4-5 on the Huginn.

They need another set of combat recons that fill the armor role better. Just because CCP removed the skill and name differences doesn't mean they actually solved anything.


Lachesis have 7 mid so you using 1-2 scrambler/disruptor/remote sensor damp/prop mod
Huginn have 6 mid so you using 1-2 web/TP/prop mod

Bouth of these are likely balanced around using more than 1 or 2 slots for their role

When was the last time you used a Rook with 1-2 slots for ECM, or a Pilgrim with 1-2 slots for TD+Neut/Nos ?


I fly my pilgrims with the NOS in the midslots to free up high slots for autocannons. Doesn't everyone do this?


We all know NOS is not a mid slot module, but even 1 NOS in the spare high (3 turret hardpoints / 4high slots) means you use as many slots for your bonused EWAR as the Lachesis / Huginn from this example.
Pilgrim is the only Recon ship with more high slots than hardpoints (turret+launcher), the other recons need to use -1 weapon to even fit their cloak (we are talking about the other kind of recon tho, my bad about that)
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#14 - 2015-10-13 15:55:28 UTC
Argue all you want about your pointless little ins and outs. Raw EHP you fly Proteus/Loki with armor fleets because you have to. End of story.

Not today spaghetti.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#15 - 2015-10-13 16:06:42 UTC
Sexy Cakes wrote:
Argue all you want about your pointless little ins and outs. Raw EHP you fly Proteus/Loki with armor fleets because you have to. End of story.


So you actually DO have options it seems. Guess there is no need for further change...
Nafensoriel
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2015-10-13 18:45:27 UTC
Bet you fit a DCU on every single fit and think the fake "ehp" number means its better. You totally and completely ignore a higher primary defense band and completely ignore the fact that shield or hull in an armor fleet means jack and diddly squat. You have reps. This is basic doctrine thinking that you are failing at.

Not to mention in just the lach alone you forget to use math and understand that armor fits are lower sig. Less EHP is not less tank. Additionally in actual usage Maximized EHP is not always the best horse to bet on. All EHP does in fleet situations past a certain point is prevent an alpha blap. Unless the other side has enough ships to do that in one go or at the longest a few seconds EHP becomes less important than ewar or utility. Shield lach is a brick.. Armor lach is EWAR and more targets pinned. That's more targets that will die if you force the enemy FC to bounce.
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#17 - 2015-10-13 18:49:54 UTC
Karmafleet bads ITT

Not today spaghetti.
Nafensoriel
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2015-10-13 21:08:43 UTC
A brilliant and insightful counter. I commend your debate skills.

Come join KarmaFleet. We can teach you to not be terrible.. Or if you hate cats Pandemic horde might have puppies.. Honestly we can never be sure if they keep them as pets or eat them.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#19 - 2015-10-14 11:42:05 UTC
I think I have only armor tanked these ships in order to make the most out of their mids did I miss something?

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Alundil
Rolled Out
#20 - 2015-10-14 12:18:37 UTC
OP - fitting choices matter on all ships, always. But they matter even more on ships that are flexible enough to run in either shield of armor setups. This is working as designed (what I imagine ccps response to be).

I'm right behind you
12Next page