open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Eagle -- 5th Turret?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 ... : last (62)

Author Topic

Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
Posted - 2007.09.24 04:57:00 - [1471]
 

Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 24/09/2007 05:00:09
Quote:
No, you god damn liar. I simply accept that if you start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded you might have well as brought a tech 1 battleship. Because the tech 1 battleship is better at the job. I know you will now say "but battleships shoot battleships!" But that is also bull****. That battleships are better at shooting battleships has no bearing on what is the best choice is to shoot cruiser. What this means is that you shouldnt be shooting cruisers unless nothing else is left. What this means is that you dont start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded!


Are you honestly this stupid, or are you just trolling? If you bring a battleship, you shoot at other battleships. It doesn't matter if you're good at shooting cruisers also, you don't shoot them until there are no more battleships left to kill.

Now guess what this means: the task of killing cruisers goes to the non-battleship ships in the fleet by process of elimination.


And you know, most of us have the minimal intelligence required to change ammo types. A fact you should know perfectly well, since you keep posting these ideal graphs with the perfect ammo type used at every range. Except going from iron to spike is actually a realistic change, since it's a single swap, not a constant string of them, and it only happens once, when you move from interceptors/interdictors to everything else.

Yes, these ships will spend time shooting interceptors with T1 ammo. But that doesn't mean you get to just declare T2 ammo irrelevant and ignore the balance issues with it.

Quote:
Yes, you god damn liar. Artillery is supposed to have lower DPS over time... and it does when you have comparable ranges If the Eagle had one optimal bonus it would be reasonable that the Eagle did more DPS at 100km. But the Eagle does not have one optimal bonus, it has two. This means that in order for the two ships to be balanced, instead of being equal at the Artilleries optimal range the Artillery has to be better at its optimal range. In this situation the arties are slightly better than the rails at that range. And in exchange, the rails can hit out much much farther. If the Muninn had 2 optimal bonuses then that arguement would make sense. But it doesnt.


Really, why is this so hard to understand? Artillery and rails start out balanced as follows:

Rails: better range, better damage over time, slightly better tracking
Artillery: much better alpha strike, no cap use

To be balanced, we give each ship the same number of our balanced rails/artillery: five turrets each.

Now ship bonuses: by your standards, optimal and tracking count as damage bonuses. So we have:

Eagle: 3 damage bonuses, 1 tank bonus
Muninn: 4 damage bonuses

Each ship gets the same number of equally-valuable bonuses, on top of the same number of evenly balanced turrets. In fact, in your fantasy world, the Munnin gets BETTER bonuses since it doesn't waste a bonus on tanking. So far from being overpowered, the double optimal bonus is actually weaker than the Muninn's set of bonuses.

Now to state the obvious, the Muninn's bonuses improve on something other than range. Get it through your thick head: the Muninn's "poor" long-range performance is a result of CCP's choice of ship bonuses. The Muninn is NOT a dedicated sniper, and its bonuses reflect that. Instead of the Eagle's specialized double optimal bonus, the Muninn gets a set of more general bonuses, trading focus for versatility.

Silence Duegood
Posted - 2007.09.24 05:07:00 - [1472]
 

Originally by: Goumindong

No, you god damn liar. I simply accept that if you start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded you might have well as brought a tech 1 battleship. Because the tech 1 battleship is better at the job. I know you will now say "but battleships shoot battleships!" But that is also bull****. That battleships are better at shooting battleships has no bearing on what is the best choice is to shoot cruiser. What this means is that you shouldnt be shooting cruisers unless nothing else is left. What this means is that you dont start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded!


Oh my God. It's amazing that you can even manage to log into this forum or use a computer. This is the stupidest thing I've read. Take a poll of Eagle pilots and they'll tell you that 95% of the time they use two ammo types - Spike and Antimatter. Spike is used about 70 % or 80% of the time because people want to take advantage of the Eagle's range bonuses. Of course, you don't know this because you don't fly this ship. You don't have time, since you're a professional moron.

QuickFit fails again.

Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
Posted - 2007.09.24 05:26:00 - [1473]
 

Originally by: Silence Duegood
Originally by: Goumindong

No, you god damn liar. I simply accept that if you start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded you might have well as brought a tech 1 battleship. Because the tech 1 battleship is better at the job. I know you will now say "but battleships shoot battleships!" But that is also bull****. That battleships are better at shooting battleships has no bearing on what is the best choice is to shoot cruiser. What this means is that you shouldnt be shooting cruisers unless nothing else is left. What this means is that you dont start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded!


Oh my God. It's amazing that you can even manage to log into this forum or use a computer. This is the stupidest thing I've read. Take a poll of Eagle pilots and they'll tell you that 95% of the time they use two ammo types - Spike and Antimatter. Spike is used about 70 % or 80% of the time because people want to take advantage of the Eagle's range bonuses. Of course, you don't know this because you don't fly this ship. You don't have time, since you're a professional moron.

QuickFit fails again.


Well, he's somewhat right (in the broken clock sense). T1 ammo IS better against interceptors, since spike's tracking penalty is too severe if they actually come in at a decent angle. But he's still a quickfit pilot (and not even a good one), since this doesn't mean you ignore spike completely. You just use it in the appropriate situation, a fact he can't seem to grasp.

As a Vulture pilot (the same is true of other snipers, and the Eagle is functionally identical to the Vulture), I carry:

*Spike: range and damage, when tracking isn't an issue (in other words, for everything but interceptors/interdictors)

*Faction long-range ammo (one, maybe two at absolute most): for dealing with interceptors/interdictors

*Antimatter: for the obvious

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.24 05:55:00 - [1474]
 

Originally by: Silence Duegood
Originally by: Goumindong

No, you god damn liar. I simply accept that if you start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded you might have well as brought a tech 1 battleship. Because the tech 1 battleship is better at the job. I know you will now say "but battleships shoot battleships!" But that is also bull****. That battleships are better at shooting battleships has no bearing on what is the best choice is to shoot cruiser. What this means is that you shouldnt be shooting cruisers unless nothing else is left. What this means is that you dont start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded!


Oh my God. It's amazing that you can even manage to log into this forum or use a computer. This is the stupidest thing I've read. Take a poll of Eagle pilots and they'll tell you that 95% of the time they use two ammo types - Spike and Antimatter. Spike is used about 70 % or 80% of the time because people want to take advantage of the Eagle's range bonuses. Of course, you don't know this because you don't fly this ship. You don't have time, since you're a professional moron.

QuickFit fails again.


I have a feeling your starts are wrong, but hey, if your numbers are correct, 95% of them are wrong.

Nerogk Shorn
Caldari
Invicta.
Posted - 2007.09.24 06:06:00 - [1475]
 

Well, this topic has breached the 50 page mark, so I think it must actually be implemented now.

Now in my experience in flying eagles, I'd say that: yes an eagle's dps is **** poor with rails fitted, no matter how many mag stabs or type of ammo you have fitted. Nevertheless, it does indeed kill frigates damn well at range. I'd say that a 5th turret should indeed be added, but in terms of increasing the eagle's pg and cpu for fitting this extra turret? I'd say that the eagle's pg and cpu should be altered a bit for the new turret, but make it tougher to fit 5 on the new eagle, than fitting 4 on the old one is now. Not sure how clear that is, but imo i think that would make it fairly balanced. = /

KD.Fluffy
Caldari
Sacred Templars
Black Swan.
Posted - 2007.09.24 06:16:00 - [1476]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Merin Ryskin

1) You refuse to consider T2 ammo. Even if it's less useful for interceptor killing, cruisers can't really out-track it except at the really short ranges where you can't hit period.


No, you god damn liar. I simply accept that if you start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded you might have well as brought a tech 1 battleship. Because the tech 1 battleship is better at the job. I know you will now say "but battleships shoot battleships!" But that is also bull****. That battleships are better at shooting battleships has no bearing on what is the best choice is to shoot cruiser. What this means is that you shouldnt be shooting cruisers unless nothing else is left. What this means is that you dont start a battle with tech 2 ammo loaded!



the problem with your logic is the muninn can decide it wants to shoot inties with an ammo swap while its warping to its sniping spot. Your battleship cannot. You get versatility with the hacs that the eagle is denies. Thats not balance.

Quote:

Quote:

2) You stubbornly ignore the fact, mentioned way too many times already, that artillery is supposed to have lower damage over time compared to rails. Once again, since you completely lack reading comprehension:


Yes, you god damn liar. Artillery is supposed to have lower DPS over time... and it does when you have comparable ranges If the Eagle had one optimal bonus it would be reasonable that the Eagle did more DPS at 100km. But the Eagle does not have one optimal bonus, it has two. This means that in order for the two ships to be balanced, instead of being equal at the Artilleries optimal range the Artillery has to be better at its optimal range. In this situation the arties are slightly better than the rails at that range. And in exchange, the rails can hit out much much farther. If the Muninn had 2 optimal bonuses then that arguement would make sense. But it doesnt.



muninn outdamages eagle pretty much at all ranges till it can't lock anymore. Right now eagle can at best match the muninn's dps when intie sniping. Not better, just match. Giving the eagle a 5th turret still leaves the muninn with the alpha strike advantage, and it will still have a slight dps edge with t2 ammo. Then couple the two missle launchers, and the drone bay it has over the eagle (or would over a 5t eagle) and it simply boggles my mind that you claim its balanced. Its not balanced in any sense, there literally is no reason to fly an eagle.


Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.24 06:45:00 - [1477]
 

Originally by: KD.Fluffy

the problem with your logic is the muninn can decide it wants to shoot inties with an ammo swap while its warping to its sniping spot. Your battleship cannot. You get versatility with the hacs that the eagle is denies. Thats not balance.



No, it cant, because there will pretty much always be support to kill. If there isnt, then grats you should be in a BS. Deciding to be sub-optimal is just plain stupid, let alone counting that as an advantage.


Nyxus
Amarr
Fat J
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2007.09.24 06:48:00 - [1478]
 

KD -

If the new 5T Eagle you propose has better damage, 1/3 more range, and better tracking from T1 faction ammo throughout the Munnins range what reason is there to ever fly a Munnin over an Eagle?

Nyxus

Ash Bringer
Posted - 2007.09.24 08:22:00 - [1479]
 

Why do ppl use Tempest or Rokh.. 1 for alpha other for range :)

Munnin with artilleries will be the best cruiser with alpha... Rails can't even get close to it in alpha

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.24 09:07:00 - [1480]
 

Originally by: Ash Bringer
Why do ppl use Tempest or Rokh.. 1 for alpha other for range :)

Munnin with artilleries will be the best cruiser with alpha... Rails can't even get close to it in alpha


Except that the Rokh does not outdps the Tempest at the Tempets optimal range.

And tech 2 ammo is much better for battleships than it is for cruisers.

d026
temp holding
Posted - 2007.09.24 09:12:00 - [1481]
 

Edited by: d026 on 24/09/2007 09:13:00
Originally by: Nyxus
KD -

If the new 5T Eagle you propose has better damage, 1/3 more range, and better tracking from T1 faction ammo throughout the Munnins range what reason is there to ever fly a Munnin over an Eagle?

Nyxus



why fly a tempest if a mega and outdmgs a tempest at all tempes ranges. hint ALPHA.

d026
temp holding
Posted - 2007.09.24 09:20:00 - [1482]
 

Edited by: d026 on 24/09/2007 09:22:34
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ash Bringer
Why do ppl use Tempest or Rokh.. 1 for alpha other for range :)

Munnin with artilleries will be the best cruiser with alpha... Rails can't even get close to it in alpha


Except that the Rokh does not outdps the Tempest at the Tempets optimal range.

And tech 2 ammo is much better for battleships than it is for cruisers.



temp probably has a 2k window where rokh has to switch from cn iron to spike where (on paper) the tempest could do a little more dps. anyway in regards to battleships the tempest is still the better choice over a rokh due to its much better alpha (and its a cheap t2 bs). anyway the problem here is that the mega completely outdps the rokh and tempest at all important sniping ranges from 175 to 200k + has way better tracking.


Augeas
Anvil of Creation
Posted - 2007.09.24 09:22:00 - [1483]
 

Quote:
If the new 5T Eagle you propose has better damage, 1/3 more range, and better tracking from T1 faction ammo throughout the Munnins range what reason is there to ever fly a Munnin over an Eagle?


Easy one, this. Muninn has better alpha and far superior versatility.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.24 09:22:00 - [1484]
 

Originally by: d026
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ash Bringer
Why do ppl use Tempest or Rokh.. 1 for alpha other for range :)

Munnin with artilleries will be the best cruiser with alpha... Rails can't even get close to it in alpha


Except that the Rokh does not outdps the Tempest at the Tempets optimal range.

And tech 2 ammo is much better for battleships than it is for cruisers.



temp probably has a 2k window where rokh has to switch from cn iron to spike where (on paper) the tempest could do a little more dps. anyway in regards to battleships the tempest is still the better choice over a rokh due to its much better alpha (and its a cheap t2 bs). anyway the problem here is that the mega completely outdps the rokh and tempest at all important sniping ranges from 150 to 200k + has way better tracking.




Rokh tracks as well or better than the Mega and does nearly as much DPS.

Or it can fit for the same range with 50% less tracking, but 2x the hit points.

d026
temp holding
Posted - 2007.09.24 09:29:00 - [1485]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: d026
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ash Bringer
Why do ppl use Tempest or Rokh.. 1 for alpha other for range :)

Munnin with artilleries will be the best cruiser with alpha... Rails can't even get close to it in alpha


Except that the Rokh does not outdps the Tempest at the Tempets optimal range.

And tech 2 ammo is much better for battleships than it is for cruisers.


temp probably has a 2k window where rokh has to switch from cn iron to spike where (on paper) the tempest could do a little more dps. anyway in regards to battleships the tempest is still the better choice over a rokh due to its much better alpha (and its a cheap t2 bs). anyway the problem here is that the mega completely outdps the rokh and tempest at all important sniping ranges from 150 to 200k + has way better tracking.




Rokh tracks as well or better than the Mega and does nearly as much DPS.

Or it can fit for the same range with 50% less tracking, but 2x the hit points.


the mega once you have loaded spike, and that happens often if your warp in is at 180-200k, outps the rokh. the rokh can only shine at 150k where it gets badly outps from the abdaddon. so in all cases it does not make any sense to fly a rokh in fleet. tempest does similar dps + better alpha, abaddon does better dps at 150k, mega does better dps overall (especially at 170-200k)




d026
temp holding
Posted - 2007.09.24 09:35:00 - [1486]
 

the worst thing is a mega at bs lvl 4 outdps a bs V rokh from 150-200k (with spike).

kIM JONGELL
Perkone
Posted - 2007.09.24 10:11:00 - [1487]
 

I agree to everything everyone said in this topic

Bad Borris
Mortis Angelus
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2007.09.24 10:25:00 - [1488]
 

Originally by: d026
the worst thing is a mega at bs lvl 4 outdps a bs V rokh from 150-200k (with spike).



Thats depressing and quite ridiculous. Crying or Very sad

KD.Fluffy
Caldari
Sacred Templars
Black Swan.
Posted - 2007.09.24 12:49:00 - [1489]
 

Edited by: KD.Fluffy on 24/09/2007 12:55:03
Quote:
No, it cant, because there will pretty much always be support to kill. If there isnt, then grats you should be in a BS. Deciding to be sub-optimal is just plain stupid, let alone counting that as an advantage.


so your saying the advantage of having the dps to do decent damage to some cruisers isnt an advantage? The eagle can only scratch a cruiser, the muninn can alpha halph its shields. If you dont count that as an advantage your a moron.

Originally by: Nyxus
KD -

If the new 5T Eagle you propose has better damage, 1/3 more range, and better tracking from T1 faction ammo throughout the Munnins range what reason is there to ever fly a Munnin over an Eagle?

Nyxus


First off it doesnt have better damage, it almost equals muninn's damage, but not quiete. And reasons to fly muninn over 5t eagle?
Insane alpha strike, capless weapons, drone bay, faster to warp, MUCH better dps in the close range, two missle launcher points for point defense...

Basically the muninn has versatility that ccp thinks ok to not afford the eagle, and unfortunatly makes just as good of a sniping cruiser as the eagle. If you think thats balanced then whatever, i'll just go back to training my gallente ships.

Neuromandis
Posted - 2007.09.24 13:00:00 - [1490]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: riddick Valer
I never said it should have that many turrets. Way to attack a straw man. 1 more turret would make it more effective at attacking cruisers.
No it wouldnt. If you wanted to attack cruisers you would STILL be better off in a tech 1 battleship.
And?
Inties don't last THAT long, Gourm.
For me, in 90% (whatever?) of the time it works like this:
You start sniping inties. you kill one, two, whatever, and then they close up with your fleet. That's usually less than a minute in the fight, often less than half a minute.
Then, you have 3 options:
a)Start shooting slower stuff that has not closed up yet (that means cruisers, usually, and if there are any oddball frigates in the fleet). What am I supposed to do, go and refit to a Rokh? In that case, you need the Firepower to shoot cruisers.
b)Change to close-med range ammo, and shoot the inties that have closed (of course, except the one orbiting you, which you use your missiles only and pray). That's usually the best option for your fleet. In this scenario, the Muninn and Zealot, and even the Deimos (rail or blaster fit even!!) simply out-dps you. They do better damage hands down with better tracking, and they use drones too.
c)Warp out and back in again. Wishful thinking, and not always an option. Eagles are tackler-attractors...

Originally by: Gourmindog
Other long range HACs cannot effectivly attack cruisers. They are all anti-frigate machines. Its what they do. They are all outperformed by tech 1 battleships.
They sure can. It's just the Eagle that cannot be effective at it because of its hideous dps. When the Munin loads on the high damage ammo of its choice it can kill heavy tacklers just fine, and the pulse-zealot in principle can do it even better (the
"in principle" pare means that, as said, the Zealot could probably also use another gun).

And yes, HAC's are borderline outperformed at SNIPING cruisers by battleships (borderline because your damage calculations ignore quality of hits, which is an EXTREMELY IMPORTANT factor that multiplies or cuts into your dps a lot more than you appear to accept). But you are forgetting that anti-support is a hybrid damned role, where eventually you'll have to shoot the tacklers at medium-close range, and you have to kill heavy tacklers as well taht the battleships cannot be bothered to shoot, even if you're not THE ideal ship for the target.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.24 13:53:00 - [1491]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 24/09/2007 13:53:28
Originally by: KD.Fluffy

so your saying the advantage of having the dps to do decent damage to some cruisers isnt an advantage? The eagle can only scratch a cruiser, the muninn can alpha halph its shields. If you dont count that as an advantage your a moron.


My a moron what?

The eagle does plenty of DPS to cruisers, 194 dps at 100km in fact. In the 10 seconds that the Muninn changes ammo to tremor the Eagle will do about 1940 damage. This will take the Muninn 67 seconds of continuous fire to make up.

Considering 70 seconds[total firing differential between 60 seconds of muninn fire and 10 seconds of reload] of fire from a 194 dps eagle will kill any cruiser or HAC fit for fleets, i dont fine the tremor arguement especially convincing.
Quote:

First off it doesnt have better damage, it almost equals muninn's damage, but not quiete. And reasons to fly muninn over 5t eagle?
Insane alpha strike, capless weapons, drone bay, faster to warp, MUCH better dps in the close range, two missle launcher points for point defense...

Basically the muninn has versatility that ccp thinks ok to not afford the eagle, and unfortunatly makes just as good of a sniping cruiser as the eagle. If you think thats balanced then whatever, i'll just go back to training my gallente ships.


First off, it DOES have better damage, 228 DPS at 114km.[it needs 4 mfs to do that, but it fits just fine with 2 lock range rigs and 3 tracking computers with an MWD and sensor boostes]

Second off the Muninn and Eagle warp at the same speed when it matters. Its called "alligning" you should try it.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.24 14:18:00 - [1492]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 24/09/2007 14:20:13
Originally by: Neuromandis
Oh noes, i cant warp out


Yes, you can, stay alligned, burn out of any bubbles, warp out and warp back in.

Inties that are tackling eagles are inties that are wasting their time not tackling battleships that will warp out. That is what loses you fleet battles.

I am seriously laughing at the "change ammo" option.

Quote:
They sure can. It's just the Eagle that cannot be effective at it because of its hideous dps.

It doesnt have hideous DPS, it has the same DPS as the Muninn if it decides to load that ammo. The Muninn doesnt have hideous dps, so how can you say the eagle does?

O.K. how about this for an arguement.

1. BoB knows how to PvP.
2. BoB will use the best ship to kill anti-support in their fleets
3. If we look at what BoB use for anti-support we will get a good idea of what the best anti-support snipers are.
4. For the sake of arguement lets ignore Vultures even though they are just like eagles in terms of DPS and range, with also other benefits.

Last 10 Fleet Battles on killboard.net

Eagles: 2,0,6,7,7,10,3,5,4 Total: 44
Muninn: 0,0,2,2,5,4,1,0,1 Total: 15
Zealot: 3,2,1,4,2,3,3,3,0 Total: 21

Eagles seem to be ahead, even counting the smaller engagements which favor the Zealot and even figuring the Amarr skill point slant typically found in BoB fleets[Sansha rats+old characters]

Shall we count the total number of contributions made by those pilots to the battles as well?

Quote:
quality of hits!


A rokh does 425 DPS to a 2km/s mwding cruiser with a base sig of 125 at 100km. Factoring quality of hits. Its base dps is 507, it hits 88.23% of the time, its average non wrecking hit deals 94.08% of normal damage. I should know, Kz1g and I were the ones to figure out the quality of hit workings and turn it into a formula.

That is nearly TWICE that of what a Muninn puts out, with more alpha strike. Even with low skills, tech 1 guns, and tech 1 ammo the Rokh outdps's a Muninn against cruisers when factoring hit quality.

Assuming the Muninn hits 100% of the time[it wont] the rokh will average 85% more dps than the Muninn.

trouser boy
The Eve Pacification Syndicate
Posted - 2007.09.24 16:06:00 - [1493]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Stuff about bob...


That's because they understand the fact that a Zealot/Muninn has no place sniping in a vast fleet because they are not sniping ships. They are versatile heavy assault cruisers that specialise at their races optimal ranges.

Half of your problem stems from your belief that the muninn and zealot are ships designed for combat above 60-70km. They aren't.

Zixxa
Posted - 2007.09.24 16:13:00 - [1494]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Edited by: Goumindong on 24/09/2007 14:20:13
O.K. how about this for an arguement.

1. BoB knows how to PvP.
2. BoB will use the best ship to kill anti-support in their fleets
3. If we look at what BoB use for anti-support we will get a good idea of what the best anti-support snipers are.
4. For the sake of arguement lets ignore Vultures even though they are just like eagles in terms of DPS and range, with also other benefits.

Last 10 Fleet Battles on killboard.net

Eagles: 2,0,6,7,7,10,3,5,4 Total: 44
Muninn: 0,0,2,2,5,4,1,0,1 Total: 15
Zealot: 3,2,1,4,2,3,3,3,0 Total: 21

Eagles seem to be ahead, even counting the smaller engagements which favor the Zealot and even figuring the Amarr skill point slant typically found in BoB fleets[Sansha rats+old characters]


You lie as usually.
At least RA+Goons and AAA knows how to kill better than BoBs.
looks for AAA killboard
HACS flown:
1. Vagabond [1]
2. Munnin [11]
3. Zealot [23]
4. Eagle [26]



Zixxa
Posted - 2007.09.24 16:16:00 - [1495]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Edited by: Goumindong on 24/09/2007 14:20:13
O.K. how about this for an arguement.

1. BoB knows how to PvP.
2. BoB will use the best ship to kill anti-support in their fleets
3. If we look at what BoB use for anti-support we will get a good idea of what the best anti-support snipers are.
4. For the sake of arguement lets ignore Vultures even though they are just like eagles in terms of DPS and range, with also other benefits.

Last 10 Fleet Battles on killboard.net

Eagles: 2,0,6,7,7,10,3,5,4 Total: 44
Muninn: 0,0,2,2,5,4,1,0,1 Total: 15
Zealot: 3,2,1,4,2,3,3,3,0 Total: 21

Eagles seem to be ahead, even counting the smaller engagements which favor the Zealot and even figuring the Amarr skill point slant typically found in BoB fleets[Sansha rats+old characters]


You lie as usually.
At least RA+Goons and AAA knows how to kill better than BoBs.
looks for AAA killboard
HACS flown:
1. Vagabond [1]
2. Munnin [11]
3. Zealot [23]
4. Eagle [26]



Elmicker
Wreckless Abandon
Posted - 2007.09.24 17:54:00 - [1496]
 

Originally by: Zixxa
You lie as usually.
At least RA+Goons and AAA knows how to kill better than BoBs.
looks for AAA killboard
HACS flown:
1. Vagabond [1]
2. Munnin [11]
3. Zealot [23]
4. Eagle [26]


He was talking about ships involved in fleet battles.

Also, to goumindong's figures. They're not THAT unbalanced, once you factor in the fact caldari players make up about 1/2 the game.

Augeas
Anvil of Creation
Posted - 2007.09.24 18:06:00 - [1497]
 

Quote:
Half of your problem stems from your belief that the muninn and zealot are ships designed for combat above 60-70km. They aren't.


This. ^^^

And once you realise this, it becomes clear that the very fact that the Zealot and Muninn are being used as snipers is evidence that the Eagle is underpowered.

Opinionated Git
Posted - 2007.09.24 18:33:00 - [1498]
 

Sniper Muninn is the only long range HAC worth a damn, Eagle has laughable DPS and Beam zealot is nice at the 60-70km mark but doesn't have the range to really shine.

My Muninn has that sort of "OH **** WHAT JUST HIT ME" effect on people that Eagle just can't replicate.

Graphs and 50 page forum threads aside, anyone with HAC 5 and quad skilled for cruisers will tell you Muninn is the dogs crown jewels.

As far as rails go, Astarte is your best bet.

Albrecht Wassenar
Caldari
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
Posted - 2007.09.24 18:51:00 - [1499]
 

Well.. I think the response has been pretty unanimous. The overwhelming vast majority of the people who have commented on this thread point out there are many, many pros to having the eagle slot set up shifted to have a 5th turret hard-point and/or removing the missile slots altogether with the appropriate grid tweaking. The cons, which from what I have been able to understand is that it will out DPS other ships in the same class at longer ranges...
- like its supposed to
- like it says on its description.
It will not make any of the other HACs obsolete in their designed role in any way. In fact it would actually make people use the ships in their intended role. The fact the eagle is inferrior at its intended role to ships not designed for that role should be a big hint that it was broken at its introduction.
This is not a "Caldari want an 'I win" button." All we want is a button that says "play!"

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2007.09.24 18:52:00 - [1500]
 

Originally by: Augeas
Quote:
Half of your problem stems from your belief that the muninn and zealot are ships designed for combat above 60-70km. They aren't.


This. ^^^

And once you realise this, it becomes clear that the very fact that the Zealot and Muninn are being used as snipers is evidence that the Eagle is underpowered.


The exact opposite is true. If i want to fight below 60km i am going to bring a harbinger/absolution/Hurricane/Sleipnir because the higher number of turrets without the optimal bonus will produce more DPS than the lower number of turrets with the optimal bonus. The Zealot and Muninn are exactly to be used above 60km, because they are outclassed at shorter ranges by ships both more expensive and less expensive than they are.

Quote:

That's because they understand the fact that a Zealot/Muninn has no place sniping in a vast fleet because they are not sniping ships. They are versatile heavy assault cruisers that specialise at their races optimal ranges.



Their races optimal ranges are 100km for both. Which seems to make the second statement you make false.

Also, i laugh at the "versatile" part, for both. The Vagabond is versatile, the Muninn and Zealot are not.


Pages: first : previous : ... 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 ... : last (62)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only