Cpt Tirel

Community Members
  • Content count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Cpt Tirel

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    ANI 1x tracking computer, optimal range script. 1x tracking enhancer - Scorch 3.48 tracking, 917 DPS@ 55+19.5km - Imperial navy multi 4.64 tracking, 1151 DPS @ 19.9+19.5km - Conflagration 3.25 tracking, 1284 DPS @ 19.9+19.9km Switching scripts to tracking speed gives this ship a tracking of 6.19 with multi. Vindicator, WTM optimal - Null 6.7 tracking, 1329 DPS @ 12.6+17.5km - Void 6.7 tracking, 1861 DPS @ 6.5+6.25km The advantage on tower bashing comes from heavy and medium drone DPS and gives it a 27 second advantage over the other fleet. To achieve this it is lacking in sniper DPS and will be slowed down by this. You could drop Vindicators and fill in Snipers to try and fix this, but in the end you will end up with less concistency than the ANI fleet which only needs one ship. The Vindicator fleet is dependent on a perfect composition of snipers/dps, to match it. The ANI fleet uses Lokis for webs. Vindicators can be used aswell, but as role ships, not main doctrine.
  2. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    Nikki already told me that sentry drones are not allowed. I can see why you would not have them. They are not very practical on blaster boats and none of the other main ships can use 5 of them. In this case though i am trying to argue that i don't think blasters are ideal for Incursions. One of my arguments for the Armageddon navy issue is that it can use sentry drones effectively as blap blap assistance in places (NRF, TPPH tower area) where heavy/medium drones are much less effective and mainly advantageous for the tower siege. I guess you could say that the doctrine i am suggesting is mainly a pulse laser doctrine. As i said in my reply to Nazeth, they are just too good in the 15-60km range, and is second only to blasters in total DPS as a turret system. At what point does range give a total versatility advantage over higher maximum paper DPS? I think it is at this point. In this doctrine i am suggesting i think any ship that can use pulse lasers well is acceptable. Though, as someone who has used maxed out variants of pulse NM, pulse Paladin and Pulse ANI in HQ's, i say the pulse ANI has the advantage because of its sentries. Pulses are just so good by default. The bonuses to them that the NM and Paladin has is not enough to put them above the 250+ ranged DPS advantage that sentries give the ANI. This is what i got from my experience of testing all of them. The shield EHP is indeed something to be considered. The resist profiles are solid however. And it wont pop faster than any other 100k EHP ship so i think its not really something that invalidates the ship. The fact that it has 50 more rig calibration frees up a mid slot for the tank too comparing to the optimal fit pirate ships, so i do not think it is at much of a total disadvantage here. I remember in TVP after i had used ANI and sentries to great success for a while, grabbing aggro left and right. I noticed some of the frequent Vindicator pilots started switching to sentry drones too. With mixed results of course. I think this tells a lot about the effectiveness of the ANI. Or maybe they just switched their drones at random, and i am delusional
  3. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    Maximus, thanks for the good data, I would however argue that you are only half right that the ANI has a high level of entry. Its barrier is mostly ISK, not skills. [Armageddon Navy Issue, Shield cheap] Damage Control II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Capacitor Power Relay II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II Domination 500MN Microwarpdrive Republic Fleet Large Cap Battery Pithum B-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field Pithum B-Type EM Ward Amplifier Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L Mega Pulse Laser II, Scorch L [Empty High slot] Large Energy Collision Accelerator II Large Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I Large Core Defense Field Extender I Curator II x5 This is what i would consider close to a minimum fit. The ship and everything costs 1.3 bill according to Pyfa. This has 70 CPU and 2.5k powergrid to spare. It has pretty much enough cap to swap out the cap power relay with a power diagnostic if it needs more power. The tank is good like this pretty much forever, so all this needs now is more skills and damage upgrades to be close to perfect.
  4. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    Nazeth you bring up some good points. I think your FC was very wise. Lasers, particularly pulses, (in this case large pulses) dominate in the ranges between 15-60km, all things considered. It would be quite an imbalanced weapon system if it had less cap drain. When you have a large fleet, some range flexibility without major downsides like massive decrease to tracking or low DPS is just awesome. I have some comments for the negatives you mention: high cap consumption like most of T1 Amarrs - Nothing that cant be managed, it needs less frequent cap transfer from logi than the Vindicator when used and fitted properly. They haven't super webs like Bhaals or Vindis - I think role-ships are better used for webs, like 2-3 Loki. Specialized roles means more focus on the main task. This goes for all ships really. Half the fleet dont need webs, most likely it will be overkill/waste of slots. Or even waste of ships. They are slower than Vindis - Not by a major factor, and speed is less of an issue when you have 60km turret range. They have only 4 medium slots. Probably armor doctrine should be better - It only needs 2 of those for the tank when you have a b-type tank. If it required 3 it would be pretty bad, but that is not the case ^^ What we do with targets above 60 km? - MWD On tower bashing its still will be lower DPS - It could, however the fleet comparison in my thread show that if the fleet has less than half the number of Vindicator than it would have ANI's, the maximum DPS is more or less equal. Considering that my fleet only has 1 main ship and the other has 3, it will be able to get more, how many more? who knows.
  5. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    Hi Ixex, thanks for the suggestion, maybe i will apply for those badges. I agree about the tracking, the ANI here can get 6.19 tracking if using multi and switching scripts so its pretty close to the Vindi at that point.
  6. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    Ademiri, I know very well that it is not an approved ship in particularly DTF and WTM. I would still hope that any doctrine can be open to serious, theoretical discussion. Nikki, you said that the Vindicator has more cap, also more DPS and application below 25km. And that the Nightmare has twice the tracking: In Pyfa, i get these numbers: Armageddon navy issue (Pulse, the ship linked near the end of my official forum thread) - Scorch 3.48 tracking, 917 DPS@ 55+19.5km - Imperial navy multi 4.64 tracking, 1151 DPS @ 19.9+19.5km - Conflagration 3.25 tracking, 1284 DPS @ 19.9+19.9km Nightmare, WTM optimal (2x optimal range script, 1x tracking speed script) - Imperial navy multi 3.23 tracking, 1170 DPS @ 43.6+43.2 - Gleam 4.04 tracking, 1187 DPS @ 21.8+42.2 Vindicator, WTM optimal - Null 6.7 tracking, 1329 DPS @ 12.6+17.5km - Void 6.7 tracking, 1861 DPS @ 6.5+6.25km From this i would say there is no major advantage to neither the beam Nightmare or the Vindicator VS pulse Armageddon when it comes to tracking. At least not something that will allow you to reliably hit a target the Armageddon navy could not hit at their respective optimal ranges. Blasters need more tracking by default because the transversal is much higher at close range. At 20km and beyond, i gather from this that the Armageddon navy beats the Vindicator rather easily considering that the Vindi is nearing twice the range of its optimal with null at that point. The webs are, much like their tracking, something the Vindicator needs for its own DPS at close range. As you said, a large amount of Vindi-webs to hold down the whole spawn can be great and works very well when a bunch of good Vindi pilots manage to pull it off. Of course, this does not always happen. And when it does it is, for the most part, only to the advantage of the Vindis themselves. I will also argue that there is a great variation in the performance of individual Vindi pilots particularly due to the very strict range management required. The performance you get will be much more variable than it would be in a long range ship. It would be very interesting to see some actual data on how much of the site that the average Vindicator is actually spending cycling the guns effectively. I think it is considerably less than the snipers. Especially in TPPH (tower excluded) and at the start and end of NRF. This is something that will drag down its real DPS considerably. In my thread i argue that Lokis are better webbers for a long range fleet, because their webs have a longer range, can be applied faster, and are sufficient for long range damage application. My Armageddon fleet with 50k DPS can kill the 9.000.000 EHP tower in about 180 seconds. The Vindi fleet i have put here with 59k will kill it in about 153. Not much of a difference. I think the huge advantage in ranged DPS will rake in more ISK/hr. That is before considering my point that a fleet with 1 main ship will be able to get much more of that than the fleet looking for 3. Most communities avoid TPPH and NRF in favor of TCRC. I think my doctrine can make those two sites more attractive. For the cap, you say it is more cap unstable than the Vindicator. This is wrong. The Vindicator with the MWD off has a cap of +30.1 and a drain of -34.2. The Armageddon has a cap of +42.3 and -38.3 The NOS wont be able to run constantly, but it is cap stable @45% when it is running. It only needs 1 active hardener, as it has 400 rig calibration as opposed to the Vindicators 350. With that it can fit an extra shield rig so its tank reach 75-70-70-75 with the single B-type and a passive hardener. With the two hardeners running, the passive drain of the Vindicator is twice as high, -8 vs -4. The Armageddon navy also requires less use of the MWD in every site.
  7. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    I would guess from your conclusive answer that you did not read much of my thread. It is getting quite long by now, and i understand that is is tedious to read it all. I will try to make a short as possible summary of my main points here. What is more or less unavoidable to what i am saying, is the fleet comparison in my thread. Fleet 1: 3 Machariel 2883 turret DPS + 475 Hammerhead II DPS 6 Nightmare 7122 turret DPS + 948 Hammerhead II DPS 22 Vindicator 40,788 turret DPS + 6974 Ogre II DPS = Total 10005 long range DPS = Max DPS: 59,190 (to 14km) Fleet 2: 31 Armageddon navy issue 28427 DPS long range (no drones) 39227 DPS to 60km 50,468 Max DPS (to 35km) As you can see the total max DPS of both fleets is not far away from each other. For the Vindicator fleet, Nearly all of their maximum DPS advantage comes from their medium and heavy drones only. So for NRF, this advantage is non-existant in these terms. For about half of the TPPH it is the same. So this DPS advantage of about 8k the Vindicator fleet has, will only be relevant in TCRC, and half of TPPH. In total: 1.5 / 3 times. Since these medium/heavy drones are only used on the tower. (while sentries with about 60km range can be more effectively used at all times) With this in mind, my doctrine has 1 main ship while the current doctrine has more or less 3, and split DPS/sniper roles. So in reality my doctrine will be able to field a consistent higher amount of Armageddons than the number of Vindicators the other doctrine can. The Armageddon has a less steep curve in terms of individual pilot effectiveness too, than the Vindi. I will argue that particularly new pilots will be more useful in this ship, than in a close range blaster ship. While the Vindicator needs a lot of MWD usage and microing to apply any DPS at all, the Armageddon can apply it instantly from almost anywhere with instant ammo swapping. So paper aside, it gains advantage in total effectiveness which is an invisible factor on a paper comparison. This is something that should not be underestimated. If you think there is merit in this, i hope you will check out my thread in more detail, as i cover all of the points you are mentioning, webs, tracking, range, application, cap and more. All of the ships in question are pretty much covered. If you are looking for the fittings themselves, they are at the end of the thread. There is one shield fit (my ship) and a few armor ones.
  8. The secret, hidden, superior Incursion ship! :D

    The Bhaalgorn has 8 effective turrets (after its bonus). The Armageddon navy issue has 8.75, and it can field a full flight of sentry drones. The Bhaalgorn cannot, so with these two things it is quite far behind on DPS. As a webbing ship, the Vindicator is better. (Or the Loki i would say, which i cover in my thread). As for the Vindicator VS the Armageddon, I don't know what you have seen from the Armageddon, but site aggro is an indicator of individual pilot performance there and then, at best. Over time it can tell you a little more, but not everything. An individual Vindicator can always pull aggro from an Armageddon if he tries, but that is not the only factor to consider. I think i have shown in my thread that the overall total fleet numbers are pretty close, lets say around 50/50 to be fair. However, the Vindicator cannot hit sniper targets as the Armageddon can, which is why i think the Armageddon navy issue comes out on top in the end. In the case of fleet utility (i cover this in my thread) The Vindicator in the fleet doctrine today is a ship that mostly works for itself. By that i mean, its webs is something it needs on its own, to be able to hit smaller targets effectively at close range. Same with its tracking. So i would argue that today, it brings no real utility, since everything it does it does for itself. In the doctrine i have suggested, i think the Loki is a better option for webs because it is faster in speed and lock time and has really long range on its webs. That will allow the fleet to start DPS on these quickly, and more effectively from afar.
  9. Hi guys, I want to share my thread on the official forums with you, and hear your thoughts on it. You can answer in this thread if you prefer it. https://forums.eveonline.com/t/incursions-armageddon-navy-issue/139337