[PvE] Luh "ideal" ockzet laylayn fae PvE combab?

[PvE] The "ideal" hardpoint layout for PvE combat?

Red Fox Four · 2017-01-20T09:45:23+00:00

Disclaimer: This is regarding PvE combat. I know there PvP is a different approach primarily focused on the current meta. So I really need to ask this cause after tinkering around in ED Shipyard (http://www.edshipyard.com/) many times with different ships I seem to always end up with the same result when it comes to hardpoint selection. Lasers to strip shields. Multicannons to finish them after shields are down. Depending on ship, your distributor and power the type of laser may vary. E.g. my Viper Mk3 uses 2 x C1 Bursts while my FdL uses 2 x C2 Beams. However... the layout is the same... lasers to strip shields. As for the multi-cannons to finish their hull I know some people prefer cannons. However when doing the math the multi-cannons "win" over the cannons because multicannons have more ammo and can do more damage total (ammo * damage per shot) than cannons and thus require less return trips to rearm. So my question is really coming down to this. Is there any reason whatsoever (again, in PvE combat) to bring missiles, railguns, plasma accelerators, fragment cannons, torpedos and all that jazz to a PvE fight instead of "Lasers+Multicannon" ? Sure using missiles is fancy and fun... but a 2B Seeker missile hardpoint only does 960 damage total as it only has 24 missiles. Meanwhile a 2F (fixed) multicannon will do 4818 damage total. This means Seeker missiles, as far as PvE goes, will completely cripple your endurance in combat (i.e. how long you can stay out there before having to rearm). Likewise other weapon systems like dumbfire missiles are equally poor giving you "only" 3000 total damage before needing to rearm. Torpedoes are absolutely worst with only 2 shots and 120 damage. The best "bang for the buck" is Packhound missiles but even with those your total damage output is only 3960, still less than multicannons, and you are shooting more expensive ammunition (not to mention cost of Packhound missile launcher compared to a Fixed Multicannon, in addition to the Powerplay grind to unlock the packhound in the first place). Looking at the math for all the different weapons that use ammunition the numbers are terrible. Multi-cannons *always* come out on top as the highest total damage potential before needing to rearm... not to mention they are also more forgiving with respect to missing shots... one miss with a multicannon affects the total damage potential very little, while missing with a missile, rail gun, cannon or plasma accelerator affects your damage potential substantially, especially for missiles. Granted.... there are other factors at play such as penetration of armor/hull and so forth. But to that I say... in PvE who cares? I have no need to penetrate to kill modules in the ship. If anything you simply target the Power Plant and keep firing your multi-cannons at it. I have no need to knock out the FSD, or drives, or hardpoints, or the shield generator and so forth. They die fast enough from multi-cannons anyhow. Everytime I am in ED Shipyard I tinker with my ships and make some not-"Laser&Multicannon" setups... but everytime it comes down to the fact that you simply gimp your endurance by having to fly back to rearm more frequently without really gaining an advantage in firepower or improving your efficiency at all. Does anyone really use missiles in PvE ? Or Railguns? Or Plasma Accelerators?