Ships & Modules

 
^ Back to top

Topic is locked indefinitely.

7 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

Why would anyone fly a Vargur?

Author
Sky Syndicate
#1 Posted: 2013.07.16 04:21
Terrible Powergrid
Which Translates into terrible DPS and range
Which turns into terrible completion time
Which = terrible isk/hr

I'm pretty sure you can run a site faster with a machariel and coming back in a noctis; or just blitzing sites and skipping salvage.

Literally the only advantage the Vargur has is the tractor beam range and an unnecessary boost to tank. It can tank C4 sleeper sites but so can a machariel, and it can't even fit the 1400s needed to DPS them, or even a smartbomb.

Just... why CCP, why is the powergrid sooooooo terrible... It should be able to fit 1400s and a LARGE shield booster with at most 1 faction reactor control unit.

IDLE EMPIRE
#2 Posted: 2013.07.16 04:52
it was designed to work with autocannons, and it does that pretty well. and for the most part pirate battleships do more dps than their marauder counterparts.
You can trust me, I have a monocole
Gallente Federation
#3 Posted: 2013.07.16 05:02
The Vargur is a lower DPS projection mach but with superior tank and the ability to salvage while you mission
#4 Posted: 2013.07.16 06:03
You are fitting it wrong.

Fit it right and you have a ship that's on par with mach.
#5 Posted: 2013.07.16 06:52
Better tracking and tank.

Marauders can be invented and manufactured anywhere in EVE, pirate ships have to be found as BPCs and these do not drop everywhere. Only because of the Vargur is the Machariel then so cheap. If you were to remove the Vargur from the game would the price for the Machariel easily triple and become a major ISK source for some alliances.

The Machariel is also over-powered and will likely see a nerf with the rebalancing, while the Marauders are said to see a conceptual change.
Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
#6 Posted: 2013.07.16 07:29
Welp Pve... Vargur solos c5 anoms, machariel does not :|
"I honestly thought I was in lowsec"

Moving pictures
#7 Posted: 2013.07.16 09:46
hellcane wrote:
You are fitting it wrong.

Fit it right and you have a ship that's on par with mach.


Yes. With less ammo use as well.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
German Information Network Alliance
#8 Posted: 2013.07.16 10:50
Whitehound wrote:
[....] the Marauders are said to see a conceptual change.

Judging from history, this can be double edged sword.

But I agree, Vargur is damn fine ship as it is.
Ixtab.
#9 Posted: 2013.07.16 11:58
vargur is near the machariel when it comes to autocannons. Has better tank and if you forget salvaging for lower ticks (not that much of a difference though. About 3-4m ticks less) you can have better defence . Biggest strenght of vargur is tracking PiratePirate (and fact it cost to fit about 1bil less than a mach)
Ride hard, live with passion 
#10 Posted: 2013.07.16 13:12
An RF ammo Vargur has the same DPS (and ranges) as a Mach. The Mach's advantage lies in being able to close the range faster and reduce DPS loss to falloff (~10% improvement in DPS for every ~11km closer you are.)

However, I ran those numbers before the TE nerf, but since the Vargur fit relies mostly on TCs, it should be a moot issue.
#11 Posted: 2013.07.16 13:13
hmskrecik wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
[....] the Marauders are said to see a conceptual change.

Judging from history, this can be double edged sword.

But I agree, Vargur is damn fine ship as it is.

It will be a while, but it *should* be a favorable balance pass. All the marauders need something special since the noctis gutted their intended purpose.
#12 Posted: 2013.07.16 13:20
stoicfaux wrote:
An RF ammo Vargur has the same DPS (and ranges) as a Mach. The Mach's advantage lies in being able to close the range faster and reduce DPS loss to falloff (~10% improvement in DPS for every ~11km closer you are.)

However, I ran those numbers before the TE nerf, but since the Vargur fit relies mostly on TCs, it should be a moot issue.


What's the fit with TCs? Have always ran with TEs in the past, surely filling mids with TCs ruins your tank, assuming a shield booster + invul setup.

And to OP, Vargur uses nearly half the ammo of a Mach and can put out 1300-1500 DPS with 3 Gyros and 5% or higher implants... slightly slower but not much.
#13 Posted: 2013.07.16 13:30
Inserith Peon wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
An RF ammo Vargur has the same DPS (and ranges) as a Mach. The Mach's advantage lies in being able to close the range faster and reduce DPS loss to falloff (~10% improvement in DPS for every ~11km closer you are.)

However, I ran those numbers before the TE nerf, but since the Vargur fit relies mostly on TCs, it should be a moot issue.


What's the fit with TCs? Have always ran with TEs in the past, surely filling mids with TCs ruins your tank, assuming a shield booster + invul setup.

And to OP, Vargur uses nearly half the ammo of a Mach and can put out 1300-1500 DPS with 3 Gyros and 5% or higher implants... slightly slower but not much.

Usually 2 TC leaving you a 4 slot tank, or 3 slot tank with prop mod when the need arises.
#14 Posted: 2013.07.16 13:57  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
Inserith Peon wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
An RF ammo Vargur has the same DPS (and ranges) as a Mach. The Mach's advantage lies in being able to close the range faster and reduce DPS loss to falloff (~10% improvement in DPS for every ~11km closer you are.)

However, I ran those numbers before the TE nerf, but since the Vargur fit relies mostly on TCs, it should be a moot issue.


What's the fit with TCs? Have always ran with TEs in the past, surely filling mids with TCs ruins your tank, assuming a shield booster + invul setup.

And to OP, Vargur uses nearly half the ammo of a Mach and can put out 1300-1500 DPS with 3 Gyros and 5% or higher implants... slightly slower but not much.

http://eve.battleclinic.com/loadout/59297-Vargur-Level-4-Minmatar-Space-Max-Gank-Min-Tank.html
edit: nowadays, I'd probably drop the Ambit rig for a Targeting System Subcontroller rig so that you have enough grid to mount a LMJD. You lose 3km of falloff (69km down to 66km) and you can lock frigates 3 seconds faster (19.6s -> 16.3s.) =/

http://eve.battleclinic.com/loadout/58393-Machariel-Level-4-Blitzer-MWD-Web-EW-Drones-Minmatar-Space.html
#15 Posted: 2013.07.16 14:59  |  Edited by: Aeril Malkyre
I strove my entire EvE life to get a Machariel, and after about a year I sold it for my Vargur. The Machariel's a beautiful murder machine, but it's demanding to fly. The Vargur has less ammo consumption, better tank, comparable kill speed, and the massive time saved of not having to jump back with a Noctis. Yes the sensors suck, yes the powergrid is awful for anything but autocannons, and it's not as fast as the absurdly fast Machariel.

I'm interested to see what their plan is for the Marauders, but also concerned it's going to mess with my new baby.
#16 Posted: 2013.07.16 15:52
Vargur's PG is pretty tight, probably overly so. If want to fit a micro jump drive or an MWD, you have to jump through hoops and/or use an undersized shield booster, and/or not use Projectile riggings, never mind artillery.




Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
#17 Posted: 2013.07.16 16:01
People fly the vargur because it's a sexy tempest hull.
#18 Posted: 2013.07.16 22:38
I can't really see how the PG is much of a problem for a Vargur. You only fit 4 guns, that removes a lot of the PG required for say a Machariel that needs more weapon PG. I've never had any problem fitting my Vargur at all. If your fittings skills aren't top notch should you really be flying this ship to begin with? There's plenty of ships/fits that need very good skills to function, but people don't hate on them for that.

If you're flying a ship worth as much as Marauder you should at least pimp it some with at least faction damage mods, prop mod and resist mod(s) imo.
Gallente Federation
#19 Posted: 2013.07.17 00:36
Kosetzu wrote:
I can't really see how the PG is much of a problem for a Vargur. You only fit 4 guns, that removes a lot of the PG required for say a Machariel that needs more weapon PG.


Machariel can fit 7 1200mm artillery, MWD/MJD, XLSB, and have almost 1500mw to spare. Vargur can't even fit 4 1200mm artillery without needing an ACR rig or RCU in the lows, and if you tack on MWD/MJD with a large, not XL, plain old L, shield booster you're looking at needing either two T2 ACR rigs or two T1s and a PDS to fit all of that.

The vargur may or may not have intended solely to be an AC platform, but that doesn't mean that comparing it to the machariel and saying, "Nope, no power grid issues" will work very well.

Kosetzu wrote:
If you're flying a ship worth as much as Marauder you should at least pimp it some with at least faction damage mods, prop mod and resist mod(s) imo.


Maybe an officer reactor control or power diagnostic system too? Roll
#20 Posted: 2013.07.17 01:31
With all V skills, a Vargur with 4x 800AC IIs uses 7920 out of 9875 powergrid. That's 1955 PG left for stuff.

XL Shield Booster: 500 to 550 PG
100 MN AB: 625 to 688 PG
100 MN MWD: 1250 to 1500 PG
Micro Jump Drive: 1375 PG

At first glance you can easily fit a single prop mod and an XLSB. However, if you add any Projectile rigs, your AC pg usage increases:
* 1 projectile rig: 8316 PG used, leaving 1,559 PG
* 2 projectile rigs: 8731.8 used, leaving 1,143.2 PG

However, if you only have projectile rigging at IV:
* 1 projectile rig: 1,479.8 PG free
* 2 projectile rigs: 976.1 PG free

Basically, you're limited to one projectile rig at most. Even then, if you want to use a MJD or MWD, then you need Projectile Rigging V and/or an undersized shield booster (I use a Pithum C-Type MSB which uses 12 PG.)

On the plus side, the PG implant doesn't conflict with projectile DPS implants.

As for artillery:
* 1400 IIs: 12,870 out of 9875 PG
* 1200 IIs: 10,890 out of 9875 PG
If you slap on 2xAncillary Current Routers, you can mount 1200's and have 1,058.8 to work with. Which means no projectile rigs and an AB plus an undersized shield booster.


It's not the end of the world, but it is pretty annoying.

7 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump