User:Konatsu miyamoto

HACS VS Their T3 Counterparts

A question that seems to pop up frequently is whether Heavy Assault Cruisers (HACS) or Tech 3 Strategic Cruisers (T3s) are "better". In this wiki page, we'll compare and contrast T2 HACS with their T3 Counterparts. Specific examples will be given so that you can import them into EFT and play around with fittings yourself. Please note that within this article, when speaking about T3s, it is in reference to building them HAC style unless stated otherwise. This is to avoid confusing situations like "But booster T3s aren't tanky at all!"

General Similarities and Differences

Before we dive into specifics, let's get some general things out of the way:

1. T3s and HACS take approximately the same amount of time to train up.

   It's a common misconception that T3s require more training than HACS. This is not true, depending on the situation they may take more OR less time, 
 but in general the amount of time to train is actually fairly similar (most of the training time being frontloaded onto T2 weapons and the Cruiser 5 Skill)

2. T3s are more expensive than HACS for the most part.

   There are always exceptions to the rule, but in general a T3 is just going to run you more isk, even if isn't faction fit.

3. T3s are usually tankier due to powerful defensive subsystems.

   Common PvP subsystems add resists or raw HP to the tank of T3s, making them very tanky in general. It's not uncommon for T3s to feature battleship level tanking ability.

4. T3s and HACs feature the same base resist profiles.

   T3s use the same resist profiles as other T2 ships as that race, the difference in tank comes from subsystem bonuses, not a special T3 resist profile.

Specific Examples

Here you will see specific examples for each race, including fittings so that you can play with them yourself.

Amarr

First let's compare the Zealot with the Laser Legion. The Zealot is considered by many to be the best HAC due to its great ability to project damage using laser's naturally large optimal engagement range. The Legion offers similar damage projection ability in a T3 platform. Let's look at a few fits: Template:FittingsTemplate:FittingsTech3

The Zealot fit here is based off the famous 'Fist of Rape' Zealot used by Pandemic Legion. It is designed to sig tank, with ECM to jam out certain targets. For more information http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9Y1dJZgRvc . However this fit can easily be adjusted to use a warp disruptor or scram, + web or even tracking computer. Tank can also be adjusted. But, on to the juicy details:

ZEALOT

COST: About 350 Million ISK

TANK: 57k EHP Resists 75/69/82/90

MOBILITY: ~550 M/S

DPS: 639 Conflag @ 11km, 573 INMF @ 11km, 456 Scorch @ 34km

The Legion fit is faction, fairly standard for T3s. More flexible than the Zealot, tank and mids can be swapped around very easily depending on your needs.

LEGION

COST: Around 1.3 Billion ISK

TANK: ~120k EHP Resists 73/73/80/89

MOBILITY: ~1300 M/S

DPS: 730 Conflag @ 11KM, 654 INMF @ 11KM, 521 Scorch @ 34KM

CONCLUSION: The Legion is considerably more tanky (About 2 times more EHP!), does more damage at the same ranges, and has more mobility and utility, at the cost of being approximately 4 times the price of the Zealot. Note that the Legion has an extra turret when compared with the Zealot, which is a large factor in the extra DPS it can push out. Another important factor to note as that not only does the Zealot have a naturally smaller sig radius, but it's using an AB in this situation, making its sig much smaller. Legion also has the possibility of using AB to sig tank however, and even has space for a tracking computer if you go AB route to apply dps to a better extent, either by increasing tracking or range.