## Inquisitor

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

i take your point, but believe that us using thermal resists will not be significant enough to change any meta. punisher, retribution, enyo, pontifexes, gallente and caldari boats will prevail in the current war zone we are operating in. and even though we have a explosive hole it is not as giant as you describe, the kinetic resist will mitigate projectile damage at least partially, also keep in mind that explosive drones deal less damage than thermal drones and that nova missiles go for alpha strike in general (such fleets usually have the numbers to alpha inquisitors off the field, with or without the hole) while the thermal will benefit us vs every amarr boat and every blaster boat we might encounter, especially the brawly ones, although admitting that enough numbers of those also alpha through you easily as well.

apart from thermal vs explosive, which is not right or wrong, but situational, some of the t1 logi fits might still need a closer look.

not necessary to discuss extensively - but ill link the numbers. both work well in my opinion. it's just a matter of preference.

so, here the quick comparison on EHP new vs old (keep in mind that to those numbers blasters and sometimes also lasers deal more damage than autocannon fits):
void s: 8.37k vs 7.67k = +700
hail s: 7.13k vs 8.29k = -1'160
multifrequency s: 9.98k vs 9.08k = +900
you win a bit vs caldari kinetic missile fleets and lose a bit vs minmatar missile fleets (both are rarely seen in the world of small hulls, and if it's talwars they blow frigates that linger out in the open out of the water.

on the EHP/s front aka how many reps you will get:
thermal: 322 vs 252 = + 70 EHP/s
explosive: 204 vs 262 = - 57 EHP/s

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

This is good stimulating discussion.

Here's another fit to throw in the dogpile.

Afterburner
Code:
[Inquisitor, Inquisitor - Armor AB 3S Cap Injected 9.4kehp]IFFA Compact Damage Control400mm Rolled Tungsten Compact PlatesEnergized Adaptive Nano Membrane IIEnergized Adaptive Nano Membrane II1MN Y-S8 Compact AfterburnerSmall Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400Small Solace Scoped Remote Armor RepairerSmall Solace Scoped Remote Armor RepairerSmall Solace Scoped Remote Armor RepairerSmall Anti-Explosive Pump ISmall Trimark Armor Pump ISmall Trimark Armor Pump I

This fit may look similar to some of the others, but the principle difference is the rigs. Here's the problem with using "rainbow" resist rigs: Stacking Penalties.

Stacking Penalties is a subject that the Wiki covers adequately enough. In this respect I don't feel the need to explain what the subject is. But in particular, trimark armor pumps, bulkhead rigs and core defense field extenders are buffer rigs which are not subject to stacking penalties: they only get better.

Never use buffer rigs on active tank setups: buffer rigs amplify the effectiveness of buffer modules (shield extenders/armor plates, the bigger the better), if you don't have buffer modules then don't use buffer rigs. (Some types of tanks like hybrid tanks, such as X-L ASB + LSE or armor repper + armor plate setups go with resist rigs in shield or auxiliary nano pumps for armor.)

My fit above has 9.4k EHP against omni damage, and can only get better. Let's pretend that you have a max skilled Pontifex pilot who came along to give you armor links (command bursts) for armor resists (Armor Energizing) and armor hit points (Armor Reinforcement). In that case, if you ran resist rigs, your links are also going to be factored in the stacking penalty equation, but with trimarks, mine only gets better.

• Your fit, base: 8.261k EHP
• My fit, base: 9.486k EHP
• My fit, linked: 11.670k EHP

That said your ship setup does perform better IF your reps are holding. Yours reps roughly 302 EHP/s against itself (with links) while mine does 280 EHP/s (with links), which is nice. In principle, the ability of logistics to hold depends a lot on the situation, and mirrors the same concerns seen with other ship setups, such as Guardians.

If your logi are getting plastered into low armor before reps can land, given lock time and end-of-cycle repairs, then you definitely need more buffer. If your reps are being fully applied but are not holding, then you need more resistances. This is a situation that isn't something we can adequately anticipate: after all, if an Inquisitor is moving extremely slowly, it can be alpha'd by a Tornado, for what it's worth.

These kind of particulars are why I argued fervently in the Guardian thread, but I can't do much more about that subject. I don't want to drift too far out off topic here, but in particular, the better your buffer is, the more you also gain from Slave implant sets. While I think the idea of an Inquisitor pilot using a HG Slave implant set is rather daft, it is a subject that when extended out further to other fitting principles of other ships that we have to consider why we do certain things.

EDIT: I forgot, also: If you can't use T2 EANMs, you should use Meta 4 ANPs.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Well done K950, twice in a row.

I like your idea of one IFFA and two EANM II's.

And while on a T1 frigate slaves wouldn't be something to encounter often, I do agree that your thoughts about EHP/s vs Buffer in regards of links and slaves on larger hulls like Guardians do have a significant impact.

Excited, I went to pyfa to try your new approach.

I did try the IFFA and two EANM II's combo on my resist focused fit, but it yielded neglecteable results, it indeed works better with buffer tanked setups.
I than did try to fit my tank modules on your rig setup and it was just slightly below your buffer and resist numbers. I did decide that for the t1 frigates I want to keep the price around 5 mill each.

So, if I want a larger buffer, I will indeed chose your rig layout:
SPOILER WARNING!
[Inquisitor, Inquisitor - Armor AB 3S Cap Injected 9.4kehp modified low slots]Damage Control II400mm Rolled Tungsten Compact PlatesEnergized Adaptive Nano Membrane IIAdaptive Nano Plating II1MN Y-S8 Compact AfterburnerSmall Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400Small Solace Scoped Remote Armor RepairerSmall Solace Scoped Remote Armor RepairerSmall Solace Scoped Remote Armor RepairerSmall Anti-Explosive Pump ISmall Trimark Armor Pump ISmall Trimark Armor Pump I

for now i am going to stay with the resist iteration i posted, mainly because of the price considerations, but if we ever realize that the buffer of 8.27k is not enough, we will switch to your's at once.

BUT I think from here your link, slaves consideration and IFFA/EANM idea will become interesting when we look at the cruiser sized hulls and potentially at the T2 logi frigs.

Thanks K950. Keep your suggestions coming.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Ya'll know these would be more cap stable using smaller cap booster charges right?
Can we please get over this thing where people just use the biggest cap sticks they can by default without checking whether the smaller ones work better for the fit.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Cutecumber Roll wrote:Ya'll know these would be more cap stable using smaller cap booster charges right?
Can we please get over this thing where people just use the biggest cap sticks they can by default without checking whether the smaller ones work better for the fit.

People all over eve aren't just using the largest charge out of habit, they are using them because it's better.

All cap booster reload time is the same. For example, you can fit one Navy Cap 400 in a small booster. It has a cycle time of 12s and a reload of 10s. Thus giving you 400cap / 22s, in other words 18cap/s. You could also fit three Navy Cap 200s. Giving you 600 cap over 46s. In other words, 13cap/s.

Therefore by fitting the largest charge you do several things:

Counter people who are neuting you (because you boost harder)
Don't get such a weak injection of cap after you boost (because you might need to activate tackle, tank and weapons if you're almost dry)

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

So I do want to make it clear that I understand there are advantages to using the largest cap boosters possible. That being said, in this case, in my opinion, that choice is wrong.

Simulating the MWD fit on a medium skill character, it shows stable with 400s. if I turn off the cap booster it shows me "depletes in 30 sec". Overheated with cap booster off it depletes in 25 seconds.

The problem that you encounter in frigate logi, is that the cycle time + the reload time (22 seconds. 19.5 seconds heated) can be nearly the same as the time that it takes to drain the capacitor completely without the booster. At the same time, the larger cap sticks overfill your capacitor, meaning that you must activate them at nearly 0%, and they bring your cap up by over 65%. this means that your cap swings wildly from extreme to extreme and you never spend more than a brief moment in peak recharge. The additional time spent in peak recharge while running smaller boosters can help make up for the lower raw cap/s.

The capacitor for a frigate logi is small enough that an unlucky timing of your modules' cycles risks you capping out each time you reload your cap booster. For this reason, it is often advantageous to ensure that reload times are as far apart as possible.

Since running all 3 reps + the MWD will use more than 35% of your cap in 5.2 seconds heated, it may even be very difficult to accurately activate the module within the necessary range range of time, which may cause you to lose cap by capping above 100% if activated early, or to accidentally cap out before you even activate it the first time.

If a pilot can simulate stable with 100s, then he should not be running 400s.
he also shouldn't be running the 100s of course, since that would make those reload times even more risky.
200s or for very good skills 150s seem to generally be a good choice for these sort of fits.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Cutecumber Roll wrote:Simulating the MWD fit on a medium skill character, it shows stable with 400s. if I turn off the cap booster it shows me "depletes in 30 sec". Overheated with cap booster off it depletes in 25 seconds.

The problem that you encounter in frigate logi, is that the cycle time + the reload time (22 seconds. 19.5 seconds heated) can be nearly the same as the time that it takes to drain the capacitor completely without the booster. At the same time, the larger cap sticks overfill your capacitor, meaning that you must activate them at nearly 0%, and they bring your cap up by over 65%. this means that your cap swings wildly from extreme to extreme and you never spend more than a brief moment in peak recharge. The additional time spent in peak recharge while running smaller boosters can help make up for the lower raw cap/s.

This is an interesting argument, but it's not well supported in practice.

First, it is actually wildly unlikely that you are running your MWD and all three reps for more than a few seconds at a time. Inquisitors are not used in kitey fleet concepts, and small reps on frigates have a very short effective range. As a result, you almost always pulse MWD to get where you need to be, then turn it off until you need to relocate.

Second, you really aren't going to be heating reps for a very long period of time. The correct use of heat on small armor reps is on the first couple cycles, to prevent your logi primary from being volleyed through reps as logi lock them up and cycle reps, and then you unheat. 20 seconds is almost 7 full cycles on a small "scoped" armor rep, which means leaving heat on long enough to wipe out your capacitor is actually very risky.

(If you were using Inquisitors with T3Ds or AFs, it might make sense to heat for a little bit under battleship damage or whatever - but then I would be yelling at you because you're using T1 logi with T2/T3 dps, which is terrible, and at any rate the bad guys would probably just primary your logi instead.)

Third, your math doesn't really add up that well. A 400 is worth a bit less than two thirds of your cap pool, so you should pop it at about 35%, go up to well over 90% cap, and spend your time working down toward peak recharge while the cap booster reloads. If your cap depletes in a little less than 30 seconds, and your total reload time is 22 seconds, this means that you should have lost a little over two thirds of your capacitor by the time the cap booster reloads, which puts you back near peak recharge. So if you were correct about peak recharge being a significant aspect of cap-injected logi (which you're not), you would be wrong about the interaction between the reload time and peak recharge.

In general, the answer is correct module management rather than changing the cap charges.
"What is good in life, Raido?"
"To crush your enemies. To see them bubbled before you, and to hear the lamentations of their carebears."

Join Fweddit - Be a Space Chikun!

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Raido Kudonen wrote:
First, it is actually wildly unlikely that you are running your MWD and all three reps for more than a few seconds at a time. Inquisitors are not used in kitey fleet concepts, and small reps on frigates have a very short effective range. As a result, you almost always pulse MWD to get where you need to be, then turn it off until you need to relocate.

I do think you are wrong on this point. Frigate logi with MWD often need to orbit the rest of the fleet with MWD on for the full term of the engagement. If they get scrammed they die. The range bonus on frigate logi makes kiting the ideal strategy. These fits actually use the scoped reps not the enduring reps, which further reinforces the idea that they should be kiting the fleet, even if the dps of the fleet is brawly. (AB fit logi can come much closer to the fleet because they are not so threatened by scrams, but should still orbit with prop on.)

I think this idea comes from treating these sort of ships as if they are supposed to die. The idea of "Get on grid, burn to tackle, land reps, get one shotted off the grid" as the role of these ships is really misguided in my view even though a surprising number of pilots seem to think of them in this way. A frigate with MWD on orbiting at almost 30 km should actually be very difficult to hit or to catch.

Your point that many of the problems I have addressed can simply be solved with correct module management is very well taken though, and I do have to concede that even a moderately skilled pilot should not let himself get capped out purely as a result of the 10 sec reload cycle.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Cutecumber Roll wrote:I do think you are wrong on this point. Frigate logi with MWD often need to orbit the rest of the fleet with MWD on for the full term of the engagement. If they get scrammed they die. The range bonus on frigate logi makes kiting the ideal strategy. These fits actually use the scoped reps not the enduring reps, which further reinforces the idea that they should be kiting the fleet, even if the dps of the fleet is brawly. (AB fit logi can come much closer to the fleet because they are not so threatened by scrams, but should still orbit with prop on.)

I think this idea comes from treating these sort of ships as if they are supposed to die. The idea of "Get on grid, burn to tackle, land reps, get one shotted off the grid" as the role of these ships is really misguided in my view even though a surprising number of pilots seem to think of them in this way. A frigate with MWD on orbiting at almost 30 km should actually be very difficult to hit or to catch.

First off, if you're orbiting 30km off, no wonder you're heating too much. Your reps are borderline useless at that range, as you're at the extreme range of falloff. You're not actually much less vulnerable to neut pressure and can still be tracked by most popular anti-frigate weapons, so your comments about how T1 frigates shouldn't be disposable are not really relevant.

Second, scoped reps on Inquisitors get you all of 11.6km optimal, which is not kiting. You're losing rep effectiveness at any distance farther than that, and Punishers are anchored on the DPS primary, so if you're more than 12km from the DPS primary your logi wing is worse than it should be.

Third, you seem to be working under very basic misunderstandings about how positioning and survivability work in fleet fights. Punishers are used because they are unusually resilient for T1 frigates, and indeed have almost comparable tank to many T2 frigates. Brawling is not done because the frigate logi are disposable, it's done when you expect that the frigate logi have sufficient numbers to hold reps without serious losses. This means the logi should be in a tight ball (orbit 500m on logi anchor, typically, for T1 frigates) and within optimal range of hostile DPS. That way, you provide maximum EHP/second to either your DPS/tackle ships or to your fellow logi, depending on which are taking damage. The MWD is not for avoiding damage, but for getting into position.
"What is good in life, Raido?"
"To crush your enemies. To see them bubbled before you, and to hear the lamentations of their carebears."

Join Fweddit - Be a Space Chikun!

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

These ships live in falloff; they are specifically bonused for it with a 600% bonus to falloff range. Your argument is as ridiculous as saying that artillery are a close range weapon because the optimal range is too short for kiting. At 20km, the reps should still be roughly 85% effective. At 30 km over 60% effective. How close the logi choose to be depends on how much of a threat the enemy is, but I see very little reason to come in beyond 15 km during a fight unless there is no threat to the logi whatsoever. The logi do need to be in somewhat of a tight ball, but only with each other, the logi should stay anchored on a designated logi anchor and not on the main dps anchor, or fly themselves manually while ensuring they are in range of each other if they are more experienced.

Idk where you got the idea that the logi are supposed to anchor near the main dps anchor but for most frigate fleets, especially any sort of brawling fleet, that is incredibly stupid. Also, as I said, the choice of scoped over enduring reps clearly indicates that this fit is intended to be flown some distance from the fleet. If they had been designed to anchor at 500m on the dps anchor they would have enduring reps instead.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Cutecumber Roll wrote:These ships live in falloff; they are specifically bonused for it with a 600% bonus to falloff range. Your argument is as ridiculous as saying that artillery are a close range weapon because the optimal range is too short for kiting. At 20km, the reps should still be roughly 85% effective. At 30 km over 60% effective. How close the logi choose to be depends on how much of a threat the enemy is, but I see very little reason to come in beyond 15 km during a fight unless there is no threat to the logi whatsoever.

Good luck giving away 15%-30% of your reps in a brawling fleet when actually fighting, as opposed to blobbing someone you could have killed with a quarter of your numbers without losing anyone. I realize you're definitely a sock puppet, but you also aren't exactly coming across as someone with a lot of experience as an FC.

The funniest part about this exercise in Pyfa warrioring is that with five T1 armor logi frigs, you are literally better off (in reps/s) repping one of your logi frigs (80% rep output) than being anywhere outside 25km and repping your DPS. So your analysis of trying to preserve the logi is completely misguided. At four logi frigates, which is really the minimum for a frigate blob, you still are better off repping one of your logi (75% output) than you are being at 30km (much less than 70% output). This math only changes significantly if your DPS resists are significantly better than your logi resists, which is only ever true of Punishers among T1 frigates, and even then, only changes if your gang size is relatively small. If you have more than five T1 logi frigates (or more than 3-4 T2 logi frigates), it is almost never correct to be outside optimal range. And if you have any kind of booshing support, it's usually correct to be anchored on the DPS wing.

Finally, your reference to artillery is not very apt. If you're close to the minimum needed to alpha targets in a hostile fleet, this actually does seriously limit your ability to use falloff effectively, which is one of the common reasons that less-experienced FCs welp Muninn fleets. But the artillery falloff formula works very differently from the logi formula, which is based on energy neutralizer falloff, not weapons falloff. Weapons falloff adds an additional fractional multiplier to your chance to hit at all with a given shot, and this formula is affected greatly by factors like the target's angular velocity, which is reduced (all else equal) by your distance from the target. It is therefore often correct to fight in falloff because you maximize your overall probability of the fleet tracking the target, even though the falloff does reduce that probability.

Logi is the opposite. As long as the ship being repaired has enough buffer to avoid getting volleyed through your reps or before reps land, the goal is to have enough reps/s on field to exceed enemy DPS while also having a number of logi ships on grid that looks "engageable" (usually, this means getting the hostile FC to think that they can kill your ships when they actually can't - this is why so many "elite" PvP groups put deadspace reps on their logi even though it's ridiculously expensive to do so). Because falloff reduces your reps/s in a direct, non-random, monovariate way, putting logi in falloff at all is only viable to the extent that you have repairs to spare on grid, which means that you're relying on the hostile FC's incompetence. Usually a bad idea.
"What is good in life, Raido?"
"To crush your enemies. To see them bubbled before you, and to hear the lamentations of their carebears."

Join Fweddit - Be a Space Chikun!

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

IDK what uni frigate blobs you have been attending but "a minimum of 4" logi and command destroyer support would certainly be amazing.
The most common number of logi, at least for our scheduled frigate roams, seems to be 2.

The most common uni doctrine which uses inquisitors is the punisher doctrine, and the expected comp for such a fleet would be something like 16 punishers & 4 inquisitors if the fleet had a good turnout. 10 punishers & 0 or 2 Inquisitors for bad turnout.

Frigate blobs simply do not use the same tactics as cruiser fleets for logi. The idea that you must bring enough logi to hold against enemy dps is absurd as frigate blobs regularly willingly engage things that they know will break their reps. The goal is to break slowly, and to have logi and ewar break last.

And for the record, putting your logi in range of enemy neuts and blasters and not expecting them to get neuted to shit, webbed & scrammed, and very quickly volleyed off grid is "relying on the hostile FC's incompetence".

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

Bear in mind that the intention with these fittings is to provide a satisfactory fit for the most ideal scenario, not just basing it on how uni fleets are.

If you can prove to me that you have a greater experience of frigate fights as logi than myself and/or Raido, then I will gladly accept your knowledge as fact in this area, but until then I don't think it's conducive to good discussion to continue this back and forth.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

I think you are right. This conversation is becoming rather unpleasant and does not seem to be leading to anywhere productive.

Member

### Re: Inquisitor

[Inquisitor, HGScout's Inquisitor]
200mm Rolled Tungsten Compact Plates
Damage Control II
Limited Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane I
Limited Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane I

5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive
Small Brief Capacitor Overcharge I,Navy Cap Booster 400

Small I-ax Enduring Remote Armor Repairer
Small I-ax Enduring Remote Armor Repairer
Small I-ax Enduring Remote Armor Repairer

Small Trimark Armor Pump I
Small Trimark Armor Pump I
Small Trimark Armor Pump I

Acolyte I x1
PreviousNext