Quell vs Sting?

[Mournblood]

I'm thinking about picking up a new ship for dogfighting. I've been using the Blackbolt for that purpose mostly, but I acknowledge there are ships better suited for that purpose. The Quell is a strike fighter, and the Sting is a scout. However, the Sting has the same armaments as the Quell, and is faster. But obviously what looks good on paper isn't necessarily the case in the field (or space, in this case).

 

If anyone has any experience or feedback they can offer on these two ships it would be appreciated.

[nyghtrunner]

If you're looking between those 2 specifically, I recommend the Sting.

 

The Quell, being a Strike, has very little really going for it. You have access to 2 missiles, which can be fun, but in general, the strikers lack the speed, evasion, tankiness, and firepower to be truly competitive. The Sting is also insanely versatile, with several viable builds.

 

I wish it weren't so, but the Strikers in general, are in a very bad place in the current meta, as they lose to both Gunships and Scouts, and are only OK v bombers. The Clarion's utility and ability to take a lot of damage puts it into viable range, but outside of that, all the Strikes are just kind of weak scouts.

 

Get a Sting. It's just simply better, especially if you already like dogfighting in a Blackbolt.

 

EDIT - If you already use Laser Cannons and Rocket Pods on your Blackbolt, the Quad and Pods build with Targeting Telemetry is really good, and very similar in how it flies. Just more powerful in general.

 

Another option is Burst Laser Cannons paired with Cluster Missiles. It's a better true "dogfighter" than a Sting using Quads and Pods, but you do sacrifice some offensive firepower if you have an enemy in a line.

 

All the System abilities have their uses, but my favorite 2 are Targeting Telemetry and Booster Recharge. Telemetry makes you more lethal, Booster Recharge helps with the survivability, especially in a heavy Ion Rail meta.

 

And having access to Distortion Field's second missile break is just gravy, and something no Strike can compete with.

Edited April 19, 2015 by nyghtrunner

[Ramalina]

The Quell also suffers from having armor instead of a reactor in secondary components. Of all of the strikes, it has the weakest defenses by a significant margin, which is not something you want if you intend to dogfight. Its selection of engine maneuvers is also less than ideal for dogfighting.

 

Basically it hangs out with the T2 gunship and T3 bomber in the gang of ships that have critical design flaws handicapping them.

 

I wouldn't go as far as Verian, who calls the Quell/Pike the worst ship in the game, but a Denon map with few gunships and no battlescouts is pretty much the only situation in which it approaches being a really decent ship choice.

 

Unless they do a major redesign of the Quell, or change missile mechanics to the point where there's a realistic chance of landing heavy missiles and torpedoes on scouts and gunships the T2 strikes just are not going to be competitive ships.

 

For dogfighting in strikes, the Clarion/Imperium offer a lot of survivability, but low ability to kill a target if the pilot is competent. The Starguard/Rycer is much less survivable, but it does have the toolkit to produce kills if you can deal with the inherent deficiencies of the base strike platform. For weapons you'd want HLCs or Quads in one slot and Ion cannons in the other slot. Cluster missiles for the secondary. For the rest of the build it's a matter of trading boost endurance vs. turn rate and trading boost endurance vs. defensive strength. There's no particular "correct" build, but taking charged plating is definitely incorrect.

 

For a given level of skill the Sting is roughly 200-300% as good at dogfighting as any of the strikes. The Blackbolt/Novadive is maybe 150% as good as any strike in a turning fight and 200-300% as good in a jousting or hit and run style. Even the T3 scout, which is the weakest scout when it comes to dogfighting, is at least as good as the T1 strike.

 

The flavor text in the hangar about strikes being great dogfighters, great multirole fighters, or great command ships, is all a bunch of lies. The T3s are situationally tough to kill and excellent healers, but that's the total current extent of strike competitiveness in GSF.

 

Despite not being competitive in terms of winning the game, the strikes do offer a different playstyle from the other classes of ships, and if you like that then they're still worth purchasing.

Edited April 20, 2015 by Ramalina

[RickDagles]

IMO the only thing good going for the Quell is that it has heavy laser cannons. This blaster can be very valuable around a node, especially in a 12 man game. You can kill turrets and drones quickly and at a safe distance. You can also do some great damage to bombers (especially charged plating bombers). However, the Starguard has the heavy laser cannon+retro combo which is better. Edited April 20, 2015 by RickDagles

[Mournblood]

Thanks, all.

 

I went with the Sting. Once I get this thing upgraded, it's going to be nasty.

[Verain]

Correct, and good call.

 

I'll also point out that the Quell and the Sting don't have many of the same armaments.

 

For primary blasters, the Sting has Rapid Fire Lasers (terrible), Light Lasers and Quad Lasers (both very good on a Sting, and ok on a Pike- the lights less so on the Pike), and Burst Laser Cannon (the default choice that you should make unless you have a reason to choose quads). The Pike has lights, which are awful on it (it lacks the maneuverability and engines to line these up, and it lacks a system component to actually make use of the move during the few times it works), quads, which are decent on it, but don't have the same firing window as the sting does, and Heavies, which are generally the Pike's best option, giving it a solid medium range threat that ignores armor.

 

For missiles, the Pike gets two, and it can choose from almost all of the ones in the game. The lack of interdiction is puzzling. In reality, this means that the Pike has several utility builds, none of which do what they really should. Meanwhile, the Sting has the excellent cluster missiles and the also excellent rocket pods, allowing for two different attack styles. It also has sab probe, which is likely not really in the same league as its other two choices, but definitely has its uses. This means that out of all their armaments, the only guy in common is cluster missiles.

 

Finally, the Sting's ability to use targeting telemetry means that it can land shots the strike fighters cannot, and they can crit impossibly hard compared to what a strike can do.

 

For shields, the directional and quick charge do overlap, but most Stings take distortion, and for good reason. The ability to shrug off a missile lock while still tunneling is quite clutch, on top of the other advantages the move has. It's pretty rare for a scout to give up distortion for directionals or quick charge, and frankly, the strikes wouldn't either, if they had the choice.

 

 

I'm glad you took the solid advice given to you in this thread. Do remember to check the stickied build guide, though, as you probably noticed, that guide is not written to tell you what the "good ships" are versus the "bad ones".

 

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=729222

 

Also, remember to pick up a Razorwire, Mangler, and probably Legion at some point. I mean, obviously get ALL the ships, but seriously, the Razorwire and the Mangler are both top ships and ALSO the game tries to throw them at you by costing them at half what the others cost. Take the hint!

[Verain]

I wouldn't go as far as Verian, who calls the Quell/Pike the worst ship in the game

 

What ship is worse?

 

That's the real question, I think. You bring up the type 3 bomber, but a type 3 bomber can still help at a node, and still break missiles better than most strikes. It's not a dominating meta force mostly because there are specialists at its roles, but it actually is a multi role ship. I would say that a type 3 bomber will normally contribute more than a type 2 strike.

 

You also bring up the type 2 gunship, the much loved "sh***y gunships". But even that ship at the end of the day still has a railgun. To think about its absolute power is very different than the "I'll dismiss this because it is pretty much strictly worse than a type 1 gunship" is valid, but that doesn't make it somehow worse than a type 2 strike because it is "less unique".

 

I like the Pike a lot, but the conclusion about it being the worst ship in the game isn't just mine. Stasie was I think the first to point that out, and I'm fairly certain Drako agrees, and seriously, what ship is worse?

 

 

I definitely agree with your statement about the strikes still being worth purchasing and playing. Their playstyle is actually great. It is just that playing in some fashion at some skill level is not "compensated" for as much as it should be- just undertuned.

[Mournblood]

So far, the Sting has not disappointed. I changed a few of the default load outs to fit my play style. Some would be approved by those responding here, others possibly not, but I'm more interested in playing to my strengths and compensating for my weaknesses with my relatively low experience than the meta-game at this point. I still use the Blackbolt for fast caps on satellite maps, but for death matches, the Sting already out-performs it. Until I get it more fully upgraded, I'll rack up requisition with my Demolisher and Blackbolt. Just got top kills in my last match with my Demolisher. It's been a good day for me in GSF so far.

 

Again, my thanks to those responding with all the useful advice and information without being condescending or trolling.

[Ramalina]

What ship is worse?

 

The T3 bomber and T2 gunship.

 

Yes, they can equip components that are on their own quite solid, but then, so can the T2 strike.

 

A slug railgun, by itself, with no support from the rest of the build is not scary. It's especially not scary on a ship that can't run, break missile locks, evade blaster shots, fight up close, or tank.

 

Same holds true for the mix of utility mines and drones on the T3 bomber.

 

The T2 strike for all it's deficiencies, is a reasonably fast, reasonably agile platform and it can be built in a way that multiple components are working together fairly well at the same time. The T2 gunship and T3 bomber don't have that.

 

In the very limited range of circumstances where a decent T2 strike build can get 2-4 components working nicely together, it has a limited capability to be scary to competent pilots.

 

The bomber and gunship do generally find it a bit easier to gobble up food ships quickly, but that's mostly a matter of having weapons that let a pilot with zero situational awareness do most of the work for you. Once the target is aware that a threat exists I consider the T2 strike significantly deadlier than the T3 bomber and situationally deadlier than the T2 gunship depending on positions relative to LOS cover.

 

If you have three or more, the bomber and gunship stack much more effectively than T2 strikes do, so in a team sense, I'd agree that T2 strikes are the worst ship to have large numbers of, where large is taken to mean any number greater than two.

 

At any rate, while in a T3 bomber or T2 gunship I find the presence of a well flown T2 strike worrisome, the reverse however, is not true.

Edited April 20, 2015 by Ramalina

[caederon]

I've run into a few T3 bomber pilots that power dive around like a yo-yo and use interdiction drone to be pretty effective and annoying combatants.

 

I was actually trying to get a T2 gs to 100-0 win/loss, carefully handpicking matches to fly it in, but only managed to go 19-0 before getting derailed by a misjudgement in team strength. It is a heap of junk that they mounted a slug railgun on. The slug makes it a semi-effective offensive contributor, but it is miserable to fly in every respect and has no synergistic components to make it viable.

 

At least the Quell can engage at a variety of ranges, depending on your loadout. I can't say for sure which of the three ships I could consistently do more damage in. I'd probably do best in the Quell, then the gs, then the bomber... but of the three, the only one I am worried by when being flown against me is the bomber.

 

If forced to pick, I'd call the T2 gs the worst ship, but it's a two horse race between the gs and the Quell. The bomber can be pretty effective in the right hands.

 

- Despon

[nyghtrunner]

So far, the Sting has not disappointed. I changed a few of the default load outs to fit my play style. Some would be approved by those responding here, others possibly not, but I'm more interested in playing to my strengths and compensating for my weaknesses with my relatively low experience than the meta-game at this point. I still use the Blackbolt for fast caps on satellite maps, but for death matches, the Sting already out-performs it. Until I get it more fully upgraded, I'll rack up requisition with my Demolisher and Blackbolt. Just got top kills in my last match with my Demolisher. It's been a good day for me in GSF so far.

 

Again, my thanks to those responding with all the useful advice and information without being condescending or trolling.

One of the beautiful things about the Sting is just how many builds you can use. It's kind of hard to make a truly "bad" configuration. You can do it, but almost have to try. The only real component on there that is just terrible is RFL. There are other things that are of questionable value, and strictly worse than other components in the same slot (Quick Charge Shield, for instance, is by far the weakest shield, but it's not totally useless, and has a couple of positives), but in general, the platform is just so solid, and the options so good, you can largely build it how you want.

 

I find the Sting to be the most interesting ship in the game from a component decision standpoint. There are so many options across component slots in which there's no clear winner, and they have so many synergistic interactions between them. Maybe the Blackbolt or some of the bombers are close-ish, but I just think there are more viable options with a Sting than any other ship in the game. I don't think there's even another ship that has 3 viable Engine choices (Retro, BR, PDive, with Koiogran being an arguable 4th if you really like it). I personally tend to go for endurance running, evasion, and dogfighting, with Booster Recharge, Disto, Retro Thrusters, BLCs, Clusters, and Wingman as the co-pilot, with all the turning I can throw on it, which is pretty far from the most popular builds, and certainly not the most explosive, but it serves my style quite well. It's really all about finding that balance between survivability, mobility, and offensive firepower that works for you.

 

The T2 Scout is the only ship I've ponied up the Cartel Coins to get the equivalent CM Ship (Ocula) just to have access to multiple builds on my bar.

[Lendul]

One of the beautiful things about the Sting is just how many builds you can use. It's kind of hard to make a truly "bad" configuration. You can do it, but almost have to try. The only real component on there that is just terrible is RFL. There are other things that are of questionable value, and strictly worse than other components in the same slot (Quick Charge Shield, for instance, is by far the weakest shield, but it's not totally useless, and has a couple of positives), but in general, the platform is just so solid, and the options so good, you can largely build it how you want.

 

The Sting even has a setup that makes RFL look good. Not optimal, but good. The Hose/Probe build.

 

BO+RFL+Freq Cap+ Bypass+Sab Probe= the most fun build in the game to play.

[Verain]

I mean, it does decent. Stasie made us all queue mastered RFL type 2 scouts one night, so I think I've had my fill. It's obviously worse than the other builds, but that was the point.

 

Is the type 2 strike better than the type 2 gunship? I just don't agree, but I can see the argument. Certainly, the Pike can bring some utility that the type 2 gunship doesn't overlap on. I don't think the Pike is any better against good pilots than the type 2 gunship, which is basically like a type 1 gunship without ion, evasion armor, and distortion. Heavies are not as powerful as burst, but they certainly aren't a "strictly worse than" case or anything. I just think that, if you are sniping you are almost as good, and you are much more fragile when swapped to.

 

I definitely don't think that the type 3 bomber is weaker in any way than the Pike. The type 3 bomber can lay concussions or interdiction drones, and both of those are strong components that it can use appropriately.

[Lendul]

I mean, it does decent. Stasie made us all queue mastered RFL type 2 scouts one night, so I think I've had my fill. It's obviously worse than the other builds, but that was the point.

 

Is the type 2 strike better than the type 2 gunship? I just don't agree, but I can see the argument. Certainly, the Pike can bring some utility that the type 2 gunship doesn't overlap on. I don't think the Pike is any better against good pilots than the type 2 gunship, which is basically like a type 1 gunship without ion, evasion armor, and distortion. Heavies are not as powerful as burst, but they certainly aren't a "strictly worse than" case or anything. I just think that, if you are sniping you are almost as good, and you are much more fragile when swapped to.

 

I definitely don't think that the type 3 bomber is weaker in any way than the Pike. The type 3 bomber can lay concussions or interdiction drones, and both of those are strong components that it can use appropriately.

Interesting question. If you could 1v1 yourself with you playing both ships(T2 Strike & T2 GS) respectively who would win?

Edited April 21, 2015 by Lendul

[Ardaneb]

The only real benefit of the type 2 gunship is that you can have a second gunship on your bar with plasma rail. Of course you do not want to sacrifice ion rail or slug rail to get plasma rail. However, when the other team is stacking stealth ships, what are you going to do? In those situations, you are going to want the seven second dot on a 25 % charge. This will prevent the good stealth ships from going into stealth for seven seconds and the bad stealth ships will simply blow their cooldown. Landing thermites on those stealthies is too hard, so I usually build my anti-stealth with slug and supplement with lingering effect on the heavy cannons. When the other side has too many stealth ships, that is when I put the type 2 gunship on by bar.

 

I really think this is the niche for the type 2 gunship. Am I delusional?

Edited April 21, 2015 by Ardaneb

[Ryuku-sama]

The only real benefit of the type 2 gunship is that you can have a second gunship on your bar with plasma rail. Of course you do not want to sacrifice ion rail or slug rail to get plasma rail. However, when the other team is stacking stealth ships, what are you going to do? In those situations, you are going to want the seven second dot on a 25 % charge. This will prevent the good stealth ships from going into stealth for seven seconds and the bad stealth ships will simply blow their cooldown. Landing tensor on those stealthies is too hard, so I usually build my anti-stealth with slug and supplement with lingering effect on the heavy cannons. When the other side has too many stealth ships, that is when I put the type 2 gunship on by bar.

 

I really think this is the niche for the type 2 gunship. Am I delusional?

 

And please oh great pilot!!! Where did you see a stealth ship in the CURRENT meta?????

[MaximilianPower]

The only real benefit of the type 2 gunship is that you can have a second gunship on your bar with plasma rail. Of course you do not want to sacrifice ion rail or slug rail to get plasma rail. However, when the other team is stacking stealth ships, what are you going to do? In those situations, you are going to want the seven second dot on a 25 % charge. This will prevent the good stealth ships from going into stealth for seven seconds and the bad stealth ships will simply blow their cooldown. Landing tensor on those stealthies is too hard, so I usually build my anti-stealth with slug and supplement with lingering effect on the heavy cannons. When the other side has too many stealth ships, that is when I put the type 2 gunship on by bar.

 

I really think this is the niche for the type 2 gunship. Am I delusional?

 

Re: the bolded - possibly. Which specific "stealth" ships are you referring to?

[Ramalina]

I definitely don't think that the type 3 bomber is weaker in any way than the Pike. The type 3 bomber can lay concussions or interdiction drones, and both of those are strong components that it can use appropriately.

 

I think my view of this is somewhat informed by spending less time in organized play with a high proportion of skilled pilots.

 

In a mostly unskilled PUG environment mines and drones devastate unskilled pilots. They're so effective that in those sorts of games shooting deployables down is as important for the skilled pilots as harassing the better scout and gunship pilots. It has gotten me into the habit of very aggressively swatting mines and drones.

 

Once that habit is established bombers are still annoyingly durable, but in order for them to be any real danger there need to be enough of them to swamp the ability of an opponent to shoot mines and drones down. That takes about 3 minelayers or dronecarriers.

 

Lacking a second deployable component the T3 bomber is a ship that I find can't maintain mine/drone uptime against a decent opponent, and that figures into my evaluation of its power. It's half a bomber worth of deployables and maybe 2/3 of a strike worth of dogfighter, but those fractions don't create a sum greater than the parts except against novices. So you wind up with 2/3 of a strike, with bomber support that evaporates faster than it gets produced. Even I don't think that 2/3 of a strike is enough ship to be really playable in GSF.

 

As far as design goes, all three of the, "bad ships," seem to be intended to work on the principle that the heavier missiles are actually effective and worth using. If that were actually the case, I think that what you'd have would be three distinct styles of, "heavy anti-bomber (with optional builds for sup-par generalist DPS)," to choose from among the T2 gunship, T2 strike, and T3 bomber rather than the, "crappy [insert ship class here]," collection of ships.

 

I suppose my view is best summarized as, "a nearly complete strike is slightly better than half a bomber or half a gunship." Subject of course to the caveat in my earlier post about strikes not stacking.

[RickDagles]

The Sledgehammer/Decimus is nowhere near the bottom of the list. It has everything the Quell/Pike has and more. Power dive means that it can actually handle ion railgun, and interdiction drone means it actually has an answer to BLC scouts. Pike gets hosed by both every. single. time. The only thing the Pike does slightly better than the Sledgehammer is kill bombers. But even that's debatable, and at least the Sledge can hold the node once it is captured (the Pike can't).

 

 

I think the Sledgehammer is actually quite a bit better than the Starguard/Rycer. The HLC/ion/cluster/retro combo works fantastic against most good scout players, but it doesn't work at all against the best aces. The Sledgehammer's interdiction drone, however, is quite good against anyone. It's unavoidable damage and downtime that even the best scout pilots cannot avoid.

 

 

T2 Gunship is a fantastic ship until you have to go on the defensive. Then you're basically dead unless you have a bomber nest.

Edited April 21, 2015 by RickDagles

[Ardaneb]

And please oh great pilot!!! Where did you see a stealth ship in the CURRENT meta?????

 

This weekend I went on a double XP pilgrimage through the skies of Jedi Covenant, Red Eclipse, and the Shadowlands. I was hardened through the crucible of the stock NovaBolt in the face of many a fully upgraded double premade. It was worth the journey. I saw the past, present and future. There was a horrible vision of silent death in deepest corners of space. But the future is not written in stone. Study your DOTs, your sensor beacons, your targetting telemetry, young padawan. Should the stealth come, we need to be ready.

[Ryuku-sama]

This weekend I went on a double XP pilgrimage through the skies of Jedi Covenant, Red Eclipse, and the Shadowlands. I was hardened through the crucible of the stock NovaBolt in the face of many a fully upgraded double premade. It was worth the journey. I saw the past, present and future. There was a horrible vision of silent death in deepest corners of space. But the future is not written in stone. Study your DOTs, your sensor beacons, your targetting telemetry, young padawan. Should the stealth come, we need to be ready.

 

I'll make sure to remember

[Mournblood]

Another question that occurred to me as I considered the myriad of options on the Sting is about Evasion. The Sting seems to have the ability to stack Evasion better than most ships. Between Distortion Field (9% passive, 17% active) and Lightweight Armor (15% passive), you can end up with 34% passive and 42% active Evasion (which includes the base 10% on scouts).

 

That seems like a lot, but what is the actual gameplay value of that? Is Evasion reducing accuracy on a 1:1 ratio, or does it work differently? If it reduces an opponent's accuracy, does that make enough difference for how often they can land laser canon shots on you? Or are you better off getting Reinforced Armor (health) or Deflection Armor (damage reduction)? I also assume it has no effect on homing missiles?

 

Again, thanks in advance for the helpful replies.

[caederon]

You're definitely better off with stacking as much Evasion as possible. I don't know the math on it, I'm sure Verain will pop in with all of that, but it essentially makes shots miss even when people are shooting right at you. Some people even go so far as to use Running Interference as their copilot ability, adding even more Evasion... though Wingman seems like the more popular choice, as it essentially allows you to counter Evasion with additional Accuracy.

 

You're right that Evasion does nothing to counter missiles.

 

Deflection Armor (with damage reduction) is only useful on a couple of very particular builds for bombers (and, coincidentally, a goofy Quell build). The reason for this is that three of the most powerful weapons in the game are able to bypass it completely. Slug railgun, Burst Laser Cannon, and Heavy Laser Cannon all have a talent choice that allows them to ignore 100% of enemy armor when dealing damage (so does the less frequently used Concussion Missile, and I think Seismic mine? I might be wrong on the mine). You'll find that you're facing these weapons very often, so on a scout, Deflection Armor is really only going to reduce your lifespan.

 

- Despon

Edited April 22, 2015 by caederon

[Drakkolich]

Another question that occurred to me as I considered the myriad of options on the Sting is about Evasion. The Sting seems to have the ability to stack Evasion better than most ships. Between Distortion Field (9% passive, 17% active) and Lightweight Armor (15% passive), you can end up with 34% passive and 42% active Evasion (which includes the base 10% on scouts).

 

That seems like a lot, but what is the actual gameplay value of that? Is Evasion reducing accuracy on a 1:1 ratio, or does it work differently? If it reduces an opponent's accuracy, does that make enough difference for how often they can land laser canon shots on you? Or are you better off getting Reinforced Armor (health) or Deflection Armor (damage reduction)? I also assume it has no effect on homing missiles?

 

Again, thanks in advance for the helpful replies.

 

Evasion is really really good. It's exactly like you thought it takes away from their accuracy on a 1:1 ratio.

If you have 50% Evasion and they ahve 100% Accuracy they only hit 50% of the time.

 

You are correct Evasion only affects Lasers, Railguns and Laser firing drones/turrets.

Evasion does not affect Mines, Missiles and the Railgun Drone.

 

 

I play a pure Evasion Sting build as one of my main ships. I actually just today posted tutorial videos of my build, how to upgrade it and me playing it.

 

Max Evasion on a Sting is 33% Passive and can get up to a maximum of 91% with all your actives up at the same time. (Passive: Lightweight 9%, Distortion 9%, Crew Passive 5%, Scout Passive 10%= 33%)(Active: Distortion 35%, Running Interference 15%, Targeting Telemetry 8%= 58%)

[tunewalker]

Another question that occurred to me as I considered the myriad of options on the Sting is about Evasion. The Sting seems to have the ability to stack Evasion better than most ships. Between Distortion Field (9% passive, 17% active) and Lightweight Armor (15% passive), you can end up with 34% passive and 42% active Evasion (which includes the base 10% on scouts).

 

That seems like a lot, but what is the actual gameplay value of that? Is Evasion reducing accuracy on a 1:1 ratio, or does it work differently? If it reduces an opponent's accuracy, does that make enough difference for how often they can land laser canon shots on you? Or are you better off getting Reinforced Armor (health) or Deflection Armor (damage reduction)? I also assume it has no effect on homing missiles?

 

Again, thanks in advance for the helpful replies.

 

Evasion is litterally the best Defense stat in the Game. Reinforce barely adds any health to a scout and Deflection can be ignored completely with DR Penatrating weapons which are every where.

 

Short Answer on Accuracy vs Evasion... yes it is 1:1, if they have a 100% chance to hit, and your evasion is 33% their chance to hit is 67%. If they have a 120% chance to hit (wing man proper weapon and range) against your 33% evasion then they have a 86% chance to hit.

 

Also I think you are lowballing the Active Evasion a little. The active (before upgrades) increases your evasion by a whopping 27% (check the tooltip) after upgrades it increases by 8% more or a Massive 35%... add that to the passive 33% and your REAL evasion is actually 68%..... so with an opponent that has 100% hit chance (highly unlikely) their chance to hit is a very low 31% chance. Basically you can count yourself as NEARLY unhittable for 3 seconds after Popping Distortion field.

Edited April 22, 2015 by tunewalker