These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Winter] Combat Cruisers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dato Koppla
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#261 - 2012-10-03 03:48:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Dato Koppla
Just echoing the majority concerns.

Rupture needs less dronebay/fitting to lose some utility AND it needs a speed nerf to ensure it doesn't completely eclipse other races Attack Cruisers in their most important stat. Right now a Rupture would murder all the Attack Cruisers except the Stabber because it can catch and out gank/tank all the Attack Cruisers.

Moa NEEDS another mid, either at the expense of a high (preferable) or a low (less ideal). Hell I'd gladly lose the utility high AND a low for that mid, it's just that important, maybe some additional powergrid but that can be worked around.

Maller needs at least some drones or it needs to get its utility high back or its way to vulnerable to frigates. At least 15m3 I think.

Vexor looks pretty good as it was already decent and got buffed, the only nitpick I have is to move 150-200 of the armor hitpoints to shield to give it better shield tanking option but still an emphasis on armor (this should also be a general theme for gallente ships to allow them to go shield)

Edit//
From just a rough look at the suggested stats, 220m/s for the Rupture would be the sweet spot, still naturally slower than all the Attack Cruisers (which it more than makes up for with dps/ehp) but faster than the other Combat Cruisers.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#262 - 2012-10-03 04:03:37 UTC
Dato Koppla wrote:
Just echoing the majority concerns.

Rupture needs less dronebay/fitting to lose some utility AND it needs a speed nerf to ensure it doesn't completely eclipse other races Attack Cruisers in their most important stat. Right now a Rupture would murder all the Attack Cruisers except the Stabber because it can catch and out gank/tank all the Attack Cruisers.


Edit//
From just a rough look at the suggested stats, 220m/s for the Rupture would be the sweet spot, still naturally slower than all the Attack Cruisers (which it more than makes up for with dps/ehp) but faster than the other Combat Cruisers.


Sorry to only quote a portion of your post but I just thought that these two points are 100% spot on Smile (not that your others were not). As you stated the issue with the currently proposed rupture is it's speed. While this may be reasonable when specifically looking at the combat cruisers, it sure as hell is OP when compared to the attack cruisers as you have highlighted.
Cerulean Ice
Royal Amarr Reclamation
#263 - 2012-10-03 04:26:51 UTC
New moa model please ^^

Cerulean Ice, Professor, E-UNI
Eckyy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#264 - 2012-10-03 04:42:09 UTC
Sard Caid wrote:
Increasing the speed as drastically as you are will make these ships much more aggressive, which is pretty scary considering the increased damage potential of the Maller and Moa, as well as EWAR/tackle potential of the Rupture and Vexor.

Unlike the Punisher, I think the maller will shine for small gang and solo with this slot layout and bonus combination. It is still a very vulnerable platform due to lack of drones or utility highs/mids to deal with frigates, however durability and now modest damage output should make it competitive with similar size peers. Given the lack of cap use bonus, I'd have to try the ship in person to feel out how well the cap holds up in PvP.

The Moa will likely feel much like how the Merlin feels with T1 Frigates now with the added damage bonus. It looks incredibly solid.

The Vexor looks very versatile with four mids and five lows, able to armor or shield tank. It'll probably be a favorite for people in small gangs or soloing due to its ability to put on many hats and excel in many roles. Lack of a utility high makes it more vulnerable to cap warfare and frigates, which is cool.

I'm going to miss the second utility high on the Rupture, however the fact it still retains one takes the sting out of the loss. The extra midslot is a tip of the hat to the folk that love the shield gank fit Rupture today, and the huge increase in speed should allow it to play the skirmishing game more effectively. A problem that I see with the Rupture after these changes, and which is repeated with the Rifter is that Null currently places projectile ships on the back foot: Null loaded blasters have better tracking and has better damage projection in all cases to similar tier projectiles. Even though the Rupture might have a slight advantage in maintaining range or choosing the fight it wants from maneuverability, the Vexor and the Moa will easily overwhelm a Rupture, and will likely lead to the Rupture falling from competitive standing.

I feel this is more an issue with projectiles than it is with the ships. I'll be hitting duality in the near future to try out fittings, however I'm guessing that the change in fitting requirements for projectiles will not solve this inequality issue.


I haven't run the numbers, how much better are blasters than projectiles?

Honestly, it makes sense to me since projectiles have some measure of damage type selection and use zero cap. IMO this should be pretty close to how all projectiles compare to blasters, with the exception of those specifically bonused otherwise (ie falloff bonus). Blasters are one-trick ponies but they do that trick pretty well.
Colman Dietmar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#265 - 2012-10-03 05:15:00 UTC
With these changes blaster moa may completely replace brawler mallers as it will have far better damage, ASBs and drones. And also, there are no cruisers with sniping bonuses now. I'd rather have optimal/damage bonused moa as a specialized sniper.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#266 - 2012-10-03 05:49:02 UTC
Why Vexor loses shield HP, when it's a shield tanker?

It doesn't have the PG to fit armor tank with guns, and both drone damage amps and magstabs go to lowslots.

Oh nice Rupture, we needed another OP minnie ship that is faster than anything else, while being able to fit everything with fitting to spare. Why OP speed but no drawbacks to it? Why drones?

What is your thinking behind making it so fast?




.
Dato Koppla
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#267 - 2012-10-03 07:06:00 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Dato Koppla wrote:
Just echoing the majority concerns.

Rupture needs less dronebay/fitting to lose some utility AND it needs a speed nerf to ensure it doesn't completely eclipse other races Attack Cruisers in their most important stat. Right now a Rupture would murder all the Attack Cruisers except the Stabber because it can catch and out gank/tank all the Attack Cruisers.


Edit//
From just a rough look at the suggested stats, 220m/s for the Rupture would be the sweet spot, still naturally slower than all the Attack Cruisers (which it more than makes up for with dps/ehp) but faster than the other Combat Cruisers.


Sorry to only quote a portion of your post but I just thought that these two points are 100% spot on Smile (not that your others were not). As you stated the issue with the currently proposed rupture is it's speed. While this may be reasonable when specifically looking at the combat cruisers, it sure as hell is OP when compared to the attack cruisers as you have highlighted.


Yeah that part bugs me the most as the rupture is already very successful at kiting other cruisers but making it faster than all the other races 'light' cruisers? It's pretty much crazy.

but honestly the Moa needs an additional midslot badly as well.

Also, after running the numbers, new Maller will still have significantly lower dps,even with a 3 HS setup, it does a measly 370 with IN MF & FMP IIs (other combat cruisers break 400 easily with only 2 damage mods) and the lack of drones is huge when going solo as it gives you a huge weakness to tackle (Maller being so slow and all especially), so giving it some drones remedies 2 problems at once or the Maller will probably remain solely as Bait/Blaster brawler.
Sard Caid
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#268 - 2012-10-03 07:09:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Sard Caid
Eckyy wrote:
Sard Caid wrote:
Increasing the speed as drastically as you are will make these ships much more aggressive, which is pretty scary considering the increased damage potential of the Maller and Moa, as well as EWAR/tackle potential of the Rupture and Vexor.

Unlike the Punisher, I think the maller will shine for small gang and solo with this slot layout and bonus combination. It is still a very vulnerable platform due to lack of drones or utility highs/mids to deal with frigates, however durability and now modest damage output should make it competitive with similar size peers. Given the lack of cap use bonus, I'd have to try the ship in person to feel out how well the cap holds up in PvP.

The Moa will likely feel much like how the Merlin feels with T1 Frigates now with the added damage bonus. It looks incredibly solid.

The Vexor looks very versatile with four mids and five lows, able to armor or shield tank. It'll probably be a favorite for people in small gangs or soloing due to its ability to put on many hats and excel in many roles. Lack of a utility high makes it more vulnerable to cap warfare and frigates, which is cool.

I'm going to miss the second utility high on the Rupture, however the fact it still retains one takes the sting out of the loss. The extra midslot is a tip of the hat to the folk that love the shield gank fit Rupture today, and the huge increase in speed should allow it to play the skirmishing game more effectively. A problem that I see with the Rupture after these changes, and which is repeated with the Rifter is that Null currently places projectile ships on the back foot: Null loaded blasters have better tracking and has better damage projection in all cases to similar tier projectiles. Even though the Rupture might have a slight advantage in maintaining range or choosing the fight it wants from maneuverability, the Vexor and the Moa will easily overwhelm a Rupture, and will likely lead to the Rupture falling from competitive standing.

I feel this is more an issue with projectiles than it is with the ships. I'll be hitting duality in the near future to try out fittings, however I'm guessing that the change in fitting requirements for projectiles will not solve this inequality issue.


I haven't run the numbers, how much better are blasters than projectiles?

Honestly, it makes sense to me since projectiles have some measure of damage type selection and use zero cap. IMO this should be pretty close to how all projectiles compare to blasters, with the exception of those specifically bonused otherwise (ie falloff bonus). Blasters are one-trick ponies but they do that trick pretty well.


This thread is asking about ship changes; I encourage you to pull up Pyfa or EFT and do some quick comparisons. Given that the Moa and the Vexor are gaining in cap stability, not gaining any more cap hungry guns and are currently cap stable with tackle/guns firing, I don't see cap usage on the guns playing a huge part in their ideal roles as brawlers.

I skimmed through several pages of comments, thought I'd give my two cents on some reoccurring opinions:

Rupture speed being too fast - of the combat cruisers, the rupture has the weakest tank, damage potential and projection of all four cruisers. Statements that it will dominate over the Attack Cruiser line of ships seems unfounded, as while it will outpace most of them by a base speed of ~20m/s, all of those ships have damage bonuses, slot layouts for tank and gank that match, if not are more competitive than the Rupture's 4 turrets with 30 m3 drone bay.

There's some talk that the Rupture's drone bay is too much, again I feel this is unfounded given the increase of power across all combat focused cruisers. If anything, the Rupture is losing its place as a damage king, and will rely greatly on the 30 m3 drone bay to compete with its improved competition.

The Moa with a fifth midslot will dominate versus other cruisers at close range to mid (13-15km) range. I think it's worth an honest look but it would necessitate losing the utility highslot, which is helping pad against cap warfare or tackling frigates, as well as less or no drone bay. A lack of drones would fit with the Caldari theme, and help offset the incredible durability and tackle/EWAR potential that the fifth midslot would provide.

The Maller in its proposed form would be incredibly vulnerable against frigates; however will be sporting amazing damage potential with great range (~400 DPS max skills with two heat sinks with scorch, ~460 DPS with IN Multifreq). Drones would probably make the ship too powerful compared to its peers given the ship's damage projection. Cap stability is definitely a concern when fitting a MWD, as it looks like with all five turrets running, a T2 point and a meta webifier that it would pretty quickly cap out. I kind of like that it requires sacrificing the usage of a low slot or a rig slot to alleviate this issue, however given the relative stability of the Vexor and the Moa, it feels quite harsh. I would like to try the ship before saying it really needs more cap or cap recharge, but playing around on EFT makes it look like it will be the case.
Dato Koppla
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#269 - 2012-10-03 08:01:59 UTC
Sard Caid wrote:


I skimmed through several pages of comments, thought I'd give my two cents on some reoccurring opinions:

Rupture speed being too fast - of the combat cruisers, the rupture has the weakest tank, damage potential and projection of all four cruisers. Statements that it will dominate over the Attack Cruiser line of ships seems unfounded, as while it will outpace most of them by a base speed of ~20m/s, all of those ships have damage bonuses, slot layouts for tank and gank that match, if not are more competitive than the Rupture's 4 turrets with 30 m3 drone bay.

There's some talk that the Rupture's drone bay is too much, again I feel this is unfounded given the increase of power across all combat focused cruisers. If anything, the Rupture is losing its place as a damage king, and will rely greatly on the 30 m3 drone bay to compete with its improved competition.

The Moa with a fifth midslot will dominate versus other cruisers at close range to mid (13-15km) range. I think it's worth an honest look but it would necessitate losing the utility highslot, which is helping pad against cap warfare or tackling frigates, as well as less or no drone bay. A lack of drones would fit with the Caldari theme, and help offset the incredible durability and tackle/EWAR potential that the fifth midslot would provide.

The Maller in its proposed form would be incredibly vulnerable against frigates; however will be sporting amazing damage potential with great range (~400 DPS max skills with two heat sinks with scorch, ~460 DPS with IN Multifreq). Drones would probably make the ship too powerful compared to its peers given the ship's damage projection. Cap stability is definitely a concern when fitting a MWD, as it looks like with all five turrets running, a T2 point and a meta webifier that it would pretty quickly cap out. I kind of like that it requires sacrificing the usage of a low slot or a rig slot to alleviate this issue, however given the relative stability of the Vexor and the Moa, it feels quite harsh. I would like to try the ship before saying it really needs more cap or cap recharge, but playing around on EFT makes it look like it will be the case.


You're comparing the damage and tank with the combat cruisers but the statement is the Rupture compared to Attack Cruisers....

Okay for starters I'm pretty sure your damage numbers are wrong as using Pyfa with an All V character the Maller does 330 dps with IN Multi and 263 with Scorch (used a Harbinger with 5xFMP IIs and 2xHS IIs) and has around 55k EHP (roughly). An armor Rupture does 327 turret dps with RF EMP with Dual 180s (220s: 348, 425s: 366) and has around 30k EHP while maintaining a medium neut, an additional utility mid for a myriad of options, more speed and with drones, well over 400dps and can break 500 with 25k EHP on shield fits. Sure the Rupture would lose in straight up slug match but that will never happen as the Rupture has so many options to disengage/run in the first place due to its awesome speed and utility.

I compared these 2 cruisers since you seem to think the Rupture doesn't need any tweaks and the Maller is going to be awesome.

You say the Attack Cruisers have slots to compete with the Rupture and damage bonuses to boot, but the Rupture can match them for dps easily and has more natural buffer as well as more fitting for that all important neut that will cause major problems for the Thorax/Omen and also allow the Rupture to dictate range better once it catches them (which it will as its faster), so yeah, I think the Rupture will always be the go-to I want a fast cruiser (other than the Stabber but thats a whole different animal) which kind of steps on the toes of the other races 'light' Attack Cruisers.

I also think your statement that the Moa will 'dominate' with a fifth midslot is unfounded as it's mostly going to be used for an Invuln or another LSE probably giving the Moa around 10k EHP extra putting it at 33kEHP/541dps which is almost exactly what an armor rupture gets, but the Rupture gets better range, medium neut, almost same speed (with armor and trimarks lol) an additional utility mid (so it would still be able to dictate range even if it was slower), I could go on but I think I made my point.
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#270 - 2012-10-03 08:11:06 UTC
Roime wrote:
Why Vexor loses shield HP, when it's a shield tanker?

It doesn't have the PG to fit armor tank with guns, and both drone damage amps and magstabs go to lowslots.

The Vexor has plenty of PG to fit an armor tank, whether active or buffer - both of the setups below fit without issue:

[New Vexor, dualrep]

Medium Armor Repairer II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Medium Armor Repairer II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 800

Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M

Medium Anti-Explosive Pump I
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump I
Medium Nanobot Accelerator I

Ogre II x2
Hammerhead II x2
Hobgoblin II x1
Warrior II x5



[New Vexor, plated]

1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Drone Damage Amplifier II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Small Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400

Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M

Medium Anti-Explosive Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

Ogre II x2
Hammerhead II x2
Hobgoblin II x1
Warrior II x5
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
Doomheim
#271 - 2012-10-03 08:19:51 UTC
Quote:
This thread is asking about ship changes; I encourage you to pull up Pyfa or EFT and do some quick comparisons. Given that the Moa and the Vexor are gaining in cap stability, not gaining any more cap hungry guns and are currently cap stable with tackle/guns firing, I don't see cap usage on the guns playing a huge part in their ideal roles as brawlers.

I skimmed through several pages of comments, thought I'd give my two cents on some reoccurring opinions:

Rupture speed being too fast - of the combat cruisers, the rupture has the weakest tank, damage potential and projection of all four cruisers. Statements that it will dominate over the Attack Cruiser line of ships seems unfounded, as while it will outpace most of them by a base speed of ~20m/s, all of those ships have damage bonuses, slot layouts for tank and gank that match, if not are more competitive than the Rupture's 4 turrets with 30 m3 drone bay.

There's some talk that the Rupture's drone bay is too much, again I feel this is unfounded given the increase of power across all combat focused cruisers. If anything, the Rupture is losing its place as a damage king, and will rely greatly on the 30 m3 drone bay to compete with its improved competition.

The Moa with a fifth midslot will dominate versus other cruisers at close range to mid (13-15km) range. I think it's worth an honest look but it would necessitate losing the utility highslot, which is helping pad against cap warfare or tackling frigates, as well as less or no drone bay. A lack of drones would fit with the Caldari theme, and help offset the incredible durability and tackle/EWAR potential that the fifth midslot would provide.

The Maller in its proposed form would be incredibly vulnerable against frigates; however will be sporting amazing damage potential with great range (~400 DPS max skills with two heat sinks with scorch, ~460 DPS with IN Multifreq). Drones would probably make the ship too powerful compared to its peers given the ship's damage projection. Cap stability is definitely a concern when fitting a MWD, as it looks like with all five turrets running, a T2 point and a meta webifier that it would pretty quickly cap out. I kind of like that it requires sacrificing the usage of a low slot or a rig slot to alleviate this issue, however given the relative stability of the Vexor and the Moa, it feels quite harsh. I would like to try the ship before saying it really needs more cap or cap recharge, but playing around on EFT makes it look like it will be the case.


ROFL.
Yep because the Rupture makes less damage than other cruisers and has less tank it is aczually the most op tech1 non faction cruiser and the most flown cruiser.
ROFL.
Actually the Rupture is similar to the old Rifter. Moa, Maller and Vexor cant compete with it. And which ship gets the biggest buff? Rupture.
I begin to be a bit disappointed with this game. After the Punisher and Tormentor disasters I hoped for the Omen. But Maller and Omen will be stil Rupture cannon fodder. Moa too.
One additional mid slot and THAT speed for Rupture is tooo much. I would let it exactly as it is now.
But even then Moa and Maller in the new version wouldnt have a chance...
Connall Tara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#272 - 2012-10-03 09:13:23 UTC
I'm going to have to say that I'm inclined to agree that the buffs to the rupture are rather excessive relative to the support other cruisers are gaining, both combat and attack. the Rupture already stands tall as easily the most powerful cruiser available at the moment and I don't believe the changes to it do much to keep it in line with its sisterships in the combat class and infact push it a bit beyond.

the main reasons for this of course have been previously mentioned in this thread but i think we can accept that the general consensus of 2X damage bonuses, a 5/4/5 slot layout and a MASSIVE boost in speed not only putting it ahead of its combat counterparts but putting it ahead of every other races "attack" vessel. at the very least this seems like an incredibly disproportionate balance in the ruptures favour.

While it has been mentioned that the rupture only has 4 turrets i think it should be argued that the rupture not only has 2 weapon "damage" bonuses (damage and RoF) on what is generally accepted as the "best" weapon platform but also recieves the 2nd largest dronebay of all the combat cruisers, the only reason it being "behind" being that the top cruiser is specifically intended to use drones.

as for people claiming that the rupture will have trouble tanking... yeah no. while most people will scoff at the concept of an armour tanking rupture it should be mentioned that at the current moment i can fit the following with relatively laughable ease.

[Rupture, 800mmneuts]
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Gyrostabilizer II

Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I
X5 Prototype Engine Enervator

220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma M
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Medium Anti-Explosive Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I


Hobgoblin II x5

390 dps, a pair of medium neuts (only activated once mwd is turned off of course) and a full wing of light drones, all fitting with a 3% pg implant. do i have a particularly brittle tank? not really, 27k EHP. Am i particularly slow compared to say a shield tanked moa? well... again no 212m/s on my fairly crappy nav skills and my equivilent moa goes at 197m/s (again, on my crappy nav skills). this is now, can you imagine what the new rupture will do?


this is of course, as i'm sure someone will point out, a sub optimal "lol its not shields!" fit but i think the comparisons are certainly valid. While the rupture might not be able to match a neutron blaster moa or a vexor for sheer damage the strengths of the rupture lie in its ALREADY absurd speeds, its phenomenal versitility and its ability, despite lacking a tanking bonus, to absorb a pretty large amount of punishment. as it stands right now it completely outclasses its counterparts as a combined package of speed, ewar, tank and gank. its a jack of all trades which happens to be a master at some of its trades at the same time.

what would I propose to balance this? well as it stands RIGHT NOW its a very potent platform and could easily compete with both the maller and the moa in their revised versions, mainly due I believe to imperfections in both those ships designs. the propsed new rupture however would again eclipse even corrected new designs once more with superior speed, range, range control, damage projection and Ewarfare (I tend to include neuts as an Ewar weapon personally). to fix this i would consider looking back towards the ruptures initial conceptual ideas

"The Rupture is slow for a Minmatar ship, but it more than makes up for it in power. The Rupture has superior firepower and is used by the Minmatar Republic both to defend space stations and other stationary objects and as part of massive attack formations."

as pulled from the ship description. my proposal? cut the speed down. the rupture is intended to be the main line slugger of the minmatar navy, the brick wall behind the skirmishing glove of frigates and stabbers. with the new slot layout, its drone bay and double damage bonuses it will have no problems throwing its weight around on the field. the 4 midslots leaves the option open for people who want to play a "fast fit" with sheilds while the 5 lowslots and frankly astounding fitting ability will more than allow good armour layouts to make themselves felt in larger engagements.

I'll save commenting on the other cruisers for a few more posts, running out of room anyways ^_^

Naomi Knight - "You must be CCP Rise alt , that would explain everything"
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#273 - 2012-10-03 09:15:27 UTC
Sard Caid wrote:


The Maller in its proposed form would be incredibly vulnerable against frigates; however will be sporting amazing damage potential with great range (~400 DPS max skills with two heat sinks with scorch, ~460 DPS with IN Multifreq).


Your math is a bit funny. A 2x Heat Sink II, 5x Heavy Pulse Laser II Maller does 300 Scorch dps and 382 with navy MF.
Sard Caid
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#274 - 2012-10-03 09:23:41 UTC
Dato Koppla wrote:
Sard Caid wrote:


I skimmed through several pages of comments, thought I'd give my two cents on some reoccurring opinions:

Rupture speed being too fast - of the combat cruisers, the rupture has the weakest tank, damage potential and projection of all four cruisers. Statements that it will dominate over the Attack Cruiser line of ships seems unfounded, as while it will outpace most of them by a base speed of ~20m/s, all of those ships have damage bonuses, slot layouts for tank and gank that match, if not are more competitive than the Rupture's 4 turrets with 30 m3 drone bay.

There's some talk that the Rupture's drone bay is too much, again I feel this is unfounded given the increase of power across all combat focused cruisers. If anything, the Rupture is losing its place as a damage king, and will rely greatly on the 30 m3 drone bay to compete with its improved competition.

The Moa with a fifth midslot will dominate versus other cruisers at close range to mid (13-15km) range. I think it's worth an honest look but it would necessitate losing the utility highslot, which is helping pad against cap warfare or tackling frigates, as well as less or no drone bay. A lack of drones would fit with the Caldari theme, and help offset the incredible durability and tackle/EWAR potential that the fifth midslot would provide.

The Maller in its proposed form would be incredibly vulnerable against frigates; however will be sporting amazing damage potential with great range (~400 DPS max skills with two heat sinks with scorch, ~460 DPS with IN Multifreq). Drones would probably make the ship too powerful compared to its peers given the ship's damage projection. Cap stability is definitely a concern when fitting a MWD, as it looks like with all five turrets running, a T2 point and a meta webifier that it would pretty quickly cap out. I kind of like that it requires sacrificing the usage of a low slot or a rig slot to alleviate this issue, however given the relative stability of the Vexor and the Moa, it feels quite harsh. I would like to try the ship before saying it really needs more cap or cap recharge, but playing around on EFT makes it look like it will be the case.


You're comparing the damage and tank with the combat cruisers but the statement is the Rupture compared to Attack Cruisers....

Okay for starters I'm pretty sure your damage numbers are wrong as using Pyfa with an All V character the Maller does 330 dps with IN Multi and 263 with Scorch (used a Harbinger with 5xFMP IIs and 2xHS IIs) and has around 55k EHP (roughly). An armor Rupture does 327 turret dps with RF EMP with Dual 180s (220s: 348, 425s: 366) and has around 30k EHP while maintaining a medium neut, an additional utility mid for a myriad of options, more speed and with drones, well over 400dps and can break 500 with 25k EHP on shield fits. Sure the Rupture would lose in straight up slug match but that will never happen as the Rupture has so many options to disengage/run in the first place due to its awesome speed and utility.

I compared these 2 cruisers since you seem to think the Rupture doesn't need any tweaks and the Maller is going to be awesome.

You say the Attack Cruisers have slots to compete with the Rupture and damage bonuses to boot, but the Rupture can match them for dps easily and has more natural buffer as well as more fitting for that all important neut that will cause major problems for the Thorax/Omen and also allow the Rupture to dictate range better once it catches them (which it will as its faster), so yeah, I think the Rupture will always be the go-to I want a fast cruiser (other than the Stabber but thats a whole different animal) which kind of steps on the toes of the other races 'light' Attack Cruisers.

I also think your statement that the Moa will 'dominate' with a fifth midslot is unfounded as it's mostly going to be used for an Invuln or another LSE probably giving the Moa around 10k EHP extra putting it at 33kEHP/541dps which is almost exactly what an armor rupture gets, but the Rupture gets better range, medium neut, almost same speed (with armor and trimarks lol) an additional utility mid (so it would still be able to dictate range even if it was slower), I could go on but I think I made my point.


You're right about the damage numbers, the damage I was looking at was the Harbinger's full rack of 7 lasers on with a max skill character, and two heat sinks. I checked what you put together and what you came up with was correct for the Maller's damage. With that in mind, adding drones to the Maller would be a good way to make it more competitive with the other cruisers.

You're right that I compared the Rupture to attack cruisers, as its slot layout and bonuses put it in direct competition with those ships. Compared to the Moa or Vexor, it cannot compete on gank. Compared to the Moa, or Maller, it cannot compete in tank, while the Vexor has the advantage of greater damage potential from the drone bonus, coupled with the the same mid and low slot layout. The Rupture from this standpoint is best suited competing with the attack cruisers.

As the proposed changes are shown now, the Thorax and Omen would have issues engaging a Rupture fit with a medium neut. However I think either of those ships would have concerns with engaging either a Vexor or a Moa, merely on the ground that those ships not only are tankier, but hit much harder to boot.

Why limit the fifth midslot to tank on the Moa? Extra tackle to dictate range, or EWAR such as TDs is entirely feasible if not likely. In addition, two modules, such as an extender/LASB combo on the Moa would be an incredibly powerful combination when put into context with the ship's range and damage potential. Four lowslots gives the Moa a lot of options for both damage and range, especially with how powerful TEs are now.
Kai'rae Saarkus
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#275 - 2012-10-03 09:23:41 UTC
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
on behalf of the rupture:

it has the second worst base HP (4900)
an even bigger base mass than the maller (which is also more agile),
while beeing as agile as the moa (i assume agility means agility modifier)

though the moa has 100 base HP less then the rupture, it has 2100 base shield with resist bonus.
from the base stats, the rupture will depend on its smaller sig and speed to compensate for the smaller tank.

the stabber will still be faster and will be the choice if speed is needed, not to speek of the new, sexy design ^^.
additionally it still has 2 "utility highs" whereas the rupture now as one.
if the rupture needs to be nerfed, which only can be determined by actual testing, it should loose all or some of the drones.


Half the Drone Bay on the Ruppie and I'll be happy.
- A full flight of ECM drones gives too much utility.
- A full flight of damage drones (with a med neut most likely) makes it OP'd against frigs.


Right now it completely overpowers the close range attack cruisers: due to comparable speed, better tank and almost as good damage projection.

Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#276 - 2012-10-03 09:35:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
If the Maller is supposed to be a unique design that trades its drone bay away for other benefits, then it needs at least a 6th turret and much more CPU (and possibly even more extras). Seriously. 5x light drones alone is an extra 80-100 dps that can be applied to frigates as well and takes no fittings. More importantly for laser ships, it's also a source of explosive damage.

Some Scorch dps numbers to put this into perspective (with a +25% dmg bonus):

5x FMP + 2x HS = 262
5x FMP + 3x HS = 296

5x HPL + 2x HS = 305
5x HPL + 3x HS = 342

6x FMP + 2x HS = 315
6x FMP + 3x HS = 355

6x HPL + 2x HS = 366
6x HPL + 3x HS = 411


Of course making it a HAM ship rather than trying to keep it distinct from the Omen at all costs would be the better solution...
Yuri Intaki
Nasranite Watch
#277 - 2012-10-03 10:07:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Yuri Intaki
Moa: Needs +1 mid-slot, i'd swap from one low-slot to mid. Also needs bit more power grid.

Rupture: Already toughest cruiser there, you are buffing it's hitpoints even more and increasing it's speed and not nerfing it's drone bay at all?

Maller: Slower but tougher Omen really. Losing utility high hurts since faction war gangs of rr-mallers no longer function.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#278 - 2012-10-03 10:16:36 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
...Of course making it a HAM ship rather than trying to keep it distinct from the Omen at all costs would be the better solution...

The HAM option shouldn't even be on the table, it is a Kingdom thing and has nothing to do with Amarr proper. Once you start down the path of breaking lore in the pursuit of balance/diversity you might as well be playing ":insertnameofgenericFPS: in Space".

The breakdown comes from the idea that all slots are equal which of course is not the case, far from it. Mids are infinitely more valuable than lows and highs simply due to all eWar using that one rack .. it is one of, if not the, primary reason for the Rust (and Gallente after ships revisions) dominance as the extra mid(s) increases tactical options immensely.
Adding drones to the Maller is dubious at best (lore wise) as is giving it more mids, ie. equal to Minmatar/Gallente/Caldari, the options for increasing its dps, applied or otherwise, dwindles.

Increase damage bonus to 7.5%/lvl or even 10%/lvl (could make it 10000% as it will still die horribly to neuts/frigates).
Give it the cap necessitated by the Abaddonification.

The beauty of the Amarr doctrine is that it is so damn simple. Powerful when exploited (triple sinks baby!) yet vulnerable/fragile as nothing else in game when facing a prepared foe (speed/size/neuts/TD) .. Amarr balances itself simply by being Amarr.
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
Doomheim
#279 - 2012-10-03 10:19:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
Let the Rupture simply like it is now.
Anything else is overkill. Rupture is already the most overpowered Tech1 not faction cruiser.
With these changes the new Omen, Maller and Moa are dead before they are born. Rupture is simply completely superior to them.
Skip one high on the moa and give it another mid. Maller needs drones. Minimum 20mb bandwith. Let the Rupture like it is now (I mean NOW and not the crazy buffed stuff you presented us).
Even then I am not sure if the actual Rupture would´t be superior to NEW Moa and Maller.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#280 - 2012-10-03 10:25:11 UTC
Roime wrote:
Why Vexor loses shield HP, when it's a shield tanker?

It doesn't have the PG to fit armor tank with guns, and both drone damage amps and magstabs go to lowslots.

Oh nice Rupture, we needed another OP minnie ship that is faster than anything else, while being able to fit everything with fitting to spare. Why OP speed but no drawbacks to it? Why drones?

What is your thinking behind making it so fast?



apparently minmatar have to be the best at everything its CCP's rule :P

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using