These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#741 - 2012-10-30 19:30:02 UTC
Stephen O'Malley wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
The Stabber shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, otherwise we're back at Winmatar.

It's supposed to be good at hit and runs, kiting and killing frigates. It's absolutely supposed to sit at 20-30 km and slowly kill a Thorax and die horribly if it cannot maintain range. If it could comfortably win in web range with brute force alone then the other non-Minmatar cruisers would be nearly useless as they don't have the same mobility, damage selection, capless guns and utility highslots.


It shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, no. It should have a chance to win a fight before capping out. The cap stability looks like itneeds to cycle the mwd to have any chance at having cap last long enough to wear down another cruiser, but by doing that, especially against these other attack cruisers, you're probably going to get caught.




you're not supposed to perma run mwd you pulse it as and when you need to

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
Olerie Viliana
Spaceforce Junkies
Atomic Fusion Industries
#742 - 2012-10-30 19:35:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Olerie Viliana
CCP should highly consider giving all of these cruisers a serious role bonus for MWD capacitor use. They are not much of an attack vessel if their cap is literally gone in 60 seconds. After seeing them on duality, this is still true after these changes. I like most of the changes, and the thinking behind them, but they don't go far enough. Cruisers are still just weak BC's and the necessary train time and isk cost is close enough BC's that they are just a waste of time getting into. The need to have more cap, more tracking, more speed, and more tank. The only role they can really fill in a small gang is as anti tackle, but they simply cannot stay on the field against BC's. They just get out ranged, out tanked, out DPS'd too hard and they still aren't fast enough to compensate. I realize BC's are supposed to be better than cruisers, but BC's can literally do everything a cruiser does, just much better.

I would give the cruisers a cap bonus for mwd usage, reduce the sigs further, give them all tracking bonus's and give them a small resist buff. This way they can stay in close with the fleet denying tackle, not run out of cap in 1 minute, and not get forced off the field in 1 or 2 volleys from a BC. This would help a lot with the range disparity between cruisers and BC's and actually give them a unique niche that BC's don't have, as anti tackle platforms. They won't have the speed of frigs and dessies so they will have to stay in close with the main fleet to be safe, where frigs and dessies are free to chase down or tackle enemy ships but can't really handle multiple enemy tacklers the way cruisers could. Sig and resist changes would also make them less afraid of BC or Battleship DPS. Which would also give them a distinct advantage over BC's in certain situations.
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
#743 - 2012-10-30 19:48:25 UTC
Olerie Viliana wrote:
CCP should highly consider giving all of these cruisers a serious role bonus for MWD capacitor use. They are not much of an attack vessel if their cap is literally gone in 60 seconds. After seeing them on duality, this is still true after these changes. I like most of the changes, and the thinking behind them, but they don't go far enough. Cruisers are still just weak BC's and the necessary train time and isk cost is close enough BC's that they are just a waste of time getting into. The need to have more cap, more tracking, more speed, and more tank. The only role they can really fill in a small gang is as anti tackle, but they simply cannot stay on the field against BC's. They just get out ranged, out tanked, out DPS'd too hard and they still aren't fast enough to compensate. I realize BC's are supposed to be better than cruisers, but BC's can literally do everything a cruiser does, just much better.

I would give the cruisers a cap bonus for mwd usage, reduce the sigs further, give them all tracking bonus's and give them a small resist buff. This way they can stay in close with the fleet denying tackle, not run out of cap in 1 minute, and not get forced off the field in 1 or 2 volleys from a BC. This would help a lot with the range disparity between cruisers and BC's and actually give them a unique niche that BC's don't have, as anti tackle platforms. They won't have the speed of frigs and dessies so they will have to stay in close with the main fleet to be safe, where frigs and dessies are free to chase down or tackle enemy ships but can't really handle multiple enemy tacklers the way cruisers could.



I'd rather nerf BCs a bit, especially in agilitiy and tracking. Going further down with signature and up with tracking gets us to destroyer levels.

That said, I ended up fitting cap boosters to my Duality Stabbers and Thoraxes and I'm not too sure what to think of it, as it gimps their tank even more.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#744 - 2012-10-30 19:50:11 UTC
Sheynan wrote:
Olerie Viliana wrote:
CCP should highly consider giving all of these cruisers a serious role bonus for MWD capacitor use. They are not much of an attack vessel if their cap is literally gone in 60 seconds. After seeing them on duality, this is still true after these changes. I like most of the changes, and the thinking behind them, but they don't go far enough. Cruisers are still just weak BC's and the necessary train time and isk cost is close enough BC's that they are just a waste of time getting into. The need to have more cap, more tracking, more speed, and more tank. The only role they can really fill in a small gang is as anti tackle, but they simply cannot stay on the field against BC's. They just get out ranged, out tanked, out DPS'd too hard and they still aren't fast enough to compensate. I realize BC's are supposed to be better than cruisers, but BC's can literally do everything a cruiser does, just much better.

I would give the cruisers a cap bonus for mwd usage, reduce the sigs further, give them all tracking bonus's and give them a small resist buff. This way they can stay in close with the fleet denying tackle, not run out of cap in 1 minute, and not get forced off the field in 1 or 2 volleys from a BC. This would help a lot with the range disparity between cruisers and BC's and actually give them a unique niche that BC's don't have, as anti tackle platforms. They won't have the speed of frigs and dessies so they will have to stay in close with the main fleet to be safe, where frigs and dessies are free to chase down or tackle enemy ships but can't really handle multiple enemy tacklers the way cruisers could.



I'd rather nerf BCs a bit, especially in agilitiy and tracking. Going further down with signature and up with tracking gets us to destroyer levels.

That said, I ended up fitting cap boosters to my Duality Stabbers and Thoraxes and I'm not too sure what to think of it, as it gimps their tank even more.


These suggestions are more for HACS i would think maybe they need to boost cap regen on these ships more

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
Stephen O'Malley
Southern Lord Industries
#745 - 2012-10-30 19:54:35 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Stephen O'Malley wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
The Stabber shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, otherwise we're back at Winmatar.

It's supposed to be good at hit and runs, kiting and killing frigates. It's absolutely supposed to sit at 20-30 km and slowly kill a Thorax and die horribly if it cannot maintain range. If it could comfortably win in web range with brute force alone then the other non-Minmatar cruisers would be nearly useless as they don't have the same mobility, damage selection, capless guns and utility highslots.


It shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, no. It should have a chance to win a fight before capping out. The cap stability looks like itneeds to cycle the mwd to have any chance at having cap last long enough to wear down another cruiser, but by doing that, especially against these other attack cruisers, you're probably going to get caught.




you're not supposed to perma run mwd you pulse it as and when you need to


Stabber pulsing a mwd will let the others catch it easily. They've all got stronger capacitor so as to run guns, along with mwd+point. Without running the guns they have much better cap to run the mwd. Pulsing the mwd against another attack cruiser means there's a good chance of getting caught, or having to run it too muchaanyways and still capping out.
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#746 - 2012-10-30 20:00:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldensaver
Stephen O'Malley wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Stephen O'Malley wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
The Stabber shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, otherwise we're back at Winmatar.

It's supposed to be good at hit and runs, kiting and killing frigates. It's absolutely supposed to sit at 20-30 km and slowly kill a Thorax and die horribly if it cannot maintain range. If it could comfortably win in web range with brute force alone then the other non-Minmatar cruisers would be nearly useless as they don't have the same mobility, damage selection, capless guns and utility highslots.


It shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, no. It should have a chance to win a fight before capping out. The cap stability looks like itneeds to cycle the mwd to have any chance at having cap last long enough to wear down another cruiser, but by doing that, especially against these other attack cruisers, you're probably going to get caught.




you're not supposed to perma run mwd you pulse it as and when you need to


Stabber pulsing a mwd will let the others catch it easily. They've all got stronger capacitor so as to run guns, along with mwd+point. Without running the guns they have much better cap to run the mwd. Pulsing the mwd against another attack cruiser means there's a good chance of getting caught, or having to run it too muchaanyways and still capping out.


Actually, false. Every other Attack Cruiser has the exact same cap recharge, with only slightly better cap pool.

Omen:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1475(+225) / 526s(+79.75s) / 2.8

Caracal:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1250(+187.5) / 445s(+63.75s) / 2.8 (+0.02)

Thorax:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1450(+75) / 490s(+25.25s) / 2.8

Stabber:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1200(+137.5) / 427.5s(+46.25s) / 2.8(+0.01)

Oh, and your guns have the benefit of not using your cap up as you use them.

Edit:
Forgot to mention. You'll both probably be using the exact same modules, at that. You'll both be running a MWD and a point. You might have an invuln field, but you should probably turn if off if you're not taking damage. If they shoot you at all, their cap will run out faster then yours. You don't have to worry about your guns capping you out. You might run out of cap one MWD pulse before them, but you shouldn't be letting the thing run constantly if they aren't running theirs. Also, by the time you cap out and they catch you, they'll be low on cap, and running the guns will cap them out. At that point, you just run your MWD again and get range again.


I'll admit: the Stabber is low on damage. It could probably use a little more. But do it 2% at a time or something, I would think. Maybe increase the fire rate to a 7.5% bonus, as that's a small tweak that shouldn't put it over the top. But careful tweaks, nothing major or drastic, as it is already almost as good as a dessy at killing frigs, murders the hell out of dessies, and is... a little weak, though not worthless in cruiser class battles.
Stephen O'Malley
Southern Lord Industries
#747 - 2012-10-30 20:12:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Stephen O'Malley
Goldensaver wrote:
Stephen O'Malley wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Stephen O'Malley wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
The Stabber shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, otherwise we're back at Winmatar.

It's supposed to be good at hit and runs, kiting and killing frigates. It's absolutely supposed to sit at 20-30 km and slowly kill a Thorax and die horribly if it cannot maintain range. If it could comfortably win in web range with brute force alone then the other non-Minmatar cruisers would be nearly useless as they don't have the same mobility, damage selection, capless guns and utility highslots.


It shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, no. It should have a chance to win a fight before capping out. The cap stability looks like itneeds to cycle the mwd to have any chance at having cap last long enough to wear down another cruiser, but by doing that, especially against these other attack cruisers, you're probably going to get caught.




you're not supposed to perma run mwd you pulse it as and when you need to


Stabber pulsing a mwd will let the others catch it easily. They've all got stronger capacitor so as to run guns, along with mwd+point. Without running the guns they have much better cap to run the mwd. Pulsing the mwd against another attack cruiser means there's a good chance of getting caught, or having to run it too muchaanyways and still capping out.


Actually, false. Every other Attack Cruiser has the exact same cap recharge, with only slightly better cap pool.

Omen:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1475(+225) / 526s(+79.75s) / 2.8

Caracal:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1250(+187.5) / 445s(+63.75s) / 2.8 (+0.02)

Thorax:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1450(+75) / 490s(+25.25s) / 2.8

Stabber:
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1200(+137.5) / 427.5s(+46.25s) / 2.8(+0.01)

Oh, and your guns have the benefit of not using your cap up as you use them.

Edit:
Forgot to mention. You'll both probably be using the exact same modules, at that. You'll both be running a MWD and a point. You might have an invuln field, but you should probably turn if off if you're not taking damage. If they shoot you at all, their cap will run out faster then yours. You don't have to worry about your guns capping you out. You might run out of cap one MWD pulse before them, but you shouldn't be letting the thing run constantly if they aren't running theirs. Also, by the time you cap out and they catch you, they'll be low on cap, and running the guns will cap them out. At that point, you just run your MWD again and get range again.


I'll admit: the Stabber is low on damage. It could probably use a little more. But do it 2% at a time or something, I would think. Maybe increase the fire rate to a 7.5% bonus, as that's a small tweak that shouldn't put it over the top. But careful tweaks, nothing major or drastic, as it is already almost as good as a dessy at killing frigs, murders the hell out of dessies, and is... a little weak, though not worthless in cruiser class battles.


I'm going off what I saw from the stream last night. The omen with guns+mwd+point had a very similar cap life to the Stabber with guns+mwd+point. I wasn't around to see what it was like for the Thorax.

Edit: phone added some words that weren't supposed to be there.
Olerie Viliana
Spaceforce Junkies
Atomic Fusion Industries
#748 - 2012-10-30 20:18:03 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Sheynan wrote:
Olerie Viliana wrote:
CCP should highly consider giving all of these cruisers a serious role bonus for MWD capacitor use. They are not much of an attack vessel if their cap is literally gone in 60 seconds. After seeing them on duality, this is still true after these changes. I like most of the changes, and the thinking behind them, but they don't go far enough. Cruisers are still just weak BC's and the necessary train time and isk cost is close enough BC's that they are just a waste of time getting into. The need to have more cap, more tracking, more speed, and more tank. The only role they can really fill in a small gang is as anti tackle, but they simply cannot stay on the field against BC's. They just get out ranged, out tanked, out DPS'd too hard and they still aren't fast enough to compensate. I realize BC's are supposed to be better than cruisers, but BC's can literally do everything a cruiser does, just much better.

I would give the cruisers a cap bonus for mwd usage, reduce the sigs further, give them all tracking bonus's and give them a small resist buff. This way they can stay in close with the fleet denying tackle, not run out of cap in 1 minute, and not get forced off the field in 1 or 2 volleys from a BC. This would help a lot with the range disparity between cruisers and BC's and actually give them a unique niche that BC's don't have, as anti tackle platforms. They won't have the speed of frigs and dessies so they will have to stay in close with the main fleet to be safe, where frigs and dessies are free to chase down or tackle enemy ships but can't really handle multiple enemy tacklers the way cruisers could.



I'd rather nerf BCs a bit, especially in agilitiy and tracking. Going further down with signature and up with tracking gets us to destroyer levels.

That said, I ended up fitting cap boosters to my Duality Stabbers and Thoraxes and I'm not too sure what to think of it, as it gimps their tank even more.


These suggestions are more for HACS i would think maybe they need to boost cap regen on these ships more


The real issue with Cruisers is simply put, why would you train cruiser to 5 instead of BC to level 4 and not want a Harbinger over an omen, a Drake over a caracal, a Talos over a Thorax, or a Hurricane over a Rupture. Cruisers need to be able to do something better than their BC counter-parts which use the exact same skill trains. The train time for a new player is the same but you get a ship that is so much better for not that much more isk.

The changes do not address this core issue of cruisers.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#749 - 2012-10-30 20:21:42 UTC
i think you need to wait for the bc rebalance too know whether cruisers will be as useful to train i suspect the attack cruisers will be a viable alternative to fleet fights instead of the current tier2 bc fights

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
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#750 - 2012-10-30 20:25:06 UTC
I wouldn't get too attached to a BC comparison. I expect the tier one BC to be upgraded from 16 to 17 slots and refocused with their slot layouts and bonuses. I expect the tier 2 BC to be nerfed from 18 to 17 slots.
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#751 - 2012-10-30 21:43:48 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
I wouldn't get too attached to a BC comparison. I expect the tier one BC to be upgraded from 16 to 17 slots and refocused with their slot layouts and bonuses. I expect the tier 2 BC to be nerfed from 18 to 17 slots.


It would be interesting if they do this, it has merit and might give new life to Battleships as well.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#752 - 2012-10-30 21:56:06 UTC
Krell Kroenen wrote:
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
I wouldn't get too attached to a BC comparison. I expect the tier one BC to be upgraded from 16 to 17 slots and refocused with their slot layouts and bonuses. I expect the tier 2 BC to be nerfed from 18 to 17 slots.


It would be interesting if they do this, it has merit and might give new life to Battleships as well.


I think 15/16 would be more than enough slots for bc's 15 being drone boats ofc.

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
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#753 - 2012-10-31 01:09:38 UTC
Are lasers ever going to get a large tracking buff? It seems to be the logical counter to being the slow, tanky armor boats that can't seem to hit the fast minmatar ships that end up kiting and killing them. It's bad enough that they have such terrible cap issues without being able to fit a nosferatu...
Cry
Felicia McVanders
xTESLAx
#754 - 2012-10-31 04:55:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Felicia McVanders
Olerie Viliana wrote:

The real issue with Cruisers is simply put, why would you train cruiser to 5 instead of BC to level 4 and not want a Harbinger over an omen, a Drake over a caracal, a Talos over a Thorax, or a Hurricane over a Rupture. Cruisers need to be able to do something better than their BC counter-parts which use the exact same skill trains. The train time for a new player is the same but you get a ship that is so much better for not that much more isk.

The changes do not address this core issue of cruisers.


IIRC, the devs have talked about changing the skill tree such that BS 1 needs BC 4, BC 1 needs Cruiser 4, Cruiser 1 needs Dessy 4, and Dessy 1 needs Frig 4.

In addition, the BC and dessy skills are going to be dropped in favor of racial BC and racial Dessy skills so as to properly fit into the above pattern.

This would, for new players/chars, give a good reason to train at least to cruiser 4
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#755 - 2012-10-31 05:18:22 UTC
Felicia McVanders wrote:
Olerie Viliana wrote:

The real issue with Cruisers is simply put, why would you train cruiser to 5 instead of BC to level 4 and not want a Harbinger over an omen, a Drake over a caracal, a Talos over a Thorax, or a Hurricane over a Rupture. Cruisers need to be able to do something better than their BC counter-parts which use the exact same skill trains. The train time for a new player is the same but you get a ship that is so much better for not that much more isk.

The changes do not address this core issue of cruisers.


IIRC, the devs have talked about changing the skill tree such that BS 1 needs BC 4, BC 1 needs Cruiser 4, Cruiser 1 needs Dessy 4, and Dessy 1 needs Frig 4.

In addition, the BC and dessy skills are going to be dropped in favor of racial BC and racial Dessy skills so as to properly fit into the above pattern.

This would, for new players/chars, give a good reason to train at least to cruiser 4

He asked why train cruiser 5 if you could instead just train BC 4. And it's a good question, because at the moment, there's little reason to use a racial cruiser over a BC. Caracal? Might as well use Drake, it's stronger, tankier, and only has a little less range and speed. Stabber/Ruppie? Same thing with 'Cane. Etc.

Of course, once tiericide hits BC's, we could quite quickly see the question turned the other way. Or you'll actually have to choose, maybe both will coexist as useful, though not overpowered alternatives to each other.
Kai'rae Saarkus
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#756 - 2012-10-31 07:13:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Kai'rae Saarkus
Olerie Viliana wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Sheynan wrote:
Olerie Viliana wrote:
CCP should highly consider giving all of these cruisers a serious role bonus for MWD capacitor use. They are not much of an attack vessel if their cap is literally gone in 60 seconds. After seeing them on duality, this is still true after these changes. I like most of the changes, and the thinking behind them, but they don't go far enough. Cruisers are still just weak BC's and the necessary train time and isk cost is close enough BC's that they are just a waste of time getting into. The need to have more cap, more tracking, more speed, and more tank. The only role they can really fill in a small gang is as anti tackle, but they simply cannot stay on the field against BC's. They just get out ranged, out tanked, out DPS'd too hard and they still aren't fast enough to compensate. I realize BC's are supposed to be better than cruisers, but BC's can literally do everything a cruiser does, just much better.

I would give the cruisers a cap bonus for mwd usage, reduce the sigs further, give them all tracking bonus's and give them a small resist buff. This way they can stay in close with the fleet denying tackle, not run out of cap in 1 minute, and not get forced off the field in 1 or 2 volleys from a BC. This would help a lot with the range disparity between cruisers and BC's and actually give them a unique niche that BC's don't have, as anti tackle platforms. They won't have the speed of frigs and dessies so they will have to stay in close with the main fleet to be safe, where frigs and dessies are free to chase down or tackle enemy ships but can't really handle multiple enemy tacklers the way cruisers could.



I'd rather nerf BCs a bit, especially in agilitiy and tracking. Going further down with signature and up with tracking gets us to destroyer levels.

That said, I ended up fitting cap boosters to my Duality Stabbers and Thoraxes and I'm not too sure what to think of it, as it gimps their tank even more.


These suggestions are more for HACS i would think maybe they need to boost cap regen on these ships more


The real issue with Cruisers is simply put, why would you train cruiser to 5 instead of BC to level 4 and not want a Harbinger over an omen, a Drake over a caracal, a Talos over a Thorax, or a Hurricane over a Rupture. Cruisers need to be able to do something better than their BC counter-parts which use the exact same skill trains. The train time for a new player is the same but you get a ship that is so much better for not that much more isk.

The changes do not address this core issue of cruisers.


Because they are more agile.

Drake v Caracal: Caracal outranges a Drake, so long as you have an Inty pointing it you can kite it to death (at 70Km).
Hurricane v Stabber: Cane will get kited to death by a Talos, but a Stabber will chase it down, getting under it's guns and kill it.
Talos v Thorax: an 800mm plated Rax is about as agile as a Talos, a well timed overheat and you'll catch it. Once armour tanking is fixed, it should be more agile than a Talos, and will be able to reliably scram, web and kill it. A Shield rax IS more agile than a Talos, can chase it down, scram and kill it.
Omen v Harby: Harbi can't kite a Cane, they can't hold tackle on a Cane that doesn't go balls deep; whereas, a pair of Omens will be ***** for a solo cane.

Not to mention that you can lose 3 T2 fit cruisers for the price of 1 T2 fit BC (or 5:1 for Tier 3 BCs).

My point: yeah BCs will still have a role, and will be better 1v1 and will be more rounded ships. But Cruisers, both CCs and CLs, will be agile fun ships to fly that you don't care about losing.

Consider a gang of 4 BCs (lets say Shield Tanked Canes) vs 6 Cruisers (say Thorax's). At present the Canes will almost certainly win, and if flown well do so without losing any ships. This is because at present Shield Canes can kite Armour Thorax's, and can Neut out Shield Thorax's.

Post patch: the 800mm Thorax's will have the speed to catch and hold down the Canes. The Thorax's will almost certainly kill 1 Cane, and have the option to withdraw if the battle starts going against them. They win from an efficiency standpoint if they lose only 1-2 Thorax's for each Cane they kill. Even against 6 Shield canes, I'd expect to kill at least one Cane and get some Thorax's out.
Wivabel
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#757 - 2012-10-31 12:12:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Wivabel
TLDR: increase cap regen on the attack cruisers if you want them to be any good.

Like others before me have said the cap on these ships is to weak. I was flying a kitey shield thorax on the test server and it was gimped by capacitor issues. These ships need the cap regen rate increased.

When flying fast low tank kitey ships you need to burn around and get into a good position to engage hostiles. I was often at about 30% cap by the time I activated my point and guns.

I also tested out an armor thorax that did ok since i was able to fit a cap booster. Though just flying around I was going through cap boosters like crazy. This basicly makes fitting a cap booster almost mandatory.

Otherwise the ships themselves seem pretty good we just need the cap to be able to fly them the way their role (attack Cruiser) suggests.

Wivabel

I am not sure if I am going to log in anymore.......
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#758 - 2012-10-31 12:37:35 UTC
I was under the impression that MWD's were supposed to be used in short bursts not constantly burning them. Using a MWD constantly in order to kite is not really their inteded use. That's a byproduct of tactics and fits from the days of olde.

I think people are going to have to adapt or die. I'm sure there are modules and rigs and implants that can assist in the way you wish to fly your ship. But that means you will have to compromise something. Oh the shock. The horror. The horror
Olerie Viliana
Spaceforce Junkies
Atomic Fusion Industries
#759 - 2012-10-31 12:49:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Olerie Viliana
Kai'rae Saarkus wrote:
Olerie Viliana wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Sheynan wrote:
Olerie Viliana wrote:
CCP should highly consider giving all of these cruisers a serious role bonus for MWD capacitor use. They are not much of an attack vessel if their cap is literally gone in 60 seconds. After seeing them on duality, this is still true after these changes. I like most of the changes, and the thinking behind them, but they don't go far enough. Cruisers are still just weak BC's and the necessary train time and isk cost is close enough BC's that they are just a waste of time getting into. The need to have more cap, more tracking, more speed, and more tank. The only role they can really fill in a small gang is as anti tackle, but they simply cannot stay on the field against BC's. They just get out ranged, out tanked, out DPS'd too hard and they still aren't fast enough to compensate. I realize BC's are supposed to be better than cruisers, but BC's can literally do everything a cruiser does, just much better.

I would give the cruisers a cap bonus for mwd usage, reduce the sigs further, give them all tracking bonus's and give them a small resist buff. This way they can stay in close with the fleet denying tackle, not run out of cap in 1 minute, and not get forced off the field in 1 or 2 volleys from a BC. This would help a lot with the range disparity between cruisers and BC's and actually give them a unique niche that BC's don't have, as anti tackle platforms. They won't have the speed of frigs and dessies so they will have to stay in close with the main fleet to be safe, where frigs and dessies are free to chase down or tackle enemy ships but can't really handle multiple enemy tacklers the way cruisers could.



I'd rather nerf BCs a bit, especially in agilitiy and tracking. Going further down with signature and up with tracking gets us to destroyer levels.

That said, I ended up fitting cap boosters to my Duality Stabbers and Thoraxes and I'm not too sure what to think of it, as it gimps their tank even more.


These suggestions are more for HACS i would think maybe they need to boost cap regen on these ships more


The real issue with Cruisers is simply put, why would you train cruiser to 5 instead of BC to level 4 and not want a Harbinger over an omen, a Drake over a caracal, a Talos over a Thorax, or a Hurricane over a Rupture. Cruisers need to be able to do something better than their BC counter-parts which use the exact same skill trains. The train time for a new player is the same but you get a ship that is so much better for not that much more isk.

The changes do not address this core issue of cruisers.


Because they are more agile.

Drake v Caracal: Caracal outranges a Drake, so long as you have an Inty pointing it you can kite it to death (at 70Km).
Hurricane v Stabber: Cane will get kited to death by a Talos, but a Stabber will chase it down, getting under it's guns and kill it.
Talos v Thorax: an 800mm plated Rax is about as agile as a Talos, a well timed overheat and you'll catch it. Once armour tanking is fixed, it should be more agile than a Talos, and will be able to reliably scram, web and kill it. A Shield rax IS more agile than a Talos, can chase it down, scram and kill it.
Omen v Harby: Harbi can't kite a Cane, they can't hold tackle on a Cane that doesn't go balls deep; whereas, a pair of Omens will be ***** for a solo cane.

Not to mention that you can lose 3 T2 fit cruisers for the price of 1 T2 fit BC (or 5:1 for Tier 3 BCs).

My point: yeah BCs will still have a role, and will be better 1v1 and will be more rounded ships. But Cruisers, both CCs and CLs, will be agile fun ships to fly that you don't care about losing.

Consider a gang of 4 BCs (lets say Shield Tanked Canes) vs 6 Cruisers (say Thorax's). At present the Canes will almost certainly win, and if flown well do so without losing any ships. This is because at present Shield Canes can kite Armour Thorax's, and can Neut out Shield Thorax's.

Post patch: the 800mm Thorax's will have the speed to catch and hold down the Canes. The Thorax's will almost certainly kill 1 Cane, and have the option to withdraw if the battle starts going against them. They win from an efficiency standpoint if they lose only 1-2 Thorax's for each Cane they kill. Even against 6 Shield canes, I'd expect to kill at least one Cane and get some Thorax's out.


Almost everything you've stated is wrong. You must have no idea how to fit and fly a BC or cruiser. Drake will lol @ caracals dps until he runs out of cap. He will have time to kill the inty with drones and missiles and then chase the caracal off the field. If a stabber or thorax tries to chase down a Drake, Talos, Cane, or Harby it will die. You will run out of cap long before you break their tank, and the cruisers tank will melt in the meantime. You also must not realize most drakes have webs and most canes have nuets,and they all have drones, also these ships should be fit with auto,pulse,and blaster. The higher tier BC's that get large turret bonus's are the ones that you can "get under their guns". I can't imagine an FC saying "well, having 1/2 the dps, less drones, 1/3 the tank, 30% less range, and only 1 minute of cap is worth it for that 15% more speed!"

BTW, if 6 thorax's attack 4 canes, they will all die. Best case scenario 1 thorax gets out and 1 cane dies, but then your still trading 5 thorax for 1 cane and that will only happen if the canes screw up somewhere. The 1st thorax primaried will be dead on arrival and the 2nd shortly after, the rest will get pointed, nueted and have drones on them, as well as devastating autoturret dps out to 30km.
Wivabel
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#760 - 2012-10-31 12:51:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Wivabel
Spugg Galdon wrote:
I was under the impression that MWD's were supposed to be used in short bursts not constantly burning them. Using a MWD constantly in order to kite is not really their inteded use. That's a byproduct of tactics and fits from the days of olde.

I think people are going to have to adapt or die. I'm sure there are modules and rigs and implants that can assist in the way you wish to fly your ship. But that means you will have to compromise something. Oh the shock. The horror. The horror



By choosing to fly an attack cruiser you have already sacrificed tank for speed that speed is mainly dependant on the ability to use a microwarpdrive. If you cannot reliably use a microwarpdrive then you have traded tank for nothing. If the ships are not fast then why fly them. I am not saying that you should be able to perma run a microwarpdrive forever but the time does need to be increased especially on the ships that also need cap for guns. Maybe around 4 minutes would be ok.

Wivabel

I am not sure if I am going to log in anymore.......