These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[WALLOFTEXT] Attack Frigs vs Combat Ceptors

Author
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#1 - 2012-08-23 17:54:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahega Amielden
It has been the opinion of a lot of people since the attack frigate rebalance that they now, more than ever, obsolete combat ceptors (Crow/Crusader/Claw/Taranis). It has also been common opinion since the t1 combat frigate and AF buffs that combat ceptors have ceased to be useful.

Let's start with the first point: T1 attack frigates now obsolete the combat ceptors, because they do almost the same job for cheaper. First, note that the interceptors have the MWD sig bonus. This is often under-appreciated but rather important, even for ships that fight at close ranges. Neither the attack frigates nor interceptors have great EHP. The t1 attack frigates, on the approach, are at a grave risk of being instapopped or at least losing a ton of their hitpoints on the approach if anything locks them. Even at great speed, a 210-sig Atron isn't going to speedtank much on the approach (even if you approach at an angle).

Now, let's take a relatively standard Taranis fit and an equivalent on the Atron.

[Taranis, Not Dualprop]

Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Stasis Webifier II
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Salvager I /OFFLINE

Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Small Hybrid Collision Accelerator I


Hornet II x2


and


[Atron, Brawl]

Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Scrambler II
Stasis Webifier II

Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Salvager I /OFFLINE

Small Hybrid Metastasis Adjuster I
Small Hybrid Metastasis Adjuster I
Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I


The Atron has 181 DPS to the Taranis' 272 (part of which is drones, which are more reliable). The Atron has 2.35K EHP to the Taranis' 3.88K. The Atron has 4048 ms MWD speed and 3.65s MWD align time to the Taranis' 3993 and 3.65. The Taranis also has a sig radius one point larger. The Atron ~does~ have a falloff bonus, however, which gives it more falloff - not that that's terribly important in a setup like this.

So, basically, the Taranis is an Atron with 65% more tank and 50% more DPS and the MWD sig bonus. Interceptor hulls are cheap; the Atron fit has a Pyfa-estimated cost of 8.82 mil, whereas the Taranis is 23.6 mil. The Taranis has an extremely noticeable improvement in DPS and tank while costing under three times as much fully-fit. When insurance is taken into account, this difference will actually become smaller because the Slasher hull is worth less than the mineral cost of the Taranis hull.

Now, let's look at the Slasher. I cannot do completely identical fits as the Slasher is decidedly shield tanked and the Claw is an armor tank, but I can come close.

[Claw, MWD/rep with Polycarbs]

Damage Control II
Small Armor Repairer II
200mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Adaptive Nano Plating II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I

125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion S
Small Nosferatu II

Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I
Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I

and

[Slasher, Real Slasher]

Damage Control II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Scrambler II
Stasis Webifier II
Medium Shield Extender II

125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
[Empty High slot]

Small Ancillary Current Router I
Small Core Defense Field Extender I
Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I


The Slasher has 30 base sig, which appears to be one of its biggest benefits. However, after the MSE and rigs, it ends up with a very mediocre 40.5, killing its ability to sig tank. Furthermore, while the Slasher actually has more EHP, the Claw has a nos/rep which will ensure that, in practice, it tanks harder and is less vulnerable to neuts. To finish it off, the Claw ends up with 20% more damage. The Claw has slightly superior speed and slightly inferior agility

After fittings, the Claw costs under double the Slasher at 18.3m compared to 8.7 mil. Slightly superior damage and tank, vastly improved sig tanking ability, and it costs you double.


From a cost/performance point of view, combat ceptors seem perfectly balanced against the new t1 attack frigates. However, I've also heard moaning that they're just not useful in general relative to other frigate hulls, usually tied to the fact that they lose to most other frigs in a 1v1. However, while I'd agree that neither of the two classes make good solo ships, they work fantastically in gangs. In gangs of other classes of ships, they allow you to have something fast to grab tackle without having to sacrifice a full pilot to a tackle ceptor that will do nothing other than get point. In gangs of their own kind (imagine a gang of Taranises...), they are powerful enough to kill most things other than equal numbers of assault frigates or cruisers while being able to easily escape from such fights, and the ability to force such fights on everyone else...

This is not to say all is fine. I compared the Gallente and Minmatar frigates for a reason; it's rather common knowledge that CCP needs to go back and revisit Caldari interceptors (which have needed it for years).
Ginger Barbarella
#2 - 2012-08-23 18:13:14 UTC
I agree, that was a Wall Of Text.

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac

Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#3 - 2012-08-23 18:30:09 UTC
Hey man, I think this is a great post. However, I'd like to bring up several points:
- I tend to see AB fit combat ceptors. This means that the MWD sig bonus is basically meaningless
- Combat ceptors do have bigger tanks and more DPS (generally)
- Combat ceptors cost more, but this doesn't matter really.
- The biggest problems crop up when a new attack frigate is capable of something that's significantly better than the combat ceptor. The Executioner vs Crusader is a great example here, because the Executioner has 3 mids and room for a nos.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#4 - 2012-08-23 18:56:02 UTC
I don't see the purpose of an AB combat ceptor, unless it's dualprop. You give up a ton of tackle/GTFO power for the ability to control range and sig tank better, neither of which are problems for ceptors.


Quote:
- The biggest problems crop up when a new attack frigate is capable of something that's significantly better than the combat ceptor. The Executioner vs Crusader is a great example here, because the Executioner has 3 mids and room for a nos.



And the Crow has 50 less CPU (after skills) than the Condor does.

I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with a t1 variant doing something the t2 variant doesn't (That's pretty common after all) - but the t2 variant should be better at the ship's role than the t1 variant. I haven't really studied the executioner, though, so I can't speak to that.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#5 - 2012-08-23 19:10:18 UTC
Kahega Amielden wrote:
I don't see the purpose of an AB combat ceptor, unless it's dualprop. You give up a ton of tackle/GTFO power for the ability to control range and sig tank better, neither of which are problems for ceptors.


I'm not sure it matters if you see the purpose of an AB combat ceptor. What matters is that most of them out there are AB fit. As for me: I AB fit my combat ceptors because I like close range fits and I've found it gives me a much larger chance of victory. The only time I'd say I'm MWD fit on a frigate is for kiting frigs (Rail Atron, Beam Executioner, Pulse Slicer, etc).

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Vilnius Zar
SDC Multi Ten
#6 - 2012-08-23 20:08:29 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Kahega Amielden wrote:
I don't see the purpose of an AB combat ceptor, unless it's dualprop. You give up a ton of tackle/GTFO power for the ability to control range and sig tank better, neither of which are problems for ceptors.


I'm not sure it matters if you see the purpose of an AB combat ceptor. What matters is that most of them out there are AB fit. As for me: I AB fit my combat ceptors because I like close range fits and I've found it gives me a much larger chance of victory. The only time I'd say I'm MWD fit on a frigate is for kiting frigs (Rail Atron, Beam Executioner, Pulse Slicer, etc).

-Liang


IIRC you always went "lol AB fits" :P

I like my Ab fitted fast frigs though and per OP (good post btw) the inties are lacking quite a bit compared to the redone T1 frigs, most of them at least.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#7 - 2012-08-23 20:43:15 UTC
Vilnius Zar wrote:
IIRC you always went "lol AB fits" :P


It's true, I do like to stand and deliver.. so to speak. But I do occasionally use a MWD frig. I have about 20 MWD frigs in Amamake right now, but the overwhelming majority are AB fit.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-08-24 01:31:02 UTC
Kahega Amielden wrote:
WoT


Your fits are horrible

Contentless comments aside, the Combat 'ceptors's predicament isn't entirely due to the revamped Attack Frigates; it's more about the compounded effect of buffed Assault Frigates with Attack Frigates that leave something to be desired from 'ceptors. The Taranis has always been a terrific combat ship, meaning that it's probably the one coming out the best out of the deal. The Claw is rather decent, but it has a lot of shortcomings that make the Slasher better in comparison (shortcomings you don't mention in your post). The Crow and Crusader just get crushed under the better alternatives and any comparison is moot - the Amarr and Caldari Combat 'ceptors don't manage to stand out as viable.

My point, in short, is that your comparisons are skewed by bad fitting decisions and biased both by the cases presented and a lack of depth in your argument.

No sig.

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#9 - 2012-08-24 01:38:12 UTC
Quote:
Contentless comments aside, the Combat 'ceptors's predicament isn't entirely due to the revamped Attack Frigates; it's more about the compounded effect of buffed Assault Frigates with Attack Frigates that leave something to be desired from 'ceptors. The Taranis has always been a terrific combat ship, meaning that it's probably the one coming out the best out of the deal. The Claw is rather decent, but it has a lot of shortcomings that make the Slasher better in comparison (shortcomings you don't mention in your post).


...

...

i'm waiting for you to explain what these shortcomings are and why the fits I posted fail to adequately compare the ships.
Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-08-24 02:06:57 UTC
Because you honestly don't know, or because you disagree with my assessment?

No sig.

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#11 - 2012-08-24 03:39:29 UTC
Hatsumi Kobayashi wrote:
Because you honestly don't know, or because you disagree with my assessment?


I would not have posted if I did.
Katalci
Kismesis
#12 - 2012-08-24 15:12:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Katalci
Kahega Amielden wrote:

[Taranis, Not Dualprop]

Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Stasis Webifier II
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Salvager I /OFFLINE

Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Small Hybrid Collision Accelerator I

Hornet II x2

:hugecripes:

I really can't fathom your reasoning behind putting a nano on a Taranis... Maybe you just never noticed/didn't read its effects?

And why you're using Hornets... It just doesn't make any sense. Most of your damage is already kinetic! Hobgoblins would make sense because they do more damage, warrior IIs are the usual because of their awesomeness/damage type, but hornets are just... Wow.

Fly this fit (you can use a t1 meta 0 MAPC if you have good fitting skills) https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/view_kill.php?id=529925
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#13 - 2012-08-24 16:48:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Kahega Amielden wrote:
Hatsumi Kobayashi wrote:
Because you honestly don't know, or because you disagree with my assessment?


I would not have posted if I did.


The fits are pretty bad, but you fit all ships equally bad so the comparison wasn't that far off. I found that the Taranis was still better than the Atron, but I think that's the only one that was. The Slasher, Executioner, and Condor were all equivalent to superior to their combat inty equivalents - primarily owing to the fact that they all have more mids than their T2 counterpart. But fitting space also feels much more spacious.

I will admit that I didn't look at the Slasher vs Claw very closely - but then all Minmatar frigates have been garbage for a long time now.

-Liang

Ed: I am curious whether you think that your rep claw is going to win out vs a dual MASB Slasher with a nos? How about a MSE+MASB Slasher?

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#14 - 2012-08-24 17:17:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahega Amielden
...so the nano on the taranis is actually a fair point.
Quote:
The Slasher, Executioner, and Condor were all equivalent to superior to their combat inty equivalents - primarily owing to the fact that they all have more mids than their T2 counterpart. But fitting space also feels much more spacious.
I will admit that I didn't look at the Slasher vs Claw very closely - but then all Minmatar frigates have been garbage for a long time now.

-Liang

Ed: I am curious whether you think that your rep claw is going to win out vs a dual MASB Slasher with a nos? How about a MSE+MASB Slasher?



Slasher v Claw seems fine to me, and I definitely don't think either are garbage.. MASB may tilt things in favor of the Slasher but only because MASBs are bullshit and not really because the Slasher's base stats are unreasonable..
Gibbo3771
AQUILA INC
#15 - 2012-08-24 17:34:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Gibbo3771
I honestly cant sit and read a wall of text belonging to someone that fits nanofibers on a Taranis and polycarbons on a plated Claw, before you start making suggestions and addressing useless frigates at least learn how to fit them first.
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#16 - 2012-08-24 17:41:09 UTC
Gibbo3771 wrote:
I honestly cant sit and read a wall of text belonging to someone that fits nanofibers on a Taranis and polycarbons on a plated Claw, before you start making suggestions and addressing useless frigates at least learn how to fit them first.


The EHP loss of polycarbs on a plated Claw exist but are marginal. It's a difference of 250 EHP.
Deena Amaj
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2012-08-24 18:14:38 UTC
There is nothing wrong with being thorough in theorycrafting.

confirthisposmed

I'm probably typing on a Tablet too, which means the auto-correct is silly and fixing typos is a pain. I ain't fixing them.

Mutant Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#18 - 2012-08-24 18:15:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Mutant Caldari
Katalci wrote:
Kahega Amielden wrote:

[Taranis, Not Dualprop]

Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Stasis Webifier II
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Light Ion Blaster II, Federation Navy Antimatter Charge S
Salvager I /OFFLINE

Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Small Hybrid Collision Accelerator I

Hornet II x2

:hugecripes:

I really can't fathom your reasoning behind putting a nano on a Taranis... Maybe you just never noticed/didn't read its effects?

And why you're using Hornets... It just doesn't make any sense. Most of your damage is already kinetic! Hobgoblins would make sense because they do more damage, warrior IIs are the usual because of their awesomeness/damage type, but hornets are just... Wow.

Fly this fit (you can use a t1 meta 0 MAPC if you have good fitting skills) https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/view_kill.php?id=529925

That fit...Lol. Leave yourself completely vulnerable to neuts for 18 DPS, gg.

[Taranis, Dual Prop]
Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II

Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I
Coreli C-Type 1MN Afterburner
Initiated Harmonic Warp Scrambler I

Light Ion Blaster II, Void S
Light Ion Blaster II, Void S
Light Ion Blaster II, Void S
Small Diminishing Power System Drain I

Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Small Hybrid Collision Accelerator I


Warrior II x2

296 DPS compared to 314(336 compared to 357 overheated), has a NOS and the rest of the stats are the same.


However, I do want to agree that the OP has no idea how to fit ships properly. (y)
Gibbo3771
AQUILA INC
#19 - 2012-08-25 00:08:06 UTC
Kahega Amielden wrote:
Gibbo3771 wrote:
I honestly cant sit and read a wall of text belonging to someone that fits nanofibers on a Taranis and polycarbons on a plated Claw, before you start making suggestions and addressing useless frigates at least learn how to fit them first.


The EHP loss of polycarbs on a plated Claw exist but are marginal. It's a difference of 250 EHP.


250EHP loss on a frigate is like losing 5k on a bs. Everything counts, the fits are bad. Nuff said.

Anyone disagrees with that clearly never flies frigates or is stuck behind the 3 speed mod x2 speed rig tackling ceptors that die in 1 shot from anything.