These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Caldari Rail Platforms and Utility High Slots
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#1 - 2013-10-26 06:55:42 UTC
Cormorant:
2 Low Slots
3 Mediums
8 High Slots (7 Turret Hard Points)

This is supposed to be a rail based platform (Firing at range) - Why would it need a neut? Now it can be argued that it can also act as a blaster platform. But even when we take both of these factors into consideration (rail cormorant or blaster cormorant) I still never see the utility high slot utilized. This is most likely due to a lack in PG.

Before the re-balancing it was common to see cormorants in operation. Now they are only used for the most part by new players or niche long range sniper fleets. I firmly believe that the utility high slot needs to be ramified - either add another turret slot with PG or remove the high slot and add either a low / med slot.

Raptor (Rubicon Update)
3 Low Slots
3 Med Slots
4 High Slots (3 Turrets)

Here is another example of poor slot layout choices. The crow appears to be receiving both four med slots as well as the point range bonus (which I do not complain about) - but when we contrast this to say the Raptor, which is supposed to be a combat / semi brawling shield tanked ship - it appears to fall much shorter from the tree then its crow counter part. The crow will be able to easily hold range at 30km, applying for the most part perfect DPS as well as E-War while holding point. The Raptor will be unable to fit both its tank and a full complement of tackle / prop. Something that would benefit a rail / blaster platform far more, I also foresee the raptor struggling to fit any form of neut in the long run.

Anyways I am most likely complaining. But I am curious to hear other peoples opinions on this, I just feel that the high slots are wasted on these platforms in their current manifestation and changing
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2013-10-26 10:49:07 UTC
Sean Parisi wrote:

Before the re-balancing it was common to see cormorants in operation. Now they are only used for the most part by new players or niche long range sniper fleets.

The reason is simple - they are slower and do less DPS than Catalysts, so why fly a Cormorant?
Reese Armgo
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2013-10-26 11:02:18 UTC
So what you are saying is, we need more useful modules for High-Slots?
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
#4 - 2013-10-26 18:52:30 UTC
Reese Armgo wrote:
So what you are saying is, we need more useful modules for High-Slots?


Would not complain with that. But I was primarily saying this - if CCP insists on actually forcing Caldari ships to use a utility high slot; either provide us with an extra turret or more PG to actually use a Neut in the fittings.

In my opinion? The Cormorant used to have 4 mid slots, I would like it to return to having those midslots again. This would increase its viability vastly as both a sniping / rail platform and a brawling blaster platform. When I rarely find Cormorants in FW, none of them have ever utilized the high slot. Before the changes I saw a lot of creativity used in utilizing the mid slots.

In regards to the raptor, I think a mid slot would do it far better then a utility high slot will - but it isn't as badly effected as the Cormorant as its natural speed bonus still gives it a bit of range dictation with or without a web and its engagement ranges are more consistent to actually utilize a neut.