These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Destroyer Analysis - Post Crucible
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#21 - 2011-12-29 04:35:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Jask Avan wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Edit: I'm showing a thrasher has the same speed as a merlin same scan resolution and bit larger sig 56 versus 40 sig. Much better tank.

Winmatar vs. lolCaldari?



The merlin is a frigate I used to fly and get in some good fights with. I think its pretty obsolete now that destroyers are so much better in every way - well except a slightly smaller sig radius.

edit: I would suggest that the scan resolution difference between t1 frigates and destroyers be about the same as the difference between t1 cruisers and battlecruisers.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
mama guru
Yazatas.
#22 - 2011-12-29 05:19:48 UTC
What destroyers need is a massive EHP buff, mobility and firepower wise they are fine. But they should kinda function as a lightweight cruiser with frigate guns.

EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak.
Goose99
#23 - 2011-12-29 05:37:17 UTC
mama guru wrote:
What destroyers need is a massive EHP buff, mobility and firepower wise they are fine. But they should kinda function as a lightweight cruiser with frigate guns.


^This

Destroyers should be to frigs as BCs are to cruisers, while vulnerable to cruisers as BCs are to BS. It would still be in a somewhat more vulnerable position than BCs, as cruiser hulls are far more common than BS outside of blobs.
Cephelange du'Krevviq
Gildinous Vangaurd
The Initiative.
#24 - 2011-12-29 07:23:30 UTC
[Cormorant, Rail (PvP)]
Damage Control II

Warp Scrambler II
Medium Shield Extender II
Invulnerability Field II
1MN MicroWarpdrive II

75mm Gatling Rail II, Javelin S
75mm Gatling Rail II, Javelin S
75mm Gatling Rail II, Javelin S
75mm Gatling Rail II, Javelin S
75mm Gatling Rail II, Javelin S
75mm Gatling Rail II, Javelin S
75mm Gatling Rail II, Javelin S
Small Nosferatu II

Small Core Defence Field Extender I
Small Core Defence Field Extender I
Small Core Defence Field Extender I

EFT Warrior-ing this attempt.

11.4k EHP
1329 m/s with MWD
7k (incl falloff) range with Javelin
147.4 DPS
293 volley

"I am a leaf on the...ah, frak it!"
Kn1v3s 999
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2011-12-29 22:45:00 UTC
tbh dps is trash and 7km with falloff included (lol) is trash too
Ehp it' s not the way to go imho
Delphina Xanieu
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2012-02-10 05:35:27 UTC
Hey there, it's my first post and yes, I am a newbie. That's going to explain a lot when you see the Thrasher build I was inspired to do. The build was as much inspired by roleplay elements as by any sort of "effectiveness." That being said, I'll spell out the strong points on this PvE build.


Thrasher, Autocannon (PvE): "Citizen's Arrest"

Low Slots:
Overdrive Injector System 2
Nanofiber Internal Structure 2

Medium Slots:
Medium Shield Extender 2
Small Shield Booster 2
1MN Afterburner 2

High Slots:
Civilian Gatling Autocannon x7
'Limos' Rocket Launcher 1 (Inferno Rockets)

Rigs:
Small Auxiliary Thrusters 1
Small Low Friction Nozzle Joints 1
Small Capacitor Control Circuit 1


I presently hit 2316 shield HP with peak recharge of 12 HP / second. I can currently run the capacitor with the shield booster for 1:34, and during missions I often get the chance to recharge. My DPS is a whopping 32.3, and will probably peak out around 36 or so, maybe 40. I've never tried overloading before. In most level 1 and 2 missions though, my DPS pops most frigates in a few seconds, so having over a certain amount would just be overkill. It would be helpful to have more DPS for a few specialty frigates and against cruisers though.

Obviously this is a ridiculous build, but it amuses me and it has some merits. For one, I only have to worry about rocket ammunition, which is not a big concern for a single launcher. I chose inferno rockets because 1) they break shields, which is useful when my primary guns deal explosive/kinetic only, and 2) they were much, much cheaper than the EM rockets. My projectiles never run out, and never have to reload. Furthermore, I would bet my tracking speed is higher than just about anyone else in this thread at 0.909 rad/sec. Even if it's not the highest, I could equip a tracking module or use an implant or get the 5th rank of Motion Prediction... but I don't need to, so you get the point. Sometimes you just have to be able to hit the SOB, and I can do that. As with any AC build, range is an issue but I can not only close with the enemy but keep the AB running indefinitely to speed tank (top speed 929 m/sec presently). When the speed tank doesn't work, the shield tank generally works.

As with most destroyer builds this one is fairly cheap, probably costing around 5 million ISK or less to throw together. Considering you rarely have to buy ammo or resupply, this ship is cheap, expendable and surprisingly enough effective. It can obviously breeze through level 1 missions, but I use it for level 2 missions. The only mission I haven't been able to finish involved eight cruisers in a tight knit bunch, which would be a challenge for ANY autocannon destroyer. If you want to run level 3 missions, you should probably just upgrade to a bigger ship than a destroyer IMHO. The Citizen's Arrest has been flying thus far ever since I earned it in my newbie missions, and hasn't failed me yet. If it ever does, I'm already building backups.

I did read the rest of the thread though, and it makes me think I ought to try the bizarre Coercer. The endless ammo of laser fire appeals to me in the same way that the civilian autocannons did. Now I'll just have to figure out armor tanking, or long range engagement.
McRoll
Extraction and Exploration Ltd.
#27 - 2012-02-10 13:01:19 UTC
I tried Cormorant and Coercer after the buff and found them better than Thrasher at sniping. When you fly in a gang, you can make especially the Coercer an excellent sniper and the Cormorant works solo very well. I killed a Wolf in it by flying away while battering him with rails and spike ammo and used cn antimatter with web once he caught up with me.

Imo you should only use the Catalyst with close range weapons because it's the only destroyer which really delivers an obscene amount of damage with close range weapons. With the other 3 the dps increase isnt that high with close range weapons and not really worth losing range control.

I found especially the Cormorant better than Thrasher now because of its 4 mids and the ability to use web, disruptor, mwd and med shield extender.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#28 - 2012-02-10 14:33:05 UTC
The new destroyers seems fun - unfortunately the Thrasher is still much better than the others for generic pvp...
But they all got some bite and are pretty cheap...

Pinky
McRoll
Extraction and Exploration Ltd.
#29 - 2012-02-10 14:42:03 UTC
What do you mean by "better"?

I cannot provide numbers right now because Im not at home but a railgun Cormorant fit is better than a Thrasher arty fit for me because of better range, not much less DPS and the ability to fit a web along with a med shield extender. If you want to do that with a Thrasher you end up with rather no web or no tank.

As for blasters vs AC, see above. Having a web together with an extender is extremely useful. I gladly give up a lowslot for that.
HELIC0N ONE
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2012-02-10 22:13:59 UTC
Half the problem with the catalyst is that it doesn't know what role it wants to fill, optimal AND falloff bonus is not a very focused combination. Switch the hull bonus from optimal to falloff, make it a dedicated blaster boat.

Possibly do the same for the Thrasher to emphasise the autocannon platform role (which also means the destroyers are split into 2 snipers and 2 short ranged gankers).
Silas Shaw
Coffee Hub
#31 - 2012-02-11 00:23:41 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
m0cking bird wrote:
Destroyers do more damage and have more hit-points. Still as useful as they were. Not sure much else needs to be said. Fittings remain the same for the most part.


By the way Zarnak Wulf. I believe electronic attack frigates should get the afterburner bonus. They're the least useful ships for direct engagements. So least likely to cause a "imbalance", with exceptions. For the most part I would not mind a Keres going 2,500m/sec with a afterburner. Provided CCP lowers or does not increase electronic attack ship damage in anyway. They will still pop ALOT, but will be unique I suppose.


EAF - Quite some time ago I suggested that they get that AB bonus. There's only one per race so it's harder for it to be unbalanced and it would contribute to them surviving longer. Recently I've had a mind that since so many get cap bonuses that would be the way to go for a role bonus. The truth is that EAF are very broken and they will have to sit down and hammer out a solutions.

Destroyers - The Thrasher gets right at 8k EHP and puts out 300- 440 DPS consistently. The other destroyers you have to play a game of twister to fit. Why fly the Coercer when the Retribution offers more? (Soon - TM) Why fly the Catalyst when you have the Enyo? I'm just looking ahead.


Keres has a bigger Sig than a Thrasher.

Just sayin'.
Ahrieman
Codex Praedonum
Divine Damnation
#32 - 2012-02-11 00:37:16 UTC
mama guru wrote:
What destroyers need is a massive EHP buff, mobility and firepower wise they are fine. But they should kinda function as a lightweight cruiser with frigate guns.


I agree with the notion of the dessie as a lightweight cruiser with frig guns, but believe a "massive EHP buff" would do away with dessies filling this role. I would advocate for a small EHP buff - maybe via a small resist buff. Give em a little more but don't overdo it.

Thrasher is great. Catalyst and cormorant are good, but just not as versatile. They do project damage better than the thrasher though. Coercer can facer*** frigs, but is just very limited in versatility due to it's 1-mid slot.

A second mid on coercer would be nice, but for the most part, each dessie has it's chance to shine without always being outclassed by the others - this is what balance is about.

Solo Rifter since 2009
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#33 - 2012-02-11 01:00:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Zarnak Wulf
The Thrasher, with it's damage bonus, has essentially 8.75 turrets in addition to a utility spot. The other destroyers have exactly what you see - 7 to 8 turrets. It's a sad fact that they will always be bringing up the rear.

Cormorant - Harpy does everything better.
Catalyst - it lacks the capacitor to active tank and the grid to buffer tank w/o killing its gank. You can get a high DPS blaster or rail boat but you need to accept you're only going to have around 5.5k EHP.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#34 - 2012-02-11 01:29:30 UTC
Afs are definitely better than destroyers now. Now that we see what they did to afs, the destroyers don't seem op.

I'm a bit sad about t1 frigates being left far behind.

But these buffs demonstrated the chasm that existed between the frigate classes and t1 cruisers. And I think its for the best that there is a smoother curve instead of a steep cliff between these classes.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Ahrieman
Codex Praedonum
Divine Damnation
#35 - 2012-02-11 01:49:16 UTC
I absolve myself of this whine thread.

I was going to post some fits, argue the merits, show that each dessie has it's place, but I am done with the "Not fair that catalyst can't fit a full rack of neutrons AND have a great tank" and the "Not fair that cormorant isn't a viable blaster boat."

If the problem is AF's address AF's, don't try to address that issue by whining about destroyers.

/wrings hands

Solo Rifter since 2009
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#36 - 2012-02-11 02:54:21 UTC
Are the destroyers viable? Yes. A lot more then they used to be. How is balance within the dessy class? The Thrasher is still top dog. How do destroyers relate to other small ships? The Thrasher again can approach many situations while the others are very niche.

I have had alot of fun with a rail Cormy. A gank catalyst is wicked. But a 7.5k EHP Thrasher with 430 DPS is just much more well rounded. I've tried to take on Thrashers in Catalysts. So if this is whining then at least it is 'informed.'
Belthazor4011
Battle BV Redux
#37 - 2012-02-11 03:26:21 UTC
Well yes Destroyers are at ton of fun and the buff has improved them a fair bit.

But the 2 main faults with them are not addressed by the buff. Too little choice too little EHP.

-vs frigs it’s too good so they'll stay away from you
-vs destroyers it has too much DPS and too little EHP in a matter of seconds and few shots it’s over. The battle is more about luck and tracking (hence why the Thrasher is still the best) then skill or good flying.
-vs cruisers you lack the EHP to take them on

Possible fixes.
-Simply have more destroyers, there are tons of frigs and cruisers and there are even 3 BCs by now. Would a 2nd T1 destroyer per race really be that hard to do?
-Give the Destroyers more EHP so they can have good battles among themselves or actually take on a cruiser and have a chance. I mean I know this means frigs stand even less of a change against them but seriously who is taking a frig to a destroyer anyways?

Those two can obviously be combined make new destroyers the tier 2 kind and give those the extra EHP I mean even T2 destroyers don’t get resist bonuses. Destroyers are simply tied down in ability by their EHP.

And please don’t reply by saying I once killed a destroyer with a frig or I killed a cruiser in a destroyer. Exceptions happen, but in general neither of these fights is a good idea.

ps for the few that said an Enyo or Harpy does things better, well I'd freakin hope so with the extra training and cost involved with flying a T2 ship. So let’s not compare things that were never meant to be equals.
Ahrieman
Codex Praedonum
Divine Damnation
#38 - 2012-02-11 03:33:14 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Are the destroyers viable? Yes. A lot more then they used to be. How is balance within the dessy class? The Thrasher is still top dog. How do destroyers relate to other small ships? The Thrasher again can approach many situations while the others are very niche.

I have had alot of fun with a rail Cormy. A gank catalyst is wicked. But a 7.5k EHP Thrasher with 430 DPS is just much more well rounded. I've tried to take on Thrashers in Catalysts. So if this is whining then at least it is 'informed.'


In light of this post, I will agree with you. I mistook your message in a previous post. The thrasher never seems to be the best, but it's always great. I disagree that the other dessies "are very niche." They just require you to choose your engagements more carefully.

This is not unique to the destroyer ship class though. For example: I often fly the firetail and it is very limited in engagements against other navy faction frigs. My original point was that versatility makes the thrasher the best destroyer, although I still believe that it can be solo's by any of the other destroyers given the right circumstances/fitting.

Solo Rifter since 2009
Previous page12