Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I personally don't like the way you are handling Medium Rails by wrecking the T1 Ships that use them into the same SR Gun categories you jam every T1 Cruiser into.

You have never explained though a bunch of people have asked why you never made it a viable Medium Rail Ship.

I was a little sad you didn't give it a fifth turret and dumped that silly double DPS bonus for a real second bonus. Also while the speed is more in line with its competitors everything else doesn't seem to be. I would suggest moving a low to a mid, leave the Nano / TE / Gyro game to the Stabber and make this thing a slugger or an Artillery Cruiser.

I think that between the Moa / Rupture / Omen and the Long Range Weapon Ships they are based you could have designed some cool long range ships instead of the same mix of kiters and brawlers but you didn't. That is a big waste and a missed chance to make Cruiser with LR weapons matter and to Medium fix LR Weapons in general.

Once again everything is fixed after a second go at it, good stuff.

The merlin change was a great way to set up the caldari hybrid combat ships, thus the moa being similar makes it a lot more reasonable. A damage bonus is much more useful for the utilization of rails, because rails have crappy damage and need a bit of a buff up to do well at their great range. A damage bonus helps a lot more than the previous range bonus, just because what's the point of more range when your damage is still pretty bad? As well, caldari boats just need the extra mids to add some passive recharge to compensate for their crappy speed, or to add more tank to offset changing a damage control to an overdrive/nano to get up to speed with the faster combat boats. This new setup is a lot better.

Rupture also isn't faster than the non-minny attack cruisers, that makes it a lot fairer. Combat cruisers should have problems catching attack cruisers unless they are double or triple nano fit.

I can't really say much for the vexor, don't fly them.

Maller looks good and tanky and really needed the drones to help take down frigs, it can't defend itself extremely well against frigs due to minimal mid slots for ewar.

That is cute, wrong in every single way but cute. No it will not be used as a Rail Boat and instead of fixing that they jammed it into Blasters and that is a sad move. Also a TC does not do much compared to a 50% Range Bonus or a TC on a Ship with a 50% Range Bonus.

It could have these so called options with a rail designed ship but they didn't do the leg work to fix Medium Rail Platforms and instead took the easy way out. Saying it is not necessarily a pure brawler is a lie, it is a pure brawler and no one will fit rails.

I must point this out, the range bonus offered by a TC as well as a 5% damage bonus per level is far superior to a 10% range bonus with no additional damage whatsoever. The only feasible PvP Moa 'before' (well actually right now) is with blasters, because the range bonus actually does help them there due to blasters having non-laughable base damage.

What I think is going to happen is the following: People try rail Moas. They're ok (because they don't do 180 DPS at 80 kilometers and be unable to hit anything closer than 70), but they could be better. People respond to the fact that medium rails are kind of lackluster and post more about it, because there are more ships that can potentially use them that are actually found in PvP. If enough people can accrue the same coherent argument, then the change will most likely be made. That is precisely the nature of the Combat Cruiser changes witnessed earlier today. Now, I don't know if it's completely accurate to compare these two situations (it may not be, in which case do not further point out that it's inaccurate). But still, having more ships that can competently use railguns, will alert more people to the fact that railguns aren't that good, which will be a catalyst for what you want.

I'm sorry that you don't like the fact that the Moa's role isn't to do flailing fuckall DPS at ranges that aren't even relevant anymore. Maybe you should consider adapting your strategies to what is relevant now instead?

Okay, that is a major boost for the Maller. Quite possibly too big of an improvement. It remains to be seen in testing whether the particular drawbacks of the Maller justify such a monster.

With those stats it's possible to reach 51k hitpoints, 517 AN MF and 424 Scorch dps.

[NEW Maller, 1437.5 PG 375 CPU]
1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Damage Control II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II

10MN Afterburner II
Faint Warp Disruptor I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I

NEW Heavy Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency M
NEW Heavy Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency M
NEW Heavy Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency M
NEW Heavy Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency M
NEW Heavy Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency M

Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

3x Hobgoblin II

I'm glad to see the Moa getting a more sensible slot layout and the Rupture not having attack cruiser speeds.

Hm I'm not sure if the Rupture will still be competitive after those changes.

The way I see this, it's OK if cap stability is an issue in longer fights. What's not so OK is that there aren't any real alternatives to cap boosters (which are more meant to counter energy neutralizers or power active tanking setups anyways) or cap from logistics (which might not be available). Cap rechargers et al are only good when several are fitted. Elutriation rigs are decent but a bit weak on all ships that already have a cap usage bonus. They are also hard to fit, especially on beam setups which are the cap hungriest of all. It would be nice if a slightly stronger low slot equivalent of the elutriation rig existed.

It really isn't.

I like you.

Yes the vexor needs more mass over 12mil it needs to be