...

MODULES:

The point of module changes is to increase usefulness of weapons we consider as either underpowered or just too difficult to fit right now. This includes medium beam laser, medium pulse lasers and light missiles.

• All medium beam laser variations: -1 PWG and -1 CPU
• All medium pulse laser variations: -1 PWG and -1 CPU
• All light missile variations: explosion velocity reduced from 50 to 40, damage increased by 10%

That makes no sense. Med beams have lower optimal than 150mm rails and the same optimal as 280mm arty. With lower falloff than both, they're actually the "shortest" long range weapon system. Or was that what you were trying to say?

I think they're underused in part because they're too similar to pulse lasers with scorch and the extra range over scorch isn't that helpful with frigate speeds.

It's actually and very likely a typo. The number given, 50, is the current explosion radius, so it actually is a damage-appliance boost by lowering explosion radius from 50 to 40.

I have an open mind to any suggestions or ideas posted here. Having said that, the Thrasher really is the golden standard that all the other dessies get compared to - and come in lacking against. The Thrasher is the only destroyer with a damage bonus. This is huge. If you really wanted to balance the playing field while keeping racial flavour you should:

Coercer:
7 High/ 7 Turrets
2 Mid
4 Low
Bonuses - Optimal, Damage, Cap Use(?)

Catalyst:
7 High/ 7 Turrets
3 Mid
3 Low
Bonuses - Optimal, Damage, Tracking

Cormorant:
7 High/ 7 Turrets
4 Mid
2 Low
Bonuses - Optimal, Optimal, Damage

Thrasher:
As is.

This in effect gives each destroyer an effective 8.75 turrets (more DPS then before) and allows them to be competitive in their own right. Losing a turret on the catalyst and coercer frees up alot of grid.

I always happen to feel destroyers should be a little faster because cruisers and battlecruisers kill them so fast... But on the other hand it is difficult to tell with the incredible tracking from autocannons with the combination of huge fall-off bonus on tracking enhancers.

And to critics I tell you they NEED the tracking from the current role bonus. And tbh it might not even be sufficient enough depending on how strong these destroyers are supposed to be... Also as destroyers would there be a point to increase their sensor strength? After all even some noobships carry a 30% bonus towards ecm these days... 10% would seem enough if they absolutely had to do it.

Btw - why does the catalyst get the ultimate role as a blaster ship with a joker small drone? If you want it with drones why not remove a turret and give it 10m3 drone bay/with. Otherwise strip it and wait for the second destroyer...

Pinky

Tech 1 frigates have around 10 slots, the rebalanced tech 1 cruisers will have around 14-15 slots, so 13 slots for destroyers is a number we are happy with for the time being. Adding more med / low slots would increase their survivability too much and not fit with the class role.

The reason with the low fitting output of the Catalyst is to prevent it from totally overpowering close range encounters with overwhelming damage. Internal tests and combat we ran showed that a Ion Catalyst setup is quite fine at the moment against the other race counterparts.

We would like the Coercer turret capacitor bonus to stay, as this ship can now have a decent fitting with medium pulses (even medium beams with high skills) which allows it to reach a far better damage projection that it currently does on TQ.

It is difficult to assess the extend of the changes until they go live on the test server for everyone however, which is why we want to wait and give you the possibility to test the changes for yourselves on the destroyers and frigates before considering all of this final though.

The Coercer is getting more grid and a second mid at the cost of a low. The largest tier weapons are also going to be easier to fit which is a stealth buff to Amarr small ships in general.