|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
41
   |
Posted - 2012.10.03 05:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
I like the direction the Stabber is going but I think it needs a little bit more:
1 more turret (Puts it inline with the others in this class)
+50 Base grid (For the additional turret)
Drone bay and bandwidth for 5 light drones... (Shooting for the moon here. Only having 1 drone is laughable at best. Maybe 2 or 3? )
Ditch the split weapons (I personally don't see the point of the guns/missiles combo. Call me a purist) |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
42
|
Posted - 2012.10.21 04:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
Stabber still feels a little too light in the damage department.
If adding a turret isn't an option, what about adjusting the bonuses a little.
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret firing speed
to
7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret firing speed
7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff
to
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff
Gives a little bit more DPS to keep up with the other ships and a little more range for wiggle room. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
42
|
Posted - 2012.10.30 17:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:The Stabber shouldn't be able to compete in a brawl, otherwise we're back at Winmatar.
It's supposed to be good at hit and runs, kiting and killing frigates. It's absolutely supposed to sit at 20-30 km and slowly kill a Thorax and die horribly if it cannot maintain range. If it could comfortably win in web range with brute force alone then the other non-Minmatar cruisers would be nearly useless as they don't have the same mobility, damage selection, capless guns and utility highslots.
It's supposed to be good at hit and runs.
Agreed... It just a little light on the "Hit" part of the equation.
kiting and killing frigates...
LOL... go buy destroyers, it's cheaper.This is an ATTACK CRUISER not a DESTROYER.
It's absolutely supposed to sit at 20-30 km and slowly kill a Thorax and die horribly if it cannot maintain range.
Yes... but it can only really do that effectively with ONE type of ammo. BARRAGE.
mobility
Yes because getting killed and exploding at 2400m/s + is just awesome 
damage selection
Sure that's true at close range but doesn't help much to a kite ship with ONE effective ammo type to shoot at range with. Even using close range/high damage ammo, the damage output vs other ships of this class is laughable at best. One could argue that the (EM/THERM/KIN/EXPLO) drones the other ships carry could be considered damage selection as well and they can go a hell of a lot further that the falloff of the Stabber.
capless guns
Can't say much there. They are what they are. Take that one up with CCP.
utility highslots
I'd give up the utility for another turret personally.
And the missile slots... ugh... ditch them.
No one here asking for improvements to the proposed Stabber want a "I WIN" ship, they want a ship that does it's job. Kite and do damage at range. It's got the kite part. It's just missing damage and maybe shooting at range now. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
45
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 21:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:hell no on a stabber drone bay!
rather make this split weapon viable or give it another turret and ajust damage bonus.
is there a reason for giving drone bays to every combat ship bigger than a frig? if anything, reduce the number of ships with drone bays.
(and yes i have drone skills and i use them regulary, actually i like them) just reducing the number of ships with drones would be so much love for drone boats and frigs. there a still other ways to cope with pesky little frigs (neuts, smartbombs and teamplay) and would go a long way in breaking the bigger is mostly better paradigm.
the first class, which has drone bays across the board should be battleships, imho.
YES YES YES YES a drone bay for the Stabber! 3 light drones! Huey, Dewey and Louie!!!
I like drones because gives you something to throw at frigs,AFs and destroyers for a moment of pause. Besides, neuts and smartbombs eat cap. The Stabber's cap reserve is fragile enough as it is just trying to run the MWD. Let's not make it worse...
And a 5th turret... with the PG and CPU to fit it...
And moar falloff...
AND NO DAMN MISSILES SLOTS... SPLIT WEAPONS NO GOOD... |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
45
|
Posted - 2012.11.03 23:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
T1 Cruisers and Drone Bays (bay/bandwidth)
Amarr
Augoror - 20/20
Arbitrator - 50/150
Omen 40/40
Maller 15/15
Caldari
Osprey 20/20
Blackbird 10/10
Caracal 10/10
Moa 15/15
Gallente
Exequror 50/50
Celestis 50/50
Thorax 50/50
Vexor 75/125
Minmatar
Scythe 45/45
Bellicose 40/40
Stabber 0/0 ?????????????
Rupture 30/30
Between the current and proposed changes to Cruisers, one of these ships is not like the others...
Im not seeing any reason why it should not have some drone capability... |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2012.11.04 23:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Meldorn Vaash wrote:T1 Cruisers and Drone Bays (bay/bandwidth)
Amarr
Augoror - 20/20
Arbitrator - 50/150
Omen 40/40
Maller 15/15
Caldari
Osprey 20/20
Blackbird 10/10
Caracal 10/10
Moa 15/15
Gallente
Exequror 50/50
Celestis 50/50
Thorax 50/50
Vexor 75/125
Minmatar
Scythe 45/45
Bellicose 40/40
Stabber 0/0 ?????????????
Rupture 30/30
Between the current and proposed changes to Cruisers, one of these ships is not like the others...
Im not seeing any reason why it should not have some drone capability...
giving the stabber a drone bay would be the lazy "fix".
just may personal opinion, but 50-75% of the ships you listed, in opther words 50-75% of all T1 cruiser should loose the drone bays entirely. even without drones cruiser can be fit to kill every frigs easily, but this should be a choice, done while fitting your cruiser, not some build in feature. thats what we have destroyers for.
giving the stabber a drone bay would be the lazy "fix".
-I disagree. It would bring it back in line with the rest of the T1 cruisers.
just may personal opinion, but 50-75% of the ships you listed, in other words 50-75% of all T1 cruiser should loose the drone bays entirely
-And you are entitled to your opinion. Thank you for expressing it! I see drones like utility slots, drone bays have their place on ships. Their utility allows a degree of flexibility that maybe couldn't be achieved with a fit alone.
even without drones cruiser can be fit to kill every frigs easily
-While I agree with you in regards to capability, not everyone wants to fit and fly cruisers as dedicated frig killers. As you mentioned, we have destroyers for that.
|
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 01:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Meldorn Vaash wrote:even without drones cruiser can be fit to kill every frigs easily
-While I agree with you in regards to capability, not everyone wants to fit and fly cruisers as dedicated frig killers. As you mentioned, we have destroyers for that.
Indeed, and hence, you don't need these drones for frigate defense.
I disagree. There's no reason to limit the ship just because it can be fit as an anti-frigate platform. Nor should it be assumed that frigates would be the only target this ship pursues.
Now, if the whole Attack Cruiser line was limited to anti-frigate, and ship bonuses matched that capability, would the Thorax, Omen and Caracal still need their drone bays and a 5th turret/missile? |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 06:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
Lord Calus wrote:I called it. Post after post of whinge that the stabber doesn't get drones. The main drone race is Gallente, the backup drone race is Amarr. Be happy you get drones at all on anything smaller than a battleship. Pray I do not alter our deal any further.
The main drone race is Gallente
-True enough. Can't argue that.
the backup drone race is Amarr. Be happy you get drones at all on anything smaller than a battleship.
-While eve lore may support that argument, the reality is that all races and ship classes use drones. Unless there is some radical shake up, drones will continue as they are for a good long time to come.
I would be interested to hear your argument as to why the Stabber specifically shouldn't have a drone bay. Beyond calling it whining.
Pray I do not alter our deal any further.
Ok there Darth Calus 
As you'd like to see practical changes to the Omen, I'd like to see the same for the Stabber that allow it to compete with other ships of its class (attack cruisers specifically) |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
50
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 17:29:00 -
[9] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Meldorn Vaash wrote:
even without drones cruiser can be fit to kill every frigs easily
-While I agree with you in regards to capability, not everyone wants to fit and fly cruisers as dedicated frig killers. As you mentioned, we have destroyers for that.
the only attack cruiser with a drone bay should be the vexor because its a gallente boat (even the talos got one). omen, stabber and caracal should be without.
I'm assuming you meant the Thorax when referencing Attack Cruiser. Beyond stating "it's Gallente", why does the Thorax need still drones then? What makes it the exception?
As you've indicated, this line of ships is meant for hit and run. Short and fast combat. I personally see that to mean high DPS, high speed engagements. Since you believe drones to be impractical for such combat then the Thorax does not need its drones either. It's 5 guns can provide enough punch without including the "slow" drones.
Every bit of DPS can mean the difference between a kill and a loss. From overheating the guns to the lowly unbonused warrior II pecking away at the target, its all fair game when in combat.
If Attack Cruisers are meant to be gunships, then the Stabber is in dire need of its 5th gun. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 18:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
Johnny Bloomington wrote:Meldorn Vaash wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Meldorn Vaash wrote:
even without drones cruiser can be fit to kill every frigs easily
-While I agree with you in regards to capability, not everyone wants to fit and fly cruisers as dedicated frig killers. As you mentioned, we have destroyers for that.
the only attack cruiser with a drone bay should be the vexor because its a gallente boat (even the talos got one). omen, stabber and caracal should be without. I'm assuming you meant the Thorax when referencing Attack Cruiser. Beyond stating "it's Gallente", why does the Thorax need still drones then? What makes it the exception? In that case if you minus the drones then add another gun to the Thorax.
- Thorax doesn't need another gun. It already puts out almost double the DPS and volley damage of the Stabber, Omen, and Caracal. And that without throwing drones into the mix.
I agree with your 5th gun for the Stabber, however the fact that the Thorax has drones at all is the fact that it is a Gallente ship and they are the predominant drone race. I'm totally happy to reduce its drone bay from 50m3 to 25m3 to facilitate use of light fast drones, keeping with the hit and run theme. Also removing the drone bay from the Stabber, Caracal and Omen.
- If that's the case, then the Thorax should rely on its drones for damage and not its guns. Drop the gun damage bonus and replace it for drone damage and keep its current bay size. You can't have it both ways. |
|
|
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 18:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
- If that's the case, then the Thorax should rely on its drones for damage and not its guns. Drop the gun damage bonus and replace it for drone damage and keep its current bay size. You can't have it both ways.[/quote]
You understood us wrong it seems... the Vexor is the droneboat not the Torax. [/quote]
-Then the Thorax doesn't need the drone bay does it?
|
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 19:28:00 -
[12] - Quote
Jason Sirober wrote:Meldorn Vaash wrote:- If that's the case, then the Thorax should rely on its drones for damage and not its guns. Drop the gun damage bonus and replace it for drone damage and keep its current bay size. You can't have it both ways.
You understood us wrong it seems... the Vexor is the droneboat not the Torax.
-Then the Thorax doesn't need the drone bay does it?
Yes it does. It is Gallente. It's like saying the Caracal doesn't need shields, Omen doesn't need armor and the Stabber doesn't need speed. Gallente uses drones... Get over it.
Shields, Armor and Speed are attributes of a ship. The drone bay is an add-on.
In the case of the Thorax, drones are an optional weapons system. It's strength is in its guns. Not its drones.
|
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 20:31:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jason Sirober wrote:Also here's a recap of the offensive systems used my each race.
Amarr - Lasers and drones
Caldari - Missiles and hybrids
Gallente - Drones and hybrids
Minmitar - Projectiles and Missiles
All races can use drones...
The difference is that Amarr and Gallente have ships with specific bonuses for drones. The Thorax in this case does not. Nor does it need them to do its job. Which is to sprint in, unleash hell, and live or die. I understand why you want the drones. You want more damage or utility. Hey, guess what? I want the same thing for the Stabber!
The Thorax can only do high damage at point blank range.
- The same could be said for any ship. You also have the option to load Null ammo for some range. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 20:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
Randy Wray wrote:Omen is the stepping stone to the harbinger which has 50 m3 drone bay.
Caracal is the stepping stone to a drake which has a 25 m3 drone bay.
Thorax is the stepping stone to the brutix which has a 50 m3 drone bay.
The stabber is atm what looks like the stepping stone to a tornado, which doesnt have a drone bay.
The other races have ships that encourage people to train drones because it doesnt matter what race youre flying youll still need some basic drone skills to get the full potential out of a ship. If you want to change the relation between the other races and drones, this is where change has to happen.
IMO the stabber should get a 5th gun and a 7,5% damage bonus to bring its damage in line with any of the other cruisers, atm its almost out dps-d by a bellicose.
While I agree with the assessment. I think of the hurricane or cyclone as the next step beyond the Stabber. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
53
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 03:09:00 -
[15] - Quote
Your stabber can get drones as soon as my omen can get a 2nd bonus that isn't pants on head dumb.
- You might get your wish.
Your fastest in class ships can get more DPS when armor tanking is not gimped beyond belief.
- care to show a fit for the Stabber that backs that claim up?
You can get fitting options once the ASB is not the iWIN butan.
- Yes because fitting 180s and an ASB is how everyone flies
Shield/Mattar pilots are so entitled it is sickening. Until recently when CCP finally wised up all of your ships were tuned around fitting arty, which had ungodly fitting reqs.
- I wouldn't call a 10% decrease in arty PG a dramatic shift in Minmatar fittings. It just opens up the possibility for more ships to fit them.
When you decided to fit autocannons you never had to downgrade a gun, or skimp on tank, or use fitting mods to fill all of your ship slots.
- Nonsense, of course you have to change guns based on tank fittings. Do you honestly believe you can fit 425s with 2 LSE IIs or an 800 or 1600 plate? Unless of course you like using your rigs slots for CPU and PG rigs. Like every other ship in Eve, you decide the best way to fit the ship whether it's tank or gank.
Quit the whinge already. Be happy that your ship lineup is still vastly superior. Use that whole racial role thing to your benefit. Hit and run, hit and run. Don't try and slug it out with the "brawler" races.
The only whining I see is coming from you and your belief that the Stabber shouldn't stand on level ground with the rest of the ships in its class (that would be Attack Cruisers btw).
In my opinion (to sum up my postings) it should receive a 5th turret, a slight adjustment in the falloff bonus (5% to 7.5% per level) and a small drone bay of 2 or 3 drones. That to me feel balanced. That to me feel competitive to the rest of the ships in this class.
If you have some constructive input beyond "No" or "When hell freezes over" or whining that you're pony (ship) isn't on top of the heap, please share your thoughts |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
53
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 04:10:00 -
[16] - Quote
What I'd like to see is the Omen get a second bonus that isn't pants on head dumb, and still be able to shoot its guns for more then a minute without emptying its cap reserve. And I just mean shoot its guns. Not run the MWD, not run some EWar... just shoot.
- What would be a viable way to help the Omen cap-wise? use the 6th low for a cap relay/pds II or maybe change the 6th low to a 4th mid slot for a cap booster? Increased cap reserve or recharge rate? The whole ship line itself suffers from a cap reserve problem just trying to run the MWD alone. Maybe a 20% boost to cap reserve and recharge rate for the Omen and 10% to 15% for the rest of the class?
I think what he's trying to get at here is the fact that Artillery had such high fitting requirements that CCP had to base ships around Arty, and because of that has ample amounts of spare fitting when using AC's.
- A good point. In my opinion however, I don't think putting arty on a Stabber is the right direction for the ship. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
54
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 17:32:00 -
[17] - Quote
Read up a few mate, I'm in favor of giving the Stabber a 5th turret. My response you quoted is directed at a twit who only want more fittings on a Stabber while at the same time removing drones from the Thorax.
So read a bit more before calling me a hypocrite, sir.
-Oh goody... I was wondering when we'd get to the name calling. Way to go bringing the thread to a new level.
-Beyond the fact "it's Gallente" what was your argument for keeping the Thorax's drone bay when from a DPS stand point it doesn't need it? The only "fitting" I think the Stabber needs is the PG and CPU to fit a 5th turret. I'm all in favor of dropping the missile capability for the ship in favor of a small drone bay.
|
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
55
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 16:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
What if there was a role bonus attached to each ship class?
Since attack cruisers are about speed, maybe a cap bonus to MWD like what the thorax has now. Except the full 25% from the start instead of 5% per level?
Would that make them overpowered?
Would that help the laser and hybrid guns cap usage? |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
57
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 19:06:00 -
[19] - Quote
Fozzie,
Are you still evaluating and tweaking ships at this point or have you locked everything down for Retribution's deployment? Your dev blog seems to suggest you're done for now. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
58
|
Posted - 2012.11.17 20:59:00 -
[20] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Lavitakus Bromier wrote:Garviel Tarrant wrote:Ningishzida wrote:I'm on Buckingham, playing with the rebalanced cruisers.
The Omen and Maller. Two ships with the same slot layout that says: "Armor tank + 5 focused Medium Pulse Lasers". The Maller just does it better. Tell me why I should fly an Omen now.
The Stabber feels by FAR the weakest of all the T1 cruisers. It's speed doesn't make up for the lack in dps and tank, IMO. Needs more dps or something. Having to mix guns and missiles is just.. meh. I'd rather have a 5th turret and fit a neut. Because the omen is better. It is fast enough to stay in lolscorch range long enough to tilt the fight in its favor. The Maller doesn't, thus can't track **** and caps out from THINKING about shooting its guns. There still so similar. I'd like to see the omen with rof + ab bonus maybe. Or rof and something else to hlp it squeeze more damage then the maller. Put Beams on it and enjoy shooting blue lazors.
I like the pretty lights....
I think the Omen needs a touch more speed... feels pretty damn slow with plate and rigs... |
|
|
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 02:26:00 -
[21] - Quote
Vayn Baxtor wrote:Well, there are ways to compensate, of course. It's all in the hands of CCP. Some feel that things are already a "done deal", unless we all scream loud enough, but I have doubts.
I for one just don't want what the german expression says "Nothing half, nothing whole" - which basically means in this case that it doesn't make sense to have a DPS specific bonus if it is not really even helping much. As said, terrible dps is terrible. Put something else there then.
Heard bitchy people also say, if you want dmg with Stabber, either buy a Rupture or stuff the Stabber full with 425mm, rigs, gyro and yourself with Imps - or gtfo.
I know well myself that having a Falloff bonus requires a decent AC/DPS bonus, but then again, it is already a great aspect. It also means that Ambit/Falloff rigs will give us even more range.
Remember though, with ACs you're fighting in falloff. Your full damage potential is already dropping like a rock the further from the target you get. At the edge of your falloff range you're only doing 1/3 to 1/2 the DPS. Short of giving an insane amount of falloff bonus to compensate for DPS loss, the Stabber will still be iffy as a kiter and marginal as a brawler. A 5th turret may help. Swapping the ROF bonus for a Damage bonus may help. Even though I really really like the fast ROF, the volley damage just isn't there at range.
I still want drones for the Stabber 
While IGÇÖm complaining, if they decided to go with 5 turrets I would suggest dropping that last high slot and add a mid slot, let it the Stabber be shield tanked. The Rupture is geared more towards armor anyways. |
Meldorn Vaash
State War Academy
Caldari State
59
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 02:41:00 -
[22] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Sheynan wrote:Can you post a fit of a Stabber where no other cruiser could do the job better ? There is one thing actually. [Stabber, BUMP] Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400 Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400 Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot] Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Ancillary Current Router I
*Blink*
Really?
|
|
|
| |
|