EVE Search - Sticky:[Winter] Attack Cruisers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Winter] Attack Cruisers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 35 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Wivabel Exanimo Inc Anger Management. 3	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:45:00 - [31] - Quote Connall Tara wrote: wivabel: [Thorax, New Setup 1] Damage Control II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Hammerhead II x5 this is now... I think we'll be fine with the new layout with 30 extra cpu for MOAR WEBBING! considering the overall preformance the single PG rig isn't exactly a crippling weakness ^_^ it is dumb to need a fitting mod to fit the smallest guns If you like to pew small gang style check us out.-á http://exanimo.enjin.com/page/150364/recruitment-á
tgl3 Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms 160	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:46:00 - [32] - Quote Wivabel wrote: Connall Tara wrote: wivabel: [Thorax, New Setup 1] Damage Control II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Hammerhead II x5 this is now... I think we'll be fine with the new layout with 30 extra cpu for MOAR WEBBING! considering the overall preformance the single PG rig isn't exactly a crippling weakness ^_^ it is dumb to need a fitting mod to fit the smallest guns Not empty quoting. I write a blog. I think people read it. http://throughnewbeyes.wordpress.com Mate
DeBingJos Weirdo Asylum Shadow Rock Alliance 366	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:47:00 - [33] - Quote Wivabel wrote: Connall Tara wrote: wivabel: [Thorax, New Setup 1] Damage Control II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Hammerhead II x5 this is now... I think we'll be fine with the new layout with 30 extra cpu for MOAR WEBBING! considering the overall preformance the single PG rig isn't exactly a crippling weakness ^_^ it is dumb to need a fitting mod to fit the smallest guns I lolled really hard at that statement. Ungi ma+¦urinn ++ekkir reglurnar, en gamli ma+¦urinn ++ekkir undantekningarnar. The young man knows the rules, but the old man knows the exceptions.
Allandri Liandri Industrial Liandri Covenant 2	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:47:00 - [34] - Quote Warde Guildencrantz wrote: ... Allandri wrote: Would it be possible to exchange the caracal's missile velocity bonus for one of explosion velocity to better fit into the idea of attack cruisers being close range? Caracal should always be a long range missile platform and should never not be. . Long range missile platforms are generally the bottom of the pile when it comes to pvp. I would love to see a HAM brawler caracal that actually had bonuses for damage projection instead of kiting
MisterNick The Sagan Clan Pax Romana Alliance 109	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:52:00 - [35] - Quote 6 lows on the Omen? That thing us going to hurt The thorax's tracking bonus is a nice idea but the base speed buff might need a little extra to make up for the lose mwd bonus. it's not like it has a choice regarding getting all up in your face. Stabbers are going to be the new FOTM then, with that falloff bonus and that speed nothing's going to ever catch it, except maybe a navy Exequror "Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom."
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 57	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:56:00 - [36] - Quote Warde Guildencrantz wrote: As previously stated quite a few times, they want to look at the range of heavy missiles. Caracal has always had this bonus, i don't see why it becomes OP now, when it can actually use it to a reasonable extent. Yea i'm saying that its a stupid bonus that is only useful in weird unlikely situations. Or if you want to kite with heavy assaults?
Kalaratiri Lutinari Syndicate Electus Matari 247	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:56:00 - [37] - Quote +1. I like it :)
Alara IonStorm 3159	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:57:00 - [38] - Quote Well this sucks. I wish you better luck Combat Cruisers. RIP Caracal / Stabber.
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy 200	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:57:00 - [39] - Quote Stabber will actually be a horsehair slower than it was before due to the missing velocity bonus (about 3-4 m/s slower base stats) But you have a 4th lowslot for speed modules if you want hehe
Mr Floydy The Xenodus Initiative. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 19	Posted - 2012.09.18 12:57:00 - [40] - Quote Changes look awesome :) T1 cruisers are going to be fun soon! :)

Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy 200	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:00:00 - [41] - Quote Wivabel wrote: it is dumb to need a fitting mod to fit the smallest guns Not when you are fitting a 1600mm plate designed for battleships and a MicroWarpDrive on top of those 5 medium sized guns... Back in the days you would have to use small frigate guns if you wanted a 1600mm plate.
Iroxorsju The Foreign Legion Fidelas Constans 0	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:02:00 - [42] - Quote Wivabel wrote: Not happy with the thorax. With an 800 plate I can fit only IONs with a 1600 plate I cant even fit electrons without fitting mods. looks like you will not have tank or gank on this ship at the moment. Ok I take it back it seems to fit out well on the shield side are you guys leaning towards a shield setup because that is what it looks like. Stabber looks awesome though it is soo soo much faster than the other three may be kinda imbalanced. I am actually showing the stabber slower after buff now without its old speed bonus. I am in game sitting in a stabber with no speed mods and it shows 360.9 m/s and the new speed is 285 m/s. Maybe i am not seeing something. Old Bonus was 5% faster per level.
Daneel Trevize Give my 11percent back 186	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:03:00 - [43] - Quote So where does this leave the Phantasm, the Navy Exequoror, and the Vigilant? One might be slightly less terrible, one is still awful, untouched forgotten, and one doesn't even have a 4th mid as a feature for its hull, only the web bonus, when it is already the most expensive pirate cruiser (why IDK). I hope that arty fitting buff is because the cane's getting an out-of-step PG nerf. Because AFAIK projectiles don't need any buffing.
MisterNick The Sagan Clan Pax Romana Alliance 109	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:03:00 - [44] - Quote Woops, forgot the Caracal. Agreed that it doesn't really need that huge range, i'd sawp the velocity for explosion velocity, to better hit the new faster everything. "Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom."
Alara IonStorm 3159	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:06:00 - [45] - Quote Stabber: 4 Turrets Drones (bandwidth / bay): 5 / 5 So CCP Fozzie now that the Stabber is basically the new Minmatar Shuttle how do you plan to rebalance the Minmatar Shuttle into an Attack Cruiser?
Connall Tara Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 35	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:10:00 - [46] - Quote alara: you are aware that the stabber has always had that weapon layout right? O_o Fly reckless cohost and all round bad pilot o7
X Gallentius Justified Chaos 492	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:14:00 - [47] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: Stabber: 4 Turrets Drones (bandwidth / bay): 5 / 5 So CCP Fozzie now that the Stabber is basically the new Minmatar Shuttle how do you plan to rebalance the Minmatar Shuttle into an Attack Cruiser? Maybe by putting two missiles/nuets in the other two high slots?
Alara IonStorm 3159	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:14:00 - [48] - Quote Connall Tara wrote: alara: you are aware that the stabber has always had that weapon layout right? 4 turrets 2 launchers and 6 highs with a drone for essentially giggles ^_^ Funny you mention Giggles because that has been basically what the Stabber has been good for thus far.
Wivabel Exanimo Inc Anger Management. 5	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:15:00 - [49] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: Wivabel wrote: it is dumb to need a fitting mod to fit the smallest guns Not when you are fitting a 1600mm plate designed for battleships and a MicroWarpDrive on top of those 5 medium sized guns... Back in the days you would have to use small frigate guns if you wanted a 1600mm plate. Sure but in the current meta 800 plates are laughable. ~28000 ehp just is not enough when your looking at 50000+ EHP battlecruisers. the shield fit for the rax looks ok and I am thinking that CCP may be angling towards it for the thorax. If you like to pew small gang style check us out.-á http://exanimo.enjin.com/page/150364/recruitment-á
Akrasjel Lanate Naquatech Conglomerate 762	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:15:00 - [50] - Quote Heh

Aethlyn EVE University Ivy League 133	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:15:00 - [51] - Quote Horrible table layout again. :( Here's a better version of the updated turret stats: http://i.imgur.com/PsDpk.png Looking for more thoughts? Read http://aethlyn.blogspot.com/ or follow me on http://twitter.com/Aethlyn.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos 492	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:16:00 - [52] - Quote Daneel Trevize wrote: So where does this leave the Phantasm, the Navy Exequoror, and the Vigilant? I will be parking my 35 ENI hulls until CCP gets around to rebalancing them.
Yun Kuai Justified Chaos 1	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:17:00 - [53] - Quote I mentioned this in ewar cruisers, but I think this needs stating again as I just saw the Omen getting a 40m3 drone bay.... "But my question to CCP and the devs focused on balancing. You said somewhere in these pages (and yes I've read all 17 at this point) that you didn't want to specialize for the sake of specialization, but you are inherently taking away what makes Gallente ships versatile....its ability to fit drones and half the time, rely on its drones to actually hit the target and provide damage. Now you can't with good faith honestly say that Gallente are not the drone users of Eve, so why are you adding "buffs" to all the other ships by giving them drone versatility? Take a look inside starter corps like CAS - a Gallente player npc corp - you'll often find people asking "What ship should I use? What skills should I train?" The almost over whelming response is to train up your drone skills and get into a ship like the vexor or ishkur, then eventually into an ishtar or dominix. Not to mention, almost every ship (pre-winter changes and some that we've seen now) have some form of drone to balance their dps. Having the ability to field some form of ewar drones and combat drones is what made the Gallente hulls creative. When you take away that niche by giving everyone some "Oh we don't want other ships to make gallente feel left out" 15m3 drone bays or 20m3 drone bay, you take away the role that gallente ships have in small scale fleets. Let's be honest, if we're blaster fit to provide real dps, we usually are the last ones to get dps on the target because we're slow, but we can send webber drones or some other ewar/combat drones and those start going right away to help the fleet out. With your proposed changes to just add crappy drone bays on every ship because it makes them balanced, you're taking away the sandbox feel as everyone just wants to build ecm-300 OP jamming sandcastles. The fact is that most people fill that joke of a drone bay with ecm-300s and know full well they will get at least 2 or more jams off from 2 or 3 ecm-300s, giving them the safety net of being able to warp off if the armor ship actually manages to catch the kiter. And for those who prefer to always bring combat drones, by adding those small drone bays, you are just welcoming more people to shoot my precious dps and kill it when i fly something like a vexor or arbitrator. So I'm asking the devs when you consider balancing cruisers and ships in general. Just giving small drones bays to everyone isn't the way to go, it's the easy way out. The races are specialized or else I'd be fitting autocannons on my thorax because they fit nicely and don't use cap, but that's not the case. Each race has a play style and backup play style, so keep that mentality going by not making everyone a drone user. If it so requires, give those ships an extra high slot for another gun, but you should be removing drone bays of most ships that aren't green and made to be in your face brawlers :P" CCP, quit giving drones out to everyone and their mother just because you hate Gallente!!!! Just my two cents from a true Gallentean, Yun
Azula Kishtar Lonely among the Stars 10	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:18:00 - [54] - Quote 285 m/s is the base speed of the new Stabber. Add a maximum of 25% as a bonus to it because of the Navigation skill which gives you 5% more speed per level. That makes it go 356 m/s which is just a bit less than the old speed. It also gets a fourth low slot which you can use for an additional Nano or Overdrive if you want. Iroxorsju wrote: I am actually showing the stabber slower after buff now without its old speed bonus. I am in game sitting in a stabber with no speed mods and it shows 360.9 m/s and the new speed is 285 m/s. Maybe i am not seeing something. Old Bonus was 5% faster per level.
Julius Foederatus Hyper-Nova 122	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:18:00 - [55] - Quote So the real question is, are you guys going to do something about the speed penalties on armor rigs/plates and how they balance out with shield tanking? Because that's really what has been holding a lot of cruisers behind, especially when it comes to the dominance of the shield cane.
Dex Ratzinger Corsairs Inc. Soldiers Of New Eve 0	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:19:00 - [56] - Quote Quote: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret firing speed Reading that as rate of fire, but can you confirm?
Roime Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance 1225	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:30:00 - [57] - Quote Thorax hints to an active armor tanking module buff. Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman
Alara IonStorm 3159	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:33:00 - [58] - Quote Dex Ratzinger wrote: Reading that as rate of fire, but can you confirm? It is.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 1452	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:35:00 - [59] - Quote Dex Ratzinger wrote: Quote: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret firing speed Reading that as rate of fire, but can you confirm? Yeah, that's a quirk of the way it's described in the current stabber description that I left unchanged for this. I'll change it to the same wording as the other ships. Game Designer \| Team Game of Drones https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie

LtCol Laurentius Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 72	Posted - 2012.09.18 13:36:00 - [60] - Quote Overall I think this is certainly an improvement over the current state of affairs. Attack cruisers are meant to be hit and run types of ships, providing excellent range control, speed and agility over tank and dps (which is the realm of the combat cruisers). And these rebalanced ships are certainly way faster and better able to hit at range (Omen, Stabber). Some questions and observations though: 1. Whats the reasoning behind choosing the Thorax over the Vexor for the attack role? I always envisioned the Vexor as the ranged kiter and the Thorax as the up and personal blaster brawler. Wouldnt it make more sense? I mean lore-wise, the Gallente weapons are blasters and drones, while the Caldari weapons are missiles and rails - even if both races can use both types of hybrids. Also, the new tracking bonus on the Thorax would be even better utilized on a close ranged blasterboat than a ranged rail-platform. 2. You seem to buff sensorstrenghts on most rebalanced ships so far, and this is of course therefore a nerf to the effectiveness of ECM. Is this part of the new ECM rebalance? 3. Why do you retain the dual weapon system layout on the Stabber? Wouldnt a 5/1 configuration work even better without competing with the Vagabond? Especially since you choose to keep the anemic 1 light drone on this hull.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 35 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.