| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
110
   |
Posted - 2012.10.03 19:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
MOA is highly unoriginal and defeats the purpose of Caldari rail boats.
I would sugguest the following to make it more original:
10% Optimal per level
5% resistance per level
6/5/2 slot layout:
6 Turrets
+250 Powergrid
This allows the ship to get a damage boost w/o requiring the ship bonuses to change, and it gives it a more desired mid slot layout for range/tank boosting depending on the build you go.
It keeps it's damage boost for the most part as 6 turrets would be 20% damage boost, but does not lose it's optimal bonus, which is the whole allure of Rails. |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 20:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nah, giving it 3 lows and 4 mids would make it too much tank and gank with the option for 2 Mags and a DCU. Choice needs to be made, 2 Mags or 1 Mag/1 DCU b/c with 6 turrets, the blaster fit would be way too much tank and gank for that combo.
giving it 2 lows with a 6/5/2 layout allows it to do decent rail damage/range and still solid blaster damage up to 501 with void/perfect skills... all the while giving it unique caldari bonuses and not just making it a shield thorax.
My choice is to do what the devs seem incapable of, make unique ships with actual choices rather than stale ships that all look identical on paper. |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 20:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:I'm Down wrote:Nah, giving it 3 lows and 4 mids would make it too much tank and gank with the option for 2 Mags and a DCU. Choice needs to be made, 2 Mags or 1 Mag/1 DCU b/c with 6 turrets, the blaster fit would be way too much tank and gank for that combo. Noooooo... It really would not. I'm Down wrote:
giving it 2 lows with a 6/5/2 layout allows it to do decent rail damage/range and still solid blaster damage up to 501 with void/perfect skills... all the while giving it unique caldari bonuses and not just making it a shield thorax.
Your decent rail Dmg is less Dmg then a Thorax does with Rails. 304 Dmg CM Antimatter with 250mm eating all the Grid and that is with no DCU. So no your Moa would never be Rail Fit.
you didn't see the massive PG boost I gave the ship? and of course the rax does slightly more damage, but at much shittier optimals, hence, tradeoffs. |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 21:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:I'm Down wrote:
you didn't see the massive PG boost I gave the ship?
I did. It would be enough to fit now that I remember the engineering bonus it would not eat up the grid but it would still have terrible DPS.
it would be 5% less dps than the thorax w/o drones.... i don't get your definition of terrible dps |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 23:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:I'm Down wrote:
it would be 5% less dps than the thorax w/o drones.... i don't get your definition of terrible dps
That is an incredibly vague statement, like you think I have a psychic window into your preferred Thorax Fit vs your Rail Moa fit.
It's a statement based on base statistics of 6 guns w/o a bonus vs 5 with a 25%. Basic math is hard? |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
110
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 03:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:I'm Down wrote:Alara IonStorm wrote:I'm Down wrote:
it would be 5% less dps than the thorax w/o drones.... i don't get your definition of terrible dps
That is an incredibly vague statement, like you think I have a psychic window into your preferred Thorax Fit vs your Rail Moa fit. It's a statement based on base statistics of 6 guns w/o a bonus vs 5 with a 25%. Basic math is hard? /Facepalm. The some of a Ships value is not static based on the modules that can be directly fit and used as well as how well they are supported. Again +5% is vague and varies fit to fit. Bottom line your Rail Moa does 255 DPS with CNAM using 250mm Rails and 305 with 2 Magstabs and no DCU. It is literally terrible as a rail boat.
Yeah and 501 with Blasters, and the fact that it can fit 2 LSE, and the fact that there's no such thing as damage rigs, or other reasons to fit it to a massive shield specific tank.
But then again, who wants a 45000+ EHP (60,000+ EHP with bonuses) boat that can do decent rail damage comparable to any other T1 cruiser or Solid CR damage when it can't fit a DCU... I mean WTF crack can I be smoking not fitting a DCU to every ******* ship in game. |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
113
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 17:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
FistyMcBumBasher wrote:I
If you are set on turning the cruisers into mini battleships, my suggestion would be to turn the Omen into a mini Apoc by replacing one of the bonuses for an optimal range bonus. This would give it a way to project it's damage similar to the other attack cruisers (falloff on stabber, flight time on caracal). Giving the Maller some form of dronebay would also go a long way into helping it not just be the brick bait and having some form of frigate defense. Hell, it is the only t1 cruiser without a dronebay. How does that make sense considering that you devs have stated that you want drones to be the secondary weapon system of Amarr? Replace the turret damage bonus with a 50/150 drone bay with a drone bonus similar to the arbitrator/vexor and now the maller is a brick able to defend itself.
Also, isn't it a little boring and a bit monotonous that almost every single t1 Amarr damage ship has one of it's ship bonuses to capacitor use of energy turrets? A problem easily solved by fitting a cap booster.
Thanks for your time,
-Fisty
Pleaase god no... II've already proposed the Prophecy should get a 15% optimal per level, 5% resist per level at the BC class to make it a unique build that doesn't overlap with the BS, Cruiser, BC, or Hac platforms in any significant way while having an actual role.
Making a cruiser fill this role too diminishes the concept.
All the justification there:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=157299&find=unread |
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Against ALL Authorities
133
|
Posted - 2012.11.15 05:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:What I mean is that this maller still have some undeniable qualities and that some of its drawback are either inherent (lack of mids, you have a LOT of lows to compensate) or known problems (armor tanking...)
You cannot ask a plated armor ship to be fast (to be honnest, you can't ask a lot of an armor ship at the moment), and yet you cannot make all the ships shield tankers just because of this. The right way is to fix armor tank, not to compensate for armor balance problems in the hull.
Second thing is ehp : your mallers have, for the frailest one, 50% more ehp than regular gallente or minmatar ship. You cannot ask your ship to have such resilience AND have comparable other stats (speed/dps/cap).
Start by reducing your tank to standard lvl and minmatarize your ship if what you want is a lazors minmatar ship. As I said, you can easily remove all the armor rigs for something else to alleviate the problems you face. Even one ellutriation rig can be enough to solve all your cap problems (well, to the level of a cap using ship of course, but that's another debate).
You ever stop to think a slow brick might need more range and tracking to make up for it?
Medium Pulse range is an absolute joke. Medium beams are a disaster to fit and a joke for range as well. There are only a few ships even capable of using either of those well.
For starters, why isn't there a medium and small equivalent to Tachyons? Good alpha, high DPS, horrible on cap, horrible on grid?
Secondly, why do medium pulses get such terrible optimal? Bump their optimal up by about 2 base, and it fixes a lot of the issue with speed ships just kiting it all day. |
| |
|