EVE Search - Sticky:[Winter] Combat Cruisers

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Winter] Combat Cruisers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 12 post(s)
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 199	Posted - 2012.10.03 12:22:00 - [1] - Quote I don't think dropping the Moa's optimal range bonus is a good idea. I feel that the Cadari rail boat philosphy will be lost for pure blaster boats. I think a better idea would have been to give the ship an extra turret (total 6) and the required fittings for it and to keep 10% per level optimal bonus. This would essentially build into the hull a 20% damage increase and allow the ship to retain range advantages. This fix would also work for the Ferox and would keep the Caldari turret ships in line with the Rokh (Optimal and Resist bonused hulls) instead of mixing up the line with damage and resist hulls.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 200	Posted - 2012.10.03 13:47:00 - [2] - Quote Takeshi Yamato wrote: A look at the new Vexor [Vexor, new] Damage Control II Overdrive Injector System II Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive 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 Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Hammerhead II x2 Ogre II x2 Hobgoblin II x1 Roughly 29k hp (new armor and hull values simulated with a 6% hull implant, Reinforced Bulkheads II, 200mm RT plate) 450 drone dps (2x stacking penalized 23% drone damage mods and 315 base drone damage) 306 blaster dps with void. 274 blaster dps with navy antimatter. 218 blaster dps with null. 368 / 375 CPU 732 / 1000 PG Goes 2153 m/s I always find it [totes] hilarious that alot of Gallente ships are far better shield tanked than armour tanked even when they have armour bonuses.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 201	Posted - 2012.10.03 14:40:00 - [3] - Quote ColdCutz wrote: - I would also recommend the 5H, 6M, 3L layout for the Moa. It needs enough mids for adequate Tank and Tackle - Staying power. I'd rather have a 6H (6 turrets), 5M, 3L layout with a 10% optimal range bonus over a 5% damage bonus
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 204	Posted - 2012.10.09 11:06:00 - [4] - Quote Jerick Ludhowe wrote: This major killz guy is an idiot. I think he might just be a child to be honest.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 208	Posted - 2012.10.10 08:44:00 - [5] - Quote The fact that there hasn't been a response from CCP Fozzie in regards to the feedback in this thread gives me a I'd really like to hear what CCP Fozzie thinks of: The mass issues with these ships (velocity under propulsion mods) The Moa not havving an optimal range bonus The Moa not having enough mid slots The Maller still being a little lame Please Fozzie. Your responses always give us ~~an erection~~ a
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 220	Posted - 2012.10.17 11:37:00 - [6] - Quote Lili Lu wrote: It seems to me most people commenting in this thread are underwhelmed with the Maller and Moa. Maller needs a dronebay. Moa needs another mid for the loss of a high slot. Vexor and Rupture are where we would expect a "combat cruiser" to be. Although I think the speed advantage of the Rupture is a little excessive. Maller: I agree. Moa: I'd rather see a low slot move to a mid slot. Drop the damage bonus for the old 10% optimal and fill that 6th high slot with another gun ( and the PG/CPU to fit it of course). It would actually work as a brawler or a sniper then. Vexor: Is pretty damn good. I'm just a little afraid that the 4 mids of the Vexor pushes it too a shield tank setup. Maybe if it dropped it for the utility high slot it wouldn't just be used as a shield gank. Also, it's mass is too low. Rupture: Agree that the Rupture is too fast.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 220	Posted - 2012.10.18 09:35:00 - [7] - Quote These are the changes I would make: Maller: Cruiser skill bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage 5% bonus to all Armor Resistances Slot layout: 5 H (-1), 3 M, 6 L, 5 turrets Fittings: 1000 PWG (+100), 280 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1200(-168) / 2100(+225) / 1700(-19) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1550(+50) / 515s(-22.5s) / 3 (+0.2) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 205(+41) / 0.56(-0.045) / 11550000 / 6.1s (-0.4) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 47.5km / 280(+10) / 6 Sensor strength: 16 Radar (+2) Signature radius: 130 Cargo capacity: 480 (+200) I've just added a flight of light drones to this hull as the ship just seemed a little lame without them. Moa: Cruiser skill bonuses: ~~5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage~~ 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret Optimal range 5% bonus to shield resistances Slot layout: 6 H, 5 M, 3 L, 6 turrets, 2 launchers Fittings: 900 PWG (+20), 400CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2100(+225) / 1200(-129) / 1500(-24) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1425(+50) / 475s(-16.25s) / 3 (+0.2) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 195(+31) / 0.54 / 11720000 / 5.9s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 20 / 20 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 260(+7) / 7 Sensor strength: 17 Gravimetric (+1) Signature radius: 135 Cargo capacity: 450 (+200) I've added a 6th turret here and moved a low to a mid. I've also changed the Hybrid damage bonus for an optimal. This is to keep the Moa in line with Caldari doctrines and creates a "mini Rokh" feel to the ship. Moving the low to a mid allows for better use of needed mid slot modules and the ship can now be used as either a rail boat or a pure blaster brawler. To compensate for the loss in damage (+1 turret doesn't cut it) I've added an extra light drone. Vexor: Cruiser skill bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 10% bonus to drone hitpoints, damage and mining yield Slot layout: 4 H (-1), 4 M (+1), 5 L (+1), 4 turrets Fittings: 800 PWG (+125), 300 CPU (+30) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1100(-73) / 2000(+515) / 2000(+515) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1450(+200) / 482.5s(+36.25s) / 3 (+0.2) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 215(+46) / 0.6(+0.03) / 11310000 / 5.8s (+0.3) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 100 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 52.5km / 280(+4) / 6(+1) Sensor strength: 16 Magnetometric (+2) Signature radius: 145 (-5) Cargo capacity: 480 The only problem with the Vexor was it's mass. I've bumped it's mass up here to be more in line with the other combat cruisers. Rupture: Cruiser skill bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret firing speed 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage Slot layout: 5 H (-1), 4 M (+1), 5 L, 4 turrets, 2 launchers Fittings: 860 PWG, 350 CPU (+25) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1500(-63) / 1800(+159) / 1600(+37) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1275(+25) / 425s(-21.25s) / 3(+0.2) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 225 / 0.54 / 11650000 / 5.9s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 30 / 30 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 50km(+5) / 290(+8) / 6(+1) Sensor strength: 15 Ladar (+3) Signature radius: 125 (-5) Cargo capacity: 450 (+150) The Rupture was very good. It was just too fast. I've reduced it's max velocity to bring it more in line.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 224	Posted - 2012.10.19 13:08:00 - [8] - Quote One day Fozzie told us how, The combat cruiser rebalancing will go, He posted on the EvE-O forums, The things that we should know, We studied them in depth, And theory crafted their roles, Some argued and some debabted, And some just fed the Trolls, Though we came to a conclusion, The Maller needs some drones and the Rupture's too fast, The Moa needs a mid slot and the Vexor will be a blast, We posted this feedback, So Fozzie could reply, But little did we know, To Austin Fozzie did fly, But now he is back, And to this task he has been set, The CSM has been informed, So what are we going to get? So please Fozzie pretty please An update could you make, I'm sure we will all "like" it, and then we can eat some cake!
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 228	Posted - 2012.10.24 11:11:00 - [9] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: sten mattson wrote: i would not be surprised if the prophecy suffured the same fate as the maller and punisher , despite being tier 1 and not tier 2 CCP Fozzie posted in the minutes and somewhere else that he wants to make it a Drone Boat. Which would be a sad day. A 5% HML/HAM RoF bonus and the 5% armour bonus would be so much better (would also have synergy with T2 and be the armour option for HML/HAM)
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 228	Posted - 2012.10.24 11:20:00 - [10] - Quote Bouh Revetoile wrote: Why not drone/EWAR prophecy ? Cause it would make Arbitrators pointless
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 235	Posted - 2012.11.01 09:39:00 - [11] - Quote Torei Dutalis wrote: So I have to ask, what's with the vexor having 13 total slots and the other 3 cruisers having 14? Drone ships always get one less slot
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 239	Posted - 2012.11.22 09:23:00 - [12] - Quote Well I've been looking at these ships a lot now. I have to agree with most people in this forum that the Maller is lame in comparison to the Moa, Vexor, Rupture, Thorax and even the Omen appears to be a better "Combat" cruiser than the Maller. The Maller needs more drones to up it's DPS a little and more CPU to be able to fit two EANMs. If it had a 40/40 MBit / M3 drone bay it would massively solve the poor damage the Maller has. I do think it should keep it's capacitor problems though. This should be it's drawback. Remember Amarr ships don't really need a MWD as their short range damage projection is fantastic. Also. Please rebalance capacitor batteries so that they're worth fitting. Anything less than a large capacitor battery isn't worth fitting to a cruiser. A medium cap battery should have the large cap battery stats. The large should give closer to BS sized capacitor increases.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 239	Posted - 2012.11.22 11:55:00 - [13] - Quote Bouh Revetoile wrote: Sheynan wrote: disregarding any range/tracking/drone destruction (!)) Disregarding range when it is the primary strength of pulse laser against the other weapons... In fact, you would only use blasters then. Now, combat cruiser are not meant to obsolete attack cruisers, and the maller definitly is more robust than the Omen (and than any other cruiser for that matter), and you can't blame it for having a battlecruiser speed when it have a battlecruiser tank. Why all cruisers should be best solo brawlers ? In a fleet, with damage application of pulse, only the Caracal will match it, and its tank is unrivaled. There definitly is situations where tank matter. And for the tank he have, the Maller is not that slow (not all BC go to the shield nano hurricane speed). But a Moa and a Vexor can get very competitive tanks and still deal substantial DPS. A Vexor also has excellent damage projection with drones. The Maller seriously has nothing going for it at the minute. It can field a maginally larger tank than the other combat cruisers and project poor dps with weapons that are utterly dependent on capacitor which the Maller can't support without a cap booster or a battery. The Omen is a far superior ship. Capable of actually using it's damage projection.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 240	Posted - 2012.11.26 13:28:00 - [14] - Quote Is it just me or is the Thorax a better Combat Cruiser than the Rupture?! Edit: I've also just realised that the Celestis is a better combat cruiser than the Rupture!!
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 241	Posted - 2012.11.26 14:55:00 - [15] - Quote Bouh Revetoile wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: Is it just me or is the Thorax a better Combat Cruiser than the Rupture?! Edit: I've also just realised that the Celestis is a better combat cruiser than the Rupture!! And what does make you think that ? Raw dps and tank ? ...............and speed and tracking (Thorax). Show me a Rupture fit that the Thorax can't do.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 241	Posted - 2012.11.26 15:49:00 - [16] - Quote The VC's wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: Bouh Revetoile wrote: Spugg Galdon wrote: Is it just me or is the Thorax a better Combat Cruiser than the Rupture?! Edit: I've also just realised that the Celestis is a better combat cruiser than the Rupture!! And what does make you think that ? Raw dps and tank ? ...............and speed and tracking (Thorax). Show me a Rupture fit that the Thorax can't do. Something with a neut maybe? Touch+¬ However........5x EV-600's (yes, I know ) would cap out a Rupture using a medium neut on a Thorax a long time before the Thorax was capped out by the Ruptures Neut.
Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 241	Posted - 2012.11.28 15:21:00 - [17] - Quote I'd still Fly this Celestis against a Ruture. Fit wrote: [Celestis, Celestis: Shield Blasters] Damage Control II Drone Damage Amplifier II Drone Damage Amplifier II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I Warp Scrambler II Heavy Electron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Hammerhead II x5

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.