This thread is asking about ship changes; I encourage you to pull up Pyfa or EFT and do some quick comparisons. Given that the Moa and the Vexor are gaining in cap stability, not gaining any more cap hungry guns and are currently cap stable with tackle/guns firing, I don't see cap usage on the guns playing a huge part in their ideal roles as brawlers.

I skimmed through several pages of comments, thought I'd give my two cents on some reoccurring opinions:

Rupture speed being too fast - of the combat cruisers, the rupture has the weakest tank, damage potential and projection of all four cruisers. Statements that it will dominate over the Attack Cruiser line of ships seems unfounded, as while it will outpace most of them by a base speed of ~20m/s, all of those ships have damage bonuses, slot layouts for tank and gank that match, if not are more competitive than the Rupture's 4 turrets with 30 m3 drone bay.

There's some talk that the Rupture's drone bay is too much, again I feel this is unfounded given the increase of power across all combat focused cruisers. If anything, the Rupture is losing its place as a damage king, and will rely greatly on the 30 m3 drone bay to compete with its improved competition.

The Moa with a fifth midslot will dominate versus other cruisers at close range to mid (13-15km) range. I think it's worth an honest look but it would necessitate losing the utility highslot, which is helping pad against cap warfare or tackling frigates, as well as less or no drone bay. A lack of drones would fit with the Caldari theme, and help offset the incredible durability and tackle/EWAR potential that the fifth midslot would provide.

The Maller in its proposed form would be incredibly vulnerable against frigates; however will be sporting amazing damage potential with great range (~400 DPS max skills with two heat sinks with scorch, ~460 DPS with IN Multifreq). Drones would probably make the ship too powerful compared to its peers given the ship's damage projection. Cap stability is definitely a concern when fitting a MWD, as it looks like with all five turrets running, a T2 point and a meta webifier that it would pretty quickly cap out. I kind of like that it requires sacrificing the usage of a low slot or a rig slot to alleviate this issue, however given the relative stability of the Vexor and the Moa, it feels quite harsh. I would like to try the ship before saying it really needs more cap or cap recharge, but playing around on EFT makes it look like it will be the case.

The Maller in its proposed form would be incredibly vulnerable against frigates; however will be sporting amazing damage potential with great range (~400 DPS max skills with two heat sinks with scorch, ~460 DPS with IN Multifreq).

You're comparing the damage and tank with the combat cruisers but the statement is the Rupture compared to Attack Cruisers....

Okay for starters I'm pretty sure your damage numbers are wrong as using Pyfa with an All V character the Maller does 330 dps with IN Multi and 263 with Scorch (used a Harbinger with 5xFMP IIs and 2xHS IIs) and has around 55k EHP (roughly). An armor Rupture does 327 turret dps with RF EMP with Dual 180s (220s: 348, 425s: 366) and has around 30k EHP while maintaining a medium neut, an additional utility mid for a myriad of options, more speed and with drones, well over 400dps and can break 500 with 25k EHP on shield fits. Sure the Rupture would lose in straight up slug match but that will never happen as the Rupture has so many options to disengage/run in the first place due to its awesome speed and utility.

I compared these 2 cruisers since you seem to think the Rupture doesn't need any tweaks and the Maller is going to be awesome.

You say the Attack Cruisers have slots to compete with the Rupture and damage bonuses to boot, but the Rupture can match them for dps easily and has more natural buffer as well as more fitting for that all important neut that will cause major problems for the Thorax/Omen and also allow the Rupture to dictate range better once it catches them (which it will as its faster), so yeah, I think the Rupture will always be the go-to I want a fast cruiser (other than the Stabber but thats a whole different animal) which kind of steps on the toes of the other races 'light' Attack Cruisers.

I also think your statement that the Moa will 'dominate' with a fifth midslot is unfounded as it's mostly going to be used for an Invuln or another LSE probably giving the Moa around 10k EHP extra putting it at 33kEHP/541dps which is almost exactly what an armor rupture gets, but the Rupture gets better range, medium neut, almost same speed (with armor and trimarks lol) an additional utility mid (so it would still be able to dictate range even if it was slower), I could go on but I think I made my point.

on behalf of the rupture:

it has the second worst base HP (4900)
an even bigger base mass than the maller (which is also more agile),
while beeing as agile as the moa (i assume agility means agility modifier)

though the moa has 100 base HP less then the rupture, it has 2100 base shield with resist bonus.
from the base stats, the rupture will depend on its smaller sig and speed to compensate for the smaller tank.

the stabber will still be faster and will be the choice if speed is needed, not to speek of the new, sexy design ^^.
additionally it still has 2 "utility highs" whereas the rupture now as one.
if the rupture needs to be nerfed, which only can be determined by actual testing, it should loose all or some of the drones.

...Of course making it a HAM ship rather than trying to keep it distinct from the Omen at all costs would be the better solution...

Why Vexor loses shield HP, when it's a shield tanker?

It doesn't have the PG to fit armor tank with guns, and both drone damage amps and magstabs go to lowslots.

Oh nice Rupture, we needed another OP minnie ship that is faster than anything else, while being able to fit everything with fitting to spare. Why OP speed but no drawbacks to it? Why drones?

What is your thinking behind making it so fast?

Let the Rupture simply like it is now.
Anything else is overkill. Rupture is already the most overpowered Tech1 not faction cruiser.
With these changes the new Omen, Maller and Moa are dead before they are born. Rupture is simply completely superior to them.
Skip one high on the moa and give it another mid. Maller needs drones. Minimum 20mb bandwith. Let the Rupture like it is now (I mean NOW and not the crazy buffed stuff you presented us).
Even then I am not sure if the actual Rupture would-¦t be superior to NEW Moa and Maller.

I think the general consensus is that you should take this all back to the drawing board and give it quite a lot more thought.

Especially the maller, stop hating on amarr <.<

I agree it seemed quickly slapped together, the moa is also weird in regards to slot layout. An on a cruiser I do feel that the vex or can be much more drone focused than it currently is.

mm.. you could give vexor armour rep bonus drop a mid to low drop a turret and double its drone bonus and drop its drones to 50/100. And do buff its cpu you realise all drone upgrades use lots of cpu and rigs compound it even more by taking away cpu?.

dat moa!

so can we expect a hybrid damage bonus for the ferox and Rokh too?

loving the rest, especially the improvements to the vexor.

I've compared the Rupture to All combat and attack cruisers and even 1 electronic warfare cruiser. The Rupture is being overshadowed in close and long range combat area by 3 - 4 other cruisers.

That list can be backed up with setups and facts. Could go into silly variables of they could encounter all day (solo or small gang).

Are Faction cruisers being adjusted? With the buffs to the basic cruisers most of the faction ones seem pretty redundant. Just to take Caldari as an example.

Please back it up with some fits and numbers. So far the consensus is that the Rupture is excellent.

This is definetely something which should be adjusted at the same time as other cruisers. Otherwise we will be waiting for update a long time I fear.

At the very least faction hulls should get some changes to speed, shield, etc. that vanilla versions get. However, that still does not address the imbalance of slots. For example Nosprey has 12 slots compared to 14 of attack cruisers and Nosprey is supposed to be the fastest caldari boat out there. Right now Nosprey can be surprisiginly effective but come winter, it's going to be laughed at by pretty much anything.

Nosprey would probably need increase to drone bay and +1 high/mid with one more launcher to make it worthwhile. And PG/CPU to go with it of course.

I've already compared the Rupture with the Omen, Thorax and Caracal in terms of damage in this thread. The damage is the same as it is now except with alot more CPU and powergrid and since I've flown both solo I'm very aware of thier strength and weaknesses. The fact you're asking me something you should investigate yourself instead of throwing out random words. Suggest you don't know what you're on about.

Those with sense and experience know that list is correct for the most part. Many of the future damage increases can be graphed now with EFT. You can compare the damage projected and applied of the Omen, Thorax, Caracal and Rupture now with "common setups". Otherwise you can use substatutes like the Osprey Navy Issue or Caracal Navy Issue to get a good idea of what the Bellicose and Caracal will look like.

The rest is just throwing in changes to hit points, velocity, capacitor and other factors. Overall, CCP will be forced to boost Navy Faction cruisers because that's what these new tech 1 cruisers are.

I find it ammusing when someone just randomly brings up velocity without looking @ other factors. A shield-ac-Hurricane is alot faster than a hml-Drake. However, it doesn't matter. There are other factors that make that higher velocity mute. One of those is damage projection and overall hp. Compare a Talos versus a Hurricane etc. A ship that has alot less tank compared to a shield-hurricane, but has insane damage application and projection. That is the same comparison that can be made with the proposed Omen and Rupture. About the only thing that can be said is that a shield-Rupture may escape. I prefer using a armor-Rupture. A shield-Omen will school it provided it can maintain range (nano).

I'm also rather saddened by the fact that not a single cruiser was made with active tanking in mind.

Why not?

Or make it a rail boat as Navy caracal will prob end up being faster and what not