| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Simyaldee
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
36
   |
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:18:00 -
[61] - Quote
Over all the changes seem good, more in line with the Combat Close range brawlers, just a few problems.
Maller: I was hoping the Maller would be put in line with the Sacrilege, now the HAMs are getting are getting a tiny buff, a HAM Maller Brawler would have been awesome, not sure why it gets the Cargo Bay upgrade either, doesn't really need such a massive cargo bay.
Also, why no drones? it might be because the Maller isn't losing any of its ridiculous tanking, so it might be some sort of compensation to make it more vulnerable to tacklers. I have to say again, was reaaaalllyyy hoping for a Missile Maller, now it looks like the Caracal and maybe the Bellicose will be the only cruisers spamming missiles out there.
Moa: Think that that either a high or a low should be dropped for a mid, Honestly the extra dps it might get from a launcher in the spare high is minimal when compared with extra tank or tackling ability. Also, fitting a full rack of Medium Hybrid Guns is still a little difficult with the Moa, would give it a tiny percent more in the way of PG and CPU.
Vexor: Haven't flown Gallente to much, so im not sure about this, Upped its tank by a fairly substatial amount, the extra mid, will allow people to shield tank a little more effectively, kiting vexors might be a thing...the drone bay is pretty ok by me, full flight of light, full flight of medium with some room for spares.
Rupture: Still great, the removal of the extra high slot will nerf it a little bit, which it kind of needed since it was basically one of the only cruisers out there.
This is more of a question for all of the cruisers that have the sort of haphazard weapons design where you have an almost full rack of one type of weapon(in this case Turrets) and a couple of a second weapon system(in this case two launcher slots) when it only has bonuses to one weapons system. For example, have you ever seen a turret on a Caracal? it has the slots for them but everybody always fits a full rack of Launchers because its the best fit. I can't remember ever seeing a rupture with launchers in its spare highs, most people fit a neuts, this goes even more since your dropping a high slot from the ruppie, now unless your planning on fitting a Rupture with only three turrets(Why the hell would you do that when it has a double bonus to Turret Damage, your basically dropping off your dps with pretty much no other gain whatsoever) your always going to have a full rack of the bonused weapons system no matter what, and the utility highs are almost never used for
Join the war, Join the4
|
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
92
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:20:00 -
[62] - Quote
Kithian Hastos wrote:
Would an ECM heavy drone with +50% increase in strength be overpowered?
yes, ridiculously |
Gorn Arming
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
67
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:21:00 -
[63] - Quote
The Moa and Maller are still quite poor, while the new Rupture is so fast I am skeptical that any other cruiser will be worth flying.
Why does the Moa have the same powergrid as the Vexor, despite the fact that the Moa is expected to fit more guns? Why does it have only four midslots? And why is the Rupture so fast? You recognize that you've made it faster than most of the "attack" cruisers, right? Was this deliberate? |
Gypsio III
Chemikals
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
377
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:23:00 -
[64] - Quote
Just echoing that it sounds absurd for the Rupture to be faster than all the attack cruisers. |
Harvey James
Prospero's Sight
41
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:23:00 -
[65] - Quote
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:Kithian Hastos wrote:
Would an ECM heavy drone with +50% increase in strength be overpowered?
yes, ridiculously
indeed they have 12.5 ecm strength already so think mini falcons with that bonus.. lol that would bee funny to see in AT. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Toxic Waste Industries
163
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:24:00 -
[66] - Quote
I'm usually hyper critical of these changes however these looks absolutely fantastic! 
My only two suggestion at this point which seems to follow the trend in this thread so far is for the removal of 1 low from the moa in exchange for 1 mid slot as well as a reduction to the speed of the rupture. Rupture has two damage bonuses and will be traveling at similar speeds as some of the attack cruisers. I'd advise it's speed be dropped by 20ish. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
92
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:25:00 -
[67] - Quote
Sheynan wrote:
Utility highs are cool, it's about time we have them on something else than minmatar ships. I think the Moa might even have enough pg to fit a medium neut into that
nothing cruiser sized of caldari will ever fit a medium neut |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
220
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:28:00 -
[68] - Quote
I am a little puzzled why the Minmatar and Gallente combat cruisers doesn't follow the line of Combat ships with a Repair bonus for the Vexor and Shield Boost bonus for the Rupture. The Vexor and Rupture looks more in line with Attack Cruisers suited up for dps and not so much staying power... In my opinion Minmatar should have a tank cruiser and Gallente should have a cruiser with a repair bonus to follow the trends and perhaps break the obsolete image of Minmatar as a buffer gank race and the image of Gallente Droneboats with 1 unused bonus.
What is the argumentation behind these lay-outs?
Moa:
Giving the Moa only 4 medslots in return for a near useless 6th hi-slot is one of the few things I expected a balancing team to fix and not pass on the eternally haunt the Moa.
The Moa as a Shield tanking gunboat desperately needs more medslots than a missile ship (e.g. Caracal) to properly function in combat. With both blasters and railguns being an option the Moa need at least:
- Propulsion
- Tank mod (Shield Extender / Shield Booster)
- At least 1 resist module
- Tackle (Blasters need at least web + scrambler or Point + Tracking Computer for Railguns)
- Cap Booster, 2nd resist module, Shield Boost Amplifier, Tracking Computer, ECCM etc etc
|
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
The Forsworn Protectorate
Imperial Protectorate
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:29:00 -
[69] - Quote
This is all.... Bah.
Simply compare the NEW Rupture to the new Omen.
Rupture with additional medium will have more tank is a LOT faster and has similar maybe even more firepower plus a neut.
Super job guys (caution: sarkasm is on)
Maller is still a completely joke. If I fit Blasters on it it will be a nice Brawler. Moa is a completely joke. And you now it.
Vexor.... well it is the pve boat as always.
So what do you propose us?
A big BUFF to the already almighty Rupture and laughable buffs to the other cruisers.
Are there so many Minmatar players you fear if they loose their winmatar status?
Why should I fly a new caracal, new omen or even a new kitey rail Thorax when Rupture is a LOT faster, has more tank with this new mid slot and same or even more firepower????
Yeah you will say use a maller then. LOL. Very funny. The lasers on the Maller will still s... and with Blasters it will get kited by the rupture. Hahaha.
Rupture vs Rail Moa? You know the outcome: Rupture under Moas guns= Moa dead. Blaster Moa? Gets kited by Rupture to hell.
And Vexor? Well Gallente would REALLY need some love. It is still the PVE boat as always.
And why do minmatar medium turrets kill frigs better than any other medium weapon which is considered to kill cruisers?
You will never get a frig Shot with Medium pulse lasers if it is under your guns. Trying this with a medium AC fitted ship= you die.
That is overkill. |
Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
171
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:31:00 -
[70] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Registering Vexor pilot approval.
The other changes look nice too. I expect some Rupture fans to start crying about the -1H slot though. :)
Actually I'm crying about the -1 on the Vexor, myself.
My Alliance used the crap out of slot as a medium RR, with 6+ people in little gangs, each with an RR, we've pissed off many a war target when our T1 cruisers wouldn't die as easily as they thought.
Hey, as a dude that lives in lowsec, you should read my idea on how to "fix" it... in Blog format, complete with a spreadsheet!
http://3xxxd.blogspot.com/2012/09/how-to-buff-lowsec.html |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
931
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:37:00 -
[71] - Quote
a maller without neut, dronebay, range or tracking bonus is still the weakest cruiser of the four. Sure i would like to test it first before commenting but it still looks like the old brick to me - just a little bit easier to fitt.
a eve-style bounty system https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105
You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility
72
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:38:00 -
[72] - Quote
First of all. The dudes complaining about the Rupture getting a boost are p deluded. The ship got 1 mid slot and lost a utility slot. Every other combat cruiser received a significant boost. Either a damage bonus or extra slots. The Vexor is the worse offender and probably, along with other Gallente ships should be near overpowered given Gallente ships lack of versatility.
Only those who understand meta combat aspects of Eve will see the usefulness of a forth mid slot. Most will just think about having an extra shield extender.
In anycase, if the Rupture didn't get a forth mid slot many attack cruisers would overshadow a Rupture close or long range and according to CCP that's not suppose to happen.
So only 3 of the 4 cruisers on that list got boosted. The Rupture is the same ship and all of the combat cruisers got a increase in velocity.
EDIT: Also, to the r3t@rds. The Omen will and does do significantly more damage @ 17km than a shield-Rupture. The new Caracal and Bellicose will also out damage a Rupture @ those ranges with more tank. Infact the shield-Rupture will have as much damage and tnak as a shield-thorax @ 20km. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
372
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:38:00 -
[73] - Quote
+1 for the amount of posts CCP Fozzie, after the Summer of Silence its nice to see some activity for Eve. Dunno TBH how much I'll personally use these crusers though I pretty much skipped them when I first started Eve 2 years ago.
Are they meant now to be level 1-3 mission boats? TBH I doubt they'/ll see much action in NULL fleet doctorines when HACs, T3's & BS's are so much more powerfull. Its good newbies get some buffs though.
Nostalgie ist die Faehigkeit, darueber zu trauern, dass es nicht mehr so
ist, wie es frueher nicht gewesen ist. -- Manfred Rommel-á |
Frothgar
V0LTA
Verge of Collapse
40
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:39:00 -
[74] - Quote
What sort of fitting goals do you have for the Moa? EG 200 or 250 rails on a kiting fit? I would really like to see people being able to paly with fits like Heavy Beams, 720s, 250s with a small tank (1LSE, or 800 plate) with no more than 1 RCU or 2 Rigs. |
Iris Bravemount
The Golden Gaze
85
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:40:00 -
[75] - Quote
Great!
Thanks for not giving the vexor an active repper bonus, those always feel wasted.
Mad props for making the moa useful! I hope the Ferox will get the same treatment!
However, why did you remove utility high slots on the maller and the vexor? No love for NOS modules?
Can't really tell what to think about the ruppy, I don't know that ship at all.
My suggestion: replace all active tank boni (as in on all ships in the game) with either damage, range or passive resist boni. The latter apply to both active and passive tanking. Do I think about a +dmg +falloff brutix? Do I? :)
I accidentally... the bookmark.
How much is it worth? |
Satracz
Meteoric Security Supply Service
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:41:00 -
[76] - Quote
Deez Icho wrote:Why Moa have only 4 medium slots? As brawler he need tank and good tackle options, we put scrambler, web and MWD and only 1 medium slot left for tank. Better remove 1 hight slot and give additional 1 medium, trade for 1 low slot will be good too.
Slowest ship of this type, so a lot of low sots only can have at dealing damage. This ship have bonus for shield not for armor.
100'% agree
If you dont want too add an Extra Mid - 1 Lowslot pls....
otherwise Moa is a real bad Cruiser :/ |
Mizhir
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
114
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:42:00 -
[77] - Quote
Wouldn't the rupture steal the spotlight from the Stabber with its 4 mids? I would love to see both ships viable and different.
Pinky Denmark wrote:I am a little puzzled why the Minmatar and Gallente combat cruisers doesn't follow the line of Combat ships with a Repair bonus for the Vexor and Shield Boost bonus for the Rupture. The Vexor and Rupture looks more in line with Attack Cruisers suited up for dps and not so much staying power... In my opinion Minmatar should have a tank cruiser and Gallente should have a cruiser with a repair bonus to follow the trends and perhaps break the obsolete image of Minmatar as a buffer gank race and the image of Gallente Droneboats with 1 unused bonus.
I would rather see the Rupture being open to both shield and armor tanking rather than being shoehorned to an active shield tanked ship. Bonus for active tanking should be a niche role and I would prefer it to be an option for all ships rather than having a shiplineup which is perfectly matched for that type of tanking.
Also, Minmatar tank with speed and guns :)
|
MotorBoatMe WithYourFace
PiiiGGGss iiiNNN SSSpppAAAcccEEE
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:52:00 -
[78] - Quote
Great start,
Moa suggestions for me would be -1 high +1 mid. Then it will be a clear path forward from the Merlin. Maybe a tad more speed and grid as well.
Going to agree with above posts that the Maller needs at least 3 light drones or it will be useless for pve and subpar on dps.
Vexor and Ruppie look good (my minnie toon is smiling from ear to ear with the speed + mid slot buff, makes the cane nerf a little easier to take)
Looking at the changes overall to missiles, destroyers, attack / ewar / logistics cruisers you can see the direction CCP is going for enhanced group play with more synergy between ships and even cross race groupings. All my missile boats will want a pocket Bellicose! Glad you have the marbles to make some change to shake up the status quo CCP |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
932
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:52:00 -
[79] - Quote
btw when is all this stuff on a test server? i think the guy from pyfa requires a running server to grab all the specs for a new build
a eve-style bounty system https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105
You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
120
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:54:00 -
[80] - Quote
Mizhir wrote:Wouldn't the rupture steal the spotlight from the Stabber with its 4 mids? I would love to see both ships viable and different.
This, pretty much. I'm playing around with them in evehq and I can't come up with anything I can do with a stabber that the rupture doesn't do better. |
Harvey James
Prospero's Sight
41
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:57:00 -
[81] - Quote
Tsubutai wrote:Mizhir wrote:Wouldn't the rupture steal the spotlight from the Stabber with its 4 mids? I would love to see both ships viable and different. This, pretty much. I'm playing around with them in evehq and I can't come up with anything I can do with a stabber that the rupture doesn't do better.
its like give the stabber a role that works properly this time... oh and then make the ruppy who already has a role as armour tanker better than the stabber as its role and lol at people who thought we would make the stabber a viable ship again... also maller is the only cruiser without drones... lol even the bb got some for some reason oh and one drone is pointless on a ship. |
Frothgar
V0LTA
Verge of Collapse
40
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 14:58:00 -
[82] - Quote
Tsubutai wrote:Mizhir wrote:Wouldn't the rupture steal the spotlight from the Stabber with its 4 mids? I would love to see both ships viable and different. This, pretty much. I'm playing around with them in evehq and I can't come up with anything I can do with a stabber that the rupture doesn't do better.
I'm kinda concerned about that too. Rupture has hands downt he most utility options out of all of the cruisers ATM. |
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
The Forsworn Protectorate
Imperial Protectorate
13
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:00:00 -
[83] - Quote
Quote:Major Killz
Posted: 2012.10.02 14:38
First of all. The dudes complaining about the Rupture getting a boost are p deluded. The ship got 1 mid slot and lost a utility slot. Every other combat cruiser received a significant boost. Either a damage bonus or extra slots. The Vexor is the worse offender and probably, along with other Gallente ships should be near overpowered given Gallente ships lack of versatility.
Only those who understand meta combat aspects of Eve will see the usefulness of a forth mid slot. Most will just think about having an extra shield extender.
In anycase, if the Rupture didn't get a forth mid slot many attack cruisers would overshadow a Rupture close or long range and according to CCP that's not suppose to happen.
So only 3 of the 4 cruisers on that list got boosted. The Rupture is the same ship and all of the combat cruisers got a increase in velocity.
EDIT: Also, to the r3t@rds. The Omen will and does do significantly more damage @ 17km than a shield-Rupture. The new Caracal and Bellicose will also out damage a Rupture @ those ranges with more tank. Infact the shield-Rupture will have as much damage and tnak as a shield-thorax @ 20km.
Omen doing more damage than rupture? What did you smoke?
Yeah all combat cruisers got increase in velocity and rupture is still faster.
Standard Rupture fit is 4 425mm ac T2, med+¡um energy neut, small energy neut 2, large shield ext, warp dis2, 10mn microwarp, tracking enhancer2, nanofiber2, 2gyrostab 2, damage control, field extender, thermal and em shield rigs.
Does 391fdmg at 26km with drones, 1741m/s and 19k ehp. 465dmg/s with Rep fleet phase plasma m at almost 18km.
NOW we can get rid of the small energy neut and get an invu field.... CCP are you crazy???
That thing is faster than any other T1 non faction cruiser (okay stabber is faster) and kills like hell PLUS tank????
Rofl. |
Anja Suorsa
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
8
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:01:00 -
[84] - Quote
Satracz wrote:Deez Icho wrote:Why Moa have only 4 medium slots? As brawler he need tank and good tackle options, we put scrambler, web and MWD and only 1 medium slot left for tank. Better remove 1 hight slot and give additional 1 medium, trade for 1 low slot will be good too.
Slowest ship of this type, so a lot of low sots only can have at dealing damage. This ship have bonus for shield not for armor. 100'% agree If you dont want too add an Extra Mid - 1 Lowslot pls.... otherwise Moa is a real bad Cruiser :/
Wat?
Don't get me wrong, I agree it needs a fifth midslot, preferably at the expense of a Low or the utility high. But if we can't get the mid you want them to take a low slot anyway?
...
Not sure if serious. |
Heribeck Weathers
The Executioners
Capital Punishment.
14
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:05:00 -
[85] - Quote
I must display my disatisfaction over these changes.
@Mauler - So what we got here looks like a Prophocy with 2 less highs and no drones. Its not Bad but its not anything interestign to put it on par with the other Combat cruisers, likely still going to be bait or only sean with T1 logis. Not sure how to fix it tho other than givign it another turet, gimping its speed and just have it as a high damage "defence" platform. (at least give it more cap)
@ Moa - so Yay? we do more damamge but as a caldari ship still shield tank the same as the other cruisers? 4 mids is a caldari sin especialy on a blaster boat that almost requires you to have MWD, scram and web. not much is changing here. still to slow and not enough mids to get adiquate tank/tackle. (+1 mid or go home)
@ Vexor - Looks great, but sadly not in a good way, its now going to be a mini Gila, it can fit a decent shield tank with plenty of room for speed and drone damage mods, or just shield gank bralwer it up. wont see many of these armor tanked lol. (give it 100 band with and 125 bay, lose another turet and that will make 4 sentury vexors something to play around with.)
@ Ruppy - LOL seriously LOL! you made a better Stabber than the stabber, is fast, has better slot layout and dose more damage, will be able to ift bigger guns easyer AND has room for an aditional TE, so stabbers fall off bonus wont be an advantage, and oh look it gets the one thing you ddin't give the stabber. darn drones! .... (Honestly drop the drones from the stabber all together and give it 5 turrets, or there will be no reason to fly the stabber beside alittle speed)
Honestly you guys buffed things nicely, but you didnt change the balance of the cruiser class at all. Amarr will still never be used besides arbitrator, Ruppy will still outclass Stabber and most cruisers in general. Moa will still blow, guess T1 logis will be something to look forward to. (did make the thorax, carical, vexor, and Belicose funner tho, 1/2 right isent terrible i guess.)
TLDR: give more love to amarr and the Moa, Make the stabber not a crappy ruppy. |
Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
487
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:10:00 -
[86] - Quote
Compare this armor Rupture to the Maller fit posted earlier
[Rupture, New]
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
10MN MicroWarpdrive II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Warp Disruptor II
Tracking Disruptor II
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Hail M
Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Hobgoblin II x4
Hammerhead II x1
No fitting issues, about 34k hitpoints (more than the Maller), 521 dps with Hail, 480 dps with fleet EMP, 410 with Barrage. Has no issues killing frigates and doesn't have to fear neutralizers like the plague. The Tracking Disruptor reduces the Maller's Scorch to 11-12 km optimal. Even with the 1600mm plate it's still faster in top speed and align times than the Maller.
Common sense dictates that a ship such as the Maller with two big drawbacks should pretty much kick ass in other areas to compensate. |
Nnezu
Imperial Guardians
Tribal Band
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:12:00 -
[87] - Quote
Dear Mr. Fozzie,
Why those mixed highslots?
Especially aiming at the moa, the rupture (and the stabber). They all provide slots for missile launchers, even though over the last decade, that slot has been used for NOS/neuts/smartbombs exclusively. Maybe with the exception of the claymore/cyclone, but wait -- ASB makes you use neuts again.
So currently, I see those sweet cruisers and I like them a lot. Especially the maller. Was hoping that you would overcome some unnecessities, like those mixed turret/launchers, but hey - let's enjoy them being an unused relict of the past for a bit more. (Or just think of them as the appendix that still wasn't cut out)
And why are you giving the rupture that many drones, it looks like the slightly slower, but incredibly much better stabber when not in superdeep falloff -- with drones, even there.
In addition, the midslot overdose of the current iteration really smells like shieldtanking all the ships (but amarr). Especially given that shieldtanking is (atm) the superior way of tanking for solo and large fleets (small engagements aside), this really looks weird.
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Random Rule Conform Corpname
A Point In Space
53
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:13:00 -
[88] - Quote
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. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
46
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:19:00 -
[89] - Quote
These look pretty disappointing.
I like moas currently. I've used them a lot. I think they're alright, but don't work just because t1 cruisers aren't popular gang ships, and this is definitely a gang ship. They currently have a problem with cap, inflexibility with the mids (you need 2 slots of tank, so you really have no choice with the other 2 slots), and the fitting is pretty annoying. All these problems remain with this new thing. Like the cormorant: long range ships really have no use for utility highslots, it's such a waste. I don't want an unbonused heavy launcher, even if it was possible to fit one. If I'm at the ranges I plan to be at (20km), I have no use for nos/neut. Give 5th mid and some powergrid, basically. I can deal with the horrible cap problems.
Maller is even worse than I expected since you cut its slots and gave it no drones or anything. So you fixed the PG problem slightly, but it still has a CPU problem. The 25% damage bonus is nice, except the damage is still really bad, and you may have just traded bad damage for bad cap. I don't think I'd want a cruiser that effectively only has 2 midslots. I think this may be a laser problem, not a maller problem, but even if you fix lasers this is still going to be a pretty poor ship, just like the punisher, tormentor and planned omen. I'm pretty sure I'm not making this up - nobody flies punishers and tormentors, because they are rubbish.
I was expecting some sort of boost to the vexor's defenses beyond tiericiding its hitpoints and giving it the same slots as a thorax. I was also expecting a change to its drone bandwidth and possibly bay. You talk about how well drones project damage, and even though that's actually wrong when you're using the correct size, it's really even more wrong when you're using heavy drones. They are slower than a drake, and everyone explodes them instantly. It's pretty terrible. Totally unsuitable weapon for a cruiser. How about 50 bandwidth and a bigger damage bonus, or one specifically for meds? Having to use this wonky 2h/2m/1l loadout is also really irritating for having spares, though the vexor has no bay for spares anyway. Its sig is strangely out of line as well. If you need another reason to do what I say, it's it's probably more annoying for new players to train for, because of heavy drone op.
Rupture, whatever. I expect it to be really obnoxious just because ACs and tracking enhancers are obnoxious. It's hard to see past that. Why is it so much easier to fit than other cruisers?
I was expecting to see some tank bonuses. I don't think adding 100-200 to the base hitpoints really makes any difference at all in the end setup, because there's so much plating and extending going on. These all seem to be based around buffer tanking as well, and for 3 of them if you're fitting them properly that's buffer armour. Buffer armour makes you far too slow, wrecks your agility and uses too much fitting, and in the case of small gang honour bros you have a problem with getting your HP back, which is really a seriously annoying problem if you're a pirate as well.
I guess active tanking would never work like on frigs, because you just can't mitigate damage in the same way in these. That sucks.
Anyway, I expect to see vast numbers of shield buffer/tracking enhancer plebs in ruptures, thoraxes and vexors, and probably the usual bads in blaster moas. Still going to advise all new amarr players to crosstrain asap if they want to do t1 frigs/cruisers. |
Nnezu
Imperial Guardians
Tribal Band
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 15:24:00 -
[90] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:
I was expecting to see some tank bonuses. I don't think adding 100-200 to the base hitpoints really makes any difference at all in the end setup, because there's so much plating and extending going on. These all seem to be based around buffer tanking as well, and for 3 of them if you're fitting them properly that's buffer armour. Buffer armour makes you far too slow, wrecks your agility and uses too much fitting, and in the case of small gang honour bros you have a problem with getting your HP back, which is really a seriously annoying problem if you're a pirate as well.
cruisers getting a 25% velocity buff and mostly a fourth midslot. And you want to armortank them? |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |