EVE Search - Give the Moa some credit (and love)

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Give the Moa some credit (and love)

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
elitatwo Congregatio 2	Posted - 2012.01.06 17:45:00 - [1] - Quote Since the recent hybrid changes I have discovered the Moa to be an excellent hybrid boat with some scary abilities. Now what I and a lot of other people agree on is that the Moa is lacking a 5th medium slot to the mix, which in I would happly trade for the one extra utility highslot. Moa new: 5 Turret and 5 high slots 5 medium slots 4 low slots Moa now: 6 high slots with 5 turret hardpoints and 2 missile slots 4 medium slots 4 low slots Bonus need no change Well maybe a little bit of powergrid wouldn't hurt. Fiited with heavy neutron blaster II's and void this unloved boat may surprise you. Maybe she gets a new ship model as well, but we don't want to strain your art department too much.
Goose99 642	Posted - 2012.01.06 18:04:00 - [2] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Since the recent hybrid changes I have discovered the Moa to be an excellent hybrid boat with some scary abilities. Now what I and a lot of other people agree on is that the Moa is lacking a 5th medium slot to the mix, which in I would happly trade for the one extra utility highslot. Moa new: 5 Turret and 5 high slots 5 medium slots 4 low slots Moa now: 6 high slots with 5 turret hardpoints and 2 missile slots 4 medium slots 4 low slots Bonus need no change Well maybe a little bit of powergrid wouldn't hurt. Fiited with heavy neutron blaster II's and void this unloved boat may surprise you. Maybe she gets a new ship model as well, but we don't want to strain your art department too much. What it needs is to be not so slow... and a new model.
Alara IonStorm 1309	Posted - 2012.01.06 18:10:00 - [3] - Quote I think they should ditch the Resist Bonus and shift it to a Damage Bonus so that when you fit it with Rails it doesn't tickle. Giving it an extra mid in place of the utility high that see's little practical use would be great. Being able to put an in Invuln would allow it to keep it's Shield Tanking potential and give it a much needed Dmg buff to it's rails. The extra Blaster Damage and even extra room for a web would not hurt ether. Also the speed could use a look. The Hurricane is slightly faster even without Nano's I mean come on it is a damn class larger then the Moa. I know Minmatar but that is just a tiny bit ridiculous. Base Speed Max Skill Moa 205m/s 1273m/s MWD Hurricane 206m/s 1311m/s MWD And 2 extra slots for Nano's... I think speed is something a Sniper Cruiser would want, well that and Dmg. Would 10m2 Extra Drone Bay / BW on top be to much to ask for?
Liang Nuren Heretic Army 566	Posted - 2012.01.06 18:13:00 - [4] - Quote 5 High/5 Turrets, 5 Mids, 4 lows and some more agility would make the moa my favorite T1 cruiser by far. Oh my gosh. -Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
zhang elliott Advent Chaos Theory KRYSIS. 0	Posted - 2012.01.07 04:21:00 - [5] - Quote As having flown the Moa, I agree it needs some love as well as its variants. I fly a Gila sometimes and I think a 4th launcher would be a great improvement or the option to use guns.
Lady Ayeipsia Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent 15	Posted - 2012.01.07 04:28:00 - [6] - Quote Don't change my nessie's model. Sorry, I just think the moa looks like the loch Ness monster. As for variants, I fly the onyx and think it works well.
Biced Mnt N' Dew. 0	Posted - 2012.01.07 05:30:00 - [7] - Quote the ship is fine. i like the looks of the hull as well. #1 t1 cruiser in my book for station games. LOL @ ****** asking for an extra launcher on the gila in a moa thread.
Liam Mirren 177	Posted - 2012.01.07 06:19:00 - [8] - Quote Making it lose its utility slot makes worse, It needs a little bit more base speed and it's good (other than hybrids still not being where they need to be). If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 186	Posted - 2012.01.07 09:27:00 - [9] - Quote It is not an utility high slot ,but a salvager slot as there is no pg to fit anything other in it. This goes for the other caldari/gallente ships with useless highslots. "Making it lose its utility slot makes worse, It needs a little bit more base speed and it's good (other than hybrids still not being where they need to be)." dumby tell us what you usually put into that slot
Liam Mirren 178	Posted - 2012.01.07 10:30:00 - [10] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: It is not an utility high slot ,but a salvager slot as there is no pg to fit anything other in it. This goes for the other caldari/gallente ships with useless highslots. "Making it lose its utility slot makes worse, It needs a little bit more base speed and it's good (other than hybrids still not being where they need to be)." dumby tell us what you usually put into that slot Guess what other PVP ships fit that don't blob like the average idiot. [Moa, Whoa] Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive Large Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Warp Scrambler II Heavy Ion 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 Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Small Energy Neutralizer II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Warrior II x3 If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 187	Posted - 2012.01.07 11:19:00 - [11] - Quote So the 1 new mid would be way better as web >>> small neut everytime
Alara IonStorm 1319	Posted - 2012.01.07 11:21:00 - [12] - Quote Liam Mirren wrote: Naomi Knight wrote: dumby tell us what you usually put into that slot Guess what other PVP ships fit that don't blob like the average idiot. Small Energy Neutralizer II Agree, I would rather have a small energy neut in my spare high instead of a Stasis Webifier in my new mid. Webs on a Blaster Boat are for Blobs, Small Neut well that is just solo PvP L33tness... Also even when it isn't bastardized as a Blaster boat what is an extra mid gonna go to on a Rail boat. A Tracking Computer, Capbooster, Warp Disruptor, Ha. Small Neut is a much more preferable option. Now that sarcasm time is over I will take a ship that "Blobs like an idiot". CCP give me my Webifier slot please.
Liam Mirren 178	Posted - 2012.01.07 11:40:00 - [13] - Quote Here's two things to realise. - If you give Caldari a full damage bonus where does that leave Gallente? Answer; it won't happen. - It'll never get a 5th midslot unless it loses its resist bonus, balance and all that Result of that is if you do give it a 5th mid it loses tank, which it doesn't make up for because it won't get massively increased dps, all in the name of getting a web? That's just not logical. So, if you stay realistic (rather than in illogical lalaland) all you really need is a bit more speed and some more iteration on hybrids. The ship itself is fine. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Fade Azura Chemikals Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 117	Posted - 2012.01.07 11:41:00 - [14] - Quote i actually kinda like the model ..... and am partial to the gila myself ....its basically the caldari HAC. similar to ishtar but with much better buffer tank. dont get rid of the suitcase! =)
Alara IonStorm 1320	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:04:00 - [15] - Quote Liam Mirren wrote: - If you give Caldari a full damage bonus where does that leave Gallente? Answer; it won't happen. Where they are currently. Naga gets a dmg bonus and it works out fine. Liam Mirren wrote: - It'll never get a 5th midslot unless it loses its resist bonus, balance and all that I am fine with that. It's rail dmg is minimal as is and could use a buff. Liam Mirren wrote: Result of that is if you do give it a 5th mid it loses tank, which it doesn't make up for because it won't get massively increased dps, all in the name of getting a web? Then put an Invuln on it and go webless as you have shown you are perfectly willing to do. Get most of your tank and a 25% Dmg increase which is a large amount. Liam Mirren wrote: That's just not logical. So, if you stay realistic (rather than in illogical lalaland) all you really need is a bit more speed and some more iteration on hybrids. The ship itself is fine. Says the person who posted a Blaster fit on a rail boat. All the "Iteration" in the word is not going to help a Rail Boat be used as a Rail Boat if it has pathetic Dmg. 5th Mid is fine as is a Hybrid Dmg Bonus. It will make it just as good a Blaster Boat and a much, much better range boat as it is supposed to be. If this hurts Gallente then perhaps their Cruisers need a second look. I will stay in lalala land because that is the only place a Viable Rail Moa will ever come too.
Liam Mirren 178	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:17:00 - [16] - Quote So you want to give it extra dps because it's rail damage is low (rather than having them look properly at rails) and, rather sneakily, give it 500 dps with blasters? And you're fine to lose the resist bonus in favour of a web, where's the web any use in a rail ship? Also, "rail ship" is pretty much lol. There is little use for rails in pvp and even less so for ships that use rails while losing EHP in favour of a web. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Alara IonStorm 1320	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:26:00 - [17] - Quote Liam Mirren wrote: So you want to give it extra dps because it's rail damage is low (rather than having them look properly at rails) Look at them all you want but without a dmg bonus their DPS will be lol to an almost useless point. Liam Mirren wrote: and, rather sneakily, give it 500 dps with blasters? Sure, Cruisers in general could use a buff, 500 DPS on a short range Brawl Fit Cruiser is not a bad start. Liam Mirren wrote: And you're fine to lose the resist bonus in favour of a web, where's the web any use in a rail ship? Also, "rail ship" is pretty much lol. Nope in favor of a mid. Throw a tracking computer, an Invuln, Point, Painter, Sebo, Cap Booster or anything else that you think would boost the ships effectiveness. An Invuln alone will get most of your EHP back while your Rails are actually useful on the field. Liam Mirren wrote: There is little use for rails in pvp and even less so for ships that use rails while losing EHP in favour of a web. Yet gaining a better Range DPS mix with a TC or craming on more tank with that mid will more then mitigate that. As for their being little use for Rails taking positive steps with the ships that use them is a great factor in balance, Speed/Agility to hold range and Dmg are primary concerns that can be handled on the the ship it's self.
Liam Mirren 178	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:36:00 - [18] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: Agree, I would rather have a small energy neut in my spare high instead of a Stasis Webifier in my new mid. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 188	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:37:00 - [19] - Quote I dont understand why would it loose its tank if 1 high slot moved to 1 mid. 500dps hmm so similar like a rupture? hmm that is heresy nothing should come close to winmatar. Btw as it is mainly railboat yes rail cause caldari is longrange --> aka rail for hybrids, the resist bonus isnt rly worthy ,only if it can fit a huge tank + usual rail fit , but it cant due to too few med slots too low pg. What I see that you want to hinder everything which tries to bring back/fix hybrid ships into competitive useable form vs projectile ships. Yep rails needs a boost/fix. Still moa and possibly most of the other hybrid ships needs to be fixed. 1 useless unfittable high slot doesnt help it anyway no matter if it is fitted for close range blasters or long range rails.
Alara IonStorm 1320	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:39:00 - [20] - Quote Liam Mirren wrote: Sarcastic Alara wrote: Agree, I would rather have a small energy neut in my spare high instead of a Stasis Webifier in my new mid. /Fixed for context.
Liam Mirren 178	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:48:00 - [21] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: I dont understand why would it loose its tank if 1 high slot moved to 1 mid. 500dps hmm so similar like a rupture? hmm that is heresy nothing should come close to winmatar. Btw as it is mainly railboat yes rail cause caldari is longrange --> aka rail for hybrids, the resist bonus isnt rly worthy ,only if it can fit a huge tank + usual rail fit , but it cant due to too few med slots too low pg. What I see that you want to hinder everything which tries to bring back/fix hybrid ships into competitive useable form vs projectile ships. Yep rails needs a boost/fix. Still moa and possibly most of the other hybrid ships needs to be fixed. 1 useless unfittable high slot doesnt help it anyway no matter if it is fitted for close range blasters or long range rails. Because keeping the resist while allowing for a 2nd invul gives it 40k EHP which is a bit much and WAY more than what the rupture (or any T1 shield) can do, the combination of 540 dps with 40k EHP is just silly. If you have issues with a rail fitted Moa, then ask to fix rails (dps wise). If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Buzzmong Aliastra Gallente Federation 101	Posted - 2012.01.07 12:56:00 - [22] - Quote If the Caldari hybrid cruisers get a direct damage bonus (damage mod or rof) alongside their current hybrid range bonuses, I can't see myself ever wanting or needing to fly a Gallente gun cruiser ever again. Having the same damage, extra range and extra mobility (shield tank + range offsets lesser base speed and agilty) means they'd be too good not to use in comparison to the equivilant armour tanked Gallente ship. I still think that certain Caldari boats would do better with a range bonus alongside a hybrid tracking bonus, as the tracking bonus is normally of a much bigger benefit to rails as it helps to up their applied dps while also shrinking their minimum ranges.
Liam Mirren 178	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:01:00 - [23] - Quote Buzzmong wrote: If the Caldari hybrid cruisers get a direct damage bonus (damage mod or rof) alongside their current hybrid range bonuses, I can't see myself ever wanting or needing to fly a Gallente gun cruiser ever again. Having the same damage, extra range and extra mobility (shield tank + range offsets lesser base speed and agilty) means they'd be too good not to use in comparison to the equivilant armour tanked Gallente ship.. That's exactly my reasoning why Caldari shouldn't get a damage bonus. One thing to note; I don't want Caldari turret ships to be OP/very good, not because I dislike caldari but because i DO fly them (this char is Caldari only and hybrid only + some drones, still in training obviously). I like the fact that ppl think they're crap because that means you get fights rather than ppl running away or blobbing you. The problem blasterboats have is the OPness of scorch and faloff on ACs, THAT is what should be sorted. The problem railboats have is the rails themselves, not necessarily the ships. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.
Alara IonStorm 1320	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:09:00 - [24] - Quote Buzzmong wrote: If the Caldari hybrid cruisers get a direct damage bonus (damage mod or rof) alongside their current hybrid range bonuses, I can't see myself ever wanting or needing to fly a Gallente gun cruiser ever again. Having the same damage, extra range and extra mobility (shield tank + range offsets lesser base speed and agilty) means they'd be too good not to use in comparions to the equivilant armour tanked Gallente ship. That is part of a much larger problem. The second bonus on most Gallente Ships doesn't match up to a range bonus on a ship built for close range brawling combined with the slowness of Armor Tanking. CCP has stated that they will look into Armor Tanking vs Shield Tanking in the future. The Naga currently gets both a range bonus and a Dmg Bonus as is and has actually been successful as a Rail Platform. The thing they need to look at is how to make Gal Bonuses stick for close range Brawls. Buzzmong wrote: I still think that certain Caldari boats would do better with a range bonus alongside a hybrid tracking bonus, as the tracking bonus is normally of a much bigger benefit to rails as it helps to up their applied dps while also shrinking their minimum ranges. But that still doesn't do much for a ship that has very low DPS. It just means it can apply its low more accurately but not effect the field in a meaningful way as a mid range high DPS platform can. Buzzmong wrote: If you have issues with a rail fitted Moa, then ask to fix rails (dps wise). DPS wise Rails are fine, the problem is how many long range gun ships do you fly in PvP without a Dmg Bonus. This game almost every ship used as a Dmg Dealer no matter the range runs with a DPS Bonus. It is no secret that the Apoc sees the least use of the 3 Amarr Battleships. If you want DPS on the field with long guns it has to more then then an unbonused ship can provide or else go medium range or switch to a longer range ammo on a Dmg bonused ship since you have the option to provide good DPS with long guns at an acceptable range while switching ammo allows you to still back off and deal dmg.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 188	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:10:00 - [25] - Quote Liam Mirren wrote: Because keeping the resist while allowing for a 2nd invul gives it 40k EHP which is a bit much and WAY more than what the rupture (or any T1 shield) can do, the combination of 540 dps with 40k EHP is just silly. If you have issues with a rail fitted Moa, then ask to fix rails (dps wise). 2nd invu rly?:O that would make it way capdependant so you would have to fit a cap booster oh wait that would need another mid... btw where do you get this 540dps from ? max i can realistically do is 480dps with 29k ehp rupture can do 500+dps with 27.5k ehp + faster choosable dmg type and actually being cap independant for guns and tank.
Buzzmong Aliastra Gallente Federation 101	Posted - 2012.01.07 13:57:00 - [26] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: Buzzmong wrote: If the Caldari hybrid cruisers get a direct damage bonus (damage mod or rof) alongside their current hybrid range bonuses, I can't see myself ever wanting or needing to fly a Gallente gun cruiser ever again. Having the same damage, extra range and extra mobility (shield tank + range offsets lesser base speed and agilty) means they'd be too good not to use in comparions to the equivilant armour tanked Gallente ship. That is part of a much larger problem. The second bonus on most Gallente Ships doesn't match up to a range bonus on a ship built for close range brawling combined with the slowness of Armor Tanking. CCP has stated that they will look into Armor Tanking vs Shield Tanking in the future. The Naga currently gets both a range bonus and a Dmg Bonus as is and has actually been successful as a Rail Platform. The thing they need to look at is how to make Gal Bonuses stick for close range Brawls. Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not against changes to Caldari, I'm just saying that damage bonuses alongside the range ones will obsolete most of the Gallente gunboats under current mechanics. A Ferox and Moa with damage+range would mean the death of Brutixes and Thoraxes as choices when used in the current systems. However, even if CCP look at armour plates (new skills -> mass reduction or something) and lower or change the armour rig penalites, I still think a damage+range bonus would mean Caldari gunboats would come out swinging. Alara IonStorm wrote: Buzzmong wrote: I still think that certain Caldari boats would do better with a range bonus alongside a hybrid tracking bonus, as the tracking bonus is normally of a much bigger benefit to rails as it helps to up their applied dps while also shrinking their minimum ranges. But that still doesn't do much for a ship that has very low DPS. It just means it can apply its low more accurately but not effect the field in a meaningful way as a mid range high DPS platform can. That's true, but CCP have said they might be looking at the entire ammo selection, which generally changes lots of things, so you might see higher dps with rails in their proper ranges in the near future anyway. Buzzmong wrote: If you have issues with a rail fitted Moa, then ask to fix rails (dps wise). That's not my quote, that one belongs to Liam Mirren.
Alara IonStorm 1320	Posted - 2012.01.07 14:10:00 - [27] - Quote Buzzmong wrote: That's true, but CCP have said they might be looking at the entire ammo selection, which generally changes lots of things, so you might see higher dps with rails in their proper ranges in the near future anyway. I hope so. Their is not a lot of use of the pin point variation in range between the 20 types of ammo. Buzzmong wrote: That's not my quote, that one belongs to Liam Mirren. Sorry I hate when that happens to me. But I fixed it.
Seetesh Hand of the Sword Coalition of Alarmists 2	Posted - 2012.01.07 16:09:00 - [28] - Quote Liam Mirren wrote: Naomi Knight wrote: It is not an utility high slot ,but a salvager slot as there is no pg to fit anything other in it. This goes for the other caldari/gallente ships with useless highslots. "Making it lose its utility slot makes worse, It needs a little bit more base speed and it's good (other than hybrids still not being where they need to be)." dumby tell us what you usually put into that slot Guess what other PVP ships fit that don't blob like the average idiot. [Moa, Whoa] Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive Large Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Warp Scrambler II Heavy Ion 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 Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Small Energy Neutralizer II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Warrior II x3 Great setup ive used it before with good effect. The moa is fin just as it is slot wise, however some model rework is something we could use.
Jacob Stov 6	Posted - 2012.01.08 20:30:00 - [29] - Quote Well, while the straight damage bonus to the Naga seems to somewhat work, I don't like it. Give me moaar range bonus and stick with the resist bonus for Caldari rail ships. Antimatter/shortrange T2 out to useful ranges, that's what I want. Throw in reduced sig and better agility. I mean hey, Caldari are the physically smallest ships in eve ! Yet they have the fattest sigradius and the highest mass. Massive sigradius + low scanres is a somewhat unfortunate combination in a sniper duell. (Especially if Minmatar is the other way around + Minma get the alpha while Caldari get... Ahhh, what do Caldari get exactly ? Crap DPS, crap Cap (same as Minma but cap consuming guns), no damage type selection. Only saving grace is the resist bonus, that somewhat helps to cope with Minmatars good alpha. For a shortrange fitting I would pick the fifth mid over the utility highslot.
Hungry Eyes Ministry of War Amarr Empire 322	Posted - 2012.01.08 21:08:00 - [30] - Quote i like the moa/gila models. i fly the gila, and it would be OP with a 4th launcher.

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.