Moving Highslot to low slot on T1 Attack Frigs

I like to do most of my solo PvP in Tech 1 attack frigs. They’re fast and they’re fun. But i noticed i’m almost never using the 4th highslot on any of these ships. Even if its not a kitey fit i’m often not using a neut, and i think they’d all be better off with an extra low slot instead.

I wondered if its just me and had a look on zkillboard to see what other people were doing. I looked at the latest 100 losses for each Tech 1 attack frig and counted how many were using all 4 high slots. The counts are as follows:

Condors 22%
Atron 22%
Executioner 33%
Slasher 29%

(Now there’s a lot of losses on there that could easily be argued as non-applicable like ships with 4 salvagers or travel fits with no guns. So if you disregard the data i wont be offended).

So tell me what you think. Swap one high-slot to a low slot?

An additional low slot is a significant power boost. A power increase for a small drawback, since as you say, most utility highslots are not used. Seems to be an obvious want. Yet, without any proper data, it is a shot in the dark in regards to balance implications.

Personally, I liked my utility high on the Slasher. So I would keep it on that one. Never used it on the Condor and didn’t really fly many Atrons or Executioners.

It would be. If nothing else it’ll be an extra nano or CPU mod.

But i don’t think we’re in danger of causing any balance problems. A Exec would be in no danger of taking away the role of a Punisher or Tormentor, and a Condor would not replace even an armour kestrel with a low slot in its favour. They would still have lower HP and firepower than their Combat counterparts.

I think it just depends on how attached people are to the 4th highslot, like you and the slasher.

1 Like

As mentioned, I find it hard to really assess, since I don’t really know what metrics CCP look at for balance between ships.

Yet, I would not turn down an additional low slot. A could also live without the Slasher utility, I just liked it, cause I usually flew it with a scram kite setup. A neut or nos can be quite useful in certain matchups, if your engagement range is the scram range.

This is the key. A slot you have no use for in solo becoming an indispensable asset in fleet.
I don’t think anything here needs a change.

1 Like

In gangs attack frigs are more likely scout/tackle and won’t achieve much with a neut in a short space of time. Or the entire gang is in attack frigs like a Condor gang but they are kitey fit and not using neuts.

I have realised though that, with the exception of the tristan, combat frigs have no utility highs. E-war ships have no utility highs.

Oh for the old Rifter…

1 Like

The best fit T1 attack frigs for their intended role (First Tackle) are dual-propulsion long-range points. This allows them to quickly close in on the enemy with MWD and then switch to AB to maintain distance and speed tank without dying due to sig bloom and without draining cap to zero. Apart from fast tackle, the primary objective of the attack frig is simply to survive, so damage is supplementary - but still desired. The fact that the ship should operate at range makes the utility slot useless for these specific kinds of ships (eg. it won’t benefit from ATS), so I agree moving it to low would give it more options in defense or offense (esp since long range weapons are already weak and could use a boost). Close range First Tackles don’t make too much sense given that Second Tackle hulls (Tormentor/Kestrel/Tristan/Rifter) are better suited for close range combat, so there’s no point reserving a high slot for close range encounters. They did something similar to the Rifter a while back and that was a fantastic decision in my opinion; the First Tackle hulls would benefit greatly from the same treatment.


1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.