Hmm - in the name of avoiding (or at least mitigating) power creep, wouldn't the Responsible thing to do here be dialing back the Eradicator, Fury, and perhaps the Champion, a slight bit? Not something I'd want to do now, regardless, but those ships are very much meant to be balanced against the Eagle. As noted, it's a jack of all trades which makes it a pretty useful balance center point to try to work around.
The only power creep that is going on is the raising difficulty. Eagle was designed when top level player was stronger than AI. Now its weaker. This introduces us to the actual problem:
Eagle is not a jack of all trades. It is the artillery specialist.
That was OK when. Now late game is all about missiles because of their capability to deal flux damage without flux cost to its carrier. It is the initial exchange of Squalls and Sabots (plus whatever fighters) what defines the result of the initial clash and serves the purpose of gaining the needed advantage against stronger enemy. Eagle's missile capabilities are pathetic and fighter ones are non-existant. Therefore "artillery specialist". Not only that but since half the artillery is in fixed mounts it is more like "artillery specialist of the line" since it requires close flank protection. Here lies another problem. If you put 22 DP Eagle as a front liner to protect 20 DP Gryphon or Heron and the enemy brought two actual jack-of-all-trades in the form of Brilliants every one of them being individually stronger than Eagle the situation will not be sustainable.
To fix Eagle you have to either fix the artillery or fix Gryphon and Heron so what they will be capable of engaging multiple target simultaneously and without much loss in performance/will get much better disabling capabilities.
Eradicator, Fury and Champion are all better because they are multipurpose and less dependent on external support.