These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon] Interceptors

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kenpo
The Guardians of the Beam
#261 - 2013-10-06 19:30:57 UTC
Love the idea of sliding in unhindered by bubbles, I shall rename my Taranis "suicide suppository". Big smile

Caution, rubber gloves and faceshield required when handling this equipment.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#262 - 2013-10-06 21:27:47 UTC
Teth Razor wrote:
Drake Doe wrote:
Teth Razor wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
You dont think bubble immunity will make ceptors extremely OP? I mean they got the speed to get out of the bubbles anyway so it's not like they slow them down much.
No more OP than covops ships.


That statement is completely wrong.

What makes covops not op is the fact that you can still bubble them and try for the decloak, or if a covops is not smart he will warp strait gate to gate and hit drag bubbles.

When I bubble camp I catch more covops and bombers then any other ship.

Nullified intys on the other hand can jump in to a system and instantly warp out of a bubble on the gate. On top of that the pilot will not even have to think about the out gate being safe. Nullified intys create and reward dumber pilots. We already have nullified T3s, we DO NOT NEED NULLIFED INTYS.

So you're upset that you have to actually try and plan for nullified ships when you camp?


No I am not. But I am upset that bubble camps that you see now will turn in to remote seboing instalocking legion / loki / huggin / lachesis gangs. That will be a down grade in play style and a lot less noob friendly.

Camping with a drag bubble is one of the first things a new player can effectively do on his own. By adding nullified intys (null sec shuttles) you take away lots of the action these new players can enjoy.


Everyone who does this stuff is terrible.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#263 - 2013-10-07 01:05:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
All interceptors need a massive lock range bonus. Seriously. The speed and point range of these ships demand it.


As for the specifics.

1. Crusader needs a low switched to the mid. This will make it a more effective fleet interceptor AND will also make it a more effective solo brawler because the extra mid helps with range control.

2. Not sure about the split weapons system for the Ares (or for Roden ships in general for that matter). It's good that you won't turn the Enyo into this kind of ship (I always thought it was more of a Duvolle Labs ship) but if this design philosophy moves on to affect the Phobos later on I predict some rage. Either way for the Ares I don't think anyone will care since it won't really affect its main role as a fleet ceptor and rockets destroy drones quite well.

3. Great job on the Crow, Raptor and Malediction.

4. Everything else is pretty unchanged. Claw remains kind of crap IMO, Stiletto still does it's job very well, Taranis nerf unneeded TBH (after the t1 frig buff, a decent amount of t1 frigs could already kill it) but it is still a viable high damage anti-support/solo ceptor.
LuisWu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#264 - 2013-10-07 01:38:57 UTC  |  Edited by: LuisWu
Helicity Boson wrote:
The summary here, is that no pirate will be able to catch a smaller vessel once it warps to a gate/far away point

And no pirate fleet will ever escape a FW blob again, due to the fact FW can deploy interceptors to tackle them on gate, and pirates can not.

This seems a bit lopsided to me.


This

Edit: also I can´t understand why some ceptors still have bigger Signature than some assault frigates.

F*** This Game
Azrael Dinn
Imperial Mechanics
#265 - 2013-10-07 08:03:20 UTC
Not saying this is a bad idea but sounds alot like you are not supose to rat in carriers idea.

After centuries of debating and justifying... Break Cloaks tm
Susitna
League of Gentlemen
The Initiative.
#266 - 2013-10-07 09:15:10 UTC
Please leave the utility high on the malediction. You buff the nos then you start removing the slots? The slot layout on the malediction is fine as is.
Denuo Secus
#267 - 2013-10-07 12:37:28 UTC
Please give the Ares 3 missile and 3 turret slots! Like you did on the Scythe Fleet Issue. I hoped this is the new approach for dual weapon bonus :(

To go full damage on the Ares I'd need to fit different damage modules, which would gimp my fit. But being able to choose to go full missiles or turrets would offer some nice options/unpredictability/flexibility - the Gallente way.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#268 - 2013-10-07 12:41:08 UTC
Denuo Secus wrote:
Please give the Ares 3 missile and 3 turret slots! Like you did on the Scythe Fleet Issue. I hoped this is the new approach for dual weapon bonus :(

To go full damage on the Ares I'd need to fit different damage modules, which would gimp my fit. But being able to choose to go full missiles or turrets would offer some nice options/unpredictability/flexibility - the Gallente way.

You just misspelled Minmatar into Gallente. Interesting typo. :-)
Denuo Secus
#269 - 2013-10-07 13:05:07 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Denuo Secus wrote:
Please give the Ares 3 missile and 3 turret slots! Like you did on the Scythe Fleet Issue. I hoped this is the new approach for dual weapon bonus :(

To go full damage on the Ares I'd need to fit different damage modules, which would gimp my fit. But being able to choose to go full missiles or turrets would offer some nice options/unpredictability/flexibility - the Gallente way.

You just misspelled Minmatar into Gallente. Interesting typo. :-)


In my book Gallente combat philosophy is about flexibility. If you refer to the missile bonus itself...I for one would like 3 turret slots and no missile bonus/slot at all more that the current half-and-half concept.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#270 - 2013-10-07 13:18:55 UTC
Denuo Secus wrote:
In my book Gallente combat philosophy is about flexibility. If you refer to the missile bonus itself...I for one would like 3 turret slots and no missile bonus/slot at all more that the current half-and-half concept.

Your book is bad then. Gallente phylosophy is all about firepower. Versatility and flexibility are Minmatar atributes. But I see what mistaken you : yes Gallente have some versatility in the sense that they can light shield tank their ships to earn even more firepower ; and because drone ships allow you to fit something else in the high slots, but no sane gallente would fit anything else than weapons on here, or at least says the manuals of gallente warfare.
Drake Doe
88Th Tax Haven
#271 - 2013-10-07 13:24:18 UTC
Teth Razor wrote:
Drake Doe wrote:
Teth Razor wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
You dont think bubble immunity will make ceptors extremely OP? I mean they got the speed to get out of the bubbles anyway so it's not like they slow them down much.
No more OP than covops ships.


That statement is completely wrong.

What makes covops not op is the fact that you can still bubble them and try for the decloak, or if a covops is not smart he will warp strait gate to gate and hit drag bubbles.

When I bubble camp I catch more covops and bombers then any other ship.

Nullified intys on the other hand can jump in to a system and instantly warp out of a bubble on the gate. On top of that the pilot will not even have to think about the out gate being safe. Nullified intys create and reward dumber pilots. We already have nullified T3s, we DO NOT NEED NULLIFED INTYS.

So you're upset that you have to actually try and plan for nullified ships when you camp?


No I am not. But I am upset that bubble camps that you see now will turn in to remote seboing instalocking legion / loki / huggin / lachesis gangs. That will be a down grade in play style and a lot less noob friendly.

Camping with a drag bubble is one of the first things a new player can effectively do on his own. By adding nullified intys (null sec shuttles) you take away lots of the action these new players can enjoy.


Since when is it only possible to camp with seboed t3s? This has nothing to do with new players.

"The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! pops more corn" ---Evernub--
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#272 - 2013-10-07 13:51:04 UTC  |  Edited by: DNSBLACK
"A RAZOR Ragnarok accidentally pressed the “Jump” instead of “Bridge” button. Very unlucky in this case as it resulted in the titan being tackled. After a short rage form of a Naga fleet for Russian speakers (from which the footage was taken) and a Rokh fleet for English speakers, the titan was swiftly killed despite RAZOR’s futile attempt to save it with their tier 3 bc gang. Furthermore, just as the titan went down, RAZOR jumped in 3 carriers and a single dreadnaught (?) to try to save it.

Titan Killmail

Shortly after, an NC. Maelstrom fleet bridged on a grid ping spot. The Stainwagon fleet warped to the enemy cyno at 100km and attempted a brawl. However, with a relatively “kitchen sink” fleet composition, we decided to bail and head back to reship.

Overall Battle Report

After re shipping to Rail Tengus, the Stainwagon fleet bridged next door to the enemy Maelstrom fleet who were attempting to return to their staging system. After waiting for the enemies to jump through the gate, it was clear they did not want to engage us without some help. So the NC. fleet waited in system for their PL help to arrive. Sure enough, as soon as they did, the NC. gang warped in on our Tengu fleet at optimal and a fight ensued. Despite fighting outnumbered 3 to 1, the Stainwagon Tengu fleet continued fighting, weaving its way under the Maelstrom guns and out of range of the PL Proteus/Loki/Legion gang. However, towards the end of the fight, somehow the PL fleet managed to catch up to the Stainwagon logistics, resulting in the majority of our logi being wiped out. After it was clear that our logi weren’t able to sustain the incoming damage, and our FC pointed and webbed, our Tengu fleet aligned and promptly warped out. Great fights!

Battle Report"


I guess this is what I mean when you have to define the battle field. There is no need for a ceptor in todays eve fleet battles. The interceptor should be good at tackling and surviving period. The speed tank of old should be brought back. I love everyone in this thread talking about dps, tank blah blah blah. The ceptor should not be a solo super frig it should focus on tackling in every battle field eve presents. After a fight the ceptor should be one of the only ships flying off. The only ship they should fear is another ceptor. Give me back my 2 bil ceptor doing 22000 meters per sec that could tackle dive in and out yet kill no one by itself. Define the battle field then the ship ccp
Denuo Secus
#273 - 2013-10-07 13:56:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Denuo Secus
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
...but no sane gallente would fit anything else than weapons on here, or at least says the manuals of gallente warfare.


Nos/Neut/RR/Smartbomb/Probe/Tractor/Salvager Tristan/Vexor/Myrm/Domi says hellooo Big smile

Drones themselves are a very flexible weapon. No other type of ship can switch from insta damage sniping to hvy damage brawling in seconds without docking.

But we derail...this is about the Ares with an (imho) outdated split weapon bonus.
ArcticPrism
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#274 - 2013-10-07 14:39:21 UTC  |  Edited by: ArcticPrism
Please allow the Maeldiction to keep its turret slots. Rockets and Missiles cost too much pg/cpu to fit. Also not as good at drone defense due to low sig radius and high orbit speed of drones.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#275 - 2013-10-07 14:41:40 UTC
I love my Crow so much now that I want to have babies with it

also: lockrange

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#276 - 2013-10-07 15:34:51 UTC
Hey guys, I'm back from vacation and fully caught up on this thread. Thanks for the feedback so far.

We have sisi updated now with an early Rubicon build so go ahead and check out these versions of the changes there. I'll be putting together some responses to themes in the feedback I'm seeing soon.

Thanks again all!

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#277 - 2013-10-07 15:39:10 UTC
thanks in the form of lock range would be adequate

overall though, ignoring that these are great changes so keep it up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#278 - 2013-10-07 15:49:09 UTC
crow has too much lock range, claw has too much fitting, ares and taranis have no fitting if you like having a tank that doesn't require your gang to bring a remote hull repairer, raptor needs 4 mids and its role back, crusader is stupid because lasers suck
Randy Wray
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#279 - 2013-10-07 15:54:32 UTC
hahaha please fozzie give the taranis huge bonuses to hull reps including cap use and cycle time :D

Solo Pvper in all areas of space including wormhole space. Check out my youtube channel @ http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd6M3xV43Af-3E1ds0tTyew/feed for mostly small scale pvp in lowsec/nullsec

twitch.tv/randywray
sten mattson
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#280 - 2013-10-07 16:29:13 UTC
malediction is fun , but the capacitor is horrible. it needs its NOS back if its want to hope holding tackle against someone with a small neut

IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!