These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Benito Arias
Angry Mustellid
#321 - 2013-10-08 16:14:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Benito Arias
CCP Fozzie wrote:
SPECIFICS

CLAW

STILETTO

Claw is still sub-optimal. Even more likely to explode quickly inside web/neut range (no ulility high). Do not want arties to kite something because drones and too small tank, cannot even try with ACs for it anymore (TE nerf). Capacitor on the Claw is still meh compared to the Slasher.

Stiletto remains good , but still gets beaten by the Slasher in Scan Resolution and Capacitor, which I think is strange.

Claw
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 285(+4.75) / 213.75s (+2.8) / 1.33

Stiletto
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 250 / 187.5s / 1.33
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 27.5km(+2.5) / 925 / 5(+1)

Slasher (not copypasting, using Pyfa)
Capacitor 240 / 120 (!!) / whatever
Targeting 22.5km / 940 (!!) / 4

Why is it so?

Please make T2 interceptors at least not worse than T1 frigates in acquiring targets and running mods. Please do it before adding weird role bonuses that do not always work towards intercepting and tackling.

Edit: Correction. There IS an utility high on the Claw.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#322 - 2013-10-08 16:28:01 UTC
Morwennon wrote:
Capqu wrote:
but yeah if you're not gonna give us lockrange at least put the turret slots back on the malediction

Why would you want the turret slots back? As far as I can see, it has plenty of fitting room for both rockets and light missile launchers, in both brawling and tackle configurations. What specific fit do you have in mind?


[Malediction, a1]

Damage Control II
Energized Armor Layering Membrane II
200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
1MN Afterburner II
Warp Disruptor II

125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Core Probe Launcher I, Sisters Core Scanner Probe /OFFLINE

Small Ionic Field Projector I
Small Ionic Field Projector I



is the fit i used to use for armor fleets, was very good at staying alive on pretty hostile grids
i'm sure its not a perfect fit or absolutely fantastic or anything, but its nice to have the option to use very low fitting anti-drone weapons and use your cpu/pg elsewhere
rei natuski
Perkone
Caldari State
#323 - 2013-10-08 17:01:36 UTC
i have another idea... why not supress dictor from the game ?

they become useless.
Morwennon
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#324 - 2013-10-08 17:10:06 UTC
Capqu wrote:
Morwennon wrote:
Capqu wrote:
but yeah if you're not gonna give us lockrange at least put the turret slots back on the malediction

Why would you want the turret slots back? As far as I can see, it has plenty of fitting room for both rockets and light missile launchers, in both brawling and tackle configurations. What specific fit do you have in mind?


[Malediction, a1]

Damage Control II
Energized Armor Layering Membrane II
200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
1MN Afterburner II
Warp Disruptor II

125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Core Probe Launcher I, Sisters Core Scanner Probe /OFFLINE

Small Ionic Field Projector I
Small Ionic Field Projector I



is the fit i used to use for armor fleets, was very good at staying alive on pretty hostile grids
i'm sure its not a perfect fit or absolutely fantastic or anything, but its nice to have the option to use very low fitting anti-drone weapons and use your cpu/pg elsewhere

Fair enough, I hadn't considered that you might want dualprop and a plate. However, afaict the rubicon malediction can do basically the same thing:

[Malediction, a1 rubicon]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Damage Control II
Adaptive Nano Plating II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
1MN Afterburner II
Warp Disruptor II

Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket

Small Ionic Field Projector I
Small Ionic Field Projector I

Gains an extra 100 EHP, slightly better resists, and 10 km of lock range in exchange for the offlined probe launcher; overall, I'd say that's a pretty good trade.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#325 - 2013-10-08 17:12:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
Morwennon wrote:

Fair enough, I hadn't considered that you might want dualprop and a plate. However, afaict the rubicon malediction can do basically the same thing:

[Malediction, a1 rubicon]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Damage Control II
Adaptive Nano Plating II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
1MN Afterburner II
Warp Disruptor II

Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket

Small Ionic Field Projector I
Small Ionic Field Projector I

Gains an extra 100 EHP, slightly better resists, and 10 km of lock range in exchange for the offlined probe launcher; overall, I'd say that's a pretty good trade.


you're right of course, that is a better fit - the new maled is certainly better than the old one in almost every circumstance. however imagine you could fit 125mms instead of rockets. you couldu probably drop the maux for a ancil rig, or upgrade the plating to an enam, or use a sig amp and have some warp speed rigs perhaps. i just feel like taking away options is almost never a good thing
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#326 - 2013-10-08 17:29:36 UTC
Ok after looking at the warp changes i'm feeling a lot more positive about these ships. I do however think they require to be better rebalanced within their class, i think they should all be about as powerful as the taranis/claw.

Crusader: Bad for lowsec but i think its probably fine as is for 0.0.

Malediction: Needs a bigger damage bonus, (not a ROF, i need to reload enough already thank you kindly)

Raptor: Its pretty hard to fit guns and a tank on it, id suggest enough pg to fit a meta MSE and electrons personally.

Crow: Is probably going to be incredibly powerful with the extra point range and lml's.

Taranis: I can we please let go of the "lol the ranis's tank is all in hull" joke? Honestly it would be a much better ship with more armor and less structure. could use slightly more pg.

Ares: I really dislike missiles on this (Why do all the races need missiles? If you go through with this every single race in the game will have a missile ship /o\ ) also it needs a ton of fittings, its really almost impossible to fit anything on it.

Stiletto: Its.. fine?

Claw: The fitting differences between AC's and ARties need to be rebalanced so that this ship can get more reasonable fittings. Although tbh i wouldn't mind if all the inties could be fitted like a claw with AC's. That would be pretty baller.


So yea much less hate, i think the strong ones are good, the weak ones just need to be brought to that level.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

XavierVE
No Corporation for Old Spacemen
#327 - 2013-10-08 17:53:09 UTC  |  Edited by: XavierVE
Royaldo wrote:
The bubble immunity + the new warp speed makes ceptors silly.

What is supposed to catch these?


Nothing can catch them. Fozzie has made a ship that is impossible to engage unless it wants to fight. Any smart interceptor pilot knows what fights they can and can't take -- meaning that the ship is absolutely ungankable unless they make a major mistake. This is a good example of why devs shouldn't listen to player ideas which really aren't all that thought through.

It is a major buff to home defense blobs against non-interceptor gangs though, given that the main recourse of retreat for a small gang roam into 0.0 is dropping bubbles behind it... a tactic that is absolutely nerfed into the ground now. Sure, you can kill the 30+ man blob's 4-5 interceptors if you get far enough ahead, but aggression means loggoffski as the gang then catches up to you and covers your out-gates.

What is going to be HILARIOUS is when people start taking out small gangs of only Taranis to gank ratters. I suggested it to my guys in my "I'm quitting, sorry!" post about this change. You'll have more than enough DPS to kill any non-carrier ratter you run across and you will absolutely be impossible to kill unless you make a mistake killing a ratter. By say, not moving at all, heh.

The idea behind this change is to remove the effectiveness of spamming anchored bubbles on gates to protect ratting systems. A simpler solution that wouldn't be overpowered would have been to restrict the anchoring of bubbles to within 40km of gates, much akin to how you can't anchor a GSC within X distance of a gate. Such a change would also "fix" large bubbles spammed on regional gates as well. It would buff every ship class roaming through 0.0 and remove non-player bubbling of gates, making 'dictor pilots and HIC's more worthwhile, rather than less.

Instead, Fozzie decided to give nullification to a ship class that simply does not need it on any level. Interceptors have no problems getting through gate camps, either by simply running away or gate crashing. Now, he's created a situation where if you're a small gang FC that likes to roam through 0.0, you're incredibly stupid not to take out Taranis-only gangs to get incredibly easy ratter ganks while never being at risk of being attacked yourself. Way too easymode to be fun. EVE is supposed to be a challenge. Nullification takes a player skill and turns it into a ship skill. It removes the viability of the one avenue small gangs had to retreat from blobs in 0.0 by nerfing interdictors. Bad.

I don't think Fozzie is stupid, so once he realizes that the warp speed changes are all that interceptors needed for the ship class to be buffed to the max... then hopefully he'll remove Inty nullification as the game-breaking mistake it so truly is.
Mr Barbeque
Mayhem and Ruin
#328 - 2013-10-08 18:06:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Barbeque
I wont say I have the familiarization with the relationship of the other intys to their t1 counterparts but they don't seem to be quite in line, nullification aside.

Edit: With zor's navigation hyper-link

Atron vs. Taranis
Atron:
all lvl 5 no speed mods mwd: 3859/5526
10% falloff bonus gives it better damage projection: 10k with null
mass: 1.05m kg
37pg
3 rigs that give it even more flexibility, especially in pg

Taranis:
all lvl 5 no speed mods mwd: 3816/5462
no falloff bonus: 6.1k with null
mass: 1.07m kg
35pg
2 rigs

Sure the ranis does better damage and tracks better but with poor projection it wont matter if you cant dictate range. If both ships are in scram/web/ab configurations, the atron should win if he just keeps at range at 8k, and kills those 2 drones. The atron is faster, more nimble, has more powergrid, and further damage projection. This seems to be out of line. Shouldn't the t2 combat variant of the atron actually be better than the t1?

Keres > Mallus
Ishkur/Enyo > Incursus
Deimos/Phobos > Thorax
Astarte/Eos > Brutix

I feel the intys need another combat bonus and a bit more of a tweek to get them in line with their t1 counterparts. (I havent done the wealth of research on the others, so I wont suggest for them specifically.) In particular for the ranis I suggest:

+7.5% bonus to small hybrid turret falloff (to accompany its 7.5% to tracking)
Lower mass from 1.07m kg to 1.03m kg
Buff powergrid to at least 37, preferably 39

Bubble immunity is great, but when on the field it really doesn't matter. I do recognize the mwd bloom reduction helps on the approach for fighting upclass, which it doesn't do poorly. It does however suffer when fighting same (hull) class ships. I do not wish to "win button" the ranis, and I don't believe my suggestion would do so.
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
#329 - 2013-10-08 18:53:26 UTC
I really feel that those of you against nullified intys are not being vocal enough. This will change the game we love, this will give more power to the major blocs (the ability to project fleets and super caps across the map in mere minutes).

This in general is not a good change for null sec.

If you are against nullified intys, SPEAK UP! Get your friends and corp mates to speak up. Fozzie will be reading this thread regularly so if we voice our concerns about this maybe CCP will at least re-think the idea!
Bo Bojangles
Interstellar Renegades
#330 - 2013-10-08 18:58:12 UTC
Interdiction Nullification for inties is bad. There are plenty of times, being an inty, that you want to come out of warp at that bubble's edge (because that's where the guy you're chasing comes out of warp, too). I don't want to lose that mechanic just to render bubble blobs useless, especially considering that they're not an issue for an interceptor, anyway.

It would be interesting topic, as a prior poster suggested, for light dictors. The perceived safety in it easily offset by the chance to get separated from your support, leaving you vulnerable, but that's a different subject.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#331 - 2013-10-08 19:29:28 UTC
Teth Razor wrote:
I really feel that those of you against nullified intys are not being vocal enough. This will change the game we love, this will give more power to the major blocs (the ability to project fleets and super caps across the map in mere minutes).

This in general is not a good change for null sec.

If you are against nullified intys, SPEAK UP! Get your friends and corp mates to speak up. Fozzie will be reading this thread regularly so if we voice our concerns about this maybe CCP will at least re-think the idea!



The hell are you talking about I live in null and I can't wait.
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
#332 - 2013-10-08 19:32:10 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Teth Razor wrote:
I really feel that those of you against nullified intys are not being vocal enough. This will change the game we love, this will give more power to the major blocs (the ability to project fleets and super caps across the map in mere minutes).

This in general is not a good change for null sec.

If you are against nullified intys, SPEAK UP! Get your friends and corp mates to speak up. Fozzie will be reading this thread regularly so if we voice our concerns about this maybe CCP will at least re-think the idea!



The hell are you talking about I live in null and I can't wait.


Says a member of the CFC.. biggest bloc in the game... Of course you want it.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#333 - 2013-10-08 19:39:23 UTC
Teth Razor wrote:


Says a member of the CFC.. biggest bloc in the game... Of course you want it.



Which what to do with anything? Fun fact the entire CFC doesn't really do ops unless there is a war going on......something about crossing back and forth across 9 regions.

So for that matter FA isn't that big.
XavierVE
No Corporation for Old Spacemen
#334 - 2013-10-08 20:09:52 UTC
Onictus wrote:
So for that matter FA isn't that big.


http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/memberCount

Yeah, only the fifth biggest non-renter alliance in the game.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#335 - 2013-10-08 20:18:15 UTC
XavierVE wrote:
Onictus wrote:
So for that matter FA isn't that big.


http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/memberCount

Yeah, only the fifth biggest non-renter alliance in the game.



whoo we been recruiting it seems, that was 2500 a couple months ago Shocked
Randy Wray
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#336 - 2013-10-08 20:22:08 UTC
Capqu wrote:
Randy Wray wrote:
Capqu wrote:
to everyone saying you need a nos to keep a scram on a ship with a neut

you really don't

neuts don't turn scrams off unless you are the unluckiest person in the entire world, a scram needs 0.75GJ to activate, even from 0 capacitor a stiletto will regenerate that in 1/6th of a second. if you're having trouble keeping a scram running against a 12 second cycle time med neut (or heaven forbid, a 24 second cycle heavy neut) then i don't know what to tell you

I just fought a jaguar in my medium neut hurricane, fight lasted 2 minutes and I turned of his scram 5+ times. I know jag doesn't have the cap bonus but he did have a nos.


an 80% cap bonus is a big deal, better than a nos

There is another flaw in your argument though, cap doesn't regenerate in 6th's of a second, it regenerates in bursts each second(ish). So the chance of scram cycle coinciding with the cap nuke from a neut is alot higher, and you also have to mind the fact that you need to run other modules aswell, not much use for an interceptor that's too capped out to run it's MWD.

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

Randy Wray
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#337 - 2013-10-08 20:27:05 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Brib Vogt wrote:
Randy Wray wrote:
4gn1 wrote:
I am an interceptor pilot ... - ... over the last patches.


Fozzie, this guy ^ nailed it.

Remove this stupid bubble immunity, give all the interceptors another slot. Personally as a long time interceptor pilot I think all the tackle specialized ones should have the ability to fit a nosferatu so that they can get up close and scram tackle ships with neuts. They should all have the ability to fit a fair amount of tank without hurting their mobility or general role on the battlefield. The tackle interceptors should all have bonuses and damage application good enough to be able to handle a wave of warriors. The combat interceptors should in my opinion be similar to AFs in dps potential but exchange a substantially lower tank(about half, kinda what they have now) for speed. The role of the combat ceptors has always been anti-tackle.

Buffing combat ceptors like I proposed would give a sense of scalability. As long as you don't make them very tanky we shouldn't get the problem that we had with the dramiel back in 2011 since it was pretty much like an interceptor and an AF built into the same ship.



True


Bubble immunity + warp speed changes are the biggest buff inties could ever have gotten. If you don't agree you're either bad or you havn't tried warping around in one on the test server, its ******* unreal.

I'm apparently bad.

CCP might aswell have added a tech 3 nullified shuttle with cyno ability and removed interceptors competely for all warping through bubbles in an interceptor is worth IMHO. Cause yeah, that's all that thing is gonna be used for, cynoing, travelling and blobbing. What a way to improve the game.

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

Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#338 - 2013-10-08 20:28:38 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
I jumped on briefly to look at the warp changes and used the interceptor class to see just how quickly I could go. The first thing I noticed was that all the interceptors have been moved to a 10 AU warp speed. I guess I missed the notes on that somewhere. Combat used to be 9 AU and Fleet was 14 AU. Secondly -

Holy Shitballs. Shocked

Crow:

High:
Malkuth Light Missile Launcher x 3
Mid:
Limited MWD
Regolith MSE
SB II
Warp Disruptor II
Low:
OD II
DC II
MAPC II
Rigs:
Hyperspatial Velocity Maximizer x 2 for giggles.

The rigs give the crow a ~14.4 AU Warp speed. 70 AU warp in roughly 10 seconds. The sudden stop coming out of warp is pretty awesome. In a fight I was MWD'ing in one direction having escaped one of the many faction ships on the test server. (seriously, why? I don't fight Vangels on TQ that often) I hit the 'warp to station' button with 9 seconds left on the aggression timer. I entered warp at 6 seconds left (3.5 AU warp). I arrived in time to be declined docking rights due to my aggression. LolLol Those rigs are going to be a thing.


this fit is good example how crow is hard to fit, no t2 weapons no t2 extender and it has sensor booster which takes only 10 cpu and it has micro aux powercore fitted already for power grid.
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
#339 - 2013-10-08 20:36:27 UTC
Come on CCP. Give us something intys can use to survive IN COMBAT. NOT A MECHANIC TO AVOID IT!
Bischopt
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#340 - 2013-10-08 21:42:50 UTC
Like a lot of people have been pointing out, these inties are still pretty thin and easy to kill. When I heard inties were getting love I was expecting something like what happened to assault ships before: a proper overhaul. Right now the biggest change to interceptors is the insane warp speed which is, obviously, going to make inties dangerous in a fleet environment.

For solo work I'm afraid these interceptors are still a bit useless :/

The taranis, raptor and malediction might be able to brawl or kite their way into victory in some cases but even they'll have trouble with t1 frigates.

Could you guys (Rise and Fozzie) consider making the combat interceptors a bit more dangerous to allow solo work? I understand you need to be careful not to make them too powerful but right now they're only really good for fleets and ganking carebears that don't shoot back.

Have a more clear difference between combat and tackle interceptors.