Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Why are people crying about the dps so much? The main purpose of intys is to avoid bubbles and point and hold things while dps is on the way. Any damage is just an added bonus.

And for those that like to roam null looking for solo frigate fights these changes actually favor that, so stop whining, these are good changes.

So, no updates for the Claw and Crusader. Would that indicate that you believe them to be working as intended?

Is there any reason in particular why the Raptor needed to have its mass and inertia increased? Caldari no longer have a sub-2 align time Interceptor. muh travel fits.

What is the logic of increasing the Raptors mass when a few patches ago a ship rebalance went into place where shield frigates had mass decreased and Amarrian Frigates had increased mass.

The Amarrian Frigates had increased mass so there would be a smaller percentage increase of mass when an armor plate was installed. Shield frigates had received decreased mass so they would take a much larger hit from the armor plate.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325209

Its a penalty. A RoF of 10s becomes 10.6s

CCP can keep up with these non-updates for years instead of fixing actual important stuff like links, logis, caps and T3s. probably because it's easier, I guess.
I think also because they don't like it when people get mad and complain on the forums, which is something that'll be happening a ridiculous amount if the proper broken stuff got fixed.

All will fly only on the Ares and Taranis. This boost Gallente. all on the fly Gallente ships. Already all fly to the Gallente ships in cruse size, now it will be in freegsize.

Amarr will not ships working at a distance disruptor. It was Malediction.

I am compelled fly gallente ships, as they are the best.

They need to nerf the garmur just because its expensive doesn't mean it has to be OP CCP. Get your head out of your arses and fix stuff that really needs fixing.

I really think the change from the kinetic damage to an explosion radius bonus for the Crow is a poor tradeoff, and I hope you'll rethink it. Here's why:

All of the gunnery Interceptors with a long range bonus (eg optimal range on the Ares) can use boosters to change the other values as needed:

-Need more Tracking? Take Drop.
-Need more Optimal Range? Take Frentix.
-Need more Falloff? Take Sooth Sayer.

Sure you have the various T2 ammo which can adjust as well but they're roughly on the same level, and a lot of the time, it's not worth using them as Faction ammo is superior from a pure damage perspective.

Now the only option you have for optimizing your missiles is Crash - which reduces the Explosion Radius. So the change to the Crow means that you'll now have less options for landing your damage, since this will now incur a stacking penalty.

Edit: Apparently Boosters don't get a stacking penalty, however the Booster is less useful in this case compared to working with a pure damage bonus to apply more damage - second part still applies.

Light missiles already apply their damage fairly well, and I find it dubious how much of an explosion radius bonus will be. The way I look at it, is that you may apply your damage a bit better against small targets - and the explosion radius bonus might make it beneficial to use Fury missiles more often instead of Faction ammo; but your damage potential is significantly reduced from the missing Damage/Level bonus, and you'll top out your potential damage faster against larger targets.

I'd rather see the damage bonus reduced in percentage in exchange for the removal of the Kinetic only bonus, or changed to a rate of fire bonus.

---

As for the overall reduction in LML rate of fire (reducing the DPS), I hope it's been looked at a whole, as the change affects a lot more ships than these two. I'm hoping the module devblog will have some new missile stat modification modules - as that had been discussed for a long time. Missiles need a much larger rebalance pass, as well as some new modules and boosters for flexibility.

---

The Explosion Radius bonus just means you'll top your damage out faster on anything larger than a Destroyer, and do less overall. I'm actually alright with the Crow doing less damage overall, since in my mind Interceptors are meant for tackling, and not doing damage.

But with that in mind - and considering the OP that "light missiles" were the problem, giving the Crow another high slot seems contradictory. I was overjoyed when the useless highslot on the Crow was removed in Rubicon, and a midslot given instead for additional utility. Adding it back seems pointless now.

Looking back on the Rubicon Interceptor Changes, no other Interceptor has less than 3 Lowslots. This really puts the Crow at a disadvantage in speed and agility potential with only 2 low slots, and mediocre base stats to start with.

What it is, is another nerf to the agility and speed of the Crow, since you now have to choose between a Damage Control, and a speed/agility rig, or go with even less tank. Since this is the second time the Crow and Malediction have been hit with this nerf bat since Rubicon, I'm pretty disappointed - they were already not the best at speed, damage, aligning, or target locking.

Please reconsider removing the 3rd low slot.

Agreed, these changes don't go nearly far enough to kill coward fleets. Interceptors shouldn't have DPS above 30 or 40 at most. Interceptors shouldn't be used for anything else than holding a target in place until DPS arrives.