These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Interceptor Agility Tweak

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2014-01-16 17:08:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
CCP... Rubicon 1.0 brought some nice features to the game, new life to Sceptors and EAF that are becoming popular now... 1.1 will ruin the game for those who liked the feature and came back to the game for it... expect a drop in the subs... no one like Nerfs like these... people want better stuff... It is better not to deploy it in the current state, or it will be a big failure....

Please read these!

New POS system New SOV system
Voyager Arran
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2014-01-16 17:09:16 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Does this actually make a difference when trying to catch an inty at a gate?


Yes.

Because of mechanical interactions server ticks and gate cloak, a ship with an align time below two seconds cannot be pointed out of gate cloak before it warps away, no matter how high your scan resolution is or how quick your finger is on the prefire button. Anything over that line can be caught. Note that this only applies to ships leaving gatecloak: ships undocking or landing on grid can be caught conventionally.


The Malediction and Crow are getting hit harder than the others because, combined with this and their ability to engage targets from a safe distances and completely ignore their MWD penalties to damage application, they have been the gold standard of uncatchable interceptor roams. To be frank, being able to do your damage without having to come within scram/web/neut range or worry about tracking while you zoom around at 4km/sec is a really really big advantage.


I haven't undocked my ratting ships since Rubicon hit for what it's worth, though I've spent plenty of time shitting up other people's space in an interceptor.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#43 - 2014-01-16 17:14:24 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Altrue wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Fun fact, I actually experimented with MWD mass penalty reductions when I was doing the Navy Cruisers. It's so overpowered that I had a blast with it on the test server but it isn't something I expect we'll see on TQ any time soon.

The best thing about it was what happened when you combine with an oversized MWD.


I don't see how it could be overpowered. If you keep the agility nerf that you are planning to do, it could just make ceptors return to their previous agility to mass ratio that they had with MWD before the nerf. With just less mass and more inertia modifier.

It may have been overpowered for navy cruisers but we are talking about interceptors right now. They have nothing in common.


Funny things have happened in the past when it comes to modules that lower mass (back in the day, Nanofibers did this and you had battleships that handled like interceptors), so I can definitely believe it turning absurd.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#44 - 2014-01-16 17:22:38 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Fun fact, I actually experimented with MWD mass penalty reductions when I was doing the Navy Cruisers. It's so overpowered that I had a blast with it on the test server but it isn't something I expect we'll see on TQ any time soon.

The best thing about it was what happened when you combine with an oversized MWD.



how about doing it for AB's they need a little help better agility and speed would help since AB's are kept on permanently not pulsed having the mass penalty nerfs top speed whilst trying to orbit...
also webs are so strong they kill off AB's usefulness even more than the mass penalty does..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#45 - 2014-01-16 17:24:04 UTC
Rekkr Nordgard wrote:
The problem with interceptors is their interdiction nullification, not their agility. Give them their agility back and remove their bubble immunity.

Yeah....uuummmmmmmmm no!

...
Iudicium Vastus
Doomheim
#46 - 2014-01-16 17:53:37 UTC
JD No7 wrote:


This. As it stands they are virtually uncatchable, even with sensor boosts etc. Stupidly easy to get a cyno into system now.


But doesn't that get you those sought after fights?

[u]Nerf stabs/cloaks in FW?[/u] No, just.. -Fit more points -Fit faction points -Bring a friend or two with points (an alt is fine too)
Johan March
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2014-01-16 18:05:29 UTC
Apologies if this has been said, I'm posting from a phone. Saw this idea on another forum : Remove bubble immunity from combat interceptors and hard points from fleet interceptors.
IrJosy
Club 1621
#48 - 2014-01-16 18:18:59 UTC  |  Edited by: IrJosy
Now if you can just make it so ceptors are no loinger interdiction nullified they will be great!

When a dev(rise) says that the best way to deal with inty gangs is to "ignore them and pray that they go away" you know they are broken.
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#49 - 2014-01-16 18:29:12 UTC
This change is really problematic for any interceptor fits that don't rely on being hyper-nanoed. If, for example, you had the temerity to fit a tank to your malediction instead of inertial stabs, you'll find it now handles like an assault frigate. It won't be quite as bad for shield-tanked interceptors, but several of them are still going to be quite clunky unless they're sporting multiple agility mods.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#50 - 2014-01-16 18:54:26 UTC
Rekkr Nordgard wrote:
The problem with interceptors is their interdiction nullification, not their agility. Give them their agility back and remove their bubble immunity.


qft. Removing bubble immunity will eliminate many of the problems interceptors currently have.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Jepp
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2014-01-16 18:57:39 UTC
The nerf is bad imo, like yeah inties have their strenghts and all, but they can be countered pretty easily too. They should stay the same
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
#52 - 2014-01-16 19:12:24 UTC
What's up with the Minmatar ships being some of the slowest? Thought they were supposed the quickest race. You know, guerilla tactics and skirmishing...

Nerfing the align times is just dumb. The real issue with ceptors is the nullification bonus. Get rid of that and leave the agility alone.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#53 - 2014-01-16 19:20:18 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Overall the Rubicon Interceptor rebalance was a smashing success...




Let us know what you think!


What do I think? I think you should be working for a tinpot dictator. Your first sentence would make Baghdad Bob blush. Your server ticks make this change meaningless.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
#54 - 2014-01-16 19:22:30 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Overall the Rubicon Interceptor rebalance was a smashing success...




Let us know what you think!


What do I think? I think you should be working for a tinpot dictator. Your first sentence would make Baghdad Bob blush. Your server ticks make this change meaningless.

If by smashing success he meant nullified ceptors succeeded in smashing small gang null-sec pvp diversity, then yes.
Talexiar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#55 - 2014-01-16 19:23:55 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Rekkr Nordgard wrote:
The problem with interceptors is their interdiction nullification, not their agility. Give them their agility back and remove their bubble immunity.


qft. Removing bubble immunity will eliminate many of the problems interceptors currently have.


The only ones complaining about bubble immunity are bubble campers, learn to fit instalock or use a command ship and you should have no issues.

Taking things away isn't a fix if you're simply too lazy to learn to overcome and adapt.
commander aze
#56 - 2014-01-16 19:43:23 UTC
....stop please.... just stop. They are all ready stupid fast stupid mobile and you can't catch them. Please just stop this stupidity before you can't fix Iit....

Commander Aze For CSM XII

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=506400

Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#57 - 2014-01-16 19:59:09 UTC
Its a good start, doesn't go far enough imo, but a good start all the same.

Hopefully, for roaming fleets at least, we'll see fewer fleets comprised mostly of crows and whatnot, and see some more variety in composition.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#58 - 2014-01-16 20:15:10 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Overall the Rubicon Interceptor rebalance was a smashing success...




Let us know what you think!


What do I think? I think you should be working for a tinpot dictator. Your first sentence would make Baghdad Bob blush. Your server ticks make this change meaningless.

no they don't, you didn't look at eft

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Verb Object
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#59 - 2014-01-16 20:29:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Verb Object
More evidence that goon tears are a major component in driving balance iteration~
Benito Arias
Angry Mustellid
#60 - 2014-01-16 20:43:14 UTC
Disclaimer. As a primarily Minmatar pilot, my opinion relies heavily on experience with Minmatar ships and absence of experience in piloting Caldari ships.

Quote:
Overall the Rubicon Interceptor rebalance was a smashing success. We're very happy with the player reaction, with the gameplay involved in flying Interceptors, and with the effect on other areas of EVE.

Really? I still think the uncalled for bubble immunity is silly.

Quote:
However we think the gameplay on both sides would be a bit more compelling and the balance between Inties and other frigates would be a bit better if they had slightly weaker agility. We're going to make a tweak to agility in 1.1 and continue to monitor the results.

Other frigates are not interceptors, yet Attack frigates excel at killing interceptors (having comparable moblility and much better capacitor) and are very very good at pointing things (same reasons) for fraction of the cost.

Quote:
The balance of having Interceptors with more speed (and warp speed and bubble immunity) and Faction Frigates with better agility is one we believe will help keep the frigate pvp landscape diverse and exciting.

Not quite, because for an Interceptor to intercept a target it needs to be fast AND agile.

Quote:
CLAW
Mobility (agility / align time): 3.15 (+0.15) / 4.8 (+0.23)

=============================================================================

STILETTO
Mobility (agility / align time): 3.5 (+0.4) / 4.95 (+0.57)


And this it what we got in Rubicon 1.0.

Quote:
CLAW
Role bonuses:
80% reduction in Propulsion Jamming systems activation cost
Immunity to non-targeted interdiction
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 475 / 3(-0.09) / 1100000(-26000) / 4.57s(-0.25) (was 4.82)

=============================================================================

STILETTO
Role bonuses:
80% reduction in Propulsion Jamming systems activation cost
Immunity to non-targeted interdiction
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 435 / 3.1 / 1020000(-80000) / 4.38s(-0.35) (was 4.73)


I'm confused. So you made them more agile 3 month ago, and now you are reverting the changes to:

Claw, align time 4.8 from 4.57 from 4.82. What?

Stiletto, align time 4.95 from 4.38 from 4.73. Really?

What I see proposed here is making Inties worse shuttes AND worse Interceptors, which is bad. Please reconsider the latter, thank you.