These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Are Interdictors gettting the changes made to Destroyers?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Azrahrn
Lunar Industries Ltd
#21 - 2011-11-17 13:43:06 UTC
+1 to applying the changes to interdictors

Interdictors play a vital role in fleet engagements where they are likely to be targeted by larger hulls and consequently die like flies. The signature reduction and the other little tweaks would help a great deal.
Wylee Coyote
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2011-11-17 15:43:17 UTC
Moneta Curran wrote:
Wylee Coyote wrote:
Content.


Content with what?

In the current SiSi build, interdictors still lack the smaller signature that their T1 counterparts were given.
This is silly and needs to be corrected before release.


Content=bump.
Billy Singer
Lunar Industries Ltd
#23 - 2011-11-17 19:05:20 UTC


Really does not make sense to withhold these changes..

Can we get some kind of formal word on whether this is actually being taken into consideration?
Moneta Curran
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2011-11-18 11:17:49 UTC
Wylee Coyote wrote:
bump.


Ah. Misunderstood.. Up it is.

Joseph Blade wrote:
It makes no sense to not buff the t2 versions. they are based on the same hull afterall. (and are supposed to be more advanced than the t1 equivalent). This needs fixing


This.
Sutha Moliko
Giza'Msafara
#25 - 2011-11-18 13:01:29 UTC
Can CCP balance team show us that there is a plan behind the buff of Destroyer ?

We are worrying about Interdictor and AF because of this buff and nothing else.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#26 - 2011-11-18 13:40:34 UTC
I agree the Eris, Flycatcher and Heretic need a boost Cool The price of the Sabre should speak for itself...
Azrahrn
Lunar Industries Ltd
#27 - 2011-11-19 18:07:25 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
I agree the Eris, Flycatcher and Heretic need a boost Cool The price of the Sabre should speak for itself...


Bah, in the land of the blind, one eye is king..
All changes should be consistently applied to all hulls.
Pytria Le'Danness
Placid Reborn
#28 - 2011-11-19 23:03:02 UTC
While I agree that Interdictors aren't really the best thing to fly if you want to stay around, what do you expect in way of changes? You fly them into the middle of the enemy fleet, prevent them from leaving and then wonder why they turn their attention on you?

But in all seriousness, you ARE in a very bad situation there. You are the sole enemy ship around and everyone has nothing better to do since you just took all their options away; basically the only thing they can do to pass the time is to shoot you. Anything that makes you survive there for a significant amount of time is going to make the class very much overpowered. Remember, you want the ship to survive the onslaught of the whole enemy fleet, a firepower that probably matches CONCORD s Smile
Azrahrn
Lunar Industries Ltd
#29 - 2011-11-20 01:16:41 UTC
Pytria Le'Danness wrote:
While I agree that Interdictors aren't really the best thing to fly if you want to stay around, what do you expect in way of changes? You fly them into the middle of the enemy fleet, prevent them from leaving and then wonder why they turn their attention on you?

But in all seriousness, you ARE in a very bad situation there. You are the sole enemy ship around and everyone has nothing better to do since you just took all their options away; basically the only thing they can do to pass the time is to shoot you. Anything that makes you survive there for a significant amount of time is going to make the class very much overpowered. Remember, you want the ship to survive the onslaught of the whole enemy fleet, a firepower that probably matches CONCORD s Smile


I am not pleading for them to become invincible. I'm not sure how you got that impression.

Whatever small tweaks are made to the signature radius and other aspects on the base hull should carry over to T2 with its substantially higher skill requirements.

It doesn't make sense to mitigate the damage a destroyer hull absorbs and let interdictors, which are far more likely, as you yourself are pointing out, to be called primary, take the full brunt of enemy fire. Roll
Jon Marburg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#30 - 2011-11-20 01:51:56 UTC
Pytria Le'Danness wrote:
But in all seriousness, you ARE in a very bad situation there. You are the sole enemy ship around and everyone has nothing better to do since you just took all their options away; basically the only thing they can do to pass the time is to shoot you. Anything that makes you survive there for a significant amount of time is going to make the class very much overp . owered. Remember, you want the ship to survive the onslaught of the whole enemy fleet, a firepower that probably matches CONCORD s Smile

If you're the only ship in your fleet on grid you're doing it wrong. The only reason interdictors should be getting primaried is if the fleet is planning on running not because someone had a spare second to lock them. While I agree that they shouldn't stand up to being primaried, they shouldn't be getting easily volleyed by individual battleships.

The destroyer class is slightly more robust than frigate hulls but slightly smaller than cruisers so their hulls should reflect this. There shouldn't be cruisers with smaller signature radiuses and frigates shouldn't have more ehp than destroyers either. While the current buff fixes these issues on the t1 hulls, it becomes glaringly obvious that similar principles should be applied to t2 as well. Guardians have smaller signatures than Heretics and my Keres has more ehp than a Sabre. This shouldn't be the case.
Einar Matveinen
Mahe Ratu
#31 - 2011-11-20 02:10:35 UTC
Jon Marburg wrote:
Guardians have smaller signatures than Heretics and my Keres has more ehp than a Sabre. This shouldn't be the case.


All logistics have a role bonus, their signature radius is smaller than the signature of their Tech I hull variations. Augoror have a larger signature than a heretic for example.
Jon Marburg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#32 - 2011-11-20 02:52:35 UTC
Einar Matveinen wrote:

All logistics have a role bonus, their signature radius is smaller than the signature of their Tech I hull variations. Augoror have a larger signature than a heretic for example.
You seem to have missed the point. I understand why logistics are supposed to have a smaller signature. (logistics ships don't specifically say they have a role bonus to sig radius fyi). I'm simply comparing T2 ships in the destroyer hull to those T2 and equivalent faction ships in cruiser and frigate hulls. If you don't like that example, how about how the flycatcher and stabber fleet issue have almost equivalent sig radius? To reiterate the point, it is critical that destroyer hulls have nowhere near the signature radius of cruiser hulls. Interdictors don't have the base ehp that cruisers do so should have the benefit of smaller signature to minimize incoming damage.
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#33 - 2011-11-20 03:09:57 UTC
Get rid of those fracking bubble shift stuff and bring interdictors to their right place dammit

-make those gates become interesting to pass

-yeah you know chances you get caught are high, very hig

BUT !! it will DEPEND on CEPTORS and INTERDICTORS job !!

Not a fücking stupid thing you just can anchor there and shoot at every thing getting in...stupid stuff !!
Hamatitio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#34 - 2011-11-20 03:13:31 UTC
Make interdictors immune to bubbles.

Or perhaps only their own bubbles... That way they can bubble and gtfo immediately.
Jooce McNasty
Islefive Consulting
#35 - 2011-11-20 03:38:46 UTC
Hamatitio wrote:
Make interdictors immune to bubbles.

Or perhaps only their own bubbles... That way they can bubble and gtfo immediately.


Honestly I would make them like interdiction fit T3's where they are immune to bubble's, couple that with a slight sig rad decrease. Keep the EHP the same and the speed the same.
Moneta Curran
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2011-11-20 21:16:04 UTC
It's been a week now and still no formal answer..

Makes me wonder what the value of this part of the forum actually is.
Jon Marburg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#37 - 2011-11-21 06:10:24 UTC
Would really appreciate some dev input. Does CCP see this as working as intended? Are you looking into it? Any sort of light shined on the thinking behind not giving the T2 destroyers the buff the T1 destroyers are getting would be great. It's kind of frustrating to see dev responses in all the trivial forum topics, but have important topics go weeks without updates or feedback.
Tetragammatron Prime
Pink Sockers
#38 - 2011-11-21 12:07:13 UTC
bumpp..

dictors need some love even if it is just the reduced sig radius
Billy Singer
Lunar Industries Ltd
#39 - 2011-11-21 19:17:37 UTC
I filed a bug report on this matter to raise some awareness @ CCP

I was told that it's not a bug, but a feature.

...
Wylee Coyote
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#40 - 2011-11-21 21:56:33 UTC
Bump.
Previous page123Next page