EVE Search - The role of the interceptor

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The role of the interceptor

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dust Puppy	Posted - 2005.02.02 19:39:00 - [1] I've always thought that the role of interceptors were to intercept ships. Meaning that they could catch but not neccesseraly kill. When the interceptor came out people had been waiting a long time for some new content and were rather exciting about the inties. So I think CCP in an effort to peace their mind borked the design by giving them to much firepower. So I propose a change waits for flames The way I see it the interceptors primary purpose has to be to hold the ship down. So it would need at least one warp scrambler/disruptor and one webifier. It also needs to be faster than the bigger ships so it would definitly need either a microwarpdrive or an afterburner (probably better to go with mwd ). So that is 3 med slots and I propose that every single Interceptor has at least 3. There are however 3 interceptors that do only have 2 slots, the Amarrians Crusader, the Gallanteans Ares and the Minmatars Claw. I also propose that the interceptors don't do so much damage. I would like to see the damage bonuses that the interceptors get now would go into reducing signature radius penalty that the mwd gives you and give you bonuses to warp scrambling and webifying strength. The bottomline is that I think that interceptors should be better at catching ships and worse at destroying things. Being as this is just a suggestion and will likely never see the light of day I'm urging people to read this with stoic calm and not to pop a vein. Please tell me your thoughts about this. __________ Capacitor research
Sangxianc	Posted - 2005.02.02 19:40:00 - [2] No one wants to fly a ship that's only used for catching people - Any man's death diminishes me, as I am involved in mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.
Hakera	Posted - 2005.02.02 19:42:00 - [3] ive said this countless times that the ceptors bonuses detract from assualt frigates which should be the dmg dealers. I dont want ceptors to deal pathetic damage, but their dmg should not be as high as it is now. I would rather see their offensive bonuses decreased in favour of cap bonuses/duration for ew. Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Dust Puppy	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:00:00 - [4] Originally by: Sangxianc No one wants to fly a ship that's only used for catching people I wouldn't say no one but definitly fewer than do now. Still people fly ships now that is purely for EW. And I didn't mean that they would have no offensive cababilities at all just considerably less than now they should still be able to kill a lone indy that isn't prepared. __________ Capacitor research
ALTNAME	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:08:00 - [5] The Devs are working to insure "Tie Fighters: Eve Edition" becomes the reality. Interceptors are more overpowered than people admit. I have escaped Ravens and Apocs, and actually held my own against a mining dominix, in a cruiser, but I flee from Interceptors.
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:09:00 - [6] 'ceptors can and should be able to do both, in general. Some can only kill (i.e. Claw), some can only Tackle (i.e. Stilleto), but overall they work well. "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:13:00 - [7] well I said this once, and I'll say it again: instead dmg bonuses, give tracking bonuses to the ships. Give tackling bonuses (increased range of warp jammers/scrammers and/or performance improvement of webs), bit more speed, and 10% sig rad bonus instead 5%. Like that you have a catcher ship (it is usefull), hard to take down (with the "** THAT'S FAST" defence aproach), but not that damaging. and also defendable againt other interceptors. the 2 med slotted intys could be given a role of anti-tacklers/space superiority. Bit slower than the tackling versions, bit more dmg and a bit more armoured. just imho thou... ------------------- Quote:** Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Arud	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:18:00 - [8] after the ew changes the devs have proposed I would expect interceptors get a change so instead of damage boosts they get boost to ew modules
Dust Puppy	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:21:00 - [9] Originally by: Arud after the ew changes the devs have proposed I would expect interceptors get a change so instead of damage boosts they get boost to ew modules I would like to see them getting modules for propulsion jamming at least. I'm not totally sure what role the black ops ships are supposed to fill but I think they would fit in nicely as an uber EW ship. __________ Capacitor research
Meridius	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:25:00 - [10] I don't use my inty to tackle so uh all my sp into interceptors/small turret/small spec go poof if there role would change. They should make a new class of black ops ships that would be real tacklers with webbing/scrambling bonus's. ________________________________________________________
Dust Puppy	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:33:00 - [11] Originally by: Meridius I don't use my inty to tackle so uh all my sp into interceptors/small turret/small spec go poof if there role would change. Well that's a sacrifice that I'm willing to make Seriously though I also think that the mass of the assault frigates should be lowered so they could be made into fast gankers although not as fast as Interceptors. __________ Capacitor research
Garramon	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:34:00 - [12] I would just like to clarify....Propulsion jamming is not classified as Electronic Warfare, even though it seems like it should be. Just a matter of terminology. ------------------------------------------------
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:39:00 - [13] Originally by: Meridius I don't use my inty to tackle so uh all my sp into interceptors/small turret/small spec go poof if there role would change. They should make a new class of black ops ships that would be real tacklers with webbing/scrambling bonus's. true there.. but interceptor's role should be more of a catching role. black ops more EW (think they are also for probe scanning) ...but this is me. It is true however that Afrigs are a bit shadowed, preformance wise, in comparision to the dmg dealed by interceptors (the comparision of crusader vs retribution that you made a few months back comes to mind here) ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Hakera	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:47:00 - [14] Edited by: Hakera on 02/02/2005 20:47:37 an example of what might be nice: Stiletto Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 2% bonus to Small Projectile Turret damage and 2% bonus to Small Projectile Turret tracking speed per level Interceptors Skill Bonus: 5% reduction in Signature Radius and -5% cap use for propulsion jamming modules Ship Bonus: -1 to warp jamming strength or 5% extra range per level to webifiers Claw Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Small Projectile Turret Damage per level Interceptors Skill Bonus: 5% reduction in Signature Radius and 5% bonus to Small Projectile Turret Tracking Speed per level, -10% per level cap need for propulsion jammers just as suggestions and then give assualt frigs a mass redcution. Dumbledore - Eve-I.com
Julien Derida	Posted - 2005.02.02 20:53:00 - [15] Edited by: Julien Derida on 02/02/2005 21:02:30 What on earth is the point of giving ships propulsion jamming cap bonuses? It is already easy to run MWD + Web + 7.5km scram indefinately. Admittedly disruptors are a bit harder to run forever, but it is certainly possible on a couple of the interceptors. Also, I don't believe any dev has ever stated that interceptors are exclusively intended for tackling. There are many other possible meanings of the word. It seems quite clear to me that at least half of the interceptors were designed for a fast-attack and anti-frig role. ---------------------------------------- Artistic Director & Chief Diplomat - FRICK
Minyon	Posted - 2005.02.02 21:10:00 - [16] Interceptors dont do that much damage well the taranis can do about 150/sec We tryed pirateing with intercptors for a bit and it was easy to kill cruisers but that has little to do with intys doing "to much damage" but almost every thing to do with almost no one tanking there ships with any hardners. After a bit we got our selfs a cruser and tryed out some setups on it to see how well we could tank it after that we just couldnt work out how we ever killed any one 1 inty cant kill a well setup cruiser hell it can some times have a hard time killing an indy But why do you think that there is no room for a fast fighter class of ships after all they dont do that much damage and just got nerfed to do a good bit less
Vampire Blade	Posted - 2005.02.02 21:17:00 - [17] Edited by: Vampire Blade on 02/02/2005 21:17:25 please stop trying to dictate what i use my ships for. i only really play this game for the fast, "dog-fighting" style combat that only interceptors offer. i only get my buzz through it. i don't want my playstyle changing to suit that of the blob war. how come i've never seen a thread crying to nerf the badger mark2's EW capabilities, sure, videos like "Battle Bestower" made us all giggle, but ask yourself "is it right for a hauling vessel to kill an interceptor?" if you work by the same standards as you do when questioning the interceptor's ability to kill larger ships then you should arrive at "no". what i like about eve is you can be the david that topples goliath. in wow you only have to be 3-5 levels above someone else of the same class and you will never lose to the lesser levelled character. i hate the "rock-paper-scissors" style combat people seem to be asking for. my ship's bigger than yours, i win. can't people accept that there are crap pilots who will fall to superior pilots with the disadvantage? won't people accept that there is no one setup to rule them all? please don't take the variety out of the game. and PLEASE don't nerf the only "dog fighter" type class eve has to offer. ----- ----- -----
Zanthiuse	Posted - 2005.02.02 21:21:00 - [18] i see it as being the tackler interceptors and the hunter-killer or dog fighter ones. I think the tacklers should have bonuses to web/scram range and duration, and the others should be left alone. ____________________________ Waiting to cut out the deadwood. Waiting to clean up the city. Waiting to follow the worms.
Vampire Blade	Posted - 2005.02.02 21:23:00 - [19] Edited by: Vampire Blade on 02/02/2005 21:26:19 another thing, as long as "tackler" inties have the same amount of med slots as the killers then it won't be balanced. ----- ----- -----
Meridius	Posted - 2005.02.02 21:35:00 - [20] Originally by: Julien Derida Admittedly disruptors are a bit harder to run forever, but it is certainly possible on a couple of the Don't forget that Disruptors use more cap then mwd. Dual-mwd was barely sustainable on a Crusader with 4 relays. Running a disruptor + mwd is just not possible. You might be able to run it for a while provided you are not using cap for weapons and have 4 relays but thats pretty gimp. ________________________________________________________
Julien Derida	Posted - 2005.02.02 22:10:00 - [21] Originally by: Meridius Originally by: Julien Derida Admittedly disruptors are a bit harder to run forever, but it is certainly possible on a couple of the Don't forget that Disruptors use more cap then mwd. Dual-mwd was barely sustainable on a Crusader with 4 relays. Running a disruptor + mwd is just not possible. You might be able to run it for a while provided you are not using cap for weapons and have 4 relays but thats pretty gimp. I am aware of that The setup I was referring to on a Crusader is... 4xModulated Dual Pulse (T2 use too much cap for this setup) 1x MWD II, 1x Disruptor 4x CPR This can sustain MWD + Disruptor forever with relative ease. Before the MWD II nerf, it could run MWD+Disruptor+Guns for over 3 minutes. Since the MWD II cap increase this has reduced to around 90 seconds. Of course, you could switch the MWD II for a Cat Cold Gas and get the old sustainability back. Admittedly the setup is moderately gimped for damage compared to a normal Crusader, but its wonderful for quickly and safely tackling large ships in a group. You can also run a similar setup on a crow, with 3 CPRs and a small cap battery. This allows you to sustain MWD + Disruptor and deal full damage forever. ---------------------------------------- Artistic Director & Chief Diplomat - FRICK
Meridius	Posted - 2005.02.02 22:34:00 - [22] Edited by: Meridius on 02/02/2005 22:37:07 Originally by: Julien Derida This can sustain MWD + Disruptor forever with relative ease. Before the MWD II nerf, it could run MWD+Disruptor+Guns for over 3 minutes. Since the MWD II cap increase this has reduced to around 90 seconds. Of course, you could switch the MWD II for a Cat Cold Gas and get the old sustainability back. Admittedly the setup is moderately gimped for damage compared to a normal Crusader, but its wonderful for quickly and safely tackling large ships in a group. You can also run a similar setup on a crow, with 3 CPRs and a small cap battery. This allows you to sustain MWD + Disruptor and deal full damage forever. Nice didn't know that, especially the crow thing Still, i'd much rather run what i run now and not be able to sustain a disruptor. I don't have time to sit there all day pecking at them ________________________________________________________
Dust Puppy	Posted - 2005.02.02 22:49:00 - [23] Originally by: Vampire Blade Edited by: Vampire Blade on 02/02/2005 21:17:25 please stop trying to dictate what i use my ships for. i only really play this game for the fast, "dog-fighting" style combat that only interceptors offer. i only get my buzz through it. i don't want my playstyle changing to suit that of the blob war. how come i've never seen a thread crying to nerf the badger mark2's EW capabilities, sure, videos like "Battle Bestower" made us all giggle, but ask yourself "is it right for a hauling vessel to kill an interceptor?" if you work by the same standards as you do when questioning the interceptor's ability to kill larger ships then you should arrive at "no". what i like about eve is you can be the david that topples goliath. in wow you only have to be 3-5 levels above someone else of the same class and you will never lose to the lesser levelled character. i hate the "rock-paper-scissors" style combat people seem to be asking for. my ship's bigger than yours, i win. can't people accept that there are crap pilots who will fall to superior pilots with the disadvantage? won't people accept that there is no one setup to rule them all? please don't take the variety out of the game. and PLEASE don't nerf the only "dog fighter" type class eve has to offer. Fair point except I don't understand how you say that "the biggest ship always wins" approach falls under "rock-paper-scissor" style combat. Maybe I just don't understand this "rock-paper-scissor" game. But your point is excellent the interceptors are the only dogfighter type ship in EVE and I think it is important to let people decide on their own what to do with their ship. Then how about just one will be designed as a dogfighting killer ship and the other optimised for catching? __________ Capacitor research
Vampire Blade	Posted - 2005.02.03 00:40:00 - [24] Edited by: Vampire Blade on 03/02/2005 00:40:56 sorry, it's a bit late to edit what i wrote so i'll write here. i got my words out, i prefer the rock-paper-scissors style where everyone has equal chance of winning a battle as opposed to the "trumps" (biggest ship wins) style of playing some people want ;( and yes, i wouldn't mind that change at all - after all, we are supposed to have tackler interceptors now ;) 2 slot ceptor for each race perhaps? ;) ----- ----- -----
Phades	Posted - 2005.02.03 01:17:00 - [25] Its quite simple actually, let the interceptors be fast and do damage, have the AF do signifigantly more damage than interceptors at greater range, and change the frigates to do the utility roles like catching. You have your 3 different and yet distinct small ship types. Ship bonuses and properties would still have to be tweaked some, but it is not that far from what exists now. Many posts talk about reducing the sig penalty as a ship bonus from the mwd, but instead it would probably be more benefical to tune the ship to be fitted with AB and give an additional ship bonus to further enhance the AB speed and performance. Making a frigate fitted with a mwd and tuned for speed to be similar if not equal to a interceptor with an AB and fitted for speed. That way the interceptor ships could be tuned back slightly in fitting numbers to reflect the change and still allow for gun and speed heavy setups. After that, all that would be required would be to slightly tune the AF and give them a 4th bonus. The current changes that give tracking speed and velocity bonus does go well with the style of the ships in theory, but perhaps not in practice with the amarr ships. With missile velocity changed increasing the range, they would possibly need to be tuned back in flight time to compensate for the ability to strike another inteceptor at maximum possible speed. While the speed is somewhat lacking in order to catch another interceptor currently, it would be a move in the right direction to tune the interceptors to fight without the ability to tackle in that instance.
Lord Titanus	Posted - 2005.02.03 02:39:00 - [26] Dont nerf combat inty's. Boost Assault Frigs, make them truly deadly ie. you need a wolfpack of frigs/intys/whatever to drag one down :D while your at it make them easier to hit tho, and make cruisers really usfull :D LT
Bobbeh	Posted - 2005.02.03 06:46:00 - [27] Mer, i can run it constant with dual light pulse II + med pulse II with 4 relays. Around 90 seconds with guns and tracking enhancer Mimiru > It'd be a tie, the monkies nerfed pooflinger wouldnt have enough tracking to hit the parrot orbiting him, but the parrot's beak is so small it couldnt break the monkey's fur tanking.
Bobbeh	Posted - 2005.02.03 06:48:00 - [28] Originally by: Dust Puppy Originally by: Vampire Blade Edited by: Vampire Blade on 02/02/2005 21:17:25 please stop trying to dictate what i use my ships for. i only really play this game for the fast, "dog-fighting" style combat that only interceptors offer. i only get my buzz through it. i don't want my playstyle changing to suit that of the blob war. how come i've never seen a thread crying to nerf the badger mark2's EW capabilities, sure, videos like "Battle Bestower" made us all giggle, but ask yourself "is it right for a hauling vessel to kill an interceptor?" if you work by the same standards as you do when questioning the interceptor's ability to kill larger ships then you should arrive at "no". what i like about eve is you can be the david that topples goliath. in wow you only have to be 3-5 levels above someone else of the same class and you will never lose to the lesser levelled character. i hate the "rock-paper-scissors" style combat people seem to be asking for. my ship's bigger than yours, i win. can't people accept that there are crap pilots who will fall to superior pilots with the disadvantage? won't people accept that there is no one setup to rule them all? please don't take the variety out of the game. and PLEASE don't nerf the only "dog fighter" type class eve has to offer. Fair point except I don't understand how you say that "the biggest ship always wins" approach falls under "rock-paper-scissor" style combat. Maybe I just don't understand this "rock-paper-scissor" game. But your point is excellent the interceptors are the only dogfighter type ship in EVE and I think it is important to let people decide on their own what to do with their ship. Then how about just one will be designed as a dogfighting killer ship and the other optimised for catching?[/quote] I believe that is the case now. bonuses to warp speeds etc. Mimiru > It'd be a tie, the monkies nerfed pooflinger wouldnt have enough tracking to hit the parrot orbiting him, but the parrot's beak is so small it couldnt break the monkey's fur tanking.
O Olho	Posted - 2005.02.03 12:41:00 - [29] Edited by: O Olho on 03/02/2005 12:41:25 I agree with Dust on this completely. I even agree with Hakera <gulp>. The problem is that inties do it ALL, and do it well. They go fast, they have amazing damage output for a frig, thier speed makes them hard as hell to hit, and they can tackle pretty well. That is quite a bit in one package. As Hakera so astutely pointed out, damage dealing really should be the forte or the Assault Frigs rather than the inties. Honestly answer me this. What other ship is among the top 2 damage for it's class (frig), that is easily 8 times faster than it's closest counterpart (Assault Frig), and has virtual inpenetrable defenses (speed at orbit)? Yes the skill requirements are high for it, but on the other hand do you REALLY want to see T2 battleships with the same overpowered abilities? Uber ships good at everything take away from the game as a whole, despite being fun. If they toned up the tackling abilities of an inty they would still be used, just as EW ships like the scorp are popular despite thier relatively low damage output. Interceptors should be good at intercepting - not intercepting/defense/damage.
Toran Mehtar	Posted - 2005.02.03 13:52:00 - [30] It's nice to talk about what interceptors should be, and how they shoud live up to their name by 'intercepting', but the current reality doesn't match that at all. Interceptors are not a specialist tech II frig, they are the tech II frig. If you can fly an interceptor, there is no reason to ever fly a tech I frig again (unless you use a probe for courier missions ). My opinion, is that this is the case at least partly because interceptors were the first tech II ships (and only behind miner IIs for anything tech II ?). They were not released as interceptors, but as tech II toys for a content hungry community. So the question now is do we keep what we have, or adapt them to fit in with the specialist roles most tech II ships are taking. I have to say I'm undecided. I don't feel that a dramatic change to the current situation would be beneficial, but I would also like to see a true tackler frigate. I see two alternatives: Make the killer/tackler divide between the current interceptors greater (cap use won't cut it as a good enough reason), or leave things as they are and bring something else in to be a true tackler. Honestly don't know what should be done, but I'd love to hear suggestions.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.