Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
|

CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
8901

|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:06:00 -
[1] - 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.
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.
Every Interceptor is getting a slight agility nerf in this pass, with the missile ceptors (Crow and Malediction) getting bigger changes than the others since they have proven extremely powerful in other ways (especially in groups). On average this will result in a 10% longer align time for the class.
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.
Agility (as a modifier on mass) affects the turning time (often measured as align time) of ships. Lower is better. The align times listed below are for a hypothetical character with 0 skills.
CRUSADER Mobility (agility / align time): 3.2 (+0.1) / 4.66 (+0.15)
=============================================================================
MALEDICTION Mobility (agility / align time): 3.7 (+0.55) / 5.12 (+0.76)
=============================================================================
RAPTOR Mobility (agility / align time): 3.35 (+0.15) / 4.64 (+0.21)
=============================================================================
CROW Mobility (agility / align time): 3.7 (+0.6) / 5.46 (+0.88)
=============================================================================
TARANIS Mobility (agility / align time): 3.25 (+0.25) / 4.82 (+0.37)
=============================================================================
ARES Mobility (agility / align time): 3.35 (+0.25) / 4.6 (+0.21)
=============================================================================
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)
These changes will be on SISI shortly for you to try out. Let us know what you think! Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
1198
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
1st again!
EDIT:
Oh I'm on a roll today! As to the OP: I've seen a few vids of the Inty's post-1.0 and I have to say wow! Think it was the A Murder of Crows but 10% seems reasonable to me but then I'm not a professional interceptor pilot...yet  Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Bart Gibson
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
4
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
^^^^^^^^ dude, noone cares |

Swiftstrike1
Interfector INC. Fade 2 Black
431
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Here's a hypothetical question for you CCP. In your opinion, what sort of scan resolution should be required to catch an interceptor after it has just jumped through a stargate? Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0 |

JD No7
V I R I I Ineluctable.
80
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Swiftstrike1 wrote:Here's a hypothetical question for you CCP. In your opinion, what sort of scan resolution should be required to catch an interceptor after it has just jumped through a stargate?
This. As it stands they are virtually uncatchable, even with sensor boosts etc. Stupidly easy to get a cyno into system now. |

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
913
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Swiftstrike1 wrote:Here's a hypothetical question for you CCP. In your opinion, what sort of scan resolution should be required to catch an interceptor after it has just jumped through a stargate? That depends...... how much effort has the interceptor pilot put into making his ship fast & uncatchable..... Or has he shield tanked it & plated it to make it slow & sluggish.
Or to put it better. How much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood. |

Tronjay the'3rd
IGNOTUS AGENDA Cult of War
39
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
****** nerf, for once i was enjoying flying inties.
sà¦FÇàn+îF¬¡TüôS¦ƒpÇéµòàFâ+FÇîtñ¦S¦ïS+ìFâ+n+îtö¿FÇîtñ¦S¦ïS+ìtö¿n+îF+æFÇîtñ¦S¦ïTüán+îTüáFÇîtñ¦S¦ïF+æ
Sun Tzu -¬ |

Nbonga
V I R I I Ineluctable.
24
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
One good fix at a time. Well done. |

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
1199
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:58:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tronjay the'3rd wrote:****** nerf, for once i was enjoying flying inties.
For the sake of 10% you're really this upset? <5.12 second align time with 0 Skills...I wonder what it is fitted and skilled? <2 seconds? Instawarp perhaps with Implants.
Might have to jump on and test on SiSi but it's not that massive a change and I don't think it'll be game breaking for all the new guys that have jumped into Interceptors since 1.0. I for one have trained it to Level 1 for quick transit but then I got my Leopard *bows*. Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Jack bubu
GK inc. Pandemic Legion
520
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 13:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Swiftstrike1 wrote:Here's a hypothetical question for you CCP. In your opinion, what sort of scan resolution should be required to catch an interceptor after it has just jumped through a stargate? That depends...... how much effort has the interceptor pilot put into making his ship fast & uncatchable..... Or has he shield tanked it & plated it to make it slow & sluggish. Or to put it better. How much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood.
no ship should be uncatchable. |
|

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
1199
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:01:00 -
[11] - Quote
Jack bubu wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Swiftstrike1 wrote:Here's a hypothetical question for you CCP. In your opinion, what sort of scan resolution should be required to catch an interceptor after it has just jumped through a stargate? That depends...... how much effort has the interceptor pilot put into making his ship fast & uncatchable..... Or has he shield tanked it & plated it to make it slow & sluggish. Or to put it better. How much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood. no ship should be uncatchable.
Well good luck with that... . I don't think he meant take it literally but if you can lock & scram before he aligns and warps then all good. If not then he fitted it better\had better skills for getting away than you did for catching him. Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
837
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:11:00 -
[12] - Quote
LOL WTF ?
WIth Eve only ticking every second its already a pain to stay at point range when you're going that fast, yet here is an agility nerf ! :(
As long as they take more than one second to align (which is clearly the case here), interceptors are lockable. An agility nerf won't help incompetent people from trying (and failing) to lock interceptors with battleships, their complaints will remain. However, it will impair their combat ability. I mentionned point range, but what about, say, blaster range ? It's very VERY hard to fly already. G££ <= Me |

darius mclever
59
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:17:00 -
[13] - Quote
Why do the 2 missile ceptors get the biggest hit here? why does the crow deserve a 1s slower base align time compared to the ares?
just curious about the reasons. |

Mind Rape
Relentless Influence
10
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:20:00 -
[14] - Quote
well, we all knew the interceptor awesomeness wouldn't last long.  |
|

CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
8913

|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
darius mclever wrote:Why do the 2 missile ceptors get the biggest hit here? why does the crow deserve a 1s slower base align time compared to the ares?
just curious about the reasons.
Every interceptor should have their own strengths and weaknesses that make the decision of which to fly interesting. The Crow has excellent damage application at long ranges (even when it is flying at high speeds), four very valuable midslots and the longest lock range of any interceptor. It's weaknesses are a bit less speed than most others, lower theoretical top end damage, as well as slightly weaker agility. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|

ZheoTheThird
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
202
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:27:00 -
[16] - Quote
And it just so happens that many people have been using 1.9s align time Maledictions to harass and kill otherwise unkillable nullsec ratters, most dominantly Goon ones. And now they're getting nerfed hardcore, making them unusable for that task entirely. :tinfoil: |

darius mclever
59
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:32:00 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:darius mclever wrote:Why do the 2 missile ceptors get the biggest hit here? why does the crow deserve a 1s slower base align time compared to the ares?
just curious about the reasons. Every interceptor should have their own strengths and weaknesses that make the decision of which to fly interesting. The Crow has excellent damage application at long ranges (even when it is flying at high speeds), four very valuable midslots and the longest lock range of any interceptor. It's weaknesses are a bit less speed than most others, lower theoretical top end damage, as well as slightly weaker agility.
Reasons for the Malediction are more or less the same? |

Abramul
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:35:00 -
[18] - Quote
Altrue wrote:LOL WTF ?
WIth Eve only ticking every second its already a pain to stay at point range when you're going that fast, yet here is an agility nerf ! :(
As long as they take more than one second to align (which is clearly the case here), interceptors are lockable. An agility nerf won't help incompetent people from trying (and failing) to lock interceptors with battleships, their complaints will remain. However, it will impair their combat ability. I mentionned point range, but what about, say, blaster range ? It's very VERY hard to fly already. Would it help if they got a reduction to MWD mass penalty? |

ZheoTheThird
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
202
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:36:00 -
[19] - Quote
darius mclever wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:darius mclever wrote:Why do the 2 missile ceptors get the biggest hit here? why does the crow deserve a 1s slower base align time compared to the ares?
just curious about the reasons. Every interceptor should have their own strengths and weaknesses that make the decision of which to fly interesting. The Crow has excellent damage application at long ranges (even when it is flying at high speeds), four very valuable midslots and the longest lock range of any interceptor. It's weaknesses are a bit less speed than most others, lower theoretical top end damage, as well as slightly weaker agility. Reasons for the Malediction are more or less the same?
The maledictions' biggest strength, its align time, got nerfed hard, making it unusable for certain ratter-harassing, travelling and cynoing applications, making it inferior to the others |

4gn1
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
Agility is extremly curcial for holding an orbit without loosing the point and still not come close into scram web range. This is already hard enough as the point bonis are not at that much difference especially at the short points.
Interceptors were not uncatchable and if - they were they were not fit too well for combat. This change is nonsense and will lead to problems in the Tackle role. I say again Tackle role - not Travel role.
This nerf comes to soon - people cry because they dont want to make any effort to counter it!!! |
|

Franky Saken
Mafia Redux Phobia.
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:49:00 -
[21] - Quote
Doesn't this hurt the tackle role of interceptors more than the travel role?
Has someone tried out what this equates to in the orbiting distance/speed on sisi yet? |

Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon Backseat Promises
992
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 14:58:00 -
[22] - Quote
i guess i will keep using my condor then |

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
838
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:08:00 -
[23] - Quote
4gn1 wrote:Agility is extremly curcial for holding an orbit without loosing the point and still not come close into scram web range. This is already hard enough as the point bonis are not at that much difference especially at the short points.
Interceptors were not uncatchable and if - they were they were not fit too well for combat. This change is nonsense and will lead to problems in the Tackle role. I say again Tackle role - not Travel role.
This nerf comes to soon - people cry because they dont want to make any effort to counter it!!!
Again that's perfectly true.
Is it me or are people actually surprised to see an interceptor able to slip past blockades and catch stuff ? Then what ? Logi will get a rep nerf because people are complaining they are repping more than logi drones ? :/
CCP Fozzie wrote: Every interceptor should have their own strengths and weaknesses that make the decision of which to fly interesting. The Crow has excellent damage application at long ranges (even when it is flying at high speeds), four very valuable midslots and the longest lock range of any interceptor. It's weaknesses are a bit less speed than most others, lower theoretical top end damage, as well as slightly weaker agility.
If you are unsatisfied about the state of missile interceptors, maybe now should be the time to take a look at the missile system in its globality, instead of nerfing missile ships with random stats that will not affect his damage application, but will affect his ability to tackle, which is much more impairing.
This does not mean that I share your analysis of the crow's damage ability. In fact I find it very wrong :( : 1- The Crow has excellent damage application at long ranges even when flying at high speeds. Indeed it does, but its dps with light missiles is quite low. In addition to that, fitting requirements for light missiles makes it impossible to use its other strenghts (i.e med slots) at the same time. You can use ridiculously overpriced meta4 launchers to ease that eventually. And of course, needless to say, dps is not very important for interceptors... 2- The Crow has four very valuable mid slots. Indeed it does, and indeed they are very valuable ! Because if you substract the MWD and Point that an interceptor MUST have, you're left with two med slots for the tank. That's one less compared to three low armor ceptors. Just look at your metrics for the Raptor (which is shield and has three med slots) and try to prove that I'm wrong :D. Also again, that's two med slots that cannot be put to good use at the same time than its damage application. Due to fitting requirements. 3- The Crow has the longest lock range of any interceptor. That is true (by only 7% more than an turret ship like the Ares, but why not...). However every interceptor has enough targeting range to keep target during the full long point range. And at these speeds, the extra range is ridiculous since it reprensent one second of piloting. 4- Nerfing its agility wont prevent tracel ceptors from prevaling, which is normal by the way. But it will cause issues during combat, a moment where current agility stats could have even used a buff.
So, overall, due to secondary and debatable advantages, you're nerfing one of the primary stats of this ship. That is not cool ! 
Edit : The solution! Let me suggest you a compromise. If you want to nerf their agility for travel, why not giving them a role bonus that reduces their mass when using MWDs. (Effectively removing the mass penalty, or even going further and decreasing their mass). This way, interception in combat remains the same (or can even be improved), but interceptors for travel are nerfed. Even if you reduce their mass during MWD, you cannot use that to travel because of the one second tick that will negate this benefit (the interceptor will loose the second of acceleration before activation of the module) and because of the sig radius penalty that decrease lock time on an MWDIng interceptor. G££ <= Me |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1080
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:12:00 -
[24] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: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.
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.
Every Interceptor is getting a slight agility nerf in this pass, with the missile ceptors (Crow and Malediction) getting bigger changes than the others since they have proven extremely powerful in other ways (especially in groups). On average this will result in a 10% longer align time for the class.
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.
Agility (as a modifier on mass) affects the turning time (often measured as align time) of ships. Lower is better. The align times listed below are for a hypothetical character with 0 skills.
CRUSADER Mobility (agility / align time): 3.2 (+0.1) / 4.66 (+0.15)
=============================================================================
MALEDICTION Mobility (agility / align time): 3.7 (+0.55) / 5.12 (+0.76)
=============================================================================
RAPTOR Mobility (agility / align time): 3.35 (+0.15) / 4.64 (+0.21)
=============================================================================
CROW Mobility (agility / align time): 3.7 (+0.6) / 5.46 (+0.88)
=============================================================================
TARANIS Mobility (agility / align time): 3.25 (+0.25) / 4.82 (+0.37)
=============================================================================
ARES Mobility (agility / align time): 3.35 (+0.25) / 4.6 (+0.21)
=============================================================================
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)
These changes will be on SISI shortly for you to try out. Let us know what you think!
Where in heel has ccp stick the cocnept of minmatar? What is the logic of the squirmish race havign the longest align turreted interceptor?
That is becoming more and more stupid. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |

Praal
Martyr's Vengence Nulli Secunda
2
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:16:00 -
[25] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Every Interceptor is getting a slight agility nerf in this pass, with the missile ceptors (Crow and Malediction) getting bigger changes than the others since they have proven extremely powerful in other ways (especially in groups). On average this will result in a 10% longer align time for the class.
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.
Agility (as a modifier on mass) affects the turning time (often measured as align time) of ships. Lower is better. The align times listed below are for a hypothetical character with 0 skills.
This balance needs to come from the interceptors' combat strength, not their tackling ability. An interceptor's primary job is to catch things and pin them down, not to kill things. With this in mind the nerf should come in form of reduced damage.
This would lead to fleets that combine fast, agile interceptors to catch enemies with other frigates (such as assault frigs) to deliver the damage. |

Marcus Elius
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:33:00 -
[26] - Quote
Altrue wrote: As long as they take more than one second to align (which is clearly the case here), interceptors are lockable.
Nope. There's a one server tick delay before the gate cloak wears off, and a one tick delay for the lock even with infinite scanres. Interceptors with <2s align times are 100% impossible to catch.
Test it on Sisi with a few mates.
|

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
838
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:43:00 -
[27] - Quote
Marcus Elius wrote:Altrue wrote: As long as they take more than one second to align (which is clearly the case here), interceptors are lockable.
Nope. There's a one server tick delay before the gate cloak wears off, and a one tick delay for the lock even with infinite scanres. Interceptors with <2s align times are 100% impossible to catch on gates. Test it on Sisi with a few mates. Unless you believe they should be uncatchable, this nerf was inevitable.
Sorry Marcus, your point was valid and I'm wrong.
Nontheless I still believe that nerfing their combat agility is a bad thing. See my proposal for keeping the current agility nerfs, along with a brand new MWD mass reduction role bonus. A few posts higher. G££ <= Me |

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
486
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:56:00 -
[28] - Quote
So you're saying instalock gatecamps being able to catch frigates is intended? |

Seranova Farreach
611
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:58:00 -
[29] - Quote
darius mclever wrote:Why do the 2 missile ceptors get the biggest hit here? why does the crow deserve a 1s slower base align time compared to the ares?
just curious about the reasons.
because CCP hates missiles it seems :/ _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|

Corey Edward
Under Heavy Fire Mordus Angels
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 16:10:00 -
[30] - Quote
Looks like Intys are back on the menu boys!!  |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |