There are other ships that project long range ewar effects, and even warp disruption, so basically I doubt they'll change the HIC the way you like.

As a matter of fact, they seem to be going the opposite way: they've added other "unfair" effects, such as ships that have the capability to drag your ship with them as they microjump 100km away, thereby forcing you off the undock point or way far away from the gate. And this dragging can be chained, if they have multiple ships; you can easily find yourself dragged to the next grid.

EDIT: Maybe with the disabling effect that scrams and the HIC script have, they'll reconsider some of the negative side-effects of installing MWDs, and un-nerf them a little. But I doubt it, and the mwd is probably ok the way it is.

The HAC, however, has six low slohe Broadsword has a 20% resist increase across the board for a role bonus! Training HIC to V would give you 100% resist increase across the board?

Infinite points are fine no I'm not biased stop asking.

I feel the long scram is compansation for not beeing able to recive Remote reps..

I'm definitely also possibly not biased maybe.
I mean, proficiency rated as IV means exactly that (never mind that it counts weapon systems but not the ability to fit a WDFG), right?

Didn't they bake the WDFG skills into the HIC skill prereqs with the ship skill changes?

Or am I thinking of another ship skill that does that?

Kind of. The HIC skill requires Propulsion Jamming V and Graviton Physics IV, same as WDFG I.
The WDFG II, however, requires Graviton Physics V, and I don't think this is reflected in any of the proficiency requirements.

Whether that was the line of thinking or not. The whole HAC-HIC comparison is pointless. HICs are supposed to sit somewhere, take a beating and keep other ships from warping away, and they don't do much beyond that. Their Speed is bad, heir DPS output is not all that impressive, and their damage application is not great either. HACs are supposed to be agile and apply loads of damage to about anything, and they are doing that fairly well. Yes, they may be less tanky, but when HACs do what they are doing best, they can get reps. When HICs do what they are doing best, they are basically stationary targets and on their own.

Just two completely different ship classes for two completely different roles.

I think, the scram feature is a nice addition to make Hictors a bit more useful, because besides pointing Supers and Titans, there wasn't much a HIC could do that couldn't be done by a cheaper ship as well.

For the whole solo destroyer thing: I am not saying you need to bring a dedicated scout for a destroyer. I wouldn't either. But if you don't you will eventually run into a gate camp and die in a fire. That's just how it is. A Lachesis with an anchorable bubble would have gotten you as well. If you fly around solo, situations you cannot realistically hope to escape will occur. A solo HIC behind a gate is just one among many.

Huh, I don't use em but the guys who do that I've flown with said for tank, they'd prefer t1 cruisers. I'll have to take a look myself now. So conflict, many confuses.

I'll say this much too, if this is true, then they probably need a nerf to their tank. T2 are supposed to be specialised, and giving a heavy interdictor a better than than a HAC, ie something specialised for catching stuff for the fleet, is akin to giving an interceptor a better tank than an assault frigate. IMO. Balance and all that, seems whack to me if they're getting better tanks than HACs.

This is the book on that. However, I do feel the pain of looking at my battle cruiser and wondering "wth?" I have a Loki sitting right beside it and that's the name of that tune.

Many ship types have been left on the side of the highway without a spare tire in the ever increasing quest of CCP to make this game fighter-pilots online.

BCs, AFs, to an extent BS are all victims of Svipuls, Command Destroyers and Interceptors online.

Many ship types have been left on the side of the highway without a spare tire in the ever increasing quest of CCP to make this game fighter-pilots online.

BCs, AFs, to an extent BS are all victims of Svipuls, Command Destroyers and Interceptors online.

I hate CCP's current meta direction. "More speed! More agility! More ships cruiser and smaller! More kiting! More range! More mobility modules!"

As if we need more speed crap. I gladly welcome any change that brings speed tanks and kiting down a notch, and scramming hictors is definitely one of those changes.

It is a hard tight-rope to walk though. On one hand we need to preserve small gang hit and run style fighting and on the other we need to prevent the hit and kite methodology taking over the game today.

I guess the biggest change I have seen is, there used to be ships designed for hit and run, now it seems CCP is trying to make it possible for all of the new ships to do it too.

HICs are a nice counter if you are proficient in their use.

"Super tanky cruiser"

Nope, not really. You're thinking of HACs. HICs are kinda meh.

Currently training
Heavy Interdiction Cruisers Level 5
Finishes 2016-01-24 09:37
8d 18h 9m 7s Remaining

I've been training to use one for a little while... well "Onyx"
No ideas how to fit it yet.. still need to do some research

Fly a ecm boat - problem solved :) your welcome

3. Ranting is prohibited.

A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.

23. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.