EVE Search - Solution to the interceptor blob.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Solution to the interceptor blob.

» 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)
Franconis Gallente Down In Flames	Posted - 2007.10.16 04:33:00 - [1] I've been browsing the interceptor buff threads, and I have to say that I'm appalled. This is the only time that I've ever seen CCP buff a ship to the point where it is near impossible to fight back against it even with a small gang of common ships (Cruisers, BCs, BSes). With the proposed changes, interceptors have lost their only weaknesses which were warp disruptor range and cap usage. If a small gang of interceptors finds any T1 ship or even a small group of T1 ships, they should be able to dance around the target/targets with impunity and no threat to their own ships. The only justification of this that I've seen from CCP so far is "you can just go to a gate" or "don't fly alone." These are not valid reasons to buff a ship class to such an extent. Ships that don't do 12km/s should be able to have some sort of defense against these interceptors, whether they choose to fit that defense to their ship or not is up to them. Here is what I propose: Precision weapons. For turrets, these would be weapons that have the tracking and sig resolution of the turrets one class below them at a significant DPS penalty, but they must keep the effective range of weapons in their class. For missiles, precision lights usually do very well but they could use a bit of a buff considering the interceptor changes and the overall popularity of fast ships. For instance, a precision autocannon could be: Quad 150mm Flak cannon I Medium projectile weapon, takes a high slot and one turret hardpoint. Sig Resolution: 40m (same as t1 150mm AC) Tracking speed: 0.35 (same as t1 150mm AC) Charge size: Small (this will effectively be the DPS penalty, and it makes sense because it's a smaller gun) Rate of fire: 3.38 sec (same as t1 150mm AC) Damage modifier: 2.475 (same as t1 150mm AC) Optimal range: 1,800m (same as t1 220mm AC) Accuracy falloff: 8,000m (same as t1 220mm AC) Fitting reqs: (same fitting requirements as t1 220mm AC) powergrid: 100mw CPU: 21mw In the end what you get is a gun that tracks like a small turret and does the same damage, but actually has the range to fight back against the incredibly fast ships we see in eve. This of course comes at a price, the price is that it takes up a turret hardpoint just like your other weapons. You would have to sacrifice normal damage output or use such a weapon as a utility high slot item in a slot that isn't often used. It would also allow for larger fast ships to sacrifice a good portion of their damage output in order to be able to hit things at speed, which allows them to more easily fulfill their roles. This would not make fast ships obsolete, it would just give the larger ship classes a chance to fight back against evasive targets should they decide to gimp their damage output. Yes, some T2 cruisers will probably be able to out range and out damage interceptors, but the interceptors should still be fast enough to at least have a chance to get away. That to me seems balanced. Similar things can be done with Large turrets to give Battleships some added flexibility against cruisers. T2 variants of these guns should exist in my opinion, and they should follow the logical pattern set forth with other T2 guns and precision turrets themselves. For instance a medium T2 precision autocannon would use Hail S and Barrage S ammo and have the same gun stats as the best named medium precision autocannon. Love it? Hate it? Let me know what you think. _________ I R teh Minnie Meanie
Vitrael Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.10.16 04:38:00 - [2] Yes, it's nearly impossible to fight back against 0 DPS and no webbing. Can I have your stuff?
Tenebrys Promethean Industries R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.16 05:10:00 - [3] Wait, 100 megawatts for something with all the stats of a T1 turret? It's gotta have an extra stat perk somewhere... something like increased rate-of-fire aka non-heavy assault missile launchers?
Franconis Gallente Down In Flames	Posted - 2007.10.16 05:19:00 - [4] Originally by: Tenebrys Wait, 100 megawatts for something with all the stats of a T1 turret? It's gotta have an extra stat perk somewhere... something like increased rate-of-fire aka non-heavy assault missile launchers? A stat perk would be nice, but that I'll leave that up to the devs to determine. As it is, these modules are tactically more viable than current small or medium turrets in a handful of situations, and that is their biggest strength. If there was to be a bonus at all, I would honestly prefer optimal range or falloff range over damage or rate of fire. _________ I R teh Minnie Meanie
Dirk Magnum Red Light Enterprises Eastern Star Federation	Posted - 2007.10.16 05:21:00 - [5] Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 16/10/2007 05:23:31 Originally by: Vitrael Yes, it's nearly impossible to fight back against 0 DPS and no webbing. That is a good point. With the scram range buff, as annoying as it will be if that interceptor has backup, they still won't have a web to put on you (maybe an officer web or something, which I seriously doubt would be fitted to a frigate.) As for the suggestion of a turret with a tracking buff, not having a web on the interceptor frees up slots for tracking disruptors, so that high-tracking turret idea is kinda dead in the water. Just launch some Warrior II's. That's really the only reliable counter to interceptors that you can't put your own webs on.
Franconis Gallente Down In Flames	Posted - 2007.10.16 05:30:00 - [6] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Originally by: Vitrael Yes, it's nearly impossible to fight back against 0 DPS and no webbing. That is a good point. With the scram range buff, as annoying as it will be if that interceptor has backup, they still won't have a web to put on you (maybe an officer web or something, which I seriously doubt would be fitted to a frigate.) As for the suggestion of a turret with a tracking buff, not having a web on the interceptor frees up slots for tracking disruptors, so that high-tracking turret idea is kinda dead in the water. If i'm not mistaken, interceptors interested in orbiting outside web range never fit a web in the first place. If they do decide to use a slot for a tracking disruptor as you suggest, then that's part of their ship setup and a counter to turrets like these. That to me seems more like flexibility and balance rather than making precision turrets obsolete from the start. Not every interceptor will fit a tracking disruptor, and not every ship will have a precision turret. Both tracking disruptors and precision turrets are simply countermeasures that level the playing field. So yes, you could fit a tracking disruptor and not be hit by precision turrets from one target, but that would be completely and totally fair. _________ I R teh Minnie Meanie
Atius Tirawa Minmatar Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.16 05:38:00 - [7] I thinks its a poor idea beccause it takes away from an advatage missle users have over turret based users. We get insta damagge, they get percision heavy missles. fair
Rilder Caldari THC LTD Dogs of War.	Posted - 2007.10.16 05:46:00 - [8] Umm You do know you can fit small guns on ships bigger then frigates? --
Mr Mozzie Caldari	Posted - 2007.10.16 05:50:00 - [9] Originally by: Franconis I've been browsing the interceptor buff threads, and I have to say that I'm appalled. This is the only time that I've ever seen CCP buff a ship to the point where it is near impossible to fight back against it even with a small gang of common ships (Cruisers, BCs, BSes). With the proposed changes, interceptors have lost their only weaknesses which were warp disruptor range and cap usage. If a small gang of interceptors finds any T1 ship or even a small group of T1 ships, they should be able to dance around the target/targets with impunity and no threat to their own ships. The only justification of this that I've seen from CCP so far is "you can just go to a gate" or "don't fly alone." Firstly, you can easily defeat interceptors, by fitting warp core stabs. Secondly, interceptors don't do any significant damage, so you can easily slowboat back to a gate. Thirdly, if you are caught solo by several ships, then you probably deserve to die. As far as I am concerned, the devs shouldn't be giving you tools to win in such situations. Moreover, interceptors will still be suceptible to Cerbs, Eagles, Huggins, Vagabonds, other interceptors etc and their tanks will still be paper thin. When the change happens people will know about the abilities of interceptors, and they will just ned to modify their tactics accordingly.
Franconis Gallente Down In Flames	Posted - 2007.10.16 06:37:00 - [10] Originally by: Mr Mozzie Originally by: Franconis I've been browsing the interceptor buff threads, and I have to say that I'm appalled. This is the only time that I've ever seen CCP buff a ship to the point where it is near impossible to fight back against it even with a small gang of common ships (Cruisers, BCs, BSes). With the proposed changes, interceptors have lost their only weaknesses which were warp disruptor range and cap usage. If a small gang of interceptors finds any T1 ship or even a small group of T1 ships, they should be able to dance around the target/targets with impunity and no threat to their own ships. The only justification of this that I've seen from CCP so far is "you can just go to a gate" or "don't fly alone." Firstly, you can easily defeat interceptors, by fitting warp core stabs. Secondly, interceptors don't do any significant damage, so you can easily slowboat back to a gate. Thirdly, if you are caught solo by several ships, then you probably deserve to die. As far as I am concerned, the devs shouldn't be giving you tools to win in such situations. Moreover, interceptors will still be suceptible to Cerbs, Eagles, Huggins, Vagabonds, other interceptors etc and their tanks will still be paper thin. When the change happens people will know about the abilities of interceptors, and they will just ned to modify their tactics accordingly. Firstly, fitting WCS doesn't defeat an interceptor it just allows you to run away from it. There's a difference. Secondly, a group of interceptors does do enough damage to be a threat without being vulnerable themselves. Thirdly, you don't have to be caught solo. You can be with a group of BSes, CSes, BCs, or cruisers and suffer the same fate at the hands of an interceptor gang with the new patch. With the new patch interceptors are far less susceptible to t2 cruisers due mostly to the fact that they can stay well out of the range or tracking of most medium turrets and they outrun most missiles. Just saying that you can get away from an inty using WCS or a gate is not good enough. Something besides another inty has to be able to kill it. Sure some vagabonds and minmatar recons can kill some interceptors, but I'd like to see a defensive mechanism for most ships to be able to at least pew pew back at fast ships like these. Precision turrets are basically the assault launcher of turrets and they would be there simply to give players more options. _________ I R teh Minnie Meanie
Semkhet KR0M The Red Skull	Posted - 2007.10.16 07:39:00 - [11] Get a brain. They can be jammed, damped, and if you're in gang, just scatter your other ships on the orbit vector of the ceptors to web them.
insidion Caldari Last of the Technocracy	Posted - 2007.10.16 07:45:00 - [12] Tacklers used to be the sacrificial lamb that ensured the team got a kill, preferrably more. Of course no one wanted to lose their ship, but it was generally accepted that tacklers in general and interceptors in particular were little more than cannon fodder if it came down to it. They take mad skills to fly well, and it's great that these changes will finally make them feared instead of just a disposable tool, but they are FAR from 'unstoppable'.
Cailais Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.16 07:54:00 - [13] Load of rubbish. Interceptors are vulnerable to a myriad of tactic - just because your BS cant solo pwn anymore is no reason to go looking for a buff. Here's a solution for you - get a Curse: kills all known interceptors - dead. C. - sig designer - eve mail
Nyack GREY COUNCIL Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2007.10.16 07:57:00 - [14] the new inty buff is prolly to let inties stay out of heavy dictors range as it will only be lachesis/arazu adn buffed inties that can keep a scram on ships and stay out of heavy dictors field.. while nanod cruisers while be hit hard by the new H-dics
Julius Romanus Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:02:00 - [15] Since it didnt have a chance at killing you just keeping you from getting away, getting away is in fact winning. Sorry you didnt get a kill mail, try a huggin next time.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:02:00 - [16] I do think interceptors need a counter in terms of them being able to be hit. Ideally I think something like Tier 2/3 destroyers or T2 destroyers would be the best option. Give them a big bonus on optimal range and a big bonus on tracking speed so they can actually hit a 12-15kms ceptor. Since they are vulnerable themselves I think it would be a good counter, encouraging people to bring a few more different ships in a fleet. Alternatively a new type of 'flak gun' could also work, something with huge tracking speed, decent range and relatively low damage. ------------------------------------------------
Franconis Gallente Down In Flames	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:18:00 - [17] I like some of the more recent posts on here. Suggestions on tactics etc are welcome and constructive. I like the flycatcher and it's bonuses, and I'd like to see more of that sort of precision weaponry in ships other than just destroyers. More destroyers, and especially a T2 anti-inty destroyer would be fun to see. In a nutshell, eve is a game of rock paper scissors and I don't see a whole lot of rocks for the scissors that are interceptors. Again, thank you for your input. Your suggestions are reminding me of some ways to take down these pesky mosquitoes. _________ I R teh Minnie Meanie
Trishan Green Men Incorporated	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:19:00 - [18] Originally by: Franconis Love it? Hate it? Let me know what you think. Let me guess, you don't fly inties. I suggest you start doing that. Btw, "flak" and "precision" on the same gun? Is that like a cold hot icecream? :)
El'essar Viocragh Minmatar FSK23	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:20:00 - [19] Thrasher, 250mm Light Artillery II [RF Nuclear S], 1x Tracking Comp II vs Stiletto, 1mn MWD II 6000m/s: 86.57% Chance to hit 8000m/s: 77.87% Chance to hit 10000m/s: 68.39% Chance to hit 12000m/s: 58.82% Chance to hit 15000m/s: 45.37% Chance to hit Tier 1 destroyers hit them just fine. It's a bit like shooting a few more km into falloff. No big deal. -- [17:47] <Mephysto> its dead, jim
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:32:00 - [20] Originally by: El'essar Viocragh Thrasher, 250mm Light Artillery II [RF Nuclear S], 1x Tracking Comp II vs Stiletto, 1mn MWD II 6000m/s: 86.57% Chance to hit 8000m/s: 77.87% Chance to hit 10000m/s: 68.39% Chance to hit 12000m/s: 58.82% Chance to hit 15000m/s: 45.37% Chance to hit Tier 1 destroyers hit them just fine. It's a bit like shooting a few more km into falloff. No big deal. I hate you and T1 destroyers. Why do you give people that sort of info? A lesson for the cleuless: the only interceptor which can hit while ignoring transversal is the Crow. The rest of them have to drop transversal a bit to hit anything, at which point, strangely, they can be hit back. T1 destroyers are just vile, vile things.
Hannobaal Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:33:00 - [21] Edited by: Hannobaal on 16/10/2007 08:36:50 There is nothing wrong with this change. Heavy ships should be powerful, but vulnerable to swarms of smaller ships if they run into them alone. And smaller light ships should be weak, but far more survivable. This is exactly as it should be. Why would you even be afriad of interceptors anyway. We have practically no damage. Especially over range.
Altai Saker Omniscient Order Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2007.10.16 08:43:00 - [22] Are you serious? I have all but given up the idea of getting another ceptor because they are so vulnerable and now you want a new anti ceptor mod? If you are whining about ceptors being overpowered nowadays I can't help but think you must be new. http://www.omniscient-order.com/ Sahwoolo Etoophie is a noob! Noob and proud -Sahwoolo
El'essar Viocragh Minmatar FSK23	Posted - 2007.10.16 09:01:00 - [23] Edited by: El''essar Viocragh on 16/10/2007 09:02:01 Originally by: Cpt Branko I hate you and T1 destroyers. Why do you give people that sort of info? Because if they understand what these numbers mean, they already figured that out themselves. The tracking guide isn't a state secret after all. Other than that, I love the change and would hate it to not hit TQ because of some uninformed forum whinage armada. And I would like to see a few more destroyers getting used. They still need a lot of clue and SP to fly effective, and have issues also. Fitting a tracking mod on a destroyer isn't an i-win cookiecutter. PS: and i completely dislike other ideas in this thread, like the cruiser guns with cruiser gun range and frig gun tracking/dps. The buff is great and we have the tools against it already on TQ, we don't need stuff like that. -- [17:47] <Mephysto> its dead, jim
Franconis Gallente Down In Flames	Posted - 2007.10.16 09:02:00 - [24] Originally by: El'essar Viocragh Thrasher, 250mm Light Artillery II [RF Nuclear S], 1x Tracking Comp II vs Stiletto, 1mn MWD II 6000m/s: 86.57% Chance to hit 8000m/s: 77.87% Chance to hit 10000m/s: 68.39% Chance to hit 12000m/s: 58.82% Chance to hit 15000m/s: 45.37% Chance to hit Tier 1 destroyers hit them just fine. It's a bit like shooting a few more km into falloff. No big deal. Problem solved, thank you. _________ I R teh Minnie Meanie
Mithrantir Ob'lontra Gallente Ixion Defence Systems The Cyrene Initiative	Posted - 2007.10.16 09:18:00 - [25] Originally by: El'essar Viocragh Thrasher, 250mm Light Artillery II [RF Nuclear S], 1x Tracking Comp II vs Stiletto, 1mn MWD II 6000m/s: 86.57% Chance to hit 8000m/s: 77.87% Chance to hit 10000m/s: 68.39% Chance to hit 12000m/s: 58.82% Chance to hit 15000m/s: 45.37% Chance to hit Tier 1 destroyers hit them just fine. It's a bit like shooting a few more km into falloff. No big deal. Not only thrasher can hit an interceptor. Yes it requires fitting rails instead of blasters. ------- Nobody can be exactly like me. Even I have trouble doing it.
Steve Hawkings	Posted - 2007.10.16 09:24:00 - [26] Yet another bad pilot complains because he has no brains to work out a counter. WOW >>>>> that way
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2007.10.16 09:26:00 - [27] CCP, please give us 15km/20km/25km Smarties. We love Smarties. :) --------- Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria! Kali is for KArebearLIng. I 100% agree with Avon. Female EVE gamers? Mail Zajo or visit WGOE.Public in-game.
Moghydin Confederation of Red Moon Red Moon Federation	Posted - 2007.10.16 09:33:00 - [28] Best solution for interceptor blob would be brains and friends. It seems you want a solo pwnmobile, and it was stated many times, there will be no such thing in Eve.
Light Elf	Posted - 2007.10.16 09:35:00 - [29] Originally by: Cpt Branko A lesson for the clueless: the only interceptor which can hit while ignoring transversal is the Crow. The rest of them have to drop transversal a bit to hit anything, at which point, strangely, they can be hit back. Interceptors aren't designed to deal damage, they dont need to slow down, their main 'Weapon' is the warp scramble/disrupter.
Molly Neuro	Posted - 2007.10.16 10:02:00 - [30] Originally by: Scott Ryder Originally by: Jenny Spitfire CCP, please give us 15km/20km/25km Smarties. We love Smarties. :) see if they got them on ebay.. . Ouch I lol'd
Nich Barker	Posted - 2007.10.16 10:45:00 - [31] it's common knowledge guys that an interceptor has a much greater tank than a raven, and can kill a large blob of idiots all on it's lonesome. **** off
Gecko O'Bac Aquilae Stellaris YouWhat	Posted - 2007.10.16 11:12:00 - [32] Personally I'd like something more on the notes of WWII flak weapons. Since appearently in century MMMMMMMMM (Whatever the future time in EVE is), they can't make missiles that go faster than a ship, and turrets can't reliably hit them, then flak ammunition (for the same turrets) is what we're looking for. Flak ammunition doesn't score precise hits, so the actual tracking of the turret is unimportant, because the ammunitions use a proximity detonator coupled with a timer set at the moment of the launch. These ammunitions explode nearby the target, dealing some area damage. Not enough against anything bigger than a frigate, but a useful counter against those pesky ceptors. Mind you, if you manage to double web one ceptor and blast away at it, you would do more damage anyway...
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.16 11:30:00 - [33] Define interceptor blob because i don't think i have ever seen one. If you mean the usual 3-10 that is hardly a blob but anyway, this buff will be great and they can focus on doing there job well, intercepting. Nothing stopping you bringing anti frigate support and if you got caught in a fleet bs or something with no scout or intel, then you deserve to die. "Random Goon " - why dont you kick box me about it, after your dad has killed himself of course
Gloups	Posted - 2007.10.16 11:41:00 - [34] Get a rapier imo.
Krazy Bitsch	Posted - 2007.10.16 12:01:00 - [35] Edited by: Krazy Bitsch on 16/10/2007 12:01:30 Originally by: Franconis WALL OF TEXT!!! I dont fly interceptors, but i swear to god if you start a "nerf them, dont buff them crusade" im going to hunt you down and make sure your life in eve is a living hell. I've had just about ENOUGH of people who cry about everything and get the carebears and whiners to unite and get things changed. Stop it now.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.