EVE Search - some comments on interceptors after using them for a few weeks

All Channels

Ships and Modules

some comments on interceptors after using them for a few weeks

» 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)
Dukath	Posted - 2004.03.10 08:50:00 - [1] Edited by: Dukath on 10/03/2004 09:43:35 I've been flying an interceptor since they came on the market and I have some things to say about them. The way that I use an interceptor is 1) warp in, scramble long enough for backup to arrive so they can take over the scrambling and do the killing. 2) when at a gate, use fast lock to scramble someone before they can warp out 3) when in a battle someone manages to warp out follow him and try to grab him when he leaves warp on the other side, then goto 1 This is how i assumed the interceptor should work and it does seem to work fairly good for that. There are however some major problems here. - target distance: the target distance of an interceptor ranges between 20km to about 27km, skills included. Since an inty will be using a mwd to get close to target fast this locking distance is way too short. I believe it should be increased at least to 35km to make it usefull in any way (unless you want to favour those with fast connection and computers more since the responsiveness of the game is affected by those things). Too much time is lost having to rightclick and select with a menu to target a ship and going at that speed. (not that using a weapon to get the crosshairs isn't always an option). - drones: I believe this problem is relatively known, the drones don't seem to be affected by range or tracking once they have been within shooting distance. A solution i'd like to see, as suggested by someone else, would be to disable heavy drones against frigate sized ships OR by letting the drones be affected by tracking, optimal range and max range. On the other hand it would be good if drones would not only protect the owner of the drones but also anyone in the same gang as the owner of the drones. That way droneships could actually be used to protect miners or indies against frigates who warp in shoot once and warp out again. - 1400mm projectile guns: This is the only large gun that has been able to hit me consistently and with high damage (500+ shots) while travelling at 15km from him on about 90 degree angle from him with an active MWD (speeds between 1000 to 3000m/sec) To be honest i haven't encountered neutron blasters yet but then again neutron blasters are a short range weapon while 1400 are long range (unless i'm badly mistaken). I don't know if its due to great tracking or some other hidden feature but it would be nice if long range guns would actually be bad shortrange so the shortrange guns would start to be usefull. For the rest the interceptors are nicely better than their normal frigate counterparts but not too much better. (a kestrel with its 4 launchers is still better than all the inties due to being able to deal so much damage with missiles in short time) One more small feature request :) If you doubleclick on a warpable object you will warp to it, it would REALLY help if a double click on a non warpable object will start an appraoch. Even more than locking this rightclick approach command costs way too much time for an inty. This is especially so when going after an instajumper and your camera is all zoomed in so you can't even double click on empty space next to the ship to start moving. With the limited time available in such circumstances every second counts. And finally some things you should always fit on an inty :) 1 mwd, forget about the shield and cap penalty, for a frig its not like it would matter once you start getting hit 1 scrambler: your task is most likely gonna be to hold someone till reinforcements arrive or to simply fast lock and scramble someone 1 armor repairer: only added this recently but a very good module to have fitted, you will be hit and one lucky hit can put you into armor damage, most shots will miss you or do only slight damage but the longer you stay the more chance you'll have of being shot badly (except against 1400 which seem to be able to hit real hard and real close). In almost all encounters you'll have some armor damage unless you are not targetted. Being able to repair in space is very convenient and will save you long trips to a station if you are deep in 0.0 space.
Nicholas Marshal	Posted - 2004.03.10 09:38:00 - [2] I have been using mine for hit and run attacks. Warping in, locking and delivering cruise missiles to the target. All my kills have been frigates so far. I can easily outrun any missiles shot at me in defence. I have taken only light damage so far.
Sally	Posted - 2004.03.10 10:01:00 - [3] Came to the same conclusions after experimenting with normal fast frigates for battleship intercepting (mainly Vigil). IMHO perfect / wrecking hits should be removed against frigates. My Vigil got shot by a 425mm projectile user today on an Apocalypse and I think every battleship pilot should have anti frigate weapons (smart bombs, medium size weapons) or not able to harm them. And yes, drones needs to be fixed. 1 km optimal firing range as in stats, but doing maximum damage from 20km at a MWD speed frigate is unbalanced. -- Stories: #1 --
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.10 10:06:00 - [4] I wouldn't mind if wrecking shots were removed from EVE... ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Siddy	Posted - 2004.03.10 10:11:00 - [5] Quote: I wouldn't mind if wrecking shots were removed from EVE... ofcorse u whuld not... u are missile user.... -------------------------------------------
Juan Andalusian	Posted - 2004.03.10 10:18:00 - [6] Quote: I wouldn't mind if wrecking shots were removed from EVE... Just have the formula do the calculation for Wrecking whenever a normal hit would occur... and not everytime a turret fires. Pain is meant to be felt
bugeye	Posted - 2004.03.10 10:20:00 - [7] It would be nice if CCP adjust the drone bay's of battleships to reflect their race descriptions. I mean, why do we have drone carriers like the thorax and arbitrator when even caldary BS carry enough drones to defend themself against frigates? business is war!
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.10 10:28:00 - [8] Quote: Quote: I wouldn't mind if wrecking shots were removed from EVE... ofcorse u whuld not... u are missile user.... Has nothing to do with me using missiles, I very often use a 4 425mm railgun 4 heavy launcher setup on my Raven. I have 2.2 million skill points invested in gunnery, how much do you have? My opinion on wrecking shots has nothing to do with my ship, sorry. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Siddy	Posted - 2004.03.10 10:41:00 - [9] Quote: Quote: Quote: I wouldn't mind if wrecking shots were removed from EVE... ofcorse u whuld not... u are missile user.... Has nothing to do with me using missiles, I very often use a 4 425mm railgun 4 heavy launcher setup on my Raven. I have 2.2 million skill points invested in gunnery, how much do you have? My opinion on wrecking shots has nothing to do with my ship, sorry. only 1.6 so far... but i am playing less time than u.... well i agree that wrecking shot formula shuld be changet - its absurd to se 800mm artillery hit 100km away target for 200dmg wrekking -------------------------------------------
Ruffles	Posted - 2004.03.10 11:21:00 - [10] Some nice information there Dukath, thank you. Another idea on the drones problem was to have drones damage/accuracy realated to the signature radius of the target, and have an optimal signature radius. If the user of heavy drones sends them against a frigate or cruiser, they would remain very effective, but against a frigate the damage/accuracy would drop. This would encourage people to carry other types of drones. If using light/medium drones was more effective against frigates the everyship in the game just carrying heavy drones, you might see some ships carrying them. I agree the wrecking stuff is rather daft, and I think your observations are right. I have lost more frigates in 1 hit from a 1400mm art shooting at me then any other ship. Neutron blaster cannons have hit me wrecking, but still they have far far far higher tracking and I would consider them a nasty threat, but arties are very slow trackers but their wrecking rate seems to be quite high. I agree that the higher end large turrets really should struggle, if not permenantly fail to hit small frigates. It would either encourage additional ships for support if the pilot didn't want to compromise their big damage dealing potential, or force people to defend themselves sufficiently. It is still extremely silly that battleships roam around solo, or only paired. As the only support they currently need is another battleship. If large turrets failed to hit frigates, that would bring in a prefectly suited role for cruisers in defensive roles to protect a fully 'guned' battleship.
Nicholas Marshal	Posted - 2004.03.10 12:56:00 - [11] It should be almost impossible for a LARGE turret to even hit a fast MWD frigate.
Vel Kyri	Posted - 2004.03.10 13:02:00 - [12] Quote: It is still extremely silly that battleships roam around solo, or only paired. As the only support they currently need is another battleship. If large turrets failed to hit frigates, that would bring in a prefectly suited role for cruisers in defensive roles to protect a fully 'guned' battleship. very true. As soon as you make frigates IMMUNE to large turrets/torpedoes etc. then it makes the smaller weapons/ships MUCH more attractive. If the little jamming frigate which is stopping you from warping/moving is impossible to hit in you gunned up battleship - then you will REALLY want to kill it - and really wish you had some frigate or cruiser support. -----
Loud Bob	Posted - 2004.03.10 13:24:00 - [13] Why it is not so hard to hit a fast frigate using MWD. The reason is: If you are moving away from target using a mwd, your probably travelling in one direction. Therefore it would be easy for a tracking computer to predict where you would be in 2 seconds when the shot would arrive. Unless you are using evasive tactics this will always be the case. Thankyou for your time.
Ukiah	Posted - 2004.03.10 13:25:00 - [14] Edited by: Ukiah on 10/03/2004 13:26:54 I agree and it would make those of us who actually PREFER flying frigates or cruisers NOT feel like we're mental decrepits for doing so.
Jet Max	Posted - 2004.03.10 13:46:00 - [15] Hi guys, just ask CCP to make ships invincible! hows that? Maybe then you all gona stop nagging about ships beying too powerfull or too weak and guns or missiles not made by your request and taste? How about fitting 150mm rails on BS then and go and fight frigates as lots of people complain that frigates too weak to do serious damage on BS cos they got big guns on or something.Cmon people its a frigate! :] Thanks for attention
Last Starfighter	Posted - 2004.03.10 14:01:00 - [16] be nice if Interceptors could warp at say 5AU/s so they could catch / overtake fleeing ships.
Teeth	Posted - 2004.03.10 15:42:00 - [17] Quote: Edited by: Dukath on 10/03/2004 09:43:35 - 1400mm projectile guns: This is the only large gun that has been able to hit me consistently and with high damage (500+ shots) while travelling at 15km from him on about 90 degree angle from him with an active MWD (speeds between 1000 to 3000m/sec) To be honest i haven't encountered neutron blasters yet but then again neutron blasters are a short range weapon while 1400 are long range (unless i'm badly mistaken). I don't know if its due to great tracking or some other hidden feature but it would be nice if long range guns would actually be bad shortrange so the shortrange guns would start to be usefull. I think this might be because tempest users often use tracking computers. I'm probably wrong here.
Jakal	Posted - 2004.03.10 16:11:00 - [18] Edited by: Jakal on 10/03/2004 16:12:45 yea if im trying to smack frigates in a tempest i normally use 1-2 mid slot tracking comps and 2-3 low slot. I don't know what the fromula for detremining wrecking hits is but as to only getting hit by wreckings at extreme range, maybe those shots are the only ones good enough to acually hit you. just my opinion anyway -Adapt and Overcome.
Mon Palae	Posted - 2004.03.10 16:41:00 - [19] Quote: Hi guys, just ask CCP to make ships invincible! hows that? Maybe then you all gona stop nagging about ships beying too powerfull or too weak and guns or missiles not made by your request and taste? How about fitting 150mm rails on BS then and go and fight frigates as lots of people complain that frigates too weak to do serious damage on BS cos they got big guns on or something.Cmon people its a frigate! :] Thanks for attention No one is suggesting any such thing that frigates should be "invincible". They are saying battleships should not be able to use their heavy weaponry effectively against small, very fast ships. Real life battleships do not use their big guns against incoming fighters. Real life battleships have a wide array of weaponry that includes fast tracking, fast firing close in guns. If an EVE player wants to mount all big guns on his/her ship then fine but they shouldn't expect to be effective against ALL ships out there regardless of what they are. There should be tradeoffs as there are with most things in EVE. If you want all big guns then you forego effectivness against small, speedy ships. You either need to mount smaller, faster tracking weapons, sbombs or have support from other ships that can effectively kill frigates. As to a frigate killing a battleship again no one is saying such a thing should be easy but it should be possible. Frigates would mostly be used to harass a battleship (scramble, web, jam, etc.). If a lone battleship with all big guns is cornered by 5+ frigates then the battleship pilot should start to sweat and those frigs should be able to kill the battleship (eventually).
Cirle	Posted - 2004.03.10 17:28:00 - [20] I do wish people would stop using the 'but in real life' argument... it should be quite possible to argue the points from within the context of the universe :) However, if you want to go down that road, why does a battleship sized gun (425mm) take the same mount as a frigate sized gun (75mm)... answer, because it simplifies the system enough to be workable. So, can we petition for a four or eight barrel 150mm rail gun please, for point defense; I'd quite happily mount one of those in place of a launcher or gun :P Cirle
Imperishable	Posted - 2004.03.10 18:17:00 - [21] I agree that large guns shouldn't be able to hit fast ships. In particular, the wrecking hit should be fixed so it doesn't bypass tracking limitations. If a BS wants to fly solo and be able to tackle frigates, he should either invest in some light missiles or equip a few samll guns. If a BS doesn't want to do that, he should ask for escort by smaller ships. Diversity is more fun, people. Don't settle for a master of all trades ship.
Ukiah	Posted - 2004.03.10 19:28:00 - [22] Actually, the wrecking shot probability doesn't bother me all that much. Yes, modern battleships DON'T use their massive cannons to shoot down attacking fighters. However, there IS a statistical chance that a shell from one of those large cannons COULD hit a fast moving fighter and would do extreme damage. However, it's not efficient to try. What REALLY makes frigates vs BS's in eve so lopsided is the problems with Drones. Yes, I think drones were intended to be point defense against frigates. However, the fact that they don't suffer tracking or range penalties is either a) a bug or b) overlooked by the devs. Either way, it needs to be fixed. In my perfect universe, a 425mm rail gun SHOULD be able to hit a Tristan at range. However, if the Tristan gets inside 10k (or so) the 425 should have SERIOUS problems tracking the attacking Tristan. Drones SHOULD be able to do enough dmg to force the Tristan pilot to break off and run, but they should STOP attacking the Tristan when they reach their documented 20k range. That's not happening. 425's are effective below 10k and heavy drones are effective above 20k. The adjustment of lock times was a bandaid at best and it's been proven that a BS with several sensor boosters can overcome the delay and still catch the frigate before the frigate can get into range to do any real dmg. This doesn't bother me so much as the fact that those 'capital class' weapons, intended for large volleys at long range, can hit a nimble little 'fighter' inside the gun arc. The solution? It's been mentioned by TomB that signature radius of ships was always intended to be part of the formula for turret tracking. When I attack a Tempest with 1400's with my Tristan, if I'm inside 10k, I outta be able to feel the heat coming from his shots, but that's all (barring a lucky shot). When he deploys drones, I outta have to run for the hills and when I GET to the hills, his drones should have to turn back. At that point, his 1400's should increase in efficiency and ability to hit my ship.
Xachariah	Posted - 2004.03.10 19:30:00 - [23] Edited by: Xachariah on 10/03/2004 19:31:13 Aeh, i guess this sounds pretty strange in this mostly or only pvp thread, but i dont want to start a new one just for this simple question: Is the information correct, that Interceptors dont have any cargo capacity?
Ukiah	Posted - 2004.03.10 19:31:00 - [24] It's incorrect. They have the same cargo space as whatever tech1 frigate was the base hull. Ie, a Malediction has the same m3 as a Executioner and a Taranis has the same m3 as a Atron.
Martin Hartl	Posted - 2004.03.10 20:38:00 - [25] hi, just look at battles in ww2 bs where able to destroy frigattes and destroyers. but they used their heavy artillery for long range and their medium artillery for shortrange battles against such targets (and bs didn't use torps :) peace and prosper
Martin Hartl	Posted - 2004.03.10 20:39:00 - [26] hi, just look at battles in ww2 bs where able to destroy frigattes and destroyers. but they used their heavy artillery for long range and their medium artillery for shortrange battles against such targets (and bs didn't use torps :) peace and prosper
Martin Hartl	Posted - 2004.03.10 20:41:00 - [27] hi, just look at battles in ww2 bs where able to destroy frigattes and destroyers. but they used their heavy artillery for long range and their medium artillery for shortrange battles against such targets (and bs didn't use torps) peace and prosper
Bellicose	Posted - 2004.03.10 20:56:00 - [28] Quote: hi, just look at battles in ww2 bs where able to destroy frigattes and destroyers. but they used their heavy artillery for long range and their medium artillery for shortrange battles against such targets (and bs didn't use torps) peace and prosper hmmm not quite true.... some of the battleships had torps and anyway look at why battleships where obsolete back then cos of the planes , dive bombers, torpedo planes, large bombers and kamikazi pilotes they where just to easy to hit Who needs a shovel when you have a nice big cannon? KittenArmy capn' crimson
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2004.03.10 21:36:00 - [29] Imagine if a 'well balanced' battleship (using Tempest as an example) had to be armed with both SHORT and LONG range weaponry to protect itself from cruisers and frigates? Such a loadout (just an example) would be like: 3 1400mm Howitzers for long range anti-battleship. 3 800mm Repeating Artillery for short range anti-cruiser/frigate 2 Heavy Launchers for short range (torpedo) or long range (cruise missile) ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Dukath	Posted - 2004.03.11 11:13:00 - [30] Or imagine if the heavy hitting battleships needed some cruiser escort to remove the frigs. Not that a frig should be any threath to a battleship except for close range scrambling :) and its then that you'll want either drones or a cruiser to take out that frigate keeping you there. Another nice thing (not a single chance it will ever be implemented though) would be if a missed shot actually has a chance of hitting something else. If you shoot at me with heavy artillery and i'm orbiting a large battleship in an interceptor the chance of you hitting the battleship in stead of me is actually quite big:) This would also help against having 2 battleships providing anti frigate support simply by keeping distance to each other

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.