But they’re paper with polarized and hecates can already do that x2 and some genius decided they should have sub2 align stock.
ye… ‘balance’
t3d’s used to be worth a lot more too
Meh it’s 2018 everyone is shitting money. If you can afford a claw you can afford a hecate.
more importantly, if you can fly a hecate, dont bother with the claw.
2 Likes
That’s what I’m saying! Let’s give them numbers. All the t3d can do like 300+ from 50+ would it be so broken that inties can do 400+ from 5?
i dont understand sorry? dps?
its late, im tired.
as amusing as this would be i believe giving them back nullification would be less of a buff than that sort of dps.
Remembering that bubbles often really only effect nullsec, certainly for combat ceptors and that buffing their dps to those levels could cause problems in lowsec.
Hmm let me rephrase. Right now tech 3 destroyers don’t cost very much and they can do easily 300dps over long ranges. Considering this I don’t think giving interceptors 400 dps within 5km would be broken.
i think rail hecate and fessor dont push out more than 250k at range but track real good, jd about 200? and arty svip is a bit ■■■■.
up close hecate can push 800, fessor around 400… svipul 350 i think?
with taranis at 350, crusader at 230/240 and the raptor and claw at about 200 i think what sort of numbers would you want to see them buffed too?
Also bearing in mind that in lowsec neither can get into the novice sites and the t3d is a destroyer which is meant to be able to kill frigs.
If you buffed these numbers i guess people might fly them in gang in lowsec with logi?
But how would they fare against af’s?
If they were to change things around in reality they would want to buff af dps and give the adc to combat ceptors as a heavy tackler - that might make sense but as it stands what the combat ceptor is supposed to be used for isnt actually viable anymore.
Perhaps what the devs should do is deal with it in a sort of ‘‘what would heppen in the real world’’ sort of way?
IE, write a simple ‘‘technology advances’’ story in regards to issues and create stuff like t2 warp disrupt probes.
I think close range should always outdps long range by far. Right now it’s too easy to buff tank and hard to buff dps. For example one a_type shield booster costs 60 mil and doubles your tank over a tech ii and one faction damage mod costs about 100 mil and gives you a pathetic increase. Hecate can do 300 dps at 70km and Jackdaw can do 300 as well at similar range. Not sure about confessor and svip but I’d bet that it can do the same. So I don’t see why interceptors with no tank and heaviest close range guns aren’t doing more than a hecate which costs a tiny bit more at 15× the range.
If combat inties aren’t nullified and remain this squishy then they should sting hard. I’d be fine with 500dps neutron Raptors because they have to wait to get in range and settle transversal before even applying.
i have 200dps on my rail hecate at around 70k
Jackdaw iirc is the same
fessor is about 240 but a little less range
are also squishy when fit for kiting.
highdps ceptors even at close range when fielded in large gangs may cause a real balance issue though at the moment i couldnt explain why so im simply going to wish you all a very good night o7
I don’t see what the difference is between high dps ceptor fleets and Daredevil fleets which could currently do the same thing.
Goodnight though o7
Looking through this thread and from previous interactions I have had , It is Clear Lugburz here is not a very nice person. He seems to just call people idiots and plebs and then ends the conversation with I cant be bothered to explain why he knows better than everyone else .
In the words of TEST , please ignore
Interceptors don’t need a buff. They still are the fastest and the nimblest of ships in the game.
Even the raptor can go to 4700m/s, and I’m sure it’ll still be more agile and have a lower signature than any AF.
Now I’m sure someone will say that another ship doesn’t need to be that fast and nimble. Or that an AF will be better for the job (not telling which one). But there’s actualy only 2 AF going over 4kms. The minmatar ones. The others hardly go over 3,5kms, which is quite less than the slowest interceptor there is. And amont those two AF, one only has two midslots. Which leaves us with the jaguar.
So the one thing some people take as an example is actualy a very particular case. And this particular case is only more resilient than an interceptor fited to be an AF. So we actualy take now 2 special cases to discuss about the balance of a whole class of ships. You can also take the dramiel, which is quite a special ship too. It, contrary to the others, actualy go to interceptors speed. But the signature is between 2 and 3 times the one of a raptor, depending on the fitting.
And interestingly enough they all have comparable dps, with the raptor having the most. Of course it doesn’t have the resilience of an AF or a pirate frigate.
It should be obvious to everyone but racial traits blur the limit between classes of ships. So indeed the raptor and jaguar will be close, but this is a very specific case, and it’s not even necessarily something to fix because the jaguar fit in this thread will never be used on TQ.
Because when arguing here people are only trying to prove they are right, or the other is wrong. Yet, as you can see, combat interceptors are the fastest combat ships in the game. And assault frigate are the toughest frigates. So if you want to be fast, you’ll take an interceptor and double down on speed to have it unmatched, and if you want to ■■■■ on all ships you can catch, an AF built for resilience will be the best choice.
And if you’re stupid enough to gimp your AF fit to match low interceptors speed to catch them, it’s working as intended, but that doesn’t make it a better combat interceptor. Because signature still matter, and because most combat interceptors are still faster and have more dps than this shitfit jaguar.
1 Like
your wrong there buddy, combat ceptors are not the fastest combat ships in the game; why are people who clearly dont look at stats allowed to post?
the mind boggles…
Im nt even going to bother pointing out all the flaws in your argument, theres just too many; congrats on that.
you are… incorrect. There is no point attempting to explain things to people who a. dont have a clue or b. when given proof, deny said proof in favour of… i dunno, chemtrails? aliens?
Hence
If someone is truly in denial about facts and shows certain… traits; there is no point in explaining. it is a simple premis.
I haven’t a fleet PVP or big Brawls experience with combat Interceptors, but I flew them a lot in Low-Sec and 0.0 especially as exploration, travelling and strike-n-run kiter by passing gate camps and flying around bubbles. Here’s my 50 cents. I just have few questions.
- What do you expect to get from Combat Interceptors, which traditional Interceptors and Assault Frigates can’t give you? He can’t have the speed and tackling bonuses of a traditional Interceptor. He can’t have the tank and dps of an Assault Frigate.
- How should he tackle targets? Should he use a 50km range Micro Jump Drive to close the gap or to get into target’s range? Should he use some sort of Micro Interdiction Spheres to tackle or catch targets faster in a smaller sphere radius? Should he use traditional tackling tools only?
- How to use them in fleets and solo/small brawl PVP? For brawls PVP he must have better resistances. For fleet PVP he must poses better bonuses for targeting range and damage application.
Personally, I’d like to see a Combat Interceptor with mini-MJD or mini-Interdiction Spheres - a Frigate class variant of a T2 Destroyer.
Therefore, here are my solutions:
-
Delete Combat Interceptors at all, because with low resistances and without Assault Damage Controls, Interdiction Immunity, they are very squishy and vulnerable in 0.0 fleet warfare battles.
-
Improve their dps by 50-70, PG, CPU, give them an Asault Damage Control and move to Assault Frigates as a fast variant with a reduced MWD signature. Overall, it’s not a needy option.
-
Grant to them one of the specified above tackling mode. Improve their PG and CPU, for more fitting options, but leave the dps unchanged. All Combat Interceptors must be very fast and agile and without Drones. Drones should not be their tool, because their MWD speed is higher than Light Drone speed. They must be cap stable with MWD on for hybrid and Laser fits. Overall, current Interceptors are very hard to fit properly and especially for combat purposes. Interestingly T1 frigates are much easier to fit differently. They need more CPU, PG, bonus to tracking and falloff to fit a range weaponry with a range between 30-40km max: Arty, Missiles, Beams and Rails. Why? Not for assault combat, but to break the Cyno Jammers, FLEX gates (it will require like a 30 ships fleet), Interdiction Spheres, other Interdictors. In other words – anti-tackling combat. Their purpose must be to jump and warp fast through systems (8-10 AU/s) far away to destroy or Reinforce FLEX structures (Cyno, Gate), to tackle an incoming fleet, to shot Interdiction Spheres to clear the way for bigger ships, for operative intel. For this they need more survivability like: agility, 20% reduction to MWD signature penalty bonus and higher resistances towards omni-tanked model. For example, a Claw has basic armor resistances like 70/35/25/10%, but it must be like 60/45/35/30%. It’s their purpose to fly in close proximity to opponents with different weapon configurations, through Smartbombed gate camps and so on, to escape some bubbles alive.
This should probably be under player ideas and suggestions and not general chat.
TBH I take back everything I said. Glad the nano cancer was nerfed. Now buff battleships. Ty
3 Likes
I feel like the problem stems from the name ‘combat interceptors’. A lot of people are under the misunderstanding that combat interceptors need to be the dps. However, tackling is also combat.
Unfortunately, a vast number of people don’t realize this and believe that tackle is not combat.
What i’m trying to say is: it is. Fleet interceptors are usually slower than combat interceptors, and for good reason. They have nullification, and therefore should not be as useful in combat. However, a combat interceptor could have higher speed bonuses that allow it to tackle targets easier, which helps solidify their role in combat as the primary tacklers
I can sort of get behind that… still feels like a very tight niche to try and sneak into though.
On one side you’ve got the slower tackle cepters, on the other side you’ve got the WAY tankier AFs that can hold tackle even if they start getting hit. Doesn’t feel like it’s worth an entire class of ships tbh. Even if logically it fits.