Free Allegiance Forums

Looking at old threads I was reminded of this

Psychosis wrote:QUOTE (Psychosis @ Jul 14 2008, 11:52 PM) I think that instead of doing something stupid, we should perhaps wait to see how these sup perks turn out, and then start talking about gentle nerfs to ints.

In my opinion int combat power is fine. Their effective range is a bit over the top, but what I'd really like tweaked is their sig. An interceptor is more stealthy than an unshielded fighter with missiles unloaded. Additionally the sig GAs are in exp, making fully tooled up heavy ints ridiculously stealthy.

I suggest raising the interceptor signature significantly, sig 125% sounds about right (25% more than a low sig fighter). Not only will this make it more challenging to sneak on miners (you can rush with brute force as well as before of course), but it will make int on int fights better too as you can actually see each other from beyond minigun range (not by much, mind you).

/edit

The poll has no specific sig on purpose, it's just about whether you think raising the sig is a good idea for balance or not.

/edit2 spelling

I find it wrong that sig of int < sig of unshielded fighter without missiles. That's why I'd like to raise int sig. The balance, though... sigh.

I don't care about int detecting int in gun range, because that's a situation that shouldn't matter. If there are no scanner sources around like scouts, bases or even miners, probably that dogfight isn't so important.

This was something I could get behind then. And i still agree with it. Bump the int sig about to about 150-175 and maybe even knock back their scanners to 300.

Finally. A 'suggestion' from the crowd that doesn't make me want to gouge out my eyes. Adept I forgive you for the last 6 things I've wanted to kill you for

I'd agree with this too.
It always seemed odd to me how the best fighting ship in the game has such a low sig.

Push the int sig up and it becomes more like the "brute force" option it should be when compared to Sup

guitarism wrote:QUOTE (guitarism @ Feb 16 2009, 05:24 PM) Adept I forgive you for the last 6 things I've wanted to kill you for

Thanks Gui

It's ok Gui, you can still disagree with me

I voted no, how about lowering the Fig's sig instead? I know they've been getting a lot of perks lately but this would make galving and miner rushes much more potent as Sup!

Or rather, increase the int's sig a tad (100 or so) and lower the Fig's sig a tad (around 100 with missiles and shields unloaded).

guitarism wrote:QUOTE (guitarism @ Feb 16 2009, 07:24 AM) Bump the int sig about to about 150-175 and maybe even knock back their scanners to 300.

This.

CronoDroid wrote:QUOTE (CronoDroid @ Feb 16 2009, 06:17 PM) I voted no, how about lowering the Fig's sig instead? I know they've been getting a lot of perks lately but this would make galving and miner rushes much more potent as Sup!

Or rather, increase the int's sig a tad (100 or so) and lower the Fig's sig a tad (around 100 with missiles and shields unloaded).

All Fighters with no shields or missiles have a base sig of 100 (Before faction modifiers), with the exception of Belters, which have a base sig of 120 before faction modifiers.

I'm in favour of bumping the int sig up a bit. Right now its at 75% base (before GAs & faction modifiers), and I'd rather it be at 100 or 125. I'm not sure it should be too much higher than this, maybe 150 tops because its a significant nerf against tac. Leave their sensors at 400. The other thread we have running right now on PPs also covers this, but there are a lot of variables to think about.

1) Ints can mount pulse probes.
2) They have to close to ~400m to kill an SF.
3) Exp generally spends less and could theoretically afford adv/hvy scouts, whereas sup as a comparison has to spend more.
4) A tac team should be able to destroy an exp team's economy.

There are obviously more points than that, but the general idea is there. Exp is already pretty strong against tac due to PPs - thats a discussion for the other thread - and increasing the int sig would help balance them out against both tac and sup. I'd rather see this implemented in small steps: Increase the int sig to 125% base, see how it fares and go from there, rather than make gigantic changes.