Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DHB WildCat
Flash Over.
|
Posted - 2011.02.28 23:39:00 -
[1]
Alright as much as I hate to say it.... its time to bring back the nano ships and webs.
Lets face it. This is game is ever changing and tbh its one of its best qualities. So in light of the game as it is today I really believe we need to bring about the nano age part2.
Why?
Capitals Online... Its fact folks. Everyone has a capital... the best strategy these days for a small gang is hot drop them! Im not even close to kidding about that.
So nano ships would give the pilots the ability to get away from ships they have zero hope of killing, and pls dont say just to counter hot drop, that rediculous and I know most of you are thinking that, stop for a second and think about that!
So if you bring back the nanos, then obviously you have to have a way to catch them.... thus the webs would come back....
Zomg with the webs back, gallente would then be usefull again! Well its an idea to bring back small gang warfare and the gallente race as a whole!
Wild
|
Industrialist12
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 00:02:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Industrialist12 on 01/03/2011 00:03:39 If i could support this, i would. Interceptor fights already take the most skill(1 mistake and you die), and the nano age was that, but for more ship classes.
:Thumbs up:
Edit - i should clarify, when i said skill, i meant player skill, not skill points.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 00:12:00 -
[3]
For me, more speed in the battlefield = more fun
Games can be balanced in numerous ways, there's no "one and only solution". The current balance is simply not as fun as it could be.
However, emphasizing speed in combat means emphasizing player skill, to the point that character skill and ship fittings become a little less important. Many people don't like that. And if some guy manages to successfully engage and escape "the blob", the people of the blob get really ****ed and whine on the forums.
To please the majority, you gotta ensure that the biggest blob always wins. And for that we need slow moving targets that can be bashed at your heart's content. Jump, lock primary, F1 F2 F3 rinse, repeat
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 00:15:00 -
[4]
Huginn and Vagabond are by far my favourite ships and have been for years. Let me say this:
Hell no, the game is much better off today. The nano age was terrible gameplay all around.
|
Tony SoXai
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 00:24:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Tony SoXai on 01/03/2011 00:26:35 It's a lot harsher these days for the lone wolf. The majority of people who want it to stay how it is are no doubt people who gate and station camp in fleets all the time.
But a second nano age is not the answer. Perhaps it needs to be more balanced somehow, but this is not the way.
Better the way it is now than a second nano age.
|
R'adeh
Gallente Storm Solutions
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 01:00:00 -
[6]
OMG YES PLS!! Would also help to boost blasters a bit :) _______________________________________________
<Random sig with a hot chick> |
Terianna Eri
Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 01:20:00 -
[7]
For someone with a reputation as an elite PVPer, you sure do whine for your instant win buttons awfully hard.
Nano age was terrible and everybody knows it but you.
Cry more. ________________
Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 01:28:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Terianna Eri For someone with a reputation as an elite PVPer, you sure do whine for your instant win buttons awfully hard.
Nano age was terrible and everybody knows it but you.
Cry more.
Anyone who throws the term "win button" around is an idiot that doesn't understand the game. Everything dies in EVE, no matter how good and overpowered it is - it always dies eventually. There has never been a real "iWin" button in EVE. Things have always been unbalanced one way or another, but never enough for something to be invulnerable or unbeatable.
|
King Rothgar
Autocannons Anonymous
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 02:09:00 -
[9]
Edited by: King Rothgar on 01/03/2011 02:11:02 Let me pose this question: what happens to all ships that don't nano well and are best heavily tanked? Oh right, might as well delete from game because there is no way that abaddon doing 600m/s is going to take out that shield tanked phoon doing 6km/s. The nano age was broken. If you want nano, you can still have it. There are many ships in the game that still nano effectively: vagabonds, cynabals, rapiers, curses, machariels, hurricanes and the list just keeps going. If you want to be a nano*** that bails from anything that shoots back, go do it. You have all the tools already in game, use them! But know that you aren't totally invulnerable, if you mess up. You will be scrammed, webbed and killed very quickly. I think you just want easy kills made easier.
Thus far you shall read, but no further; for this is my sig. |
Skex Relbore
Gallente Skexcorp
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 02:18:00 -
[10]
Everything in EVE is too slow in general. The space shuttle could easily outrun 90% of the ships in EVE.
a typical BS's top speed of 120m/s is a ***ping 268mph about half the speed of a passenger airliner on earth. At 2000m/s an ABing Dramiel can just about keep up with the X-15, With a overheated MWD at 9000m/s it could keep up with the space shuttle. That's just atmospheric craft. Our actual spacecraft are far faster than that. The fastest man made object the Helios satelite hit 150,000mph 67,100m/s.
I understand it's a style choice but it just seems wrong that "space craft" are that slow.
|
|
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 02:36:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Skex Relbore Everything in EVE is too slow in general. The space shuttle could easily outrun 90% of the ships in EVE.
a typical BS's top speed of 120m/s is a ***ping 268mph about half the speed of a passenger airliner on earth. At 2000m/s an ABing Dramiel can just about keep up with the X-15, With a overheated MWD at 9000m/s it could keep up with the space shuttle. That's just atmospheric craft. Our actual spacecraft are far faster than that. The fastest man made object the Helios satelite hit 150,000mph 67,100m/s.
I understand it's a style choice but it just seems wrong that "space craft" are that slow.
Ah yes, this is a typical misconception.
New Eden meters are about 80x larger than our meters.
--- Players are losing faith and loyalty in CCP due previous expansions not living up to player expectations. The CSM and CCP agreed that expectation management can be improved |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 02:39:00 -
[12]
I wouldn't mind seeing some increased speed, the nano nerf was a bit heavy handed. and a bit of a web boost, but neither to previous levels. maybe throw a bit of an agility boost to gallente ships.
|
oldmanst4r
Minmatar oldmanst4r's Corporation
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 02:57:00 -
[13]
Edited by: oldmanst4r on 01/03/2011 02:58:44 Only if I can nano my Nyx. 1000MN microwarpdrives plz.
Originally by: CCP Shadow
*snip* Castration successful. Shadow.
|
Patient 2428190
DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 03:08:00 -
[14]
The nano age isn't dead, it is easier to mantain range control and employ kiting tactics than before. Its just not the LOLOLimmuneLOLOLOLOL 9000 m/s days you dream back on. Also
:: Solution to hotdrops ::
Don't fly things that can get tackled by bait tackle, and even better.. avoid said bait tackle in the first place.
:: Not the solution to hotdrops ::
Crying on the forums ...Then when you stopped to think about it. All you really said was Lalala. |
Terianna Eri
Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 03:11:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Terianna Eri on 01/03/2011 03:14:16
Originally by: Ephemeron
Originally by: Terianna Eri For someone with a reputation as an elite PVPer, you sure do whine for your instant win buttons awfully hard.
Nano age was terrible and everybody knows it but you.
Cry more.
Anyone who throws the term "win button" around is an idiot that doesn't understand the game. Everything dies in EVE, no matter how good and overpowered it is - it always dies eventually. There has never been a real "iWin" button in EVE. Things have always been unbalanced one way or another, but never enough for something to be invulnerable or unbeatable.
It's a common expression and almost everyone knows that it doesn't actually mean "THIS SHIP IS UNBEATABLE AND KILLS EVERYTHING AND NEVER DIES. I say almost because there are apparently still people like you, who will happily latch onto a single phrase and spit out a typical knee-jerk reaction that makes no sense - "you said X, therefore you don't know anything about topic Y."
P.S. the old webs are already back in the game, just fly serpentis (& blood raider) ships. That shouldn't be a problem for a wealthy ELITE PVPER like yourself right?
P.P.S. OP should probably look at the angel cartel ships too, they fit nicely into the "oh dang I bit off more than I can chew, guess I better run away instead of being punished for my mistake" style that he seems to miss so much ________________
Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
|
VannyDaCruz
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 03:30:00 -
[16]
Edited by: VannyDaCruz on 01/03/2011 03:30:03 Have you EVEN been to null-sec around Geminate recently? 95% of the gangs are nano. Its not like nanos are dead.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 05:11:00 -
[17]
Originally by: VannyDaCruz Edited by: VannyDaCruz on 01/03/2011 03:30:03 Have you EVEN been to null-sec around Geminate recently? 95% of the gangs are nano. Its not like nanos are dead.
It's not that they are true "nano", it's just that "speed" is an integral part of combat. It should not be fought against, it should be embraced
In any conflict, more speed = more power
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 05:17:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 01/03/2011 05:23:25
We'd better balance out cynoes and blobs in general (by, say, widening the gap in warp speeds, implementing some sort of simpliest penalties like of scan res and lock range). Spool-up period for cynoes is also a way to go. I'd say liting a cyno should also break and disable any lock.
Nano was just wrong. Speed should be a viable and valuable stat (and it still is), but having that much speed was just way too absurd. ---[center] Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
Target Painter
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 06:40:00 -
[19]
The nano age was godawful. Why would anyone want that back?
Quote: ...pls dont say just to counter hot drop, that rediculous and I know most of you are thinking that, stop for a second and think about that!
Ignoring for a second that capitals are actually horrible at tackling subcaps, I think this is why it's referred to as a "capital escalation." Side A does something to bother/annoy/stymie Side B, Side B raises the stacks by bringing in carriers. Either it's worth it for Side A to escalate at that point or it's not.
|
Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 07:08:00 -
[20]
The Nano Age can make a comeback if there is a webifier that can threaten pilots using long points.
Stasis Webifier I: 18 km optimal, 40% velocity reduction. High cap cost. Significantly more CPU requirements. Stasis Webifier II: 22 km/40%
Skirmish Webifier I: 9 km optimal, 80% velocity reduction. Low cap cost. Skirmish Webifier II: 11 km optimal, 80% velocity reduction. Low cap cost.
~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~
Tiericide |
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 07:21:00 -
[21]
How about no. The current game is, ignoring the situation with capitals, so much better than in the age of nano*happy lads*. Also, why do you whine about hot dropping, but then ignore it in your solution. If hot dropping capitals is an issue to be fixed, then solution is to whack hot dropping with a nerfbat instead of intentionally breaking the game even more.
|
Zhim'Fufu
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 07:58:00 -
[22]
I thought the angel cartel ships were ccps concession to old school nano whooring?
Otherwise you can still nano up just fine with an lg snake set and some errmm nanos. You won't go lol25kms anymore but your still faster than anything else chasing you so the effect is the same without the gheyness of olde.
Originally by: Response to bitter carebear tears in local [19:44:46] CCP Incognito > sorry i can't talk about game mechanics. you need to use your brains and figure it out.
|
Patient 2428190
DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 08:40:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Ephemeron It's not that they are true "nano", it's just that "speed" is an integral part of combat. It should not be fought against, it should be embraced
In any conflict, more speed = more power
"True Nano" being the invincibility code of the pre-QR times.
Range control is as important as it ever has been, and its still 100% viable tactic to employ. You just don't have the LOLOLOLOLimmuneLOLOLOLOL speeds you had in the past.
It may have been your game and you may have profited greatly for it, but the game has changed and its much more balanced now ...Then when you stopped to think about it. All you really said was Lalala. |
knobber Jobbler
Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 09:05:00 -
[24]
pretty sure the increase in capitals is bot related so I'm not sure game mechanics should be altered for something that might get removed if ccp pulls thier thumbs out.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 09:06:00 -
[25]
The problem that the OP describes is capitals. It doesn't take a genius to work out that the solution might involve them too.
Anyway, what the hell is "nano"? Apart from some buzzword that people flash about as part of some dewy-eyed nostalgia?
Is "nano" range control? Because we still have that. Is "nano" giving a few ships the ability to go 3x the speed of their classmates? But reducing the diversity of ships flown is self-evidently bad. Is "nano" about reducing the importance of range and giving pilots the ability to make up for errors in piloting or positioning simply with sheer speed? Or is "nano" simply about making whiners' ships more powerful by tripling their speed without any commensurate decrease in agility, EHP or DPS at range?
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 09:32:00 -
[26]
I too wish for the days when missiles ment to take out frigates couldn't even keep up with cruiser hulls let alone hit them...
|
Jimmy Doe
POS Consultants Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 09:44:00 -
[27]
I too miss the days when my crow orbiting at 20km couldnt hit a bs with light missiles because the trajectory arc for their flight was ridiculous due to my speed
"The tree of liberty is nurtured with the blood of patriots." |
Crabs Collector
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 10:18:00 -
[28]
It is silly to bring back the nanos as they were 2 years ago.The nano'ing made ships pretty much invincible and it looks like you just want easy kills.
Currently there is a good paper-rock-scissor system, no need to change that.
|
Dr Sheepbringer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 10:26:00 -
[29]
Am I the only one who thinks there should be situations where you are basically screwed? I mean one shouldn't be able to get out of situation where the odds are that you really shouldn't get out of alive. I don't think there should be a way to always have a "fix".
No to, my ship can do everything and counter everything.
Yes to, I need fly with my friend who has a longrangeship and I have a shortrange ship.
My say is, remove dualwebs and only make it possible to fit one. If you need more, then you need to use webdrones. Make them useful so that you can close the range and apply the real web onto them. At the moment it's more modules than tactics.
Originally by: CCP Shadow Dr. Sheepbringer -- It's not that kind of horn.
|
Poaw
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 11:57:00 -
[30]
Modules are tactics.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |