Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
m3talc0re X
SandStorm. The Babylon Consortium
60
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 02:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
I think it'd be kinda nice if webs had a Falloff on top of their Optimal. So a T2 would get the 10km Optimal + say 10km Falloff. The further away the ship is, the less effective the web is. It'd make webs more useful in PvE, as well as a bit of a bonus for PvP... |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
464
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 02:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
"a bit of a bonus for PvP" is a massive understatement, lol. It would be pretty OP. Webs are balanced right now, there's really no reason to give them more range. |
m3talc0re X
SandStorm. The Babylon Consortium
60
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 02:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
How would it be OP? Webs already exist that can reach past the t2's 10km range, |
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
148
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 02:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
m3talc0re X wrote:How would it be OP? Webs already exist that can reach past the t2's 10km range,
...If you want to spend 80 mil and want to nerf the slowdown effect then yes, you can buy a faction web.
But then the 80 mil webs would just be even more powerful. You are proposing a straight buff to a module that is already really, really good (some would argue too good). No.
I would support this only if it also came with a nerf to web optimal. |
m3talc0re X
SandStorm. The Babylon Consortium
60
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 03:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
No, don't nerf the optimal, and I've never heard anyone saying webs worked too good... I'm sure it would take some toying around to get it right, but for arguments sake, lets say t2 reaches 10km optimal doing -60%. Past 10km and it drops to half, -30% and loses strength the further you go to it's max falloff. Or maybe just loses some of it's strength past 10km and drops to say 45% then gets weaker. |
mxzf
Shovel Bros
465
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 06:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
How about if it drops to 0% past 10km? That seems like it'd be just about perfect. |
m3talc0re X
SandStorm. The Babylon Consortium
61
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 20:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
Since you're going to try and troll, which I don't give two s***'s about, why don't you explain how it would be a bad idea or how it would be OP. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
174
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 21:29:00 -
[8] - Quote
In a ship with the right bonuses, you'd be able to web literally anything on a grid. Breaks kiting pretty well, don't you think? |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
319
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 23:11:00 -
[9] - Quote
stealth frigate nerf |
Misanthra
Alternative Enterprises
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 23:26:00 -
[10] - Quote
m3talc0re X wrote:Since you're going to try and troll, which I don't give two s***'s about, why don't you explain how it would be a bad idea or how it would be OP.
double web cane....now with more range.
DD's....gets you the strong webs of old, now with more range (your falloff would have this basically be normal strength web in falloff)
rapiers and huginns now with more range...you get lucky breaks with these and see who has not trained thier recon skills fully yet.
and like the guy above said....frigs are screwed. People whine enough as is about winmatar frigs...lets not make them the only tackle option besides navy slicers as the rest would be webbed and popped jsut like that. |
|
m3talc0re X
SandStorm. The Babylon Consortium
61
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 23:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
Meh, most of your "omg it's screwed" arguments are just hot air, but I did think about it earlier about being back in my AF/Interceptor, orbiting just out of web range and shots being just in range. They'd be kinda screwed then. So, scrap this idea, even though it'd be nice PvE wise. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe EVE Corporation 123566322353
78
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 07:58:00 -
[12] - Quote
I would be willing to say Falloff on webs could be interresting.... but the total range should not be doubled M3talc0re...!!!! thats plain ******** to suggest
Now that being said, if this was introduced ever (and I don't see a reason for why it should be) some better number examples could be on a t2 web: 7km optimal, 4-6km falloff where at the max range the web would web less than 1-5% |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |