EVE Search - The Nano Problem

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The Nano Problem

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.25 05:23:00 - [301] Originally by: Cpt Branko It'd make the blob for the win. Hell, it's almost always for the win now anyway - T2 ships don't have that much over their T1 counterparts to win over a 2v1 if conventional setups are considered... and multiple cheaper ships (or even solo cheaper ships with some luck) can win over T2 as is. I don't think its possible to "counter" the blob except through intel and patience. A blob of nanos engage solo targets. A blob of t1 or non nanos go after the nanos. The issue as I see it is that if the t1 stuff isn't effective (chase, engage, stop at gates) then much larger gangs will result. The nanos will complain, and start forming even larger gangs. Then we're in the situation we're in now where a roaming gang of 20-30 isn't uncommon. The t2 gear should give a significant edge but shouldn't be game changing. Otherwise this limits solo pvp and discourages lower sp pilots for even attempting pvp. Originally by: Cpt Branko Ceptors are useful (but very fragile) right now. Double-webbing a ceptor with 45% webs would make it dead in seconds. I agree that 45% may be a bit much. I'd imagine that most ships would choose range and go for a 20km-24km script @25-35%. Huggins and Rapiers usually go for 2x 90% webbers and may continue to do so. They'd be forced to choose for very long rang webbing or effectiveness. Either they'd double web at 100km and negate the nano mwd, or they still need to close in to 40-60km for 2x 90% webs and stopping the nano nearly entirely. Nanos/ceptors would still have a chance to warp out. I'm also a fan of speed decreasing agility. Orbit quickly, or go fast in a straight line. But leave it so ceptors/assault frigs/frigs are the only thing with low enough agility to both go fast and orbit. Either way these changes won't happen due to the CCP jinx. Any proposed solution discussed on the forums is guaranteed to never see sisi =). CCP will either do nothing or implement some messed up change (ie cap total is reduced by 75% versus 25%).
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.03.25 06:01:00 - [302] Originally by: ***zilla I don't think its possible to "counter" the blob except through intel and patience. A blob of nanos engage solo targets. A blob of t1 or non nanos go after the nanos. The issue as I see it is that if the t1 stuff isn't effective (chase, engage, stop at gates) then much larger gangs will result. The nanos will complain, and start forming even larger gangs. Then we're in the situation we're in now where a roaming gang of 20-30 isn't uncommon. The t2 gear should give a significant edge but shouldn't be game changing. Otherwise this limits solo pvp and discourages lower sp pilots for even attempting pvp. I agree with most of what you said (I fly a vagabond and a huginn), only issue I have is I normally fly my nano ship solo or with one other person which decreases the amount of isk I lose over time compared to flying a slow BC, a fleet of T1 cruisers, or a BS, which even with 23mil+ SP I still do not feel that I have the skills to use properly. In a gang I normally swap over to ECM or just fly as a tackler... T2 ships should have an edge in PVP, that is due to lack of any kind of insurance other than following the rule of "don't fly what you can't afford to lose". If it were possible for a stabber to kill my vagabond it'd just make me switch back to the T1 version, and polycarb rig it since it's going to give me the same amount of an insurance payout when it dies anyway. Nerfing nanos will get a lot of support pilots killed, and maybe that's what people want (I still say the whole argument is about people not getting a killmail, because someone MWD'd away after using tactics to get some kills.). But that's just my take on it... I've been very near death several times, and lost a Huginn to an interceptor when I forgot there was a falcon cloaked in system (damn MC). ------------ Originally by:** CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:05:00 - [303] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 25/03/2008 07:07:19 Originally by: Silencio Nohay'Banda You missed the point due to paying extra attention to irrelevant detail. what I'm saying is: the counters are there, they're simple: jam, damp, neut, web, smartbomb their drones, webbing drones, ceptors, be faster, etc etc etc... with rare exceptions the common small to medium gang will catch every nano-ship that crosses it's path easily. ANY competent gang will be more complex to counter and not necessarily a nano-gang. Blaming the ship types of a competent gang with an FC who knows what he's doing would be like a bad dancer blaming the floor for his mistakes. Don't blame the tool, blame the carpenter. As for scripts, the boost script for webbers will allow rapiers and huginns to web from 80km, wait, introducing webbing scripts might also require the introduction of scrambling scripts! so then an arazu with t2 disruptor + script can have a point on you at 98km with recon 5! that would be fantastic wouldn't it? what then? ishtars are imbalanced because they can send their drones while recons jam/web/scramble/damp you from over 80km away? Stealth bombers are imbalanced because they have cruise missiles? There's no end to this circle, something will always bother someone. Play the game don't change it every two days when something doesn't go your way. I don't know what you say after you lose a ship, I for one try to think how I could have avoided that loss, and it does not involve opening a thread here. Your counters were neut, damp, ecm, smartbomb, webbing drones, as well as "be faster". Let us look at these 1. Neut. Last I checked, most neuts are only a few km range. Medium Neuts have 10-12km range. A battleship can fit neuts but vs capbooster nanoships its rather useless. Also a neuted nanoship does not slow down, so a competent pilot can simply move outside neut range. Are you saying that all people should fly battleships and that all battleships should carry neuts? Because if you are, CCP would need to redeisgn BS's that dont have utility slots 2. Dampners. Last I checked, Dampners do 0dps vs nanogang. Nanogang can also dampen you so its all moot. Remember the old nano dampner curse? Wow, Neuts/Nos and Dampners were its weapons rather than counter! 3. Ecm. This does 0dps as well. All it does is help you run away if the nanogang has spread points. Nanogang can also ECM you so its moot point 4. Smartbomb. I am sure people would love long range smartbomb ships. Something with more range than cormack smartbombs, you know the type of smartbomb that does not currently exist. Unless you think that killing a few drones at 5km range or less is somehow going to do DPS on the nanogang? 5. "going faster". Ahh I see. The counter to nanogang is to fly a nanogang yourself. How continental! None of what you say are counters. They are just escape tactics. They wont let you win vs nano, just increase chance of escape. You could add WCS to that list as well Then you go into the old "omg webs overpowered" argument if you have scripts. Sorry man, but that is not going to fool anyone. A +100% range and -50% effectiveness script is what this game needs to present a decent counter to nanogangs. A single t1 web of power 37.5%(45% for t2) is not going to solopwn most nanopilots but in a competent gang, the webs all add up and give a proper counter. Either CCP will nerf nano to uselessness or introduce a less complex counter. Its no longer a question of IF, but WHEN. The real question is, are you going to pretend nothing is wrong and see nano nerfed compleatly? Or actually put forward a sensible counter? -- Billion Isk Mission
Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:08:00 - [304] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Lord WarATron So you can either get a nerf to render the whole tactic obsolete, or go for a boost that still keeps your tactic viable but give competent gangs a counter. For example, long range web scripts (+100% range, - 50% effectiveness) would only slow a nanopilot down by 37.5% per t1 web (45% per t2 web). That seems pretty balanced to me. Your suggestion makes nano-fit ships incredibly obsolete in gangs. As long as you focus web you'll drop them like flies. That's rather hilarious. Also, to that comic strip, here's the next one: Aftermath Nanoships tend to die due to lag. Is that what you are saying? -- Billion Isk Mission
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:23:00 - [305] Edited by: techzer0 on 25/03/2008 07:24:36 Originally by: Lord WarATron Either CCP will nerf nano to uselessness or introduce a less complex counter. Its no longer a question of IF, but WHEN. The real question is, are you going to pretend nothing is wrong and see nano nerfed compleatly? Or actually put forward a sensible counter? If webs are scripted it reduces the need to have pilots that have actually bothered to spec for a ship (Like my Huginn) and takes away from people needing to be diverse in a corporation. I can see it as being an effective counter, but it may be too much. If you can't come into point range in a nano-ship for fear of being webbed by just any random ship in the game it makes flying with a speed tank useless and you may as well throw away your polycarb vagabonds. Nanos have been nerfed once, then people started to only do it with HACs/Recons since the BS's were nerfed. Change much more and you make one of the worst tanking races even harder to be useful in. I don't want to see it nerfed completely, and scripted webs seem to be the flavor of the week as far as ideas go. Make webs have more of a stopping effect and not so much of a coast down to xxx m/s when when scripted... that may be more useful overall... but I can still see gangs of ceptors with 20k scripted webs just being the next "OMG NERF THIS" thread topic. I know that I'd go fit up a dual web stiletto if it was changed like that, and that takes even less SP to get into for a starting character than a HAC or a Recon does. If CCP proposes a change I'd hope it doesn't go final until it's been put on the test server and announced somewhere (forums?) so the community can give as much feedback as possible rather than just read about it in the patch notes and pray. Some of us subscribe to the "I wanna go fast!" school of thinking and flying battleships is about as much fun as flying a drake in PvE... F1-F7... wait... F1-F7 ------------ Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:29:00 - [306] I can't recall if I've posted in this thread yet and I'm too tired to read through it all to check, so I'll just make my obligatory "nerf nanos" request: CCP, please nerf nanos. They've made the ships I love flying useless and forced me into flying ships I hate if I want to be useful in PvP. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:34:00 - [307] Edited by: techzer0 on 25/03/2008 07:34:46 Originally by: Wrayeth CCP, please dont nerf nanos. It will make the ships I love flying useless and force me into flying ships I hate if I want to be useful in PvP. Fixed. But see what I mean? I do fly non-nano ships, but I hate flying them. ------------ Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
Goumindong	Posted - 2008.03.25 07:43:00 - [308] Originally by: Goumindong Nano-ships are the epitome of blobbing. Fast enough to not get caught by something you can't kill. Fast enough to bring many more forces to bear on an opponent and escape before equivalent forces can arrive. Also: http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=597162 http://eve-files.com/dl/154147 Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Vote Goumindong for CSM[/url]
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.03.25 08:14:00 - [309] Originally by: techzer0 I do fly non-nano ships, but I hate flying them. So what did you do before the nano buff, then? Here's the thing: conventional ships are the baseline for EVE ships and fittings. It's the way it was for years before this recent craze, but suddenly things changed. Suddenly the game people had grown to love became something else entirely. In my case, I enjoy ships that hit hard and can soak up punishment, and am not so much into the fighter craft thing. Unfortunately, the nano buff invalidated the entire premise of my playstyle and the reasons I had come to love EVE. TBH, if I wanted to play a space fighter game, I'd go on eBay and buy a copy of one of the games in the X-Wing series. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Semkhet Spartan Industries Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 08:22:00 - [310] What goes to the core of this so-called nano problem is the nonsense of seeking "balance". Why the hell do people desperately expect from a game to exhibit a property NONE OF US is even able to implement in our lives on a daily basis in any significant extent ? You come on this world poor or rich, dumb or smart, healthy or sick, ugly or sexy, boring or charming, with or without character, and in all shapes and variations in between these main traits. These are all elements which will define what are your chances in the world, going from doomed to Lucky Luke. Then no guarantee how your life will unfold, starting with your certifications. Years of study get reduced to a few hours exams, and despite being proficient in 80% of the matter, you can just get the wrong set, or stress can severely hamper your ability to show what you really know, etc... I'm not even talking about the kind of balance you encounter when you step in professional realms, where more competent you are and bigger a threat you represent for established collegues who will protect their position by stabbing you in the back if needed. And if you decide to create your own business, you will soon find out that "free markets" aren't that "free": unless extremely lucky, you still will need a significant amount of lobbying to go anywhere, since contracts are mostly awarded NOT to those presenting the best offers but to those who are "connected". Bottom line: fairness does NOT exist. This brings me to games. Games mainly pretend to create enjoyable moments. "Enjoyable" is already a relative concept suffering variable definitions. But when you need more than two people to play a game, we step in another league completely: teamwork. To achieve any kind of efficient teamwork, you need a well defined context and rules in order to train and better yourself. Do you see rules and specifics of football, basket or any other team-based sport game changing every 3 months ? No. Do the rules of games have any logic foundation ? Not either. There could be more players, the area organized in a different way and rules could be changed. But it doesn't happen, and you don't see the fan press moaning daily about change this change that. On top, in EVE, we have lag, which in one way is the supreme being deciding the outcome of a fight regardless of isk, ship, gear, experience and skills. So all those whining about "balance" would be well advised to first redirect their delusions against lag until that problem get solved, because as long the essence of what you can accomplish can be reduced into a rolling dice at any moment, asking for some kind of structural balance in other areas borderlines intellectual impairment. But even if we could get rid of lag, we would not get rid of the differences between players, corps & alliances: IQ, experience, isk, skills, discipline & focus. Hence no matter the area, there will always be situations which will be perceived as eminently unfair by the loosing side. And since people mainly open the mouth to complain, we will always have this subjective perception that something is wrong with EvE as long we don't change our mindset and accept EvE as what it is: an unperfect creation by unperfect beings.

Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.03.25 08:25:00 - [311] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 25/03/2008 08:27:45 Originally by: techzer0 Edited by: techzer0 on 25/03/2008 07:24:36 Originally by: Lord WarATron Either CCP will nerf nano to uselessness or introduce a less complex counter. Its no longer a question of IF, but WHEN. The real question is, are you going to pretend nothing is wrong and see nano nerfed compleatly? Or actually put forward a sensible counter? If webs are scripted it reduces the need to have pilots that have actually bothered to spec for a ship (Like my Huginn) and takes away from people needing to be diverse in a corporation. I can see it as being an effective counter, but it may be too much. If you can't come into point range in a nano-ship for fear of being webbed by just any random ship in the game it makes flying with a speed tank useless and you may as well throw away your polycarb vagabonds. Nanos have been nerfed once, then people started to only do it with HACs/Recons since the BS's were nerfed. Change much more and you make one of the worst tanking races even harder to be useful in. I don't want to see it nerfed completely, and scripted webs seem to be the flavor of the week as far as ideas go. Make webs have more of a stopping effect and not so much of a coast down to xxx m/s when when scripted... that may be more useful overall... but I can still see gangs of ceptors with 20k scripted webs just being the next "OMG NERF THIS" thread topic. I know that I'd go fit up a dual web stiletto if it was changed like that, and that takes even less SP to get into for a starting character than a HAC or a Recon does. If CCP proposes a change I'd hope it doesn't go final until it's been put on the test server and announced somewhere (forums?) so the community can give as much feedback as possible rather than just read about it in the patch notes and pray. Some of us subscribe to the "I wanna go fast!" school of thinking and flying battleships is about as much fun as flying a drake in PvE... F1-F7... wait... F1-F7 If you think flying battleships is like F1-F7 and is like pve, then you are mistaken. You are not thinking about the "big picture". You are only thinking about yourself. Thats ok because most people on this forum post about their side. Remember that I used to be a snake nano pilot. I am not being biased here at all by saying that nano's are unbalanced. Be both know that they are and eve pvp is starting to loose its tactical ability as everyone starts to nano up. I do not want to see nano's nerfed. I want to see a less complex counter. (it is far more complex to counter a nanogang than to fly one, standard game imbalance feature). Lets solve nanos with a boost to web range rather than kill nano pilot flying. -- Billion Isk Mission
Scout McAlt State War Academy	Posted - 2008.03.25 08:33:00 - [312] Edited by: Scout McAlt on 25/03/2008 08:33:33 Originally by: Semkhet What goes to the core of this so-called nano problem is the nonsense of seeking "balance". What are you trying to say? Nobody exects ever to be balanced ever. Just fairly competitive. Let me ask you, how would you counter a nanogang that has a nano-falcon with rack of 200km+ anti-minmatar jammers? How would a gang of non-manmatar players counter a nanogang?
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.03.25 08:50:00 - [313] Originally by: Lord WarATron If you think flying battleships is like F1-F7 and is like pve, then you are mistaken. You are not thinking about the "big picture". You are only thinking about yourself. Thats ok because most people on this forum post about their side. Remember that I used to be a snake nano pilot. I am not being biased here at all by saying that nano's are unbalanced. Be both know that they are and eve pvp is starting to loose its tactical ability as everyone starts to nano up. I do not want to see nano's nerfed. I want to see a less complex counter. (it is far more complex to counter a nanogang than to fly one, standard game imbalance feature). Lets solve nanos with a boost to web range rather than kill nano pilot flying. I wasn't disagreeing with you to be honest, and the thread on webs in the Ideas forum is rather well thought out even if I think the ranges might need to be a bit different than what is suggested by the op in that thread. Once a thread has reached this size it's easy to miss the good posts and normally the argument is just being restated over and over. I haven't taken the time to spec to fly a battleship since I like to go out and get some solo kills or roam in a small mobile gang. A battleship moving at 125 m/s or so is not my idea of interesting, it has it's uses, but not for the kind of small gang/support flying that I prefer. Yes, I'm arguing from my point of view on the issue, and I since I fly a nano-ship I can say that yes it's like flying with stabs, even though I never did, and yes it's not all that hard to kill a nano ship, you just have to know what you're doing. It's annoying to see the ships that you've trained for changed from what you want them to be to something that is completely different, and I don't think we need another ship-specific nerf. Changing webs is probably the best bet, but the risk there is making the huginn into an optional ship, rather than a ship you want to have with you all the time. My non-poly rigged huginn does roughly 3600m/s with my nav skills, hardly fast enough to avoid taking damage. In a gang of fast moving ships which is where a lot of the nerf-nano posts are coming from that is plenty fast enough, but I don't think reducing speed is the answer... leave the ships as fast as they are but work out a good change to webs (scripting or small/med/large) and there should be a fairly good chance that nano pilots will not be as largely detested by the players that fly slower ships, or having to make sure you're set up specifically to counter running into a nano gang. ------------ Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.03.25 09:00:00 - [314] Originally by: Wrayeth Originally by: techzer0 I do fly non-nano ships, but I hate flying them. So what did you do before the nano buff, then? Here's the thing: conventional ships are the baseline for EVE ships and fittings. It's the way it was for years before this recent craze, but suddenly things changed. Suddenly the game people had grown to love became something else entirely. In my case, I enjoy ships that hit hard and can soak up punishment, and am not so much into the fighter craft thing. Unfortunately, the nano buff invalidated the entire premise of my playstyle and the reasons I had come to love EVE. TBH, if I wanted to play a space fighter game, I'd go on eBay and buy a copy of one of the games in the X-Wing series. I fly BC and smaller almost exclusively, unless I'm needed to be in a BS. Nano buff, how? They took away the speed bonus from nanofibers and increased tracking on Pulse lasers (med pulse will hit fast ships pretty easily), wasn't explosion velocity increased on some missile types also? Ok, missiles are a joke to any halfway-fast ship, but meh... How have nano-ships been boosted? I'm not saying they have been nerfed, other than to make setting up a nano-phoon rather expensive and not as cookie-cutter easy as it was. People figured out a way to make their ships go fast and still be effective, while increasing the survivability. That's not a buff, that's just using the options the game presents to you. A change wouldn't be bad to combat larger gangs of nano-ships being virtually invincible when they have the right support. It should just be well thought out to suit the play styles of everyone affected, not just the non-nano pilots. ------------ Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.25 09:36:00 - [315] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/03/2008 09:37:28 Originally by: Lord WarATron Remember that I used to be a snake nano pilot. I am not being biased here at all by saying that nano's are unbalanced. Be both know that they are and eve pvp is starting to loose its tactical ability as everyone starts to nano up. I do not want to see nano's nerfed. I want to see a less complex counter. (it is far more complex to counter a nanogang than to fly one, standard game imbalance feature). Lets solve nanos with a boost to web range rather than kill nano pilot flying. The issue is that a boost to webrange is a killer to any small ships and a big hit on soloers. 90% webs already effectively prevent frigates/etc/etc from being effective, because they're horribly broken vs any small ships (and any long-range "scripts" would have to be followed by a flat out nerf to web power in short range). I realise that in 0.0 nanos are extremely popular, due to the more prevalent blobbing (and bubble camps). In low-sec, nanoships are more the exception then the rule, primarily because the need to nano-fit is much smaller (a T1 cruiser/BC has solid chances of survival vs a typical camp as long as he knows what's he doing, for instance; hotdropping is very rare; blobs are much smaller and so on). I'm quite sure that there must be something in 0.0 mechanics which makes nano-ing much more prevalent. Personally, I fly everything from frigs to BCs (I don't really like flying battleships) - and I have no issues with nanoships really - while the long-range webbing would very much diminish my playstyle. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint
Semkhet Spartan Industries Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 09:42:00 - [316] >Let me ask you, how would you counter a nanogang that has a nano-falcon >with rack of 200km+ anti-minmatar jammers? I commonly fit ECCM on various ships. To get that far, your falcon will trade jamming strength for jamming range, and will not reach more than 14 points at 200 Km. A huginn with two conjunctive ECCM will become almost immune and still has room to fit T2 mwd, lse and dual webs in the mids. >Another example is how would a gang of non-minmatar recon/EAS players >counter a nanogang? Curses, Rooks, Pilgrims and a logistic boat. Fit 3 nav computers and 3 drone links on the pilgrims: with good drone skills you get warriors going over 10 Km/sec and hammerheads reaching 3,7 Km/sec with a control range of over 100 Km, what corresponds to controlling a sphere of 200 Km.
Semkhet Spartan Industries Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 10:02:00 - [317] Originally by: Cpt Branko I'm quite sure that there must be something in 0.0 mechanics which makes nano-ing much more prevalent. Personally, I fly everything from frigs to BCs (I don't really like flying battleships) - and I have no issues with nanoships really - while the long-range webbing would very much diminish my playstyle. There are many features which are unique to nanoships: - The ability to include far roaming as a common task. Try to jump through 30 hostile systems and check gates, belts + stations in 1 hour with anything else than ceptors and nanos... This allow to proactively seek targets instead of waiting glued on choke point gates. - The ability to pursue targets over long distances, where your scouts struggle to keep in touch with targets allowing the nanos stay on the tale until the targets either disperse, dock, cloak, safespot or get intercepted. - The ability to split gangs and take on camps from both sides of a gate in a relatively short time. - The ability to engage nanogangs on similar grounds - The ability to bump stuff out of docking range - The ability to break through camps in order to reach the place where you've a job to do. In short, nanoships are the only form of anything close to guerilla warfare in EvE, and probably the funniest way of playing this game given the high level of dynamics involved = adrenaline. The alternative is to sit conventionally on a gate with a bunch of merry m8's, wait hours, and then when a poor sod finally jumps through, it's the F1-F8 run to who will get at least a shot to get on the KM before the target goes "Ad Patres". Not really cool IMHO...
Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.25 10:27:00 - [318] Edited by: Goumindong on 25/03/2008 10:34:34 Originally by: Cpt Branko edit for space I wrote a bit about this in the document below, but didn't go into much depth. Nano-ships are not popular in low-sec because you have to fight on gates and gates have infinite tracking and 150km range. They are also not popular because its near impossible to kill targets off of gates in low-sec since you cant bubble targets. Nano-ships rely on blobbing to win. In a 1v1 fight, the nano ship will likely have to run, a battleship will have to many hit points, and most BC's will have too much DPS and range[unless low skilled]. So what a nano-ship/gang does is prey on weaker ships[cruisers/frigates] that are alone, or by getting targets to spread out. [edit: This doesn't make blobbing wrong or bad, its just the mechanic by which nano-ships exert their power. Because they can enter an area and leave so quickly and because of the time differential it takes for targets to warp and arrive compared to how long it takes to kill targets when your target is outnumbered. Everyone really does it, no one wants to fight a fight where they can't win, and the game between gangs becomes how you can get an advantage over your opponent. It also doesn't mean there isn't a problem with nano ships] E.G. 10 nano-cruisers vs 10 battleships, 5 cruisers and 5 frigates. The nano-cruisers will attempt to catch one of the cruisers or frigates alone. The battleships know that if they can catch a target and hold it down, they can kill it easily, and so does the nano-gang. So the nano-gang sits/files around, finds that one lone cruiser or frigate and then waste it and leave. There isn't anything specific about 0.0 that makes nano-ships good, its things about low-sec that make nano-ships less valuable. Risk mitigation in low-sec is more or less moot, you will never be more than 12-15km off a gate, ever, if you don't want to and the only ships that can web you well at that range, are going to be frigates[gate guns will obliterate them], or cruisers[gate guns pretty much still obliterate them, just not quite as fast and they have enough HP to be remote repaired, but also a very specialty ship] Long range web's are only a problem if they don't reduce strength and/or there isn't some other limiting mechanic. But i don't think scripting is the right answer. Vote Goumindong for CSM
Semkhet Spartan Industries Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 10:55:00 - [319] Edited by: Semkhet on 25/03/2008 11:01:53 Originally by: Goumindong Nano-ships rely on blobbing to win. You're so wrong I don't know how to start... Or maybe it's just that we don't play the same game. Example: I guess going 17 nanos against a gang of 38 ships including 6 bs, cs, 6 hacs, 3 recons and 7 bc plus various cruisers, logistics, ecm support, dictors & tacklers is blobbing ? They where spread a good 40 Km all around the gate, and for most of our guys it was impossible to engage without taking the risk to fall either into neut, scram and web range, that's why we had to cycle ships in the melee and take alternative turns. Props to the opponents who attempted to hold ground till the end. Battle summary here. It's obvious that if we are 10 and we bump into a gang of 5, we won't just dismiss half our gang at a safe during the fight. But equally, it's not because you are outnumbered that you automatically avoid engaging. In fact, it's when outnumbered that things might become interesting as long the ratio isn't something like 4:1. Btw, I have the impression that 4:1 is the bottom mark where Goons start to feel comfortable. And you talk about blobbing ?
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:09:00 - [320] So... a mixed gang, twice your size, plenty of EW, Battleships, plenty of mixed support down to interceptrs interdictors and Vagabonds, get's totally owned by your nano-gang. Now they may have been a bunch of nubbins, or maybe I'm just being ******** here, but doesn't this show the exact problem with nano-gangs?? -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'

Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:17:00 - [321] Originally by: Semkhet Edited by: Semkhet on 25/03/2008 11:01:53 Originally by: Goumindong Nano-ships rely on blobbing to win. You're so wrong I don't know how to start... Or maybe it's just that we don't play the same game. Example: I guess going 17 nanos against a gang of 38 ships including 6 bs, cs, 6 hacs, 3 recons and 7 bc plus various cruisers, logistics, ecm support, dictors & tacklers is blobbing ? They where spread a good 40 Km all around the gate, and for most of our guys it was impossible to engage without taking the risk to fall either into neut, scram and web range, that's why we had to cycle ships in the melee and take alternative turns. Props to the opponents who attempted to hold ground till the end. Battle summary here. It's obvious that if we are 10 and we bump into a gang of 5, we won't just dismiss half our gang at a safe during the fight. But equally, it's not because you are outnumbered that you automatically avoid engaging. In fact, it's when outnumbered that things might become interesting as long the ratio isn't something like 4:1. Btw, I have the impression that 4:1 is the bottom mark where Goons start to feel comfortable. And you talk about blobbing ? Did you even bother to look at that battle? Not only were they wildly out-gunned and fit like fools, but there are more than one group involved in this fight, and there is 17 minutes between the first and last kills[about 15 minutes between the time the fight starts and when the second half of the opponents jump in, since i can't imagine you primarying caracals and drakes over falcons, zealots, ishtars and other real threats] And not only that, but it exemplifies just how nano-ships operate. You weren't fighting these ship at the same time, you were fighting them one at a time because they were spread out. Which is pretty much the same as fighting when they aren't on grid as the majoirty had no way of affecting you. Vote Goumindong for CSM
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:17:00 - [322] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/03/2008 11:18:49 Originally by: Semkhet - The ability to include far roaming as a common task. Try to jump through 30 hostile systems and check gates, belts + stations in 1 hour with anything else than ceptors and nanos... This allow to proactively seek targets instead of waiting glued on choke point gates. True. Low-sec is much smaller and there are more people per system, so doing 10-15 jumps is quite enough, what is manageable roaming in a cruiser/BC. Originally by: Semkhet In short, nanoships are the only form of anything close to guerilla warfare in EvE, and probably the funniest way of playing this game given the high level of dynamics involved = adrenaline. True. I don't disagree with that. What I'm essentially saying is that nanoships are not a requirement to roam through low-sec; and really, go to most low-sec systems and you'll see a lot of slower ships (BCs being probably the most common, with a fair number of BS, and, of course, various forms of recons/HICs/HACs). You don't need to cover much ground (more population per system), and it's much easier to survive camps (no bubbles, typically lack of interceptors/recons, generally smaller camps). You can solo roam in a BC or roam in a BC heavy gang with a few BS. Somewhat risky, yeah, but it's not instant death. Agility-based ships (frigates/etc) can even live without a MWD. Ironically, boost web range and you've reduced the ability of non-nanoships to run away even more then you've reduced the ability of nanoships to run away, and you didn't do anything about the 'blobbing' issue Guom replies; in fact, you've just made the bigger blob have yet another advantage. If something was to be done (and I'm not convinced something needs to be done, but I don't have to deal with a lot of nanogangs either), I'd sooner see a nerf to snakes/polycarbons then giving any more power to webs (and giving them the flexibility to reach out to 20km without extensive skilling is madly boosting their power, even at 50% efficency), because web changes adversely impact a lot of non-nano pilots as well. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:38:00 - [323] Originally by: Semkhet Originally by: Cpt Branko I'm quite sure that there must be something in 0.0 mechanics which makes nano-ing much more prevalent. Personally, I fly everything from frigs to BCs (I don't really like flying battleships) - and I have no issues with nanoships really - while the long-range webbing would very much diminish my playstyle. There are many features which are unique to nanoships: - The ability to include far roaming as a common task. Try to jump through 30 hostile systems and check gates, belts + stations in 1 hour with anything else than ceptors and nanos... This allow to proactively seek targets instead of waiting glued on choke point gates. - The ability to pursue targets over long distances, where your scouts struggle to keep in touch with targets allowing the nanos stay on the tale until the targets either disperse, dock, cloak, safespot or get intercepted. - The ability to split gangs and take on camps from both sides of a gate in a relatively short time. - The ability to engage nanogangs on similar grounds - The ability to bump stuff out of docking range - The ability to break through camps in order to reach the place where you've a job to do. In short, nanoships are the only form of anything close to guerilla warfare in EvE, and probably the funniest way of playing this game given the high level of dynamics involved = adrenaline. The alternative is to sit conventionally on a gate with a bunch of merry m8's, wait hours, and then when a poor sod finally jumps through, it's the F1-F8 run to who will get at least a shot to get on the KM before the target goes "Ad Patres". Not really cool IMHO... You can 'guerrilla warfare' in high damage Battleships with decent covert ops support, it's nothing close to dumbed down F1-F8 that everyone assumes 'Battleship warfare' involves. Infact I'd say it involves far more skill than nano-gangs as youFre placed in a much riskier situation` -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:48:00 - [324] Edited by: Goumindong on 25/03/2008 11:52:07 Edited by: Goumindong on 25/03/2008 11:50:30 How can you say that nano's aren't about blobbing and then saying its about Guerrilla warfare. The entire point of guerrilla warfare is to attack weaker forces and then disappear before large forces arrive. Quote: Ironically, boost web range and you've reduced the ability of non-nanoships to run away even more then you've reduced the ability of nanoships to run away, and you didn't do anything about the 'blobbing' issue Guom replies; in fact, you've just made the bigger blob have yet another advantage. Not really. The bigger blob always has the advantage, but by increasing longer range webs you can change the dynamic such that nano-ships need to destroy the targets on the grid instead of just running away. I.E. part of the problems with nano-ships is that even if you get that superior force to bear, you can't do anything because the targets just run away. For guerrilla warfare to be a interesting game there must be an instance where the larger and superior non-nano force can catch and kill the faster targets. If not, then there is nothing but nano as a rational choice. If there is nothing but nano as a rational choice then the game becomes stagnated. And this is happening across 0.0, even if you get the gangs on the same grid and in engagement, its so hard to engage the targets that you need to nano yourself. Then you just get larger and larger forces of nano-ships which is not interesting, its just larger and larger forces of nano-ships. E.G. make a payout matrix for nano-ships currently. 1= win, 0 = escape, -1= loss ____________________Tanked____/__Nano Opponent: Smaller Nano___________0______/___1 Larger Nano___________-1______/__-1 Smaller tanked_________1______/___1 Larger tanked_________-1______/___0 Total:________________-1______/___1 The rational choice beomomes to always nano, [nearly]regardless of the size of your gang. If you make an equal or larger tanked force able to kill the nano-ships then the payoff matrix returns to equality where there is both a reason to fly big tanked ships and a reason to fly nano-ships. Currently the break is much to large gang sizes, and the only instances where its not are mainly due to lag or the need to achieve strategic objectives of massive size which require standing and fighting. Vote Goumindong for CSM
Minigin Ganja Labs	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:53:00 - [325] why is this thread still going on... i won it on page 9. quit your complaining. there is no nano problem, only the same problem that has plagued the world for thousands of years - stupid people who don't think. . MINIGIN! Now bringing colour back to these forums =)
Semkhet Spartan Industries Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:56:00 - [326] @Gabriel Karade & Goumindong: There is no doubt that this gang also included noob players. But let's be realistic. They had way more firepower, and just ECM-wise, with a scorp, falcon, 2 blackbird and a kitsune, could easely have jammed half our gang permanently. We only had a single falcon with us. Against 38 targets it's not that much You are completely wrong thinking that we started working in circles from the outside in. We did exactly the inverse. We slowly blasted through the formation to get to the center where was the guardian and had to took on the ships which were on the path. Don't you see that already the 10th target is the guardian ? That our HIC was also dealing damage ? The guardian was at the center of the formation, near the gate, where our HIC stood up after taking position. You can also see that we took out the biggest damage dealers first, regardless of their position. So this engagement was the antithesis of the outside-in attrition procedures Goumindong refers to. There are only two reasons why they lost: leadership & discipline. I was getting fired on no matter if I was 70 Km away or flying near the gate, and it never was good focused fire. But here we reach the main point: at the end, it doesn't matter who won and lost. It was a long battle with barely no lag, with people jumping in and out, either to repair, break jamming locks, or replace tacklers close to being destroyed. Except for the guy who lost a CNR, I would probably have had the same fun was I flying with the other gang, and that's what matters after all: fun.
Matrixcvd Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 11:57:00 - [327] Edited by: Matrixcvd on 25/03/2008 11:58:26 Originally by: Lord WarATron counters were neut, damp, ecm, smartbomb, webbing drones, as well as "be faster". Let us look at these speed, low HP, moderate to heavy damage verse that... not alot of options you say? Originally by: Lord WarATron 1. Neut... most neuts are only a few km range. Medium Neuts have 10-12km range. Most neuts? like we got alot of different kinds? You're really a special chap... I forgot you fly snakes.. rather impressive. So you have this kind of fluid imagination of neuts. Basically Boris, lets break it down. If its not heavy then the aggressing nano is going up against a T1 crap fitted cruiser/BC or another HAC or speed fit. In which, the crap T1 dies, and its a skirmish with the T2 nano or Hac. Originally by: Lord WarATron A battleship can fit neuts but vs capbooster nanoships its rather useless. Also a neuted nanoship does not slow down, so a competent pilot can simply move outside neut range. Wow, so lets looky here at this one from our genius in game mechanics (cause you fly's the snakes). Unstable Heavies drain 600. Cap size is roughly 1000-1400 (if battery) Most nano are hac's recons, hac's have few mid's and usually fit extenders for a bit of a buff mwd, and disruptor, not alot of PG or slots availible for extra mids. nano-recons would gimp givin up mids so they fit a cap booster, they hurt their setups and are less effective. Again, cause you fly the snakes you knows... Originally by: Lord WarATron Are you saying that all people should fly battleships and that all battleships should carry neuts? Because if you are, CCP would need to redeisgn BS's that dont have utility slots. And here we go back to the age old question. Just because you have 6 turret slots, or 6 launcher slots doesn't mean you have to fit all your guns. You people, and that is ment to be derogatory because "you people" are the same people that can't be bothered to fit ECCM against falcons, have to have max damage on your ships, but you don't stop to think that maybe preparing for a little of the unknown might be more important. maybe flyin in a balanced fleet and tryin to keep all your peeps alive, maybe flyin together with group tactics might help... maybe you could get a clue and realize that maxin out your dps when in a gang might not be your first priorty... maybe not Originally by: Lord WarATron 2. Dampners. do 0dps vs nanogang. 3. Ecm. This does 0dps as well. Wow Boris, if the enemy can't do dps, what happens? You know what, you really should work for the military, i think we have found some true genius here Originally by: Lord WarATron 5. "going faster". Ahh I see. The counter to nanogang is to fly a nanogang yourself. How continental! Almost done, attempting to catch a target by fitting yourself for speed, is that a counter, or just common sense? Fill in your own derogatory comments here about fat kids tryin to run track and getting upset... idk... its just ridiculous that people go, "HAVING TO MAKE MYSELF TO GO FAST JUST SO I CAN CATCH PEOPLE WHO GO FAST IS TOO DIFFICULT AND NOT A COUNTER" unbelievable Originally by: Lord WarATron None of what you say are counters. thats right, they are called tactics... a WCS is a direct counter to the disruptor. Certain modules have their inverse. Concepts like speed develop overtime (and BTW speed isnt FOTM its been around for quite a while, just the number of new players has increased faster than they have become PVP aware in this game), which is really the problem). The hard part about this game is you can't do everything by yourself. You can't outdamage an opponent you don't know is on the other side of the gate, you can't outrun every oppoenent, you don't know how they are fit. Your gang might not be bigger than the other gang, You might not be alot of things necessary to win the fight that day. But if you fight, and learn, you might win next time.
Minigin Ganja Labs	Posted - 2008.03.25 12:01:00 - [328] Originally by: Goumindong E.G. make a payout matrix for nano-ships currently. 1= win, 0 = escape, -1= loss ____________________Tanked____/__Nano Opponent: Smaller Nano___________0______/___1 Larger Nano___________-1______/__-1 Smaller tanked_________1______/___1 Larger tanked_________-1______/___0 Total:________________-1______/___1 The rational choice beomomes to always nano, [nearly]regardless of the size of your gang. by far the stupidest thing said in this thread to date. when eve is reduced to a matrix like that... there is no point to even pvp. the reason we go out and pvp is to do what is not expected. to win outnumbered and out gunned. That matrix you set up takes no consideration for the intelligence of the pilot. eg. a crow can kill a megathron if the mega does not have a neut fitted, but a mega can kill a crow if he has a point and neut and mwd fitted. pvpers roll the dice and see what happens. you can say "oh look there is a nano gang that has less pilots than our blob gang... the outcome is already decided! we know exactly how this well end!" totally ridiculous. i guarantee... if nanos are nerfed... the same people flying them will still kick your arses, not because they cheat... but because they are smarter than you and can fit/fly ships better. thus my solution to stop idiots crying about unfair pvp tactics is nerf every ship except the drake. and no one will ever complain again. . MINIGIN! Now bringing colour back to these forums =)
XxAngelxX The Illuminati. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.25 12:01:00 - [329] I really don't see what the problem is. As far as I can see it, some of the most skilled pilots in the game use nano-ships and they use them well. Then there's those that aren't as good who lose a lot of a expensive fit vagabonds etc. However, you come across the good ones, then yes, they will kick your ass whilst outnumbered, and find a way to get out if they are in trouble. This is good piloting, much like knowing when to deagress in a BS and jump out. It's nothing to do with the game being imbalanced, it's about high skilled, rich, experienced PVPers beating poor ones who can't FC their way out of a paper bag. There are countless times when I've engaged a BS blob and they send tacklers off the gate towards us so we just sit out of range and wait for targets. If they'd just stayed on the gate we'd have had to MWD in range of neuts, webs, target painters, ECM, you name it, all of this I have to watch out for. One of the best vaga pilots I know nearly died to a hyena and rook the other day even with another vaga to help. If a BS blob is losing ships, then just jump out for gods sake. If the nano's follow you, don't warp off one by one so we can pick off the last one. I mean seriously, this is how we get most of our kills. This is just playing on people's stupidity, not an imbalance. Nano's for me give me a chance to engage things much more often than if I was in another ship type. I think you remove the speed and playstyle of this, then there will be far less engagements as everything will involve who has the greatest amount of hard-hitters. There is no nano "problem". The ships are more expensive, take more training time, take more piloting skill and a better FC. There are a million counters. Eve shouldn't be "fair" it should be darwinism. People will lose to nanos until they adapt. I've seen many alliances adapt, so it can be done. It's called getting experienced and becoming better at PVP. If nano ships are changed again then I can't see where my fun will come from in eve again, I can't be bothered flying around in slow ships looking for a fight only to have to turn around every 20 jumps because there is a 60 man Blob that I can't even think about taking on without calling another 100 friendlies. --------------------------------------
Ephemeron Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.25 12:08:00 - [330] Originally by: Minigin why is this thread still going on... i won it on page 9. quit your complaining. there is no nano problem, only the same problem that has plagued the world for thousands of years - stupid people who don't think. These people simply don't like a certain style of play, they don't care about balance since they're always eager to dismiss ANY tactic that works against nanos simply because.. they don't like it.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: 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.