Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Reem Fairchild
Shadow Forces Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 04:51:00 -
[91]
Originally by: *****zilla
Originally by: Reem Fairchild Wait, you admitted that they will be able to put effective fire on them in this way, you probably know that they are paper-thin ships,
Nearly have to kill them in the alpha strike. Mine have about 10k raw hp. I see a lot of hostiles targetting me, I align. When I see them blinking red, I warp. The tactic you've suggested most likely results in a few nanos warping off then back again, not in kills.
Same is true against any sniping ship.
You realize I never claimed a group of ships like that was a way to kill them on their own? I was just responding to someone saying they were impossible to hit at those speeds. They aren't. And that means that if you play your cards right and use the tools you have, you can fend them off, or even kill them.
And if you force them away, even if you don't kill them, it's still a win. People aren't going to put 100s of millions (not to mention billions) into ships and implants just to be consistently running away from fights.
Quote: What usually happens is the force spreads out. Someone needs to leave. Other blues pass through. All easy targets while the fleet cannot respond as it lacks the mobility to press the attack or escape. The battlecruisers are likely to be lower sp players with cheapier equipment. Otherwise they'd be in nanos themselves (or maybe commandships). Usually, they die.
Commandships are battlecruisers. And of course, any turret based ship (tech 1 or tech 2) that fits for the job can hit ships like that with effective fire. Pretty much everything you wrote in this paragraph is completely irrelevant to what I'm trying to say.
|
Stuart Price
Havoc Inc
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 05:19:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Stuart Price on 20/03/2008 05:22:37 1. Fix missiles with regards to explosion velocity. 2. Fix webs. MANY suggestions along the lines of more range/less effect, scripts, whatever. 3. Cap/change the tracking penalties for monster transversal so you can gun nanoships down using higher end cruiser guns (250mm rails for example) instead of being forced to rely on low end guns (Dual 150mm Rails etc) to score hits which barely dent the extender tank before they leg it.
More expensive mods/ships should provide and advantage, not an instant win. There is a difference. Using blobbing as an excuse does not change the fact that a gang of nano's is a more effective and survivable force than a similarly numbered gang of ANY OTHER SHIPS unless they meet a gang comprised entirely of matari recons.
Saying, "lol get a huginn/rapier", is also amusing. Enemy nano gang of 10 ships engages your gang of 9 bs's and a rapier. Who gets primaried and dies in seconds? HMMMMMM.
Why should a non-nano gang specifically fit to take out nano's, leaving them at a disadvantage against the other 95% of possible setups, when a nanogang can fit to engage that 95% of setups whilst only needing to avoid the exact specific setup that can hurt them? When you think about the odds, going nano is the absolute safest bet you can make.
Speed has it's place. It should dictate who gets to start an engagement (assuming no cunning traps) and who can control range (for the most part). It shouldn't be a primary defensive tactic or a means of beating a massive variety of other ships. "I got soul but I'm not a soldier" |
Billy Sastard
Life. Universe. Everything.
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 06:23:00 -
[93]
I am sick and tired of every other post in GD being someones great idea of how eve should be changed in order to bring it in line with their specific views in order to further their own personal agenda.
Posts such as this belong in the development forum, not general discussion.
Please accept this rant at face value.
-=^=-
|
Saryntos
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 06:52:00 -
[94]
I don't quite know where I stand on this topic, but if the nerf to nanos or rather anything in general happens, please don't neglect the ships that have ship bonuses that relate to the nerf.
Examples include the Pilgrim, and the Gallente recons, which have been left unfixed after a few nerfs, making the ships less than where they should be. Looking at all the outcries on nano ships, the Vagabond may very well be next in line to become subpar.
Regardless, people wouldn't fly mostly vagas if the Muninn was a decent HAC, other than a lackluster sniper.
Oh, I have an idea. Let's go use the Amarr solution. We nerf speeds across the board, and call it Boost Patch #2.
|
Bad Borris
Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 08:04:00 -
[95]
When groups of people go out in gangs of fast ships you might call it a strategy. In most cases this strategy is designed as a counter to the blob and to give the attacking nano-gang the ability to dictate the terms of the engagement as well as giving the fleet the ability to move many systems relatively quickly.
When an alliance is being attacked by a fleet of nano ships and undocks a blob of t1 crap with no means of countering the nano-fleet the only strategy on view is the blob and the mentality that goes with it. The blob mentality: a group of people sitting in a huge gang which outnumbers their opponant all telling themselves that they they should win seeing as they have vastly superior numbers.
On the other hand, when the alliance prepares its fleet for the attack well and individuals in said alliance take it upon themselves to step up and buy the correct ships and modules for the occasion then there are numerous counters to nano-gangs.
Stop trying to make eve f1-f8.
Of the various proposed 'fixes' to speed I have heard the worst has got to be increasing the range of webbifiers in line with disruptors or anything like that. People seem to be saying 'I dont mind you going fast as long as I can stop you in an instant and wtfpwn you in my 45mil ratting drake'.
Its ludicrous. Stop ******* whining.
|
Mostly Amazing
Mostly Amazing Corp
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 08:10:00 -
[96]
Did you guys know there is stuff in eve you can buy like rapiers, huginns, faction webs, faction ships and marauders with webbing bonus, pilgrims, curses, hyenas, etc. etc.......... -------------- I R Not Completely Amazing, But I R Mostly Amazing |
Pushtan
The BlackHand Order FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 08:13:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Speed fits exist because Webbed VS many = Dead
Webs are the problem as they are one size fits all modules
QFT - small, med and large webs would be awesome.
|
techzer0
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 08:23:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Everyone Dies OP *stuff*
First reply:
Originally by: Everyone Dies Obviously I agree with this issue and believe the OP has many fair and good balancing ideas in regards to the problem of speed in eve.
Did anyone miss that this is an obvious troll by someone who is going to back up their arguments with an alt? Nano ships die rather easily... they require I different play style (Actively controlling your ship! OMG!) and oh noes... they're changing PVP so it's not just "target, F1-F8"
I pirate in a nano ship a lot, which means I can't engage targets on a gate in lowsec, and I can choose to run away a live to fight another day when the guys I'm fighting decide that 2vs1 isn't enough and 1-2 more enter local (yesterday morning Penumbra Alliance? ).
Being pointlessly ganked and spending hours shuttling parts around and getting a new ship is something everyone hates, so I know you can understand at least that much of why some people fly nano. Other people fly nano because it's a challenge, you can pick a fight and bugger off if you're gonna lose. And this is where the whines come in "ZOMG I didn't get a killmail, I would so have pwned you but you ran like a girl!!1", funny... if I had even half of the killmails for cap ship kills I've been on where they either self destructed or attempted to self destruct... oh wait, only one actually let us get the mail.
------------
Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
|
Lord WarATron
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 08:49:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Bad Borris When groups of people go out in gangs of fast ships you might call it a strategy. In most cases this strategy is designed as a counter to the blob and to give the attacking nano-gang the ability to dictate the terms of the engagement as well as giving the fleet the ability to move many systems relatively quickly.
When an alliance is being attacked by a fleet of nano ships and undocks a blob of t1 crap with no means of countering the nano-fleet the only strategy on view is the blob and the mentality that goes with it. The blob mentality: a group of people sitting in a huge gang which outnumbers their opponant all telling themselves that they they should win seeing as they have vastly superior numbers.
On the other hand, when the alliance prepares its fleet for the attack well and individuals in said alliance take it upon themselves to step up and buy the correct ships and modules for the occasion then there are numerous counters to nano-gangs.
Stop trying to make eve f1-f8.
Of the various proposed 'fixes' to speed I have heard the worst has got to be increasing the range of webbifiers in line with disruptors or anything like that. People seem to be saying 'I dont mind you going fast as long as I can stop you in an instant and wtfpwn you in my 45mil ratting drake'.
Its ludicrous. Stop ******* whining.
I am a ex-snake nano pilot. I stoped it long ago because its no longer pvp now. Most Nano counters are more complex than nanoing up and it is bad game design to make counters that are more spesific than the original stratagy.
If standard webs were at scrambler range (yeah I know lots of people want this) then there would be no problem with nano's. People can nano up, but if they want to pvp in nanoships, then they will get danger. We both know that even if someone doubled webbed you, by the time you decellerate you are outside 10-13km range anyway. If not, then you are not a competent nanopilot. Or if you jump into a 100man camp, you wait 30sec for session change and mwd to gate with autopilot (to avoid bump issue). No amount of webs will slow you down fast enough. I know this because I did it many a time before.
Imaging if scramblers were 10km range (13km overheated)? That would seriously mess pvp up for the most part. Its the same thing with 10km standard web range.
--
Billion Isk Mission |
Sakura Nihil
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 08:58:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Bad Borris Stop trying to make eve f1-f8.
Its ludicrous. Stop ******* whining.
Seconded.
Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk i'm not a very good gambler
|
|
techzer0
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 09:03:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Imaging if scramblers were 10km range (13km overheated)? That would seriously mess pvp up for the most part. Its the same thing with 10km standard web range.
As far as I know a T2 scram is 9km. So basically you're saying that what you're saying is in game.
A long range web could never be 90% or it'd remove the role of the Huginn/Rapier that I spent MY time training for. If it was possible to fit a halfway decent tank on a Huginn I might try it, but when my mids are full of tackling gear/painters and I only get three lows... what do you think I will fit? There has to be a fix to it that is logical and will not go and make the time spent by nano pilots training the skills to be effective completely useless. I'd honestly have to reroll a 23mil and 11mil SP character if they changed it drastically. I could always respec both... but having maxed out nav skills wouldn't be much use to me if the only ships I can use can't effectively do anything with them. ------------
Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
|
Silas Beit
Joyriders INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 09:14:00 -
[102]
sick of these posts. nanos and speed are a part of the game, its not just a specially selected few that get to use them either. Guaranteed that most people whining don't yet have the skills or the ISK to fly these ships... try before whine?
there are number of ways to counter this menace: be inventive! recon combinations are usually the best.
Nano-pilots do what they do at an enormous risk to themselves, whether that be with Snake Implants or Faction Modules which are the only way they are able to get the speeds they do! This is not just your average pvp setup. pilots work very hard to earn the ISK and the skills to be able to fly these mean machines and I give them my respect for that.
Keep that in mind next time your Ratting Raven gets popped and you decide to make a whining thread about it.
don't nerf speed ccp, its fine as it is, i'm liking the idea of different sized webbers though!
Silas
http://www.save-evetv.com/ - http://spydrwear.spreadshirt.net |
Roy Batty68
Immortal Dead
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 09:32:00 -
[103]
The problem isn't the fast ships, it's slow players. That 'problem' could be solved if we could vote them off the forums.
CCP! Please implement Survivor - The Eve-O Edition!!
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cpt Branko
Surge. Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 10:06:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Pushtan
Originally by: Marcus TheMartin Speed fits exist because Webbed VS many = Dead
Webs are the problem as they are one size fits all modules
QFT - small, med and large webs would be awesome.
Nope, they'd be total death for small/med ships ;) Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
App Rentoo
Einstein Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 10:08:00 -
[105]
Yeah nerf nano! More power to the blob who can then undock in their ratting ravens and drakes and wtfpwn everything just by sheer numbers, as it is supposed to be. No need to waste time on teaching your carebear pilots not to suck. |
Lord WarATron
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 10:32:00 -
[106]
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 20/03/2008 10:34:12
Originally by: techzer0
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Imaging if scramblers were 10km range (13km overheated)? That would seriously mess pvp up for the most part. Its the same thing with 10km standard web range.
As far as I know a T2 scram is 9km. So basically you're saying that what you're saying is in game.
A long range web could never be 90% or it'd remove the role of the Huginn/Rapier that I spent MY time training for. If it was possible to fit a halfway decent tank on a Huginn I might try it, but when my mids are full of tackling gear/painters and I only get three lows... what do you think I will fit? There has to be a fix to it that is logical and will not go and make the time spent by nano pilots training the skills to be effective completely useless. I'd honestly have to reroll a 23mil and 11mil SP character if they changed it drastically. I could always respec both... but having maxed out nav skills wouldn't be much use to me if the only ships I can use can't effectively do anything with them.
Ok Smartypants, Disrupter range. Hardly anyone uses the 9km scrambler for a reason nowadays and those that do usually have a 24km scram as well! Do you know any nano pilot that uses a 9km Scrambler? I wonder why not! Webs are balanced vs 9km Scrambler. But not via the standard 24km disrupter that nanopilots use.
The concept of your ship balance vs nano is not a justification for nano. After all I was a nano-pilot as well not that long ago.
We both know that if every t2 24km scram was changed to becoming a standard 10km scrambler, it would seriously mess up pvp in the same way that 10km webs are a bit useless to someone scrambling you 15km+ away. The simple non-nerf solution to nano is longer web range. --
Billion Isk Mission |
Reem Fairchild
Shadow Forces Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 10:56:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
Originally by: Bad Borris Stop trying to make eve f1-f8.
Its ludicrous. Stop ******* whining.
Seconded.
Thirded.
|
Reem Fairchild
Shadow Forces Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 10:59:00 -
[108]
Edited by: Reem Fairchild on 20/03/2008 11:01:25
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Ok Smartypants, Disrupter range. Hardly anyone uses the 9km scrambler for a reason nowadays
I use it. If you're going to be in a ship that has to get way up close to fight anyway (any blaster ship, for example) there's no point in fitting something that takes more of your cpu and uses a lot more cap just to give you additional range that you don't need.
Quote: and those that do usually have a 24km scram as well! Do you know any nano pilot that uses a 9km Scrambler? I wonder why not! Webs are balanced vs 9km Scrambler. But not via the standard 24km disrupter that nanopilots use.
The concept of your ship balance vs nano is not a justification for nano. After all I was a nano-pilot as well not that long ago.
We both know that if every t2 24km scram was changed to becoming a standard 10km scrambler, it would seriously mess up pvp in the same way that 10km webs are a bit useless to someone scrambling you 15km+ away. The simple non-nerf solution to nano is longer web range.
You realize that you are basically asking for speed to be completely killed and rendered meaningless as a factor in any kind of mid to short range combat?
|
Cpt Branko
Surge. Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:04:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Lord WarATron Webs are balanced vs 9km Scrambler.
No they're not.
Webs are BLATANTLY, SICKENINGLY overpowered.
Having a module which completely counters, roughly, 3 slots (a web will generally counter a MWD + 2x OD II) at a 1 cap/s consumption + low fitting... and not only counters it, you get 5 times better tracking on target if it has MWD on.
A situation w/out webs and MWD would make bigger ships SO much more vunerable to smaller ships then they are now.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Lord WarATron
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:07:00 -
[110]
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 20/03/2008 11:07:11
Originally by: Reem Fairchild
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Ok Smartypants, Disrupter range. Hardly anyone uses the 9km scrambler for a reason nowadays and those that do usually have a 24km scram as well! Do you know any nano pilot that uses a 9km Scrambler? I wonder why not! Webs are balanced vs 9km Scrambler. But not via the standard 24km disrupter that nanopilots use.
The concept of your ship balance vs nano is not a justification for nano. After all I was a nano-pilot as well not that long ago.
We both know that if every t2 24km scram was changed to becoming a standard 10km scrambler, it would seriously mess up pvp in the same way that 10km webs are a bit useless to someone scrambling you 15km+ away. The simple non-nerf solution to nano is longer web range.
You realize that you are basically asking for speed to be completely killed and rendered meaningless as a factor in any kind of mid to short range combat?
Nope. Who says that a 24km Web needs to be 90%? Even at 50-60% at 24km it is effective enough to bring back risk to the nano gang vs conventional gang or even the solo nano pilot vs whoever.
And since I did the whole snake/nano thing myself in the past, I know exactly how much of a easy mode it is. Let us not kid outselves here. The whole reason we nano is that there is commonplace long range webber. And if there is enough rapiers/huggins to stop a nanogang, the nanogang just dont engage.
Let me ask you, how would you feel pvp be gimped if t2 disrupters were only 10km insted of 24km? It would feel like something is wrong. Just like 24km scrams are only half as effective as 9km scrams (1 pt vs 2 pt's), why not do the same with webs via scripts? --
Billion Isk Mission |
|
Lord WarATron
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:18:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Lord WarATron Webs are balanced vs 9km Scrambler.
No they're not.
Webs are BLATANTLY, SICKENINGLY overpowered.
Having a module which completely counters, roughly, 3 slots (a web will generally counter a MWD + 2x OD II) at a 1 cap/s consumption + low fitting... and not only counters it, you get 5 times better tracking on target if it has MWD on.
A situation w/out webs and MWD would make bigger ships SO much more vunerable to smaller ships then they are now.
As a ex-snake nano pilot myself, I am being honest here and telling the truth about these things. Just now we all know webs are pretty underpowered due to range. If you scramble someone outside web range in a nano setup, its pretty much risk free as it gets.
Again I will remind you, I do the same tactics in the past as well. And even I can see it is destroying the game balance. Cost is irrelevant to me and always has been.
The counter stratagy needs to be simpler than the original stratagy or of same complexity. The counter to winning against a competent nano gang without doing nano yourself currently is training minmatar and doing a logon trap with huggins (or mass uncloak with rapiers) and a max skilled claymore ganglinked giving everyone 40km+ scram range + enough damage dealers to kill them off before they warp away.
Thats who you win vs nanogang, as competent nanogangs simply do not engage gangs of huggin/rapiers. The best oyu can do otherwise is hope nanogang is incompetent or use a nanogang yourself. The other alternative is a draw. --
Billion Isk Mission |
Cpt Branko
Surge. Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:21:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/03/2008 11:21:45
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Nope. Who says that a 24km Web needs to be 90%? Even at 50-60% at 24km it is effective enough to bring back risk to the nano gang vs conventional gang or even the solo nano pilot vs whoever.
Let me illustrate to you what happens when I get a Interceptor trying to tackle me in a, for instance, Hurricane (D180mm AC II+Warrior II one, though).
It's basically like this: if it goes <5km/s, it dies within 10s. If it goes >5km/s and <6km/s, it dies within 25s. If it goes >6km/s & <6.5km/s, it dies *eventually*, but can tackle with reasonable efficency. If it goes >6.5km/s (which already requires rigging/etc), it lives.
Suddenly, the safety margin has been put up to 12-13km/s with 50% webs, which requires heavy pimping to achieve. A regular T2-fit max skilled Interceptor would die within seconds of lock being established. Isn't that kinda silly?
That's just the impact on Interceptors of what you propose. It's silly.
If you said 'remove MWD + remove webs' I'd maybe consider it a interesting (but very game-redisigning, which may/may-not be good) approach.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Lord WarATron
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:28:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 20/03/2008 11:31:05
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/03/2008 11:21:45
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Nope. Who says that a 24km Web needs to be 90%? Even at 50-60% at 24km it is effective enough to bring back risk to the nano gang vs conventional gang or even the solo nano pilot vs whoever.
Let me illustrate to you what happens when I get a Interceptor trying to tackle me in a, for instance, Hurricane (D180mm AC II+Warrior II one, though).
It's basically like this: if it goes <5km/s, it dies within 10s. If it goes >5km/s and <6km/s, it dies within 25s. If it goes >6km/s & <6.5km/s, it dies *eventually*, but can tackle with reasonable efficency. If it goes >6.5km/s (which already requires rigging/etc), it lives.
Suddenly, the safety margin has been put up to 12-13km/s with 50% webs, which requires heavy pimping to achieve. A regular T2-fit max skilled Interceptor would die within seconds of lock being established. Isn't that kinda silly?
That's just the impact on Interceptors of what you propose. It's silly.
If you said 'remove MWD + remove webs' I'd maybe consider it a interesting (but very game-redisigning, which may/may-not be good) approach.
Quite frankly, if the intercepter cannot acheive 5km/s (2500 with 24km 50% web script if added), it deserves to die. The Intercepter is not meant to be invincible vs a battlecruiser/battleship. It is meant to die if it wants to lock a target forever. It is meant to warp out when it takes starts taking heavy damage and it can still do so.
The intercepter is only meant to have *short term* locking on a target until the rest of the gang catches up. It is meant to use its weapons to kill off the drones attacking it. It is not meant to solo battlecruisers etc.
But let me repeat this to you. Lower chance of survival is the whole point of longer webs - there needs to be risk added back to the nano pilot to stop the invincibility of nanoships vs conventional ships.
And unlike the whiners, I did the whole nanopilot thing myself and I am being brutally honest here. Nobody can accuse me of not understanding nano pvp. Been there done it, got the t-shirt. And quite frankly, its about time more nano pilots started being honest here. --
Billion Isk Mission |
deadmeet
Star Blossom
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:29:00 -
[114]
Quote: Nano's aren't a problem the only problem is your whining and being a stupid **** and not adapting.
Adapting by fitting nano ships is my guess ?
No, maybe adapting by putting heavy neut... overheat them when fighting.... fly with rapier...... There is a lot of solutions versus nano ships...
Quote: Speed fits exist because Webbed VS many = Dead
Webs are the problem as they are one size fits all modules
QFT - small, med and large webs would be awesome.
Completely stupid, it would make nano fit useless vs battleship size ship whereas the nano fit are firstly against this kind of ships...
|
techzer0
IDLE GUNS
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:31:00 -
[115]
Edited by: techzer0 on 20/03/2008 11:32:39
Originally by: Lord WarATron Edited by: Lord WarATron on 20/03/2008 11:07:11
Originally by: Reem Fairchild
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Ok Smartypants, Disrupter range. Hardly anyone uses the 9km scrambler for a reason nowadays and those that do usually have a 24km scram as well! Do you know any nano pilot that uses a 9km Scrambler? I wonder why not! Webs are balanced vs 9km Scrambler. But not via the standard 24km disrupter that nanopilots use.
The concept of your ship balance vs nano is not a justification for nano. After all I was a nano-pilot as well not that long ago.
We both know that if every t2 24km scram was changed to becoming a standard 10km scrambler, it would seriously mess up pvp in the same way that 10km webs are a bit useless to someone scrambling you 15km+ away. The simple non-nerf solution to nano is longer web range.
You realize that you are basically asking for speed to be completely killed and rendered meaningless as a factor in any kind of mid to short range combat?
Nope. Who says that a 24km Web needs to be 90%? Even at 50-60% at 24km it is effective enough to bring back risk to the nano gang vs conventional gang or even the solo nano pilot vs whoever.
And since I did the whole snake/nano thing myself in the past, I know exactly how much of a easy mode it is. Let us not kid outselves here. The whole reason we nano is that there is commonplace long range webber. And if there is enough rapiers/huggins to stop a nanogang, the nanogang just dont engage.
Let me ask you, how would you feel pvp be gimped if t2 disrupters were only 10km insted of 24km? It would feel like something is wrong. Just like 24km scrams are only half as effective as 9km scrams (1 pt vs 2 pt's), why not do the same with webs via scripts?
There we go... script the webs, works for me. A lot less change, overloading shouldn't get them anywhere near Huginn/Rapier range, and they should only function at a reduced effectiveness than 90%, but maybe more of a velocity penalty so if it hits you inertia doesn't let you just coast out of 50% web or what have you.
I can get behind an idea like that one for sure... sounds reasonable, and not completely buggered up like making nano-ships more expensive by making them only viable with Polys/Snake sets or changing overdrives/nanos even further. ------------
Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
|
Reem Fairchild
Shadow Forces Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:32:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Lord WarATron Let me ask you, how would you feel pvp be gimped if t2 disrupters were only 10km insted of 24km? It would feel like something is wrong. Just like 24km scrams are only half as effective as 9km scrams (1 pt vs 2 pt's), why not do the same with webs via scripts?
Basically, what would happen then is that in most situations (not all) it will be about the same thing as making webs 20-24 km range.
I don't think this even really provides a solution to the supposed "problem" except with regards to Vagabonds, interdictors and interceptors (basically, the exact ships that are meant to be really fast). All speed gangs would do is bring speed fitted Gallente recons to tackle from way outside of web range and fast heavy assault ships that (unlike the Vagabond) can fight from range.
Also, we have 25 km range energy neutralizers in the game. Just saying.
|
Ephemeron
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:37:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Noelle Fay Seriously I'm not trying to whine here, but I can't count any longer how often I've seen vagas and the likes run off once they realized it became too dangerous.. the risk vs. reward thing is out of balance here.
It can't be as often as I seen Ravens run as soon as I enter local. 100s of Ravens every week. Lets nerf the Raven's ability to control the fight!
And while we are at fixing risk vs reward, we should really do something about all those level 4 missions in high sec. Move all level 4s to low sec then we can make vagas riskier.
|
Barzam
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:42:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
3. Rapier.
Again, another complicated stratagy which is more complex than nanoing up. Since only 2 ships in game such as rapier and huggin get this advantage. This means caldari, Amarr and gallente will need to retrain. Its a lot more easy for those races just to nano up than to retrain.
Two? You're forgetting the Bhaalgorn
|
Lord WarATron
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:42:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Reem Fairchild I don't think this even really provides a solution to the supposed "problem" except with regards to Vagabonds, interdictors and interceptors (basically, the exact ships that are meant to be really fast). All speed gangs would do is bring speed fitted Gallente recons to tackle from way outside of web range and fast heavy assault ships that (unlike the Vagabond) can fight from range..
I see. So first pro-nano guys tell a conventional gang having to field a pile of minmatar recons is fair, but it is unfair that a nanogang would have to insted bring their own gallente recon if a web range increase happened?
Pot meet kettle --
Billion Isk Mission |
Lord WarATron
Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:43:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 20/03/2008 11:43:31
Originally by: Barzam
Originally by: Lord WarATron
3. Rapier.
Again, another complicated stratagy which is more complex than nanoing up. Since only 2 ships in game such as rapier and huggin get this advantage. This means caldari, Amarr and gallente will need to retrain. Its a lot more easy for those races just to nano up than to retrain.
Two? You're forgetting the Bhaalgorn
Bhall needs Minmatar Battleship trained --
Billion Isk Mission |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |