EVE Search - The "REAL" Nano Problem

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The "REAL" Nano Problem

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page

Author	Topic
Enkryption Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:17:00 - [151] Originally by: Sakura Nihil All it takes sometimes is an inty or two getting close and holding you down. As you say "oh ****", the oh-so-helpful Cerb and Drake pilots you're fighting against drop a swarm of missiles on your expensive toy. And you go pop. Bye bye, 250m ISK! [serious]Its balanced, it really is. If any nanohac/vaga pilot is stupid enough to let an inty or two live long enough to hold a tackle doesn't deserve his ship to begin with tbh.
Phyrr The Gosimer and Scarab	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:18:00 - [152] Originally by: Sakura Nihil All it takes sometimes is an inty or two getting close and holding you down. As you say "oh ****", the oh-so-helpful Cerb and Drake pilots you're fighting against drop a swarm of missiles on your expensive toy. And you go pop. Bye bye, 250m ISK! [serious]Its balanced, it really is. this BS neuts are also yummy. Join us in the Exploration channel. The odds on me being here are rather slim evolutionary speaking, yet in the infinite bounds of probability my being here is a certainty.
Lady Karma	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:18:00 - [153] Originally by: Enkryption Not only do nanohacs need a nerf, webs need a buff or more ships with web bonuses need to be introduced. Every race should have a ship that gets a web bonus. Giving every race a ship with bonus to web is a bit extreme to say the least. How about every race with a bonus to ecm, while you are at it. Fit a domination web and overload it, there is your range bonus. Yes its expensive, but so are HACS
Enkryption Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:20:00 - [154] Originally by: Inertial Nanoes are not a problem. The problem is stupidity. The problem is it takes multiples of people to take down a single cruiser sized nano ship that is piloted by someone with the IQ of a chimp. But of course, you have all the answers, and I see you laid them out for everyone in your post. Those are some sound strategies you got there.
Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:27:00 - [155] Originally by: Ralara Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Vaga is still invulnerable. Even when his cap is gone he can still ride out the current cycle of his MWD and then coast which should easily get him well beyond any trouble and then he can warp away. Sure. But then you would have more than a BS with heavy neuts, you might have, say, your own support gang with, shock-horror, some interceptors or a rapier to keep it in place? All this, just to catch a nano? And you still don't see a problem with that? One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Vladimir Griftin	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:28:00 - [156] Originally by: Tarminic And what's to keep the plot from simply disengaging? I think thats the whole problem with nano-ships really, they have the option to disengage if its not going well for them. Nano fits are the new Warp Core stabs tbh.
Erik Morkai Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.05.23 13:59:00 - [157] My my, I have to wonder how many of you actually fly a Vaga. It's a tough ship to learn to fly to get it to the 'Invincible' realm you all want to put it in. Oh, thats right, just train the skills, buy the ship and you are an unstoppable eve pvp god. lol. I feel sorry for the guys that hold Vaga bpo's, they must be broke, seeing as how most of you think a Vaga pilot only ever buys the 1 ship... People have been moaning about Vagas since I have started playing 2+ years ago. There are maybe a few more around now, than then, but that is mainly due to the subscription base, and more people believing the hype, and training for them.:P Tbh, the Vaga isnt even that fun of a ship to fly solo these days, you get more fights in a t1 cruiser as less people dock or log off. How to kill a Vaga? Try getting one to engage you in a belt, roids are your friend. Many Vagas go down because they hit that one stoopid rock :))
Nyphur Pillowsoft	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:05:00 - [158] Originally by: Erik Morkai My my, I have to wonder how many of you actually fly a Vaga. It's a tough ship to learn to fly to get it to the 'Invincible' realm you all want to put it in. Oh, thats right, just train the skills, buy the ship and you are an unstoppable eve pvp god. lol. Erik, you know as well as anyone that it's more than the ship, equipment and skills. In fact that's what you said in the bit I quoted. BUT the question is whether or not there is a tactic that, if well-executed, makes the vagabond able to disengage at any time. It's not only broken if inexperienced pilots can abuse it, it's broken if experienced pilots can abuse it. More importantly, the big question is whethere or not there a countertactic that can stop the ship in the hands of an experienced pilot using the same kind of force weight. With a gang of 4 vagas versus a gang of let's say 2 deimos 2 zealot 2 cerberus, for example. There's nothing to stop an experienced vaga pilot from just disengaging and warping off if he gets in trouble. He can choose to disengage against a superior force that should have the means to at the very least catch one of them between them. The main issue is that webs are not the effective counter to speed that they used to be. Eve-Tanking.com - We're sorry, something happened.
Lilan Kahn The Littlest Hobos Insurgency	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:23:00 - [159] lul add 2 curses to teh gangz and watch all the vagas run away as fast there littel polly's can peddel. "Bringing Content to you 1 round of ammo at a time"
Kolwrath Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2008.05.23 14:49:00 - [160] My problem with nanos: CCP and pirates champion the "commit to a fight" mentality. This is why we have Scramblers. To catch targets and force them to commit to battle till the bitter end. Nanos are essentially WCS without the penalties. Yeah your tank suffers, but who cares when you cant get hit by anything. If you aren't breaking your targets tank, simply nano out. Woot. If your target get some backup, simply nano out. Woot. If your target is anything that can catch you are is itself a nano, simply nano out. Woot. All the while you can hold your target down with a 20km scram, meaning he cant escape, but you of course ... can nano out. Woot. Commit to fight my rump. Flame away. Originally by: Chaos Space Marines Do you hear the voices, too?!?!

Lamic Tarvalla Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.05.23 15:12:00 - [161] Originally by: IamAcontractALT Originally by: Tarminic So can you please explain to me how 8 destroyers and an interdictor can kill a Vagabond (assuming that the pilot has a brain stem)? Aparently, you need 9 pilots to counter 1 nanopilot??? Does that mean if there are 3 Vagabond's, you need 3 interdictor and 24 destroyers?? I thought we wanted to reduce blobs in EVE?
Chris Vattic Paxton Industries Paxton Federation	Posted - 2008.05.23 22:45:00 - [162] Edited by: Chris Vattic on 23/05/2008 22:49:53 Edited by: Chris Vattic on 23/05/2008 22:47:22 Hello, I don't think our everyday nanogangs should be removed / nerfed to oblivion, speed tanking has always been and should be a viable way of staying alive. No question about that. Vagabonds are meant to be fast and when a person spends 500 million on implants, he / she should get something back in return, right? They can't really kill anything that has something resembling of a tank anyway. Nanoships are actually quite difficult to operate, one mistake, no matter how little, usually results in you being webbed and, poof, there goes all the ISK down the drain. However, the only thing I do have a problem with is high DPS ships, such as Ishtars, Sacriledges, Cerberuses ( Jesus Christ... ) and god forbid, battleships, flying 5 km / second. Nanoed Caldari vessels are a blasphemy as it is. Those beasts do quite a bang and when you combine it with their ability to run away at will, it will start to look a bit overpowered in my personal opinion. So I give my vote to giving speed modules heavy stacking penalties ( which was mentioned in the last live dev blog before the empyrean age one by the way ). That way interceptors and Vagabonds ( + some other Minmatar trashcans ( no offence of course )), that are meant to go fast would still be viable for speed tanking, but others requiring 6+ modules in lows to archieve required velocities would have some limits. Polycarbons could use some fixing as well. After all, who wants to see "god mode" Ishtars anyway. Also, please cut them nano pilots some slack. Those guys risk a lot more than you ever will. Yes, it is hard to catch them, but when something takes some skills to fly then it should take some skills to take them down too Some examples how we do it: - Energy neutralizers - When someone wants to tackle you, he will also need to come into the 25 km range. Two to three heavy neuts and, tadaa, all the juicy cap for Micro Warp Drives alpha'd. - ECM - The gift from heavens, take a few Falcon pilots with you and you can shut off any reasonably sized roaming gang. - Baiting - Equip a web + disruptor to a cheap exhumer ( Skiff for example ), warp in your buddies and he will never know what the hell just happened :) - Webbing - I humbly present you the Hyena. Really, that bugger is cheap as chips and with a 20km webifier range your friendly Vagabond pilot will think twice before engaging a gang with a few of those. - Tracking Disruptors - Two TDs equipped with falloff scripts and the Vagabond pilot is left with an 8 km range. You all know what that means of course - Drones, yummi - Unleash a swarm of Warriors and every nanopilot either runs or dies. I could go on and on, but I think ( or at least hope ) you can use your magination a little too Chris Vattic, the man who likes to mine and has never flown a nanoship in his life. --
prathe Omega Enterprises Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.05.23 23:32:00 - [163] the funny thing about this whole nano on/off rant is that most people who write the whole nano's unbalnced routine are often the same fools hidding behind cyno jammers and carriers crying unbalanced while the spider tank and try to catch vagas with chimearas and thanatoses . the funny thing is if you listen or read most of these alliance chats from nano victims it's "nano gang incomming" "GET GANGED UP " "can i bring my raven " "um should i bring jammers on my blackbird" and so on for five minutes... then " they are gone " " ok im undocked where are they " sorry but if you cant deal with the nano's maybe that's nature saying sorry you didn't make the grade time to be relegated to the fossil record . signature removed - please email us to find out why (include a link to the image URL) - Jacques(mods@ccpgames.com) why dont you just tell me ?
Dramaticus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.05.23 23:36:00 - [164] remove the explosion velocity factor from missiles and i'll be happy. Please don't use RL pictuers of players in Sig without permission. - WeatherMan
Varscythe	Posted - 2008.05.26 23:27:00 - [165] This might be a little old, but I thought I'd add my two cents on tanks... Shield tank - congrats, you fit a shield tank! You can now take a significant amount of DPS. Armor tank - congrats, you fit an armor tank! You can now take a significant amount of DPS. Speed tank - congrats, you fit a speed tank! You can now take an infinite amount of DPS unless something makes you slow down enough to be hit; even then you're still probably going faster than everyone else, so just coast on out of range! As an added bonus (I'm trying to think up a bonus like this that you get from shield or armor tanking) you can move in and out of combat at will, and just generally dictate who and what you engage. Sarcasm set to off now... Speed shouldn't be such a good tank when it gives such a hugely valuable bonus - mobility - and shield/armor tanks don't. I realize that there are counters for speed tanks, but what's a good solo ship that can counter a nano (within reason... no mothership suggestions, please). As a final note, for those of you who don't know, I admit to being a noob and am only going by a combination of what I've read on the forums and my own experience testing with a friend who enjoys speed tanks immensely. Forgive ignorance on my part.
Call'Da Poleece	Posted - 2008.05.27 00:13:00 - [166] god you were asking for it Originally by: Chris Vattic I don't think our everyday nanogangs should be removed / nerfed to oblivion, speed tanking has always been and should be a viable way of staying alive.No question about that. lol, I beg to differ about the lack of question, as do many others I'd wager... Quote: Vagabonds are meant to be fast and when a person spends 500 million on implants, he / she should get something back in return, right? WRONG, deep wallets should not dictate whether someone can run away or not. Quote: They can't really kill anything that has something resembling of a tank anyway. not on their own they cant, but when was the last time you saw a solo vagabond Quote: Nanoships are actually quite difficult to operate, one mistake, no matter how little, usually results in you being webbed and, poof, there goes all the ISK down the drain. hehehehehe ... difficult to operate .... hehehehehe Quote: However, the only thing I do have a problem with is high DPS ships, such as Ishtars, Sacriledges, Cerberuses ( Jesus Christ... ) and god forbid, battleships, flying 5 km / second. so you want all those guys to train med t2 autocannons and minmatar cruiser 5? .. Quote: Nanoed Caldari vessels are a blasphemy as it is. Those beasts do quite a bang and when you combine it with their ability to run away at will, it will start to look a bit overpowered in my personal opinion. whereas vagabonds doing a little less dps while being able to fly faster and because of that stand even less chance of getting webbed inside warp disruptor range is perfectly alright Quote: So I give my vote to giving speed modules heavy stacking penalties yaay ... Quote: After all, who wants to see "god mode" Ishtars anyway. all the peeps sick of seeing vagas? Quote: Also, please cut them nano pilots some slack. Those guys risk a lot more than you ever will. Yes, it is hard to catch them, but when something takes some skills to fly then it should take some skills to take them down too wow, I never thought of it like that, really makes you think you know ... those poor nano guys, trying their best and everybody ragging on them sniff, they have it so hard .. and no-one likes them .. bursts into emo tears
Call'Da Poleece	Posted - 2008.05.27 00:19:00 - [167] Originally by: Dramaticus remove the explosion velocity factor from missiles and i'll be happy. Indeed, and I wouldnt stop there either, stack nerf speed mods and snakes (and other speed implants) and polys. Maybe a long range webbing ship (new bonus for AF's maybe) for each race?
Uuve Savisaalo Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.05.27 00:29:00 - [168] Originally by: Corstaad I'm just saying there's ways to counter them. A lot of people are using them, not telling people and theres the confusion. On the same token should we cry nerf over spider tanks? the problem, as has been pointed out by a lot of people already, is that the gameplay afforded by nano ships forces everybody else to essentially use the same handful of viable setups or die. Its not that nanoships don't die, they're simply head and shoulders above any other setup tactic for any ship smaller than a BS, to a point where its the only thing you can ever do with anything lighter than a battlecruiser. Spider tanks are powerful, but there are many viable options in tanking - shield or armour, drone-based from your combat ships or dedicated logistics, individual or remote, passive on recharge, passive on non-rechargable buffer, active.. -- all of these are rendered completely non-issue by a mid-sized ship that travels at 4-7km/s, and that has been acknowledged by ccp as a problem numerous times in the past. A solution has been long time coming, though its exact nature has not been disclosed. Clearly, by the ships you see in a roaming gang of qualified pilots, there is an obvious and glaring issue of balance between the ships that can go 4-7km/s, and the ships that can't. that 'they are expensive' has never been a sufficiently-justifying line of logic in eve's history before (you might recall the days when large turrets had no problems one-shot-killing frigates around caster, or multiple-stacked damage mods or multiple-stacked and over sized MWDs. Those things were clear holes in the game's balance that allowed a small number of ships to become what endgame players use, and everything else relegated to the level of noob hardware. When something like that happens, only the most wholeheartedly lame-brained can insist that nothing is wrong.
Uuve Savisaalo Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.05.27 00:33:00 - [169] Originally by: Chris Vattic Some examples how we do it: - Energy neutralizers - When someone wants to tackle you, he will also need to come into the 25 km range. Two to three heavy neuts and, tadaa, all the juicy cap for Micro Warp Drives alpha'd. - ECM - The gift from heavens, take a few Falcon pilots with you and you can shut off any reasonably sized roaming gang. - Baiting - Equip a web + disruptor to a cheap exhumer ( Skiff for example ), warp in your buddies and he will never know what the hell just happened :) - Webbing - I humbly present you the Hyena. Really, that bugger is cheap as chips and with a 20km webifier range your friendly Vagabond pilot will think twice before engaging a gang with a few of those. - Tracking Disruptors - Two TDs equipped with falloff scripts and the Vagabond pilot is left with an 8 km range. You all know what that means of course - Drones, yummi - Unleash a swarm of Warriors and every nanopilot either runs or dies. I could go on and on, but I think ( or at least hope ) you can use your magination a little too Admittedly, none of these things are anywhere near as effective as a strategy that allows its user, in the worst-case scenario, to simply run off unmolested. Nothing should be so powerful that it by and large outclasses everything else in the same context, as it renders a significant amount of the game's options non-viable. hence, bring the nerf bat. there is work to be done.
Kullankaivaja	Posted - 2008.05.27 03:00:00 - [170] Originally by: Nyphur 2) An effective nano-fit vagabond does not require a billion isk investment. Other ships might but the vagabond can reach speeds of over 10km/s with just Tech 1 rigs and Tech 2 gear. No implants, no deadspace MWD. When the mwd is overloaded, it gains a 50% boost to effectiveness, which is pretty scary. The damage done to the mwd by overheating it can be repaired in-space using nanite repair paste, making it a viable option for a roaming gang. If four nanovagas can be essentially unstoppable by a gang of five or six battleships or other HACs, the field of play is skewed toward the vagabonds. Getting a vaga to go 10km/s requires either claymore, implants, faction fit OR overloading. I dont think that nanos are overpowered, neither are vagas. I have killed more than 20 vagas without losing a single ceptor to a vaga. Maybe ceptors are imba and overpowered

Hannobaal Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.05.27 03:45:00 - [171] The only possible problem with fast cruisers in the game is that some ships that are intended for armor tanking and relatively low speed (Sacriliege, Zealot, Absolution, Ishtar... ) are able to use their low slots to fit for high speed instead. Those of you whining about fast ships like the Vagabond being able to easily disengage are basically whining about a ship being able to do the very thing it is intended to be able to do.
Cpt Cosmic	Posted - 2008.05.27 05:10:00 - [172] Originally by: Inertial Nanoes are not a problem. The problem is stupidity. this and common lazyness among eve players, it is easier to cry in forums then to counter and work against something
Garek Law legion industries ltd Veni Vidi Vici	Posted - 2008.05.27 05:49:00 - [173] Nanos shouldn't be nerfed because there speed makes them well suited to the role there designed for. While there are ways to kill nano ship far too many many of them involve nano ships to do it. My suggestion is Make a module for dictors and hictors similar to the warp buble generator except its creates a webberfier space. I'm not sure it if will fix the problem but might create a need for a more diverse raoming fleets.
Pantaloon McPants	Posted - 2008.05.27 06:35:00 - [174] yeah nice , so we only need 8 destroyers and a interdictor to kill one vaga! gone are the days of old where you could roam in rr battleships and fights could last for 3 days and the insurance meant you where out there again the next day. now we fly ships made of toilet paper and fights last spilt seconds and cost you a weeks worth of ratting. But oh well, this is the game we play now. Its either nano roaming gangs with ecm or 700 man bs blobs.
Dani Leone A Dark Cloud Unaffiliated	Posted - 2008.05.27 09:18:00 - [175] Originally by: Lord WarATron Nanoships zooming around is fine. What needs to be done, however, is for people who fight nanoships to be able to tackle them. The issue is not "nerf nano". Rather, it is to boost counters to allow people to kill nano pvpers. Currently, If I want to kill off a nanoship, I need to use a nanoship to tackle it. its a bit like the old ECM debate prior to ecm nerf, where everyone fitted ecm and the counter to ECM was ECMing the enemy first. PvP became a battle of who could ECM the fastest CCP fixed that. People started abusing nos on non-amarr ships, and CCP nerfed that. Dampners became the new tactic, and those got nerfed. Basically, any tactic that give the pilto low risk pvp at the expensive of the opponent having high risk pvp for simaler numbers get nerfed. WCS pvp got nerfed. Non-Cov Ops cloak pvp got nerfed. Yes, there will be those saying that people are not creative enough to kill nano-pvpers. As a nano-pvper myself I disagree, rather, the tools available are not practical for this new style of pvp. Webs dont have long enough range, webs do not slow targets down fast enough, neuts are only viable for longer battles since a nanoship can use its existing velocity to move outside nuet range, or cycle mwd between neut cycles to escape. Having Huggins etc just means that the nanogang blobs up untill it can win, or just escape easaly. And even Huginns are not effective enough unless they are nanoed up to lock down a nanoship for long enough for it to slow down. Yeah people will say use super rare rat loot like officer gear and faction to tackle a fully player manufacturable t2 fitted and rigged ship. That is not competitive at all and neither is it practical. Back to point, there needs to be more realistic counters to nanoships other than using nanoships themselves. Light and medium webber drones in t1 and t2 varieties would be a useful addition to throw into the mix imho. Also perhaps changing the web range on the otherwise unused T2 Webs to be 13-15km. And I don't think these would change things too dramatically but they would certainly give the nano pilots something to fear from a regular gang. -----------------------------
BIZZAROSTORMY	Posted - 2008.05.27 10:42:00 - [176] Ive said it before and Ill say it again. Mobile stasis webification fields ftw.
Garek Law legion industries ltd Veni Vidi Vici	Posted - 2008.05.27 10:59:00 - [177] Originally by: BIZZAROSTORMY Ive said it before and Ill say it again. Mobile stasis webification fields ftw. A module for dictors that would do that would be great too.
AlexiK	Posted - 2008.05.27 11:10:00 - [178] Rapiers/Huggins anyone? with 2-3 of them a nanogang will go away
Enkryption Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.06.05 00:52:00 - [179] Originally by: AlexiK Rapiers/Huggins anyone? with 2-3 of them a nanogang will go away So everyone should be forced to train minmitar recons to be able to counter nanogangs? Yah I can see it happening...not really.
Selene Bork Order of the Argent Shroud	Posted - 2008.06.05 01:05:00 - [180] Well I was in a nano-vagabond once, died to a Dominix Pilot hehe could of been my naff skills at keeping it alive. I couldn't kill anyone in it. I prefer slow ships, nighthawk is right up my alley. The only thing I have against nano Battleships, is Battleships they should be slow..

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: 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.