|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 10:53:00 -
[1]
Quote:
Speed must never reach ludicrous speed, which is defined as speeds where missiles and drones don't intercept the class of ship they were intended for. There should be a significant and meaningful difference in speed between the ship classes. Speed should not permit a larger ship to perform the role that a smaller specialized ship was intended for. Afterburners should be a viable module selection for PVP. Guerrilla warfare must remain a viable combat tactic.
CCP, my faith in you is restored.
Now if you could adress the dyspro/prom issue, too... ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 11:25:00 -
[2]
With AB being *****ble at the same time than MWD and the Webifier nerf, it is pretty clear that CCP want dedicaced speed-tankers to be really close, orbiting 2km away, slowed by the web but not enough to really take damage from the main weapons of hteir target.
The added utility of warp scramblers also sound very nice, and disruptors won't be a no-brainer choice anymore.
The nanoers will absolutely hate having to choose between MWD, Web, disruptor, scrambler, cap booster, and their lover shield extenders, tought. The day of the "fragile" speed tanker having 9k passive shield are coming to an end, it seems. Can't say it's a bad thing.
With that many fundamental changes, there will be a lot of trial-and-error involving both sides of the issue, before everyone know the rules backward and forward. It will be interesting... ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 11:45:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 25/07/2008 11:45:57
Originally by: Callistus \o/ a role for the Arazu again
Sure.
Eve population, do like this guy. Instead of whining, try thinking how to exploit those changes.
Time to go buy a few dozen Lachesis while they're still cheap.
Quote:
we have to rat 4-6 hours for a nano hac and CCP still want to nerf it???
Don't worry, with the nerf polycarbs are getting, you won't pay them 60 millions/unit anymore. ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 12:06:00 -
[4]
Originally by: voogru Edited by: voogru on 25/07/2008 11:58:44
Originally by: CCP Nozh
The same way as before. You'll still be considerably faster when fitting for speed, but just not eight times faster than normal MWD speed.
I think we're going to see a lot more blob-warfare.
I'm glad I cross trained on nearly every character because obviously, my gallente blasters are going to be collecting dust. I think missiles will be the way to go now.
I think you're looking at it the wrong way.
When an alliance want ot pvp, someone start launching invitations, and everyone who want to join, join. The speed change won't change this, aside from changing the number of players who want ot join on each side.
If nanos were the blob counters, then why are blobs of 30-60 nano ships more and more common? ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 12:35:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Instead of all this complicated crap, all CCP needed to do was this: huge stacking penalty for speed mods, halve the performance of all speed related rigs, make all speed related rigs and mods negatively stack with each other regardless of what type of mod or rig it is (OD, Nano, Istab etc.).
Problem solved. The ships that are going insanely fast due to massive stacking bonuses incured through fitting tons of speed mods are nerfed. No one else is changed. End of story. All other 'normal' ships remain untouched.
The way things are going now, every ship in the game is going to be affected in a negative fashion and nano ships will still be at the top of the pile.
Yet your suggested change doesn't do anything to make MWD and Webs less "must-have" modules.
It does nothing to boost warp scramblers, or to solve the issue we sometimes see when a single nano-HAS can jump back-and-forth between two systems to avoid destruction when they're twenty guys trying to kill it each side of the gate.
What CCP intend will certainly have sweeping consequences, and some of them won't be nice. It's our job to test things to detect as many of those consequences as possible. But on the long run, Eve should be more balanced. ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 13:33:00 -
[6]
A while ago, I was flying around solo with a non-nanoed, non-plated zealot. Then I stumbled into a camp of about 10-12 hostiles in light ships. I raced with them over 3 systems before they caught me, and in the fight that followed, I killed two of them before I lost the ship. That was FUN, and ther wasn't any nanoing involved.
That's why the doomsayers crying about small-scale pvp being dead make me laugth... ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 14:26:00 -
[7]
This is actally an indirect boost to the Pilgrim.
1- Approach target gunboat 2- Unclock, lock, use 2 tracking disruptors with tracking scripts 3- Laugth while even webbed you're still orbiting too fast for him to touch you. 4- Profit. ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 14:51:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Lorna Loot
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth Guerilla warfare isn't about small gang facing down big blob. Read up on what it is.
Lol are you stupid? That is exactly what guerilla warfare is.
You are stupid. Guerilla warfare is about hitting where the enemy isn't in strength. It's NOT a frontal charge against overwhelming numbers. ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:11:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Lorna Loot
Originally by: Shadowsword
Originally by: Lorna Loot
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth Guerilla warfare isn't about small gang facing down big blob. Read up on what it is.
Lol are you stupid? That is exactly what guerilla warfare is.
You are stupid. Guerilla warfare is about hitting where the enemy isn't in strength. It's NOT a frontal charge against overwhelming numbers.
Originally by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare
Guerrilla warfare is the unconventional warfare and combat with which a small group of combatants use mobile tactics (ambushes, raids, etc.) to combat a larger and less mobile formal army. The guerrilla army uses ambush (draw enemy forces to terrain unsuited to them) and mobility (advantage and surprise) in attacking vulnerable targets in enemy territory.
Nanos v RR BS blob are pretty useless without massive ECM support.
STRATEGIC mobility, not tactical one.
A guerilleros, oh ignorant one, strike unprotected targets and run away before the army come. He doesn't engage the army in a frontal assault and expect to win by magically being able to run faster than bullets. ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 15:26:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Lorna Loot Where have I stated its wise to go full frontal with a nano gang? In fact if you can read I also stated that a nano gang isn't that effective in today's RR BS blobs. The idea is to attack when you have the advantage then run away. Whether to attack or not is up to you, if you feel your gang has the advantage try it.
Now, reading what I have typed where can you see me saying go face a fleet of BS with nanos? Well?
You're reasoning in terms of hitting the blob and running away. That's a frontal assault. That's not what a guerrilla force is supposed to do. What it's supposed to do is going around the blob and hitting isolated targets. There's not going to be a blob in every constellation. ------------------------------------------
|
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 18:07:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 25/07/2008 18:12:59 Edited by: Shadowsword on 25/07/2008 18:12:23
Did you know you could setup a non-nanoed Vagabond to do more dps than a Zealot, while having more effective hit points, and being faster?
If the Zealot in it's current form is considered a good HAS, then by what mystery is the Vagabond going to be utter crap, even if nano-fits were completely unusable? (which they won't be)
Here's a few T2 setups, each with 2 damage mods, lv5 skills, standard gang bonuses, T2 thermal drones, tackling mods, no rigs, no implants, no faction:
800mm plated Ion Deimos: 1955m/s, 674 dps, 9km effective range, 30.4k effective hit points, huge cap issues
Single LSE 425mm vagabond: 3275m/s, 554 dps, 17km effective range, 31.5k EHT, no signifiant cap issues.
Single LSE HAM cerberus: 1650m/s, 440 dps, 45km optimal range, 37.8k EHT, few cap issues.
800mm plated heavy pulse Zealot: 1955m/s, 510 dps, 16km effective range, 28.4k EHT, huge cap issues.
Does the Vagabond strike you as underpowered, when fitted like hte other HAS? It looks pretty balanced to me. ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 18:59:00 -
[12]
Originally by: KingCappo
Originally by: Shadowsword
stuff
You left out the part where the vaga has to fight into falloff in order to have a 17km effective range. So 440 dps is closer to 250-300 DPS.
EFT != TQ
Where did I say the vagabond had to stay right at the limit of effective range (optimal+falloff)? Those setups are made to dish out pain right up your butt. And they work pretty well at that.
Quote:
could u provide exact fits?
I'll do it for that vagabond fit, cba for the other HAS, but they're similar.
5* 425mm AC II, RF EMP 1* HAM II, CN whatever
10MN MWD II Warp disruptor II LSE II Invul Field II
Damage control II 2* Power diags II 2* Gyrostab II ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:41:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Furb Killer Going arround a blob and just ignoring them sounds like a fine counter to blobs. After a while they will get bored.
What? Someone who understand how a guerilla actually work? In this board? ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 07:42:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 28/07/2008 07:42:39
Originally by: slip66
Originally by: Dray
dont hide behind stupid stats and ignorance, tell us how it is, we might leave but we'd respect you for it, at least i would, so come on CCP do it, no really, do it, tell us what the bottom line is.
If you dont have the balls just f**k off and make this game exactly what you didnt intend it to be.
It might not taste nice but the truth is its own reward.
0/ Dray
Anyways, this is actually are really good point. If ccp comes out and says what their idea of pvp should be it would make it easier for people to adjust too and possibly they would get the ideas they are missing to get it there.
If there is a maximum speed they do not want players going just say it. If there is some relative balance they are looking for spell it out with numbers and an objective.
personally I don't mind the nerf, I don't do nanos anymore. I just got tired of that style game play. I don't like the fact that with regards to speed you almost completely control the fight and can avoid gangs setup for you.
They just need to say what they(ccp)does and doesn't want pvp to be...
They, they did say it in the blog. They stated that cruisers shouldn't be going faster than medium drones, inties faster than light dornes, etc...
The stats of missiles and tracking guides are also a good way to see where speed tanking start getting in the "not intended" zone... ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 20:01:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Kery Syander I also can't help but laugh at Nozh's argument for why nanos are overpowered because the same arguments could be made for other playstyles. Aren't tanks overpowered? I know of only one solution to killing a passive tanked drake (bring more dps)...
You can't really compare the trouble a nano-has can do with the one of a passive drake. The passive drake will be slow as a brick, won't kill you without tackling mods, will have shitty dps, won't be able to escape unfavorable odds.
Overall, that's a setup for pvp noobs, who make their own survival more important that what they bring to their gang...
Quote:
and I'm not even mentioning that the 'only one way to kill nanos is to nano yourself' is both moronic and false. I really can't believe the majority of devs actually bought into this drivel.
Then explain just why most huginns and rapiers are nano-fitted? They're the specialized anti-nano ships, they shouldn't need that, yet they do it. Why?
And don't start srpouting rethoric about neuts and drones and stuff, that's not going to kill a nanoship. ------------------------------------------
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.08.12 20:01:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Kery Syander I also can't help but laugh at Nozh's argument for why nanos are overpowered because the same arguments could be made for other playstyles. Aren't tanks overpowered? I know of only one solution to killing a passive tanked drake (bring more dps)...
You can't really compare the trouble a nano-has can do with the one of a passive drake. The passive drake will be slow as a brick, won't kill you without tackling mods, will have shitty dps, won't be able to escape unfavorable odds.
Overall, that's a setup for pvp noobs, who make their own survival more important that what they bring to their gang...
Quote:
and I'm not even mentioning that the 'only one way to kill nanos is to nano yourself' is both moronic and false. I really can't believe the majority of devs actually bought into this drivel.
Then explain just why most huginns and rapiers are nano-fitted? They're the specialized anti-nano ships, they shouldn't need that, yet they do it. Why?
And don't start srpouting rethoric about neuts and drones and stuff, that's not going to kill a nanoship. ------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|