Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 144 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
J Valkor
Invicta.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:15:00 -
[1321]
Originally by: abzzo
Originally by: J Valkor
Originally by: abzzo Why nerf everything. Whit the nos neut nerf you almost killed the curse. Great now you have succeed.
Why dont nerf all missiles and shit. Dosent mather how small a ship is they still hit. They hit everything. If something has to be nerfed its everything about missiles. A mega is shoting at a inty, doses it hit? NO
A raven shots at an inty, does it hit? Hell yea...
You do realize that just because a missile hits does not mean it is doing full damage?
Yes, I didnt say it was hiting whit full damage but it still hits dont they?
You are over-estimating the actual nerf to speed that this change causes to the average player. Severely.
|
Lucas Avignon
Avignon Associates Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:16:00 -
[1322]
This is a joke, blasters are getting nerfed more, even though they have like the worst range in the game, they can't hit anything that moves even at relatively slow speed but hey lets boost missiles even more by nerfing speed into the ground
Stacking nerf to speed mods = good
Other poorly thought out stuff = bad
Originally by: CCP Prism X Yeah, and while we're at it we can create a controlled environment around account hacking and credit card fraud and all the other EULA breaches..
|
Straife
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:16:00 -
[1323]
Originally by: J Valkor You are over-estimating the actual nerf to speed that this change causes to the average player. Severely.
And you truely have no clue about how far it will go, none of us will until monday.
|
Tomic
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:16:00 -
[1324]
Originally by: EveJoker why not try fixing the bug/issue with the physics engine first, or could this possibly lead to other fixes you dont want like ummm desync, node crashes etc?
this ^^
|
Dinamita Tona
Minmatar Privateers
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:17:00 -
[1325]
to solve any new nerf or boost problem, i sugest ccp to make 1 ship aviable for each race caldari - raven amar - harbinger gallente - thorax minmatar - rifter
of course it will be not allowed to attack any raven with more than 2 ships at same time, but rifters and thoraxes shall be blobed i think then most people will be satisfied
|
Ituralde
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:17:00 -
[1326]
Ok, my turn for a wall of text.
First, I think you have a very wrong idea as to the viability of nano combat the way the game is right now. As things are right now, there is a very wide variety of available counters to nanoships:
1. Mimmitar recons. I hate to mention this simply because its the solution that everyone immediately thinks of, but it has to make the list so might as well get it out of the way.
2. Energy neutralizers. No Cap, no MWD.
3. Remote tanking and logistics. Nanoships average around MAYBE 400 DPS on average, not exactly your hardest hitting ships. A fair deal of that damage also comes from drones as well, making it possible to clear out a fair section of the incoming fire without even shooting at the nanoships themselves.
4. Traditional anti-support vessels. Undergunning vessels (namely Assault Missile launchers, the ones with light missiles - though frigate-class weapons do work) and emphasizing your tank can make you a formidable opponent against paper-thin nanoships. Additionally, with all turret weapons, generally if they can hit you, then they are moving slow enough that you can hit them if you are using the same weapons. Additionally, tracking becomes far less of a factor when at longer ranges, so after driving hostile nanoships out beyond a certain range, they become vulnerable to another array of weapons.
5. Interceptors. Yes, they don't take much fire, but its way easier and FAR less expensive to get one up to speeds capable of running down far more expensive nanocruisers, particularly now with heat in the picture.
6. Electronic warfare. Heavy Assault Cruisers have notoriously low sensor strength, and with decent skills and racials, failing jams is something that doesn't much happen. Jamming the recons is more tough, but only the Huginn, Curse, and Rapier really can get to any sort of decent speed, and they all rely largely on their drones as a source of damage, making their ability to do damage otherwise vulnerable to attack. Tracking disruptors can similarly shut down any turret vessels, nano or otherwise (particularly since nanoships often are on the very edge of their ability to track anyhow), and frankly damps just need a boost to become useful again.
Lets do examples of this by race as well, to demonstrate that all races can take advantage of the various counter methods using existing specializations in their ships:
ALL RACES: Battleship-grade Nosferatus Remote Logistics (remember, up to ~70km on logistics ships) Interceptors Ranged DPS to support friendly tackle
Caldari: Assault-fitted missile vessels (Namely the hated drake) ECM ships 2x Free utility highslots for neuts or remote reps on the raven
Matari: 2x Utility highs on the tempest for neuts and remote reps Huginn/Rapier
Amarr: Tracking Disruption Pulse Lasers (good range and tracking) Utility high on the geddon for neuts or remote tanking
Gallente: Utility high on Megathron and multiple good neut and remote rep fits on the Dominix They should have damps, but those got nerfed, un-nerf kthx. Many vessels with spare dronebay, can use Light drones on most everything(Warrior II can catch any nanoship that is at a close enough range to do damage)
Ultimately though, we've heard constant complaining about nanos. So, where there is smoke, there is fire, right?
No, not necessarily. Nanos are really only a perceived combat advantage. Really, what they are is a mobility advantage. They appear as an unfair combat advantage for a few reasons:
1. They are hard to catch. Often, even if you 'defeat' them they run off and take very few losses. So, people want to be able to murder an entire gang when they 'win' a fight.
Ultimately, nanoing away from a fight you can't win is not very different from scouting a gang and jumping someplace else because you can't fight it. Either way, no kills.
2. Nanos can easily tear apart gangs larger than them.
[CONTINUED]
_____________________________ Fear is the mind-killer.
|
Ituralde
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:18:00 -
[1327]
This is really a misconception. What nanoing allows gangs to do is simply make less coordinated enemies pay for their mistakes, and often before the enemy can react. Most of the kills nanogangs get in serious fights - are from pilots who put themselves in a vulnerable position. In a conclusive fight, the nano gang will be able to take out enough that what remains is small enough to slowly tear apart.
On the flipside, a well-organized gang can easily drive off a nano group without taking any losses. I've seen fights where BRUCE calmly drove off a combined PL/CI nanogang with a similarly sized force of ships - a couple battleships, battlecruisers, cruisers, and other miscellaneous vessels - containing minimal electronics warfare support - simply because they were well coordinated and did not leave the nano group any openings to exploit.
I would argue that if speed was truly overpowered, then you would not have many common circumstances where a well-organized non-nano gang capabably forces off a nanoed gang through coordination and skill and often very little in terms of organized or designed counters.
In fact, its worth noting that a lot of kills many nano-gangs score are simply off of undefended vessels caught with their pants down. A non-nano gang would get the same kills, the difference being that the nano gang moves fast enough to escape before the blob can close the door out.
3. Well, how about that? Is it fair that its so hard to stop a nano gang from moving about? After all, we spend billions of ISK claiming space and building our empire, shouldn't our space be easy to defend and keep hostiles out of?
Understand its hard to avoid the angry PVPer response to this, and I'd give it under most circumstances but there is something of a valid argument to this. Frankly, this question really raises 2 points.
The first is, should their be methods by which a defending power can delay roaming barbarians from pillaging their space. The answer is yes, and that they exist. Sometimes, bad things will just happen due to being at the wrong place at the wrong time, but in most cases there are things in place that allow defenders the ability to hole up and prepare their defense without first taking losses. It is my opinion that if you are unwilling to do one of the following before getting killed, you deserve to die:
a. Warp to one of those POS you spend billions on, b. Dock at that outpost you spend more billions on, c. Be fast enough to run away OR d. Fit a cloak to your vulnerable ship. If danger enters local, safe up and cloak if the above are not options.
Anyhow, it is your space, so onto the second point. Should a defender be able to passively restrict access to space simply because they throw POS up and throw billions at it? My opinion is no. They can protect themselves from harm passively, but it is my opinion that to deny others access, you have to actively drive them out. There are in fact tools that assist this. Jump bridges are the unsung heroes of territorial defense, allowing even slow gangs, if operating on a well-organized network, to keep up with or even get ahead of nanoed groups.
With all of the resources available as counters described above and the cost and hitpoint vulnerability of nanoships added on, I simply ask, is speed really that overpowered?
I'd suggest a few things to bring things slightly more in line. Add diminishing returns for speed by ship class. Something like 5k/sec for cruisers, 4 for battleships, 6.5 for frigates, 8 for interceptors, 500m/s for capitals and supercaps .(Nanoed supercaps are an abomination)
This would make it not too difficult to go fast enough to dodge a lot of fire, and investing in a little extra speed will still give you an edge against similar-class vessels, yet smaller class vessels would retain something of a speed advantage over larger ones.
Additionally, allow larger launchers to fire smaller-sized missiles to balance missile ships in PVP. _____________________________ Fear is the mind-killer.
|
evilphoenix
3vil Industries Efferus Vehemens Inasnum Latrocinium
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:22:00 -
[1328]
So you desire gorilla warfare to exist after the nerf? How do you propose I get past the 50 man gatecamp?
You don't want me to leave a fight once I start it? So what you really mean is that when I get blobed while doing your gorilla warfare you want me to die.
What you really mean is you don't want people getting bumped off a station or gate forced to pvp?
Instead of nerfing why not create mods that counter? Web bubbles? Rigs that give a web/warp scram/neut bonus?
Do you have any numbers for the number of players who actually fly a ludicrous nano ship?
I like the idea of the warp scram, and can live with the web change. Why not test and implement those before such a massive change? --------
|
Cerui Tarshiel
Minmatar Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:22:00 -
[1329]
Edited by: Cerui Tarshiel on 25/07/2008 22:25:29
Originally by: Kerfira
Originally by: Cerui Tarshiel Reduction in ludicrous speeds is all fine and well but give us a way to mess with missiles in the same way that tracking disruptors can be used to mess up the optimal range/falloff or tracking off turrets.
There is a missile you can use. They're called defenders! Of.c. they're pretty useless, but then again so are tracking disruptors these days....
Also, even if you'll be slower after this balancing, missiles might hit you, but they'll still not do a lot of damage if you're above 2k....
Ok, now I'm going to call you out on this, do you actually pvp and use those things? A) not every ship has missile launcher hardpoints nor is there much of an incentive to fit one even if there is b) defenders just don't work and even if they did they are not going to shoot down 7 missiles from a drake, 5 missiles from a cerb or whatever. As for td's being useless, nah, perhaps less useful than ecm but I can assure that optimal range disruption makes your average vaga cry along with several other very good uses for it.
I'm willing to give up my speed if ccp implement real way of doing guerilla warfare in a different way. I.e. smaller actually workable blackops or anything that makes it possible for a small, well trained and dedicated force to be able to harass a larger, disorganized and blobbing force.
|
thoraxius demioses
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:23:00 -
[1330]
Edited by: thoraxius demioses on 25/07/2008 22:23:38
Originally by: Jenny' JoJo
Originally by: Luke Lamarr
Originally by: Crumplecorn DO NOT WRECK BLASTER SHIPS
This needed emphasizing, so I quoted here.
How are you gonna stay close to your target with, say, a deimos (3 mids, MWD, scram, web?)
And note that this does not exclusively apply to the deimos. And I ain't sure I'd accept "fit MWD and AB" as an answer...
Blaster boat fitted with MWD/Scram or AB/Web or Scram/Web. You no longer need three items from Speed/tackle/slow. You only need any 2.
If Anything, blasterboats will have better fitting if they switch to AB, since their scram shuts down enemy MWD
afterburner instead of mwd.. hrmmm.. oh wait the target is 20km away and mwdfng around you, how are youever gonna get that into your scram range???
i'm a Deimos pilot .i dont mind te speed nerfing. i love te scram thing... you do stil need a web just to slow it down and make your guns hit harder... but afterburner is a no go. in this case. the only thing that worries me is some one getting out of my web range....
however getting close to somewhat longer range ships... that wil be a perilous journey....
|
|
R0ot
Eternity INC. Project Alice.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:26:00 -
[1331]
That was actually an interesting read, as expected you have a lot of people crying already, but they obviously missed the whole huge yellow writing and they might try some intellectual input into the subject rather than screaming bloody murder. I can't say I agree with all of what was in the Dev Blog but look forward to the changes regardless, might actually have a use for the AF's after this.
|
Zabijucha
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:26:00 -
[1332]
Originally by: FlameGlow
Originally by: Zabijucha Rapier, Huggin, Hyena will be totaly useless. Tkanks CCP, I got only one mini recon char skilled,now all ships I like and I can use are broken. Simple you do not respect people who invest time and money in your game. Better go under whine this all pvp crips. Because they are so stupid that they do not know how to counter nano.
You're talking crap, man, those will be usefull as long as there is need in webbing. They will no longer be a "must have" though, just "nice to have"
Compare after patch rapier/huggin/hyena with falcon/rook/kitsune and arazu/lachesis/keres and pilgrim/curse/sentinel. Who talking crap? Now Minmatar EW ships are ludicrous gimped. FC wont say "nice to have a Rapier" in gang, but "take better ship".
|
Straife
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:27:00 -
[1333]
Page 52 Snipah
|
Shamrann
Minmatar Marque and Reprisal
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:27:00 -
[1334]
Originally by: Tzrailasa This is IMHO a good and quite balanced change!
However complex it might look, in total I don't really see this as more than a change in how webbing works (incl. making AB's slightly more viable), a slight reduction in MWD speed, speed balancing between ship classes, and a reduction of stacking benefits for speed.
For the Blasterthron pilots, I really don't see that you really have anything to worry about. You might not be able to effectively combat frigate sized ship, but as a battleship, you're not supposed to! If you target has a T2 MWD (550% today, 500% if changed), scrambling him will first reduce his speed by about 85% due to the loss of MWD, and you then put a 60% web on him, it'll reduce his speed by a total of just below 94%. Another web will get him to 97.5% speedloss. If the module changes are all done too, he'll even be slower to start with.
Mainly, this is a reduction of ludicrous speed as Nozh says. Small fast-moving gangs are still effective today as they've been over the years, EXCEPT when they meet a nano-gang! They'll still be effective after this (even more so), but nano-gangs will have become vulnerable again.
Nano'ed gangs has one advantage over normal small gangs, that they can disengage even if they've made a bad call to engage when they shouldn't have. This is simply too great an advantage, and has to be removed.
Bad decisions has a penalty for other ship setups, but not so for nanos. A good pilot in a non-nano setup will probably die if he makes a bad call when engaging, while a mediocre nano-pilot will probably not die. That's the main difference, and that has to go.
I don't like BOB... that is until now Tzrailasa, with this one post changed my hole view on BOB, I hate that I'm forced to nano my ships, since in my opinion it's akin to putting stabs on you ship. And we all remember back when most PVP setups included stabs simply because then you didn't have to commit to the fight and risk loosing your ship.
Again thanx Tzrail. for making a valid post in this forest of whiners.
Shamrann (MAin) OUT...
|
Markas Crais
House of Dying Laggers
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:27:00 -
[1335]
"That being said, this is what four of us came up with during the course of a mere five hour meeting on the current speed crisis"
^ this made me roflcopter.
This shows you how much thought and time CCP actually put into addressing this issue. Yes, it is an issue and sure changes can be made. But to think that four devs in a matter of five hours can come up with a solution to something that could break many aspects of gameplay is probably the most arrogant and absurd thing I've ever heard.
Maybe with three other people and five hours I can solve world peace!
|
Avon
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:29:00 -
[1336]
Originally by: evilphoenix So you desire gorilla warfare to exist after the nerf? How do you propose I get past the 50 man gatecamp?
They should introduce a range of ship which can sneakly bypass gatecamps tbh..
Oh, wait..
Eve-Online: The Text Adventure |
Tolderan
Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:29:00 -
[1337]
Slowboats FTW, i love this Changes
I think lots of people needs handkerchiefs now
|
Tomic
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:30:00 -
[1338]
Originally by: Tolderan Slowboats FTW, i love this Changes
I think lots of people needs handkerchiefs now
don't think this will make your alliance suck any less.
|
Straife
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:30:00 -
[1339]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: evilphoenix So you desire gorilla warfare to exist after the nerf? How do you propose I get past the 50 man gatecamp?
They should introduce a range of ship which can sneakly bypass gatecamps tbh..
Oh, wait..
And you expect those uber awesome black ops to jump bridge past the gate camps into what system that isn't cynojammed again?
|
Shiwan Khan
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:31:00 -
[1340]
So do CCP honestly just sit around and think, "how can we make it impossible for a smaller gang to attack a fleet two times their size?". All this does is promote blob warfare of hundreds of battleships where loading the grid is bigger than any tactical move you can make.
Reposted from other thread.
Anyway, basically I think this boils down to a group of forum warriors that always complain about nano gangs and how they are "unkillable" when they are too lazy to fit out rapiers/huginns with claymores and overloading. The game is fine the way it is, and anyone that regularly pvp's knows this. With the amount of people that play the game, there are really very few options remaining for smaller-sized groups that rely on setups, pvp ability, and sp specialization to combat large alliance blobs. If this change is indeed the end of fast ships then it kills an entire facet of combat and eliminates the abilty to fight blobs without being in a blob yourself. ____________________________________________
AEKDB |
|
OVERCOPES 1
Amarr Amarr Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:31:00 -
[1341]
Originally by: Tomic
Originally by: Tolderan Slowboats FTW, i love this Changes
I think lots of people needs handkerchiefs now
don't think this will make your alliance suck any less.
But will it stop PL crying any less.
Technolisa>those yellow things work better than platinum insurance :P |
Kerfira
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:33:00 -
[1342]
Originally by: Straife
Originally by: Kerfira 1. Why are your scouts so bad they didn't warn you about the carrier blob so you could go around it? 2. How long does it take for carriers to lock small targets, and how many times can you warp out in that time?
Unfortunately, you'll have to THINK now when playing EVE, and you'll have to face a risk similar to everyone else who're not nano'ed
Oh I'm sorry, we should just avoid all things having to do with PVP unless we can find a lone ratter in a belt after traveling for an hour...
Why SHOULD your small group be able to get through a carrier battlegroup? Because you spent a lot of ISK on snakes?
However, you are touching another problem. The lack of small-gang targets in 0.0. The main reason for this is most likely that the only way to make money in 0.0 that is superior to making money in empire is moon mining.... which doesn't provide small-gang targets.
Ratting? Better money (in the long run) to do high-sec L4 missions. Exploration? You'll be in deadspace, so you're pretty safe with a scout. Mining? Sorry.. Silly idea... Other hunters? Bingo. Only target really left....
The only real target are other hunters.... who generally come in groups... So, blob leads to larger blog. Repeat....
Solo or very small-gang money-making in 0.0 is not worth it, thus the targets for small gangs are not there.
What is needed to address THAT problem is a change to the high/low/no-sec reward equation... A couple of suggestions: 1. A big fat nerf of high-sec L4 mission rewards. 2. No refinable loot drops from L4 missions. 3. Severe reduction of 'roid size in empire (making them not worthy of barge attention).
I make money for my 0.0 activities by high-sec L4 missions. I know how good they are! Semi-afk, available on demand, 20-40m ISK/hour with next to no risk.... Compare that to ratting....
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
FlameGlow
Caldari State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:33:00 -
[1343]
Edited by: FlameGlow on 25/07/2008 22:34:43
Originally by: Zabijucha
Originally by: FlameGlow
Originally by: Zabijucha Rapier, Huggin, Hyena will be totaly useless. Tkanks CCP, I got only one mini recon char skilled,now all ships I like and I can use are broken. Simple you do not respect people who invest time and money in your game. Better go under whine this all pvp crips. Because they are so stupid that they do not know how to counter nano.
You're talking crap, man, those will be usefull as long as there is need in webbing. They will no longer be a "must have" though, just "nice to have"
Compare after patch rapier/huggin/hyena with falcon/rook/kitsune and arazu/lachesis/keres and pilgrim/curse/sentinel. Who talking crap? Now Minmatar EW ships are ludicrous gimped. FC wont say "nice to have a Rapier" in gang, but "take better ship".
Dampener nerf hit gallente recons, nos/neut nerf hit amarrs, web nerf hits minmatar recon, ECM nerf is probly next thing on nerf agenda Nothing catastrophic, just the usual rotation.
|
Velvet69
eXceed Inc. eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:34:00 -
[1344]
Originally by: DeadDuck I believe that DEVS know how the game is played, ......
How can you say that after a dev posted this ?
o/
Velve
IXC Velvet69 Proud Member of 'The House of Prawn' |
VoiceInTheDesert
Gallente Diplomatic Disruption
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:35:00 -
[1345]
Nanos are nerfed....and they're not even dead (since webs got nerfed as well), but nano pilots are sill whining.
Nano is still a viable option IMO. Just not as good as before (read "best").
The nerf and changes should make this game more interesting. Any of those pilots who are claiming that this will become "drakes online" have obviously been in their nano ships so long that they their minds fell out in mid-warp somewhere (running away from a fight no doubt).
|
Oniko Sengir
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:36:00 -
[1346]
Again I think this is overdoing it. I think the introduction of something like the warp scramblers turning off mwd's and web falloff range idea would be much better.
Latest Video
|
Sykes
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:36:00 -
[1347]
Edited by: Sykes on 25/07/2008 22:42:28 Edited by: Sykes on 25/07/2008 22:39:10 I guess for me the question is what happens after this nerf when a small and highly skilled PvP corp attacks a major 0.0 entity in its own territory, going up against: cyno-jammers, jump bridges, intel channels, system scanners and a massive blob of experienced pilots on standby. That's what it means to do 'guerilla warfare' in Eve and since all those advantages to the 0.0 territory holder were introduced, nanos have been one of the few approaches that gave a small, highly skilled gang a faint chance of taking on the big 0.0 blobs.
So I'm very interested to know how CCP are going to test whether 'guerilla warfare' still works after making these changes. I could see that these changes might be good, but the complexity of Eve means that they are inevitably going to have emergent qualities. That being so, testing is vital if you don't want a situation where the only solution to an 0.0 holder's blob is to bring a bigger blob.
So my question is, how exactly are the devs going to validate that 'guerilla warfare still works'?
|
Trojanman190
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:37:00 -
[1348]
Originally by: Velvet69
Originally by: DeadDuck I believe that DEVS know how the game is played, ......
How can you say that after a dev posted this ?
o/
Velve
just wow
|
Kyle Haque
Solstice Systems Development Concourse Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:38:00 -
[1349]
Ok where to start,
I started reading the devblog and well it started out fine we could benefit from a rebalance of ship speed keeping in mind specialist speed ships. (Inties, vagas, and certain faction ships) All good.
Scrams turning off mwds not a problem but there is a few thing needed to be looked at. First off didnt we just have this removal of dual function mods? It seems a bit overpowered in one slot disable someones ability to close range and warp. Solution as other might have mentioned a mwd script for scrams. 2 points of distruption or mwd bye bye button (possible hictor script too?).
reactivation delay on mwds: no comments could be good depends on how long anything over 2-3 seconds is rather crippling
MWD meta levels: Now this suggested change is way off if you want ti re-adjust the percents or the differences in percent that fine but making 20 something redundant mods that have no useful advantages from another be my guest.
Webs: Huginns and rapiers should be exempt unless you give them a defensive ewar and target painters don't count.
Polys: polycarbs are slightly overpowered easy balance PC T1: 10% mass reduction nanofiber T2: 12.5% or maybe 15% mass reduction PC T2: 15% mass reduction Domination nanofiber: 17.5% or 20% mass reduction.
Polycarbs a been slighly tweaked and made domination less useless.
Overdrives, Implants and Gang Bonuses Gang mod change is reasonable. Leave overdrives as is for now or map them like the Polycarbs and nanofibers above Snakes if your going to touch snakes all faction implants must be looked at. Personally I believe they are fine as is but if you are going to nerf them it needs to be a sweeping nerf.
Boosters: Do we really need to look at these? Almost no one uses the due to the drawbacks. and the people who do have shelled out some training time and isk to use them. By removing the velocity bonus and turning it into another useless booster as it is there are only 3-4 that are even worth using them.
Other Small changes: "Afterburners are being slightly adjusted to decrease the variation in speed boost from 105-171% to 112.5-162%" This says to me "We want to make everyone go the same slow speed." That and along with the snake nerf its says to me isk shouldn't matter in eve... if thats the case can you make it so I can fit a doomsday on my rifter plzmkaybai.
Overall as introduced this nerf has way too many implications across many different game play styles. This is in its current form is a swift kick to the balls to minmatar pilots and a square ball tap to gallente pilots as well. Luckly we have some time to review these ideas on the test server and get a solution that is reasonable.
To the Dev/GM that showed us a 4km/s vaga fitout with these words next to each other: "Implants. full snake set. No special named modules etc." put down your GM tools make a TQ character from scratch and come back when you have a full snake set (not to mention the t2 rigs).
|
Straife
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 22:38:00 -
[1350]
Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Nanos are nerfed....and they're not even dead (since webs got nerfed as well), but nano pilots are sill whining.
Nano is still a viable option IMO. Just not as good as before (read "best").
The nerf and changes should make this game more interesting. Any of those pilots who are claiming that this will become "drakes online" have obviously been in their nano ships so long that they their minds fell out in mid-warp somewhere (running away from a fight no doubt).
It's not the nano nerfs we're having issues with, it's the "lets continue to take a baseball bat to problems and end up screwing up more than we fix" approach that CCP is using.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 144 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |