| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Sekh Ondaari
    |
Posted - 2008.07.27 15:49:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Captator
I would argue that boosting the counters and nerfing the high end speed stuff is the way to go, rather than blanket nerfing speed.
That is the very intention of the nerf. Wether they suceed or not is entirely different. Personally I find the idea of for the first time ever make the ships meant to go fast go fast and the ships meant to go slow go slow be one of the best they've had for some time. I almost thought they had it pinned down when they nerfed nanos the first wave IE nanophoons(and yes that includes nightmares, machs, domis and whatever other ships people nanoed up at the time).
Another point to all of this is that nerfing lowends will effectively nerf highends aswell(apart from the obvious), by increasing their risk. If everyone has to buy a snake set to be viable in a vaga, the ones who do own a snakeset will be shivering their timbers as they go in for the tackle even if they're doing some 15km/s top speed. Higher demand for highends means higher prices, higher prices means more risk. Just nerfing the highends(IE removing the bigger portion of the bonus from snakes, boosters, gang bonuses, all level 5 skills, t2 polycarbons etc) will mean the risks of using them goes down, and more will use them and... we're back at step one.
|
P'uck
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 15:54:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Sekh Ondaari
Another point to all of this is that nerfing lowends will effectively nerf highends aswell(apart from the obvious), by increasing their risk. If everyone has to buy a snake set to be viable in a vaga, the ones who do own a snakeset will be shivering their timbers as they go in for the tackle even if they're doing some 15km/s top speed. Higher demand for highends means higher prices, higher prices means more risk. Just nerfing the highends(IE removing the bigger portion of the bonus from snakes, boosters, gang bonuses, all level 5 skills, t2 polycarbons etc) will mean the risks of using them goes down, and more will use them and... we're back at step one.
if i understand it correctly low ends wont be nerfed as much, but the ability to exponentially raise your speedboost through highend equipment will be removed.
if you want: not all trees will have x metres from their tops chopped off, only the highest ones will get shortened a bit, so they dont steal the light from the smaller ones.
|
Captator
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 16:02:00 -
[33]
Originally by: P'uck
Originally by: Sekh Ondaari
Another point to all of this is that nerfing lowends will effectively nerf highends aswell(apart from the obvious), by increasing their risk. If everyone has to buy a snake set to be viable in a vaga, the ones who do own a snakeset will be shivering their timbers as they go in for the tackle even if they're doing some 15km/s top speed. Higher demand for highends means higher prices, higher prices means more risk. Just nerfing the highends(IE removing the bigger portion of the bonus from snakes, boosters, gang bonuses, all level 5 skills, t2 polycarbons etc) will mean the risks of using them goes down, and more will use them and... we're back at step one.
if i understand it correctly low ends wont be nerfed as much, but the ability to exponentially raise your speedboost through highend equipment will be removed.
if you want: not all trees will have x metres from their tops chopped off, only the highest ones will get shortened a bit, so they dont steal the light from the smaller ones.
A nerfed curse does 2.4km/s solo (currently 3.1km/s) a nerfed sac does 2.7km/s, previously 3.4km/s, a vaga solo will be doing 3.7km/s (previously 6km/s). So though you are correct, and the percentage change is less for the slower nanoships, it is still sufficient to drop them down to speeds where a speed tank is no longer viable.
|
P'uck
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 16:16:00 -
[34]
where you get those exact numbers from? i thought there are no real module details out?
|
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari
VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 16:26:00 -
[35]
Originally by: P'uck
where you get those exact numbers from? i thought there are no real module details out?
The first-try-numbers are somewhat released. Are they out for testing yet? Nope!
|
Captator
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 16:27:00 -
[36]
Originally by: P'uck
where you get those exact numbers from? i thought there are no real module details out?
From here
That is with the overdrives being changed to 12.5% as proposed, and then stacking on each other. I calculated the figures based on solo, 3 OD, implants as there: the figures stated are with gang speed mod skill at 5 in effect.
|
Sekh Ondaari
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 16:49:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Captator
Originally by: P'uck
where you get those exact numbers from? i thought there are no real module details out?
From here
That is with the overdrives being changed to 12.5% as proposed, and then stacking on each other. I calculated the figures based on solo, 3 OD, implants as there: the figures stated are with gang speed mod skill at 5 in effect.
And further more it's based on the idea that no other changes will be done. Scout around and you'll find a few mentions of what other changes will be done or are atleast intended.
These figures are far from accurate according to other posts, such as the single one where they explain that your average t2 vaga would be barely above 4km/s.
I don't mind arguing about the concepts, but leave exact figures out of it until you have any at hand. Further more those calculations are not quite accurate seeing how mass is entirely left out.
|
Captator
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 16:54:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Sekh Ondaari
Originally by: Captator
Originally by: P'uck
where you get those exact numbers from? i thought there are no real module details out?
From here
That is with the overdrives being changed to 12.5% as proposed, and then stacking on each other. I calculated the figures based on solo, 3 OD, implants as there: the figures stated are with gang speed mod skill at 5 in effect.
And further more it's based on the idea that no other changes will be done. Scout around and you'll find a few mentions of what other changes will be done or are atleast intended.
These figures are far from accurate according to other posts, such as the single one where they explain that your average t2 vaga would be barely above 4km/s.
I don't mind arguing about the concepts, but leave exact figures out of it until you have any at hand. Further more those calculations are not quite accurate seeing how mass is entirely left out.
Could you either recount or link to where these other changes are being mentioned please?
|
Sekh Ondaari
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 17:11:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Captator
Originally by: Sekh Ondaari
Originally by: Captator
Originally by: P'uck
where you get those exact numbers from? i thought there are no real module details out?
From here
That is with the overdrives being changed to 12.5% as proposed, and then stacking on each other. I calculated the figures based on solo, 3 OD, implants as there: the figures stated are with gang speed mod skill at 5 in effect.
And further more it's based on the idea that no other changes will be done. Scout around and you'll find a few mentions of what other changes will be done or are atleast intended.
These figures are far from accurate according to other posts, such as the single one where they explain that your average t2 vaga would be barely above 4km/s.
I don't mind arguing about the concepts, but leave exact figures out of it until you have any at hand. Further more those calculations are not quite accurate seeing how mass is entirely left out.
Could you either recount or link to where these other changes are being mentioned please?
Spread throughout General Discussion, Information Portal and all the live chats(in-game, sisi, irc etc..). Have you read through the comments thread on the Dev Blog? Most of it should be in there.
|
Captator
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 17:14:00 -
[40]
It was 98 pages long last time I looked  any idea where in the thread they are?
|
|
Sekh Ondaari
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 17:45:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Captator
It was 98 pages long last time I looked any idea where in the thread they are?
No clue, if you read(read: laugh at it) it as it progresses, it's never more than a page of unread text long. =)
|
Joakim Wasyl
Caldari
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 20:58:00 -
[42]
Sentry drones in a vexor work very nicely indeed.
Vigils, with T1 modules can get up to 4.5K speeds, and 5.4K with T2 fittings (no rigs), use them like interceptors.
Warrior II's with a couple of drone navigation rigs don't seem to work at all, which I don't understand, as they seem to be fast enough according to the good old EFT tool.
|
Test Ctrl
Caldari
Tacos Revolution
|
Posted - 2008.07.27 22:49:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Captator
Edited by: Captator on 27/07/2008 02:08:29
edit: 9) Precision missile-rigged boats - works for: raven/scorpion/drake/cerberus/caracal/nighthawk
Reasoning/method: putting 2 warhead flare catalysts on a heavy missile using boat, or 3 on a cruise using boat, gets the explosion velocity up to around 2km/s, which means that instead of dealing 104 damage per missle raw on a 3km/s target, you will be dealing closer to 200, as most nanoships have little or no buffer, the result if it sticks around is obvious.
10: The random curses you might find fitted with nothing but RCU IIs and Ancilary Current routers and a heavy neut with a 75km range -_-.
|
Minsuki
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2008.07.28 03:33:00 -
[44]
Methods 1 and 2 will be seen coming from miles away, unless they are terminally stupid, and also can only be used from those ships. Methods 2 and 3 are also both countered by a simple cap booster. None will reliably catch and kill a nanohac with an IQ higher than room temperature. The best you can do is force them away, resulting in a draw, at best.
The only real counter* for nanohacs is training minmatar recons. And how many of those, do you suppose, are tanked instead of nano'd?
*that will catch and kill a nanohac with a reasonably intelligent pilot at the helm, and not bad luck/stupid decisions/lag.
|
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |