EVE Search - how the nerf has affected the main nano ships

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Ships and Modules

how the nerf has affected the main nano ships

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Topic
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.03 08:21:00 - [61] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Originally by: Red Thunder i dont care what they are designed for, im on about what people use them for, atm sac is one of the best as it perma mwds with no cap mods So basically what you are saying is 'I don't care about game design and balance, I just want my overpowered precious back' ? This is exactly what is wrong with nano*s across the board. Game mechanics are broken through blob-abuse, and sometimes hugely fittings with expensive modules/implants that ppl healthier than CCP or the average player could possibly think come together. What I am concerned with now, with the current speed changes and all, is now ppl is going to fight-back to falcons, sniping ships etc. Who on earth are you going to counter a falcon with it's huge range bonuses and strength now? There was a chance that you could get close and at least tackle it before it switches focus on you etc with a ship fast enough, but now what? The scram change is fine as many ppl state: webbers where VERY powerful before, reaching out to 13km average with overheating, now scrams will work together with webbers, also close and around the 10km mark when overheated. Big deal...nothing really changed...a dual webbed target away from a gate was in a really bad position, that fact remains. But what happens when you lower base speeds on many ships that had few options other than nano-ing? Some ships, and especially Recons/HASs had some range advantages that along with nano-ing ensured some survivability: Curses and Rapiers/Huginns are going to be sitting ducks now, unless some weird ultra-expensive dead-space/snake combo is utilized for them to at least avoid some missile dmg. I know that it's not logical for a ship out-runing missiles in our world, still missiles should have some cons and counters, just like turrets do. It's perfectly logical that way. Even with lower speeds a turret BS might have trouble track smaller targets, especially when TDed, but what about missile counters? That patch is an un-presidented missile buff, with missiles getting way stronger for pvp tho no anti-missile ewar is introduced. Ranged/sniping combat and ewar ships are also hugely buffed, with falcons and sniping BSs having all the time to either warp out or kill their slow targets before getting target, or survive "forever" against a meh ceptor - the only thing that can directly approach em. I don't see balance "added" with that patch - due to extreme changes. I think that changes are in order. Missiles should be buffed against nanoes etc - especially T2 precisions. But nurfing speed in overall requires overhauling a lot of ships that won't change. And the facts that co-existed the nano era and made nano ships so iritating will still remain = VERY wealthy players with HUGELY expensive fittings (pod included) getting together against un-prepared and usually unexperienced players. It was 10+ nano-"" roaming gangs, now it will be 10+ RR BS with multiple falcons or even worse, multiple spider tanking drakes with falcons Join the Biggest Greek Corp!* www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Terraform Gallente Recreation Of The World	Posted - 2008.08.03 08:42:00 - [62] The speed nerf is still better than the huge amount of nano. Atleast with the new changes people CAN use snipers and all the other ships again without facing a blob of nano-ships that can pick you off one by one, or just run when the going gets tough. "but there are nano-counters!" so? most of the counters does nothing to actually kill the nanos, more like to just chase them away - they come back 4 mins. after with a few more people instead. People are whining so much about how every ship will be sooo boring and slow, but HACs and recons were never designed to blast away at such speeds anyway, so you want a unintended "feature" to work for you? good luck.
Red Thunder Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.08.03 08:48:00 - [63] Originally by: Terraform The speed nerf is still better than the huge amount of nano. Atleast with the new changes people CAN use snipers and all the other ships again without facing a blob of nano-ships that can pick you off one by one, or just run when the going gets tough. "but there are nano-counters!" so? most of the counters does nothing to actually kill the nanos, more like to just chase them away - they come back 4 mins. after with a few more people instead. People are whining so much about how every ship will be sooo boring and slow, but HACs and recons were never designed to blast away at such speeds anyway, so you want a unintended "feature" to work for you? good luck. wtf, of course the counters kill nanos unless you are a very *****ed noob who cannot kill a webbed and neuted vaga. before nanoing was a viable option, hardly anybody bothered to fly hacs in normal pvp, they just werent worth it. Now they have actually been nerfed WORSE than they were back then, guess whats gona happen Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines*
Terraform Gallente Recreation Of The World	Posted - 2008.08.03 09:08:00 - [64] see you keep saying it's all doom and despair, but I got a feeling that HACs will still be used, just in a different way.
Red Thunder Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.08.03 09:24:00 - [65] well they didnt get used last time they couldnt be nanoed.... Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.03 09:40:00 - [66] Edited by: The Djego on 03/08/2008 09:40:47 Originally by: Red Thunder well they didnt get used last time they couldnt be nanoed.... They did, and they work in this field now far better than before. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Red Thunder Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.08.03 09:58:00 - [67] iv tested them, the tier 2 bcs do a better job at...everything (except ishtar), and are twice as cheap Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 10:02:00 - [68] Originally by: Red Thunder iv tested them, the tier 2 bcs do a better job at...everything (except ishtar), and are twice as cheap Except, of course, you know, HACs have double bonuses, T2 resists, far superior tracking and usefulness against smaller targets, and can get within a Battleship's range... Oh, and they don't really cost twice as much nowadays. Then you're comparing an auctioned Geddon to a Sacrilege or somesuch.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.03 10:03:00 - [69] Originally by: Red Thunder iv tested them, the tier 2 bcs do a better job at...everything (except ishtar), and are twice as cheap Test a BC vs a Frig, or a BS. Hac does fare better in this areas. BCs are now back to the anti Cruiser role a bit more giving her better tank/Gank(like Frig\Destroyer). Since it is now easyer to take them down with Frigs(a bit harder to take them down with BS, but this allways was to easy in my opinion). ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Delichon Perkone	Posted - 2008.08.03 10:11:00 - [70] Edited by: Delichon on 03/08/2008 10:12:34 Originally by: Maeltstome So basically what your sayiong is we ignore the masses? So, you say 1232 against the nerf 569 for the nerf out of around 300 000 accounts Yes, that vote ignores the masses. Those masses, that don't spend their time bulltalking on forums. Originally by: Red Thunder iv tested them, the tier 2 bcs do a better job at...everything (except ishtar), and are twice as cheap Good luck hitting anything at 150 km with Ferox instead of Eagle. Kthnxbye ------------------------------------------ All nerfs are meant to hurt you personally. They will be nerfing you directly next. EVE A new game every 6 months. (c) Atomos Darksun

Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2008.08.03 11:19:00 - [71] Originally by: Red Thunder wtf, of course the counters kill nanos unless you are a very ******ed noob who cannot kill a webbed and neuted vaga. before nanoing was a viable option, hardly anybody bothered to fly hacs in normal pvp, they just werent worth it. Now they have actually been nerfed WORSE than they were back then, guess whats gona happen Ok now you are really losing it. Did you even play before nano was a widespread phenomenon? HACs were in use plenty in PVP despite prices being MUCH higher than they are now, and they performed admirably. Just because they are not an escape guarantee anymore doesn't mean they suck. At least not for anyone not minding to lose his ship regularly. I do see the issue of Tier2 BCs and Battleships offering too much power for too little price when compared to HACs, but that has neither anything to do with the nano debate nor is anyone stopping you from declining to buy HACs at their inflated prices and thus maybe driving prices down (Though this might need more work in the T2 component department too). And if you are reading this, you have arrived at the signature without noticing...
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.03 11:57:00 - [72] Originally by: Terraform "but there are nano-counters!" so? most of the counters does nothing to actually kill the nanos, more like to just chase them away - they come back 4 mins. after with a few more people instead. Best counter that actually KILLED nanos in masses was to have a BIGGER nano gang. Its the same problem with falcons. To win against 5 falcons, the BEST solution is to bring 10 instead. Wich is why they going to nerf that next. ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 12:13:00 - [73] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Originally by: Red Thunder wtf, of course the counters kill nanos unless you are a very ******ed noob who cannot kill a webbed and neuted vaga. before nanoing was a viable option, hardly anybody bothered to fly hacs in normal pvp, they just werent worth it. Now they have actually been nerfed WORSE than they were back then, guess whats gona happen Ok now you are really losing it. Did you even play before nano was a widespread phenomenon? HACs were in use plenty in PVP despite prices being MUCH higher than they are now, and they performed admirably. Just because they are not an escape guarantee anymore doesn't mean they suck. At least not for anyone not minding to lose his ship regularly. I do see the issue of Tier2 BCs and Battleships offering too much power for too little price when compared to HACs, but that has neither anything to do with the nano debate nor is anyone stopping you from declining to buy HACs at their inflated prices and thus maybe driving prices down (Though this might need more work in the T2 component department too). More well thought-out comments and constructive thinking. T2 ships should be slightly cheaper to buy and easier to build, and perhaps receive some boosts to let them compete more with battlecruisers and battleships. Not that I don't think that there should be another class of T2 battleships as well. Something a little more direct, and less vulnerable alone, but certainly not sporting a cloak or the sheer firepower of a Marauder...
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.03 12:43:00 - [74] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Terraform "but there are nano-counters!" so? most of the counters does nothing to actually kill the nanos, more like to just chase them away - they come back 4 mins. after with a few more people instead. Best counter that actually KILLED nanos in masses was to have a BIGGER nano gang. Its the same problem with falcons. To win against 5 falcons, the BEST solution is to bring 10 instead. Wich is why they going to nerf that next. Yeap - blobing, that's what's the problem... U cannot get a falcon 1 vs. 1 unless u use a weird ECCM fit etc = lose a vast amount of your pvp versatility for it. So u had to blob it, with multiple tacklers and at least a strong, un-jammed damage dealing ship. The same goes for a Vaga - u cannot kill it easily 1 vs. 1 unless u are a nano-killin Recon/HAS, and even then I wouldn't call it "easy" for most pilots. So if blobbing was and is a sure counter for certain strong tactics, like jamming and nano-ing, then fighting fire with fire is in order... Falcon blobs are becoming more and more popular, just like nano-blobs were (are): ok, a 10-20 man gang is not much of a blob, but it's very strong when it consists almost entirely of T2 Ships: nano HASs, nano Recons, falcons etc. Add some snakes to the equation and u got yourself a deal. Just like getting 10+ well organized RR BSs together, along with some logistic support, a HIC and 1-2 tackers, make up for ultra capable empire->0.0 gate camps, almost unbeatable. Some combos require more than 3-4 times the numbers in order to score some kills and scatter the enemy, and gathering 40-50+ men is not as easy as some imply. So fighting fire with more fire is what always does the trick...nano-ing could help when you were out-numbered or the fight was less favorable then u thought, so does ECM. Totally nerfing high speed ships will reduce ppl flying in small gangs even more: most likely they will be roaming gangs relying on falcons or other ECM ships to flee, just like nanos supposed to do... And most ships won't be able to solo farming ravens ratting in 0.0 space... I don't thing that these changes balance anything: they just swift "fashion of the month" ships and tactics around. I also believe - as stated above - that missiles will get an huge buff with no counters, while totally breaking some HASs/Recons that where viably only through nano fits... Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:03:00 - [75] Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 03/08/2008 13:03:37 Originally by: Diomidis Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Terraform "but there are nano-counters!" so? most of the counters does nothing to actually kill the nanos, more like to just chase them away - they come back 4 mins. after with a few more people instead. Best counter that actually KILLED nanos in masses was to have a BIGGER nano gang. Its the same problem with falcons. To win against 5 falcons, the BEST solution is to bring 10 instead. Wich is why they going to nerf that next. Yeap - blobing, that's what's the problem... U cannot get a falcon 1 vs. 1 unless u use a weird ECCM fit etc = lose a vast amount of your pvp versatility for it. So u had to blob it, with multiple tacklers and at least a strong, un-jammed damage dealing ship. The same goes for a Vaga - u cannot kill it easily 1 vs. 1 unless u are a nano-killin Recon/HAS, and even then I wouldn't call it "easy" for most pilots. So if blobbing was and is a sure counter for certain strong tactics, like jamming and nano-ing, then fighting fire with fire is in order... Falcon blobs are becoming more and more popular, just like nano-blobs were (are): ok, a 10-20 man gang is not much of a blob, but it's very strong when it consists almost entirely of T2 Ships: nano HASs, nano Recons, falcons etc. Add some snakes to the equation and u got yourself a deal. Just like getting 10+ well organized RR BSs together, along with some logistic support, a HIC and 1-2 tackers, make up for ultra capable empire->0.0 gate camps, almost unbeatable. Some combos require more than 3-4 times the numbers in order to score some kills and scatter the enemy, and gathering 40-50+ men is not as easy as some imply. So fighting fire with more fire is what always does the trick...nano-ing could help when you were out-numbered or the fight was less favorable then u thought, so does ECM. Totally nerfing high speed ships will reduce ppl flying in small gangs even more: most likely they will be roaming gangs relying on falcons or other ECM ships to flee, just like nanos supposed to do... And most ships won't be able to solo farming ravens ratting in 0.0 space... I don't thing that these changes balance anything: they just swift "fashion of the month" ships and tactics around. I also believe - as stated above - that missiles will get an huge buff with no counters, while totally breaking some HASs/Recons that where viably only through nano fits... Missiles did get a boost by this but got nerfed in latest patch to adjust to new speeds. People will still make fast gangs but now they will consist of AFs and EAS and they will kill ratting ravens just fine. What we wont have now is nano hac gangs that can engage pretty much everything they feel like and escape everything they dont feel like engaging. Its too versitile and simple. Good riddance. You touch an important issue also. Falcons and rr. Thing is we will probably see an increase in the use of falcons and they might be up for a nerf too. But problem is that you cant nerf ECM if youre not going to nerf rr. RR would be unbreakable without ecm. Problem is that ECM breaks some of the small gang fun in eve. I know not everyone participates in such pvp but it is a shame to let it die because of falcon alts. I also dont belive this is the end of smaller roaming gangs in 0.0. I remember 2 years ago when we used to roam in random ships from frig to bc, no nano and do just fine. We were a little more careful and we did just fine without getting trapped by blobs after hitting targets. ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Boz Well Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:16:00 - [76] You can run tanky small gangs in poorly defended space, sure. But in space protected by a strong alliance, jump bridges, etc. you're likely just going to get boxed in and not be able to make a run for it. You could have done this pre-patch, nothing was stopping you. Your plated HAC prior to this patch could roam just as well as it will be able to after the patch. All you're getting with this patch is less versatility, because they overnerfed (as usual for CCP) and now nano fits aren't even viable. If roaming gangs just switch to AF's, well.. AF's did need a boost, and perhaps speed was the right one.
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:19:00 - [77] Originally by: Boz Well You can run tanky small gangs in poorly defended space, sure. But in space protected by a strong alliance, jump bridges, etc. you're likely just going to get boxed in and not be able to make a run for it. You could have done this pre-patch, nothing was stopping you. Your plated HAC prior to this patch could roam just as well as it will be able to after the patch. All you're getting with this patch is less versatility, because they overnerfed (as usual for CCP) and now nano fits aren't even viable. If roaming gangs just switch to AF's, well.. AF's did need a boost, and perhaps speed was the right one. 7-8 AFs can easily get 1000+dps. There is not much that can tank that for any longer period of time. People will use frigs for guerilla tactics, just as it was intended. I see no problems. ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Diomidis Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:20:00 - [78] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Missiles did get a boost by this but got nerfed in latest patch to adjust to new speeds. People will still make fast gangs but now they will consist of AFs and EAS and they will kill ratting ravens just fine. What we wont have now is nano hac gangs that can engage pretty much everything they feel like and escape everything they dont feel like engaging. Its too versitile and simple. Good riddance. You touch an important issue also. Falcons and rr. Thing is we will probably see an increase in the use of falcons and they might be up for a nerf too. But problem is that you cant nerf ECM if youre not going to nerf rr. RR would be unbreakable without ecm. Problem is that ECM breaks some of the small gang fun in eve. I know not everyone participates in such pvp but it is a shame to let it die because of falcon alts. I also dont belive this is the end of smaller roaming gangs in 0.0. I remember 2 years ago when we used to roam in random ships from frig to bc, no nano and do just fine. We were a little more careful and we did just fine without getting trapped by blobs after hitting targets. Killing a ratting BS with a T2 pvp cruiser was not THAT difficult - u didn't need a vaga for that, a Rifter could do it with rat help ffs...so of course multiple AFs / EAS where and will be able to do it too. Rat-hunter, hunting-Nanos weren't thought overpowered and hated cause of their dps, but due to the fact they could both speed tank/perma scram ratting BSs (or pvp BSs without neut) and outrun any reinforcement's coming to the BSs aid... Also about "2 years ago etc"... Yeah, I know how it was, but EVE has grown a lot since then...most pvpers have 2-year-old alts now, with mains aging well and strong Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:34:00 - [79] Originally by: Boz Well You can run tanky small gangs in poorly defended space, sure. But in space protected by a strong alliance, jump bridges, etc. you're likely just going to get boxed in and not be able to make a run for it. You could have done this pre-patch, nothing was stopping you. Your plated HAC prior to this patch could roam just as well as it will be able to after the patch. All you're getting with this patch is less versatility, because they overnerfed (as usual for CCP) and now nano fits aren't even viable. If roaming gangs just switch to AF's, well.. AF's did need a boost, and perhaps speed was the right one. You have noticed that they are hoping to let Black Ops ignore cynos jammers, right? Personally, I just think that all the reactions on all sides are so damn extreme, and that people are neither considering how ill this may tilt things. Unless they even out the implant and overdrive issues and apply the nerf bat to the polycarbs and stacking penalties and nano modules instead, and the bloody MWDs. Smoothen things out. And, most significantly, missiles need to be adjusted and/or we need some sort of anti-missile ECM alternative.
Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:45:00 - [80] if you know better about balancing EVE why aren't you working for CCP? yeah thought so gtfo

bluechimera Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:45:00 - [81] You know what annoys me? Sure the nerf itself does...but so do the people on both sides of the argument (those pro-speed who are just posting total crap, and those anti-speed who refuse to admit that speed isnt beatable, ie pilot skill is not a factor) Using the most common anti-speed arguments, the conclusion we reach is that a nanofleet should not lose to a conventional BS+support fleet. Lets look at two recent Tri fights that involved a mostly nano/speed fleet on one side or the other, based on the anti-speed theory, the nanofleet in each engagement should win, lets find out! Triumvirate in nanos: http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=kill_related&kll_id=140893 - Ok, outnumbered speed fleet, in hostile system with hostiles supported by caps and super caps....speed fleet wins. Looking for the the anti-speed argument I guess. Lets compare this to the Northern Nappers speed fleet... NC in nanos: http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=kill_related&kll_id=141332 Wait a minute...199 pilots (+50ish showing up on tris side for some reason) means roughly 250 northerners in speed setups, attacking a smaller force made up of roughly 50% BS and 50% support, with remotely assigned fighters. More pilots + speed fit, means they should have won right? Right? So whats the difference? In both cases the defending body knew the other was coming...im both cases capitals were present and in both cases Tri was outnumbered. Clearly being in nanos cannot be stopped and flying it ensures victory...right? I mean, pilot skill and experience surely has no place in determining a ship/setup effectiveness. What is my point? My point is that just because some speed freaks catch you somewhere, and kill you because your particular ship/group didnt bring the ability to counteract their method (and if you dont know what those are by now you deserved to die anyway) does not mean its overpowered. I means that in what is essentially a massive game of paper-rock-sissors you lost. I mean really...most large & slow things, nanofleets favorite targets, have an extra high slot after their weapon fit...in alot of cases its easy as hell to fit a heavy neut..and you know what that means? that means 90% of the time you can neut the guy tackling you for his friend and leave. But whatever. This has been said before and all both sides do is cover their ears and go LALALALAL I CANT HEAR YOUUUU because *****ing suits them. But here is a heads up. The people skilled enough to make nano ships/fleets look rediculously strong, are going to be just as rediculous in whatever they come up with to use in a slower would. You are still going to be just as dead. ------------------------------------------ I suqz at sigs, someone save me!
Boz Well Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:46:00 - [82] Speaking only for myself Aleus, my reaction is strong because all the other balancing things CCP is talking about are indefinite and in the future. We might look at missiles. We might look at black ops. In the meantime, we're completely changing things around and nerfing the hell out of nano HAC's. T2 nano HAC's really weren't invincible, and especially if they just changed polycarbs, it'd have been fine. Adding more counters makes them even more vulnerable. Basically, rather than nerfing the shit out of them, tweak them so that they're balanced and still viable. And I guess part of why I dislike this patch so much is that I just have little faith in them to do the smart thing, haha. Look how they justified the patch... the speeds based on "average" nano gear including t2 and a full high-grade snake set. And look at things they've overnerfed in the past. In other games I've played, when the patch notes came out I could read them and say hey, that's a good idea. In this game, I tend to read the and think WTF were they thinking. At least that's true with parts of the patch notes. There are some changes upcoming that I like (AF's needed something), but other things go way too far (nano hac's didn't need to be nerfed into oblivion). I guess I see it as changing the game way too much, but without a clear goal in mind and without any real good justification. Slight tweaking was needed, but they hit nano's with a sledgehammer instead. Other things are screwy, but that's indefinite and might get looked at in the future. Meh. I remain a pessimist when it comes to this patch, heh.
Boz Well Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:47:00 - [83] Well said blue.
Boz Well Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:48:00 - [84] Originally by: Stab Wounds if you know better about balancing EVE why aren't you working for CCP? yeah thought so gtfo Because I'd rather live in the States and make way more money?
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:51:00 - [85] Originally by: Boz Well And I guess part of why I dislike this patch so much is that I just have little faith in them to do the smart thing, haha. Look how they justified the patch... the speeds based on "average" nano gear including t2 and a full high-grade snake set. And look at things they've overnerfed in the past. Well, even the strongest pilots need to be possible to shoot down. Of course, the whole way this turns, with polycarbs and MWDs standing out as extreme, HACs lessening in usefulness, there still being a lack of a counter for missiles, and nano ships becoming unviable and fragile, the whole equation is like an ill-balanced see-saw. It's either down completely on one end, or the other.
Sabine Demsky Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:53:00 - [86] Originally by: Red Thunder top speeds with t2 and lvl 5: vaga - 3.2kms ishtar - 2kms sac - 2.1kms rapier - 2.2kms curse - 1.8kms crow and other ceptors - 5kish dictors - 3kms seriosly ccp WTF these ships are now useless!!! vaga is too slow in orbit to evade missile damage ishtar, sac, rapier, curse are all too slow to avoid any damage even in a straight line, so there seems no point in flying them when t1 bs's have better dps, tank, and are cheaper Those speeds look great to me. It is missiles that need to be nerfed.
Weeka Amarr Tetragrammaton	Posted - 2008.08.03 13:53:00 - [87] Originally by: Red Thunder well looking at the voting now there is OVER 2 times more people against the nerf than for it hahhahhahahahahahhahaaha Well more than 2 times the people not using nanos in pvp were using ot before, so what did ya expect? MWD is mandatory in pvp, and that's crap to begin with .. without nano yourself you couldn't really web a nanoship, you couldn't scram it, you couldn't hit it, you couldn't do anything to it.. balance may occur, but I wouldn't hope for it all to get cancled. CCP looked at nano and saw :
Red Thunder Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.08.03 16:17:00 - [88] Originally by: Sabine Demsky Originally by: Red Thunder top speeds with t2 and lvl 5: vaga - 3.2kms ishtar - 2kms sac - 2.1kms rapier - 2.2kms curse - 1.8kms crow and other ceptors - 5kish dictors - 3kms seriosly ccp WTF these ships are now useless!!! vaga is too slow in orbit to evade missile damage ishtar, sac, rapier, curse are all too slow to avoid any damage even in a straight line, so there seems no point in flying them when t1 bs's have better dps, tank, and are cheaper Those speeds look great to me. It is missiles that need to be nerfed. yea id be fine with that, then nano would be a viable option for pvp again Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines
Meridius Dex Amarr 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.08.03 16:40:00 - [89] Sorry, couldn't help myself. -- Meridius Dex -- Amarr = EVE on Hard setting
Rumai Ning	Posted - 2008.08.03 16:50:00 - [90] Originally by: Red Thunder Originally by: Sabine Demsky Originally by: Red Thunder top speeds with t2 and lvl 5: vaga - 3.2kms ishtar - 2kms sac - 2.1kms rapier - 2.2kms curse - 1.8kms crow and other ceptors - 5kish dictors - 3kms seriosly ccp WTF these ships are now useless!!! vaga is too slow in orbit to evade missile damage ishtar, sac, rapier, curse are all too slow to avoid any damage even in a straight line, so there seems no point in flying them when t1 bs's have better dps, tank, and are cheaper Those speeds look great to me. It is missiles that need to be nerfed. yea id be fine with that, then nano would be a viable option for pvp again How about instead of using your brutish troll thinking, you use that snicker "brain" of yours to get defender missiles fixed instead of nerfing caldari, AGAIN, Hmm? Put your whinnying skills to good use. I'll let that simmer for a while to see if it gets through to you. But seriously, can I just get what I want?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.