EVE Search - nano nerf, what gets me

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Ships and Modules

nano nerf, what gets me

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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

Author	Topic
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 12:32:00 - [61] Originally by: Gimpb Edited by: Gimpb on 03/08/2008 12:04:40 I don't know about the whole blob vs nano thing. People say "nanos keep blobs in check" but one of the best ways for a group of newer players to make themselves a hard target for nanos is to fly in large groups of BSs. So at least to some extent, the people in the blob have more or less the same mindset as the nano gang--they fit so their opponent can't really do anything to them and thus you end up with one big standoff, no one gets blown up, and it's a borring day. The real reason I don't get the whole nanos vs blob thing is that killing nanos in 0.0 isn't really hard at all, I think most alliances have figured out how to swat them down without too much trouble if they do anything but run. They can run around and try to pick off miners or whatever but if someone gets killed by a nano the intel channel warned about 10 jumps before-hand, I don't think the ship being "nano" is the reason they died. On the other side of the coin though, I can imagine dealing with nanos in low sec where bubbles are off limits and gate guns can take down a rapier in short order would be a pain. Low sec is also where many of the newer PvPers are so I can imagine it being a frustrating situation. Why is everyone saying the roaming light gang is dead because of this though? Ok, so you're not going to be doing it in HACs... but that doesn't keep you from doing it. Bring out your bombers, EASs, inties, fleet recons, AFs, etc and go have a good time doing it with the ships that were designed for this sort of thing from the beggining--frigates and cloakers. All of these ships except AFs are already good for guerilla stuff and AFs are getting the speed to make them good... and best of all that speed will mean much more now that they won't get steamrolled by HACs going the same speed. Here is a man who's caught hang of things. In short, most if not all nanos are scavengers, something their limitations mean they have to be, disabling and picking off what they can and ruining the day for the people they come across who don't happen to have the skillpoints or protection, or when they happen to have backup nearby. It will be good to be rid of all this...
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.03 12:38:00 - [62] Originally by: Gimpb Edited by: Gimpb on 03/08/2008 12:04:40 I don't know about the whole blob vs nano thing. People say "nanos keep blobs in check" but one of the best ways for a group of newer players to make themselves a hard target for nanos is to fly in large groups of BSs. So at least to some extent, the people in the blob have more or less the same mindset as the nano gang--they fit so their opponent can't really do anything to them and thus you end up with one big standoff, no one gets blown up, and it's a borring day. So to me it's kinda silly for both sides to sit there and point at the other as the problem, it's the same line of thinking just with a different amount of skillpoints. Now it has lightened up some of the fleets seen in 0.0 a bit, and that's a good thing, even though it's more or less just nanos, inties, and recons (and nano recons) that have been added. The real reason I don't get the whole nanos vs blob thing is that killing nanos in 0.0 isn't really hard at all, I think most alliances have figured out how to swat them down without too much trouble if they do anything but run. They can run around and try to pick off miners or whatever but if someone gets killed by a nano the intel channel warned about 10 jumps before-hand, I don't think the ship being "nano" is the reason they died. On the other side of the coin though, I can imagine dealing with nanos in low sec where bubbles are off limits and gate guns can take down a rapier in short order would be a pain. Low sec is also where many of the newer PvPers are so I can imagine it being a frustrating situation. Why is everyone saying the roaming light gang is dead because of this though? Ok, so you're not going to be doing it in HACs... but that doesn't keep you from doing it. Bring out your bombers, EASs, inties, fleet recons, AFs, etc and go have a good time doing it with the ships that were designed for this sort of thing from the beggining--frigates and cloakers. All of these ships except AFs are already good for guerilla stuff and AFs are getting the speed to make them good... and best of all that speed will mean much more now that they won't get steamrolled by HACs going the same speed. Agreed. The thing about the whole nano vs blob thing that people talk about is bullshit. Nano gangs never fight and win against similar sized gangs. Nano gangs themselves are blobbing whatever they can catch and then running from the blob. To say nanos are a counter to blobs is not true. SBs with bombs, now that you can call a blob counter for example. ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Scadoo	Posted - 2008.08.03 16:06:00 - [63] Before anyone tells me that I am a noob, I'll admit to it first. My question is, why is it so hard just to reduce the effect of polycarbons and take snake implants out of the game altogether? Just give back the money that was spent for those who still own them and pretend they didn't exist? I have to say, just playing with the numbers in EFT, I don't much like the proposed patch because it seems too much like cutting off your arm to cure a hangnail.
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.03 16:37:00 - [64] Originally by: Scadoo Before anyone tells me that I am a noob, I'll admit to it first. My question is, why is it so hard just to reduce the effect of polycarbons and take snake implants out of the game altogether? Just give back the money that was spent for those who still own them and pretend they didn't exist? I have to say, just playing with the numbers in EFT, I don't much like the proposed patch because it seems too much like cutting off your arm to cure a hangnail. Because even without those mods speed was broken. ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.08.03 18:59:00 - [65] Originally by: Aleus Stygian Finally, when did the Muninn become a sniper? And thats the problem with the anti-nano brigade. Your crying that nanos need tobe nerfed, or better yet removed from the game yet, you didnt even know that something as common knowledge as a muninn operates in a sniper role. Dont get me wrong, nanos need to be balanced. Nerf implants, make MWDS a module that cant be overloaded and perhaps lower their speed boost amount and balance polycarbs. Job done.
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:13:00 - [66] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Agreed. The thing about the whole nano vs blob thing that people talk about is bullshit. Nano gangs never fight and win against similar sized gangs. Nano gangs themselves are blobbing whatever they can catch and then running from the blob. To say nanos are a counter to blobs is not true. SBs with bombs, now that you can call a blob counter for example. Lyria I read some or your posts, like the one ive quoted, and i really believe that you dont understand the whole nano vs blob concept. As for the part about nanos blobbing, thats how hit and run works Hitting a lone miner or ratter and then getting out before the cavalry arrives. Infact crying about nanos blobbing is laughable tbh. Blobbing makes up the most part of pvp weather it be a nano gang, mixed class roaming gang, big ass fleet or a gate camp.
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:17:00 - [67] Originally by: Aleus Stygian In short, most if not all nanos are scavengers, something their limitations mean they have to be, disabling and picking off what they can and ruining the day for the people they come across who don't happen to have the skillpoints or protection, or when they happen to have backup nearby. It will be good to be rid of all this... So going by that logic i presume that ccp will be nerfing gate camps next then? Since they pick off what they can and then run when their scout reports any sizeable force coming for them. Tbh avoiding nano gangs is easily done. You dont need skillpoints to be able to read the ingame map or corp/alliance chat/intel channels.
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:21:00 - [68] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Scadoo Before anyone tells me that I am a noob, I'll admit to it first. My question is, why is it so hard just to reduce the effect of polycarbons and take snake implants out of the game altogether? Just give back the money that was spent for those who still own them and pretend they didn't exist? I have to say, just playing with the numbers in EFT, I don't much like the proposed patch because it seems too much like cutting off your arm to cure a hangnail. Because even without those mods speed was broken. Speed isnt broken without those mods noob. Its because of those rigs/implants and overheating that speed is broken. Sort those mods out and speed is balanced. Or CCP could listen to nublets like you and just break the game instead
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:39:00 - [69] Originally by: carleyjones Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Scadoo Before anyone tells me that I am a noob, I'll admit to it first. My question is, why is it so hard just to reduce the effect of polycarbons and take snake implants out of the game altogether? Just give back the money that was spent for those who still own them and pretend they didn't exist? I have to say, just playing with the numbers in EFT, I don't much like the proposed patch because it seems too much like cutting off your arm to cure a hangnail. Because even without those mods speed was broken. Speed isnt broken without those mods noob. Its because of those rigs/implants and overheating that speed is broken. Sort those mods out and speed is balanced. Or CCP could listen to nublets like you and just break the game instead Hah, wtf? Are you stupid for real? Even WITHOUT those mods frigs were easily reaching speeds where they would avoid ALL light missiles and warrior IIs. IT WAS BROKEN. Catfish? ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:41:00 - [70] Please, don't ever mention overheating and 'speed broken' in the same sentence. Tip of the day: overheating is a temporary effect before all your mids, and therefore your ship, die. It's also more used for catching faster targets, as overheating defensively doesn't work. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint

Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:45:00 - [71] I love how people fling the word "blob" around like it has any meaning at all They have more numbers! Stupid blobbers! They'd be dead if they had less than us! In reality, no one really blobs because they feel they need to. Bigger alliances do it because they have more people than you do. When 30 guys "x!" up to take on a 20 man gang, does the FC tell the last 10 guys to **** off because that would be blobbing? Rarely. Did nanos counter "blobs"? Of course not. Nano oriented ships could rarely take on the same sized gangs. They were designed to attack lone players, or players who wondered away from the group, which in itself is the pure essence of "blobbing". I do think that, after the patch, we will see a sharp rise in the recon roaming gang. Which, to be honest, is much more deadly than nanos could ever hope to be, even now.
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:52:00 - [72] Originally by: Atsuko Ratu I do think that, after the patch, we will see a sharp rise in the recon roaming gang. Which, to be honest, is much more deadly than nanos could ever hope to be, even now. Well thats odd. Why didnt we see alot more of these "more deadly then nanos could ever hope to be" recon roaming gangs instead of all these nano gangs? ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.08.03 19:57:00 - [73] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Well thats odd. Why didnt we see alot more of these "more deadly then nanos could ever hope to be" recon roaming gangs instead of all these nano gangs? Because to be honest, flying a nano is just plain funner than flying any other ship currently in game. At least, to a lot of people. Some of my funnest fights were in my crow, the only fast ship I fly
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:19:00 - [74] Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 03/08/2008 20:22:56 Originally by: Scadoo Before anyone tells me that I am a noob, I'll admit to it first. My question is, why is it so hard just to reduce the effect of polycarbons and take snake implants out of the game altogether? Just give back the money that was spent for those who still own them and pretend they didn't exist? I have to say, just playing with the numbers in EFT, I don't much like the proposed patch because it seems too much like cutting off your arm to cure a hangnail. Because what you're proposing would be just as extreme a measure, when simply reducing the efficiency and limiting the amount of modules and rigs of the same typ that can be mounted on a ship, or increasing the stacking penalty, is a much better way to address the problem without practically chopping certain players' fingers off, with all they have paid and missioned and skill trained for. Not to mention that the whole issue really stems from all these nano modules simply providing the underlying stacking percentage bonuses. It's the over-the-top thrust from Microwarpdrives that is the real problem. Originally by: carleyjones And thats the problem with the anti-nano brigade. Your crying that nanos need tobe nerfed, or better yet removed from the game yet, you didnt even know that something as common knowledge as a muninn operates in a sniper role. Are you for real? Minmatar and artillery have enough problems as it is. The Muninn's a lousy nano-ship, but at least it gives you a range bonus that makes autocannons usable at a fast orbit, where you still don't have to get near enough to worry about webbers. DPS, you little ***. Avoiding nano gangs is not* easily done, since they've already proven themselves capable of venturing far into defended, supposedly secure, territory. Originally by: carleyjones So going by that logic i presume that ccp will be nerfing gate camps next then? Since they pick off what they can and then run when their scout reports any sizeable force coming for them. Tbh avoiding nano gangs is easily done. You dont need skillpoints to be able to read the ingame map or corp/alliance chat/intel channels. You're oversimplifying. Grossly. Not everybody even has scouts or is in a large corp, and with gatecamps you have a good chance of using tactics to turn things or getting out before you're toast. And not everybody reveals themselves when camping, or sits things out for a long time and in the open. And those channels keep check of far short of everything. Originally by: Atsuko Ratu I love how people fling the word "blob" around like it has any meaning at all They have more numbers! Stupid blobbers! They'd be dead if they had less than us! In reality, no one really blobs because they feel they need to. Bigger alliances do it because they have more people than you do. When 30 guys "x!" up to take on a 20 man gang, does the FC tell the last 10 guys to ** off because that would be blobbing? Rarely. Did nanos counter "blobs"? Of course not. Nano oriented ships could rarely take on the same sized gangs. They were designed to attack lone players, or players who wondered away from the group, which in itself is the pure essence of "blobbing". This man speaks truth. And that sort of scavenging, attacking lone players and particularly people outside of alliances and large corps, can costs those people so much that they don't get a chance of growing and facing up to those alliances or corporations. Not to mention keeping them from learning anything about combat other than 'Nanos r gud'. Originally by:** Atsuko Ratu Because to be honest, flying a nano is just plain funner than flying any other ship currently in game. At least, to a lot of people. Some of my funnest fights were in my crow, the only fast ship I fly I completely disagree. It's a rather extreme sort of play style that quickly becomes unimaginative and rules out a lot of tactics and approaches, and the usefulness of many ships.
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:23:00 - [75] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: carleyjones Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Scadoo Before anyone tells me that I am a noob, I'll admit to it first. My question is, why is it so hard just to reduce the effect of polycarbons and take snake implants out of the game altogether? Just give back the money that was spent for those who still own them and pretend they didn't exist? I have to say, just playing with the numbers in EFT, I don't much like the proposed patch because it seems too much like cutting off your arm to cure a hangnail. Because even without those mods speed was broken. Speed isnt broken without those mods noob. Its because of those rigs/implants and overheating that speed is broken. Sort those mods out and speed is balanced. Or CCP could listen to nublets like you and just break the game instead Hah, wtf? Are you stupid for real? Even WITHOUT those mods frigs were easily reaching speeds where they would avoid ALL light missiles and warrior IIs. IT WAS BROKEN. Catfish? lol Lyria your a joker! Speed isnt broken without those mods. If you believe otherwise log on to tranq and try it out.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari VSP Corp.	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:31:00 - [76] I'm pretty sure the interceptors role was to tackle ships. Why should they be kill-able with 5 light drones? They already had to deal with any BS or curse neuting them. Falcons ECMing them. Arazus damping them. Huggins webbing them. Capital ships smartbombing them. Snipers sniping them. Anti-interceptor 'ceptor fits. Cerb's precision lights And now we get to add any ship with a drone bay
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:39:00 - [77] Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 03/08/2008 20:39:33 Originally by: carleyjones lol Lyria your a joker! Speed isnt broken without those mods. If you believe otherwise log on to tranq and try it out. Speed is broken without those mods. Still, it's clear that we have different definitions of what's a 'broken' speed. I'll just phrase it quickly... Anything but a 'ceptor or a fast frigate clocking around or past 2.5 km/s is broken from my point of view. They should slow things down overall for this reason. However, they should also slow missiles and explosion velocities down accordingly. And drones. Or make the drones unable to track the ships. Because what Atsuko is saying is an issue, yes. Mostly though, I think things would be even easier to balance out if there were some anti-missile and anti-drone types of ECM.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.08.03 20:51:00 - [78] Speed wasn't broken. Some people just have a weird sense of what should be reasonable speed. I mean, calling 3 km/s fast??? Once I was actually even acused of using a "nano-Drake" when I was doing 1 km/s. That's just a Drake with a mwd slapped on it, no speed mods. Originally by: CCP Wrangler We are pleased to aim! Or was that the other way around?
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:13:00 - [79] Originally by: Aleus Stygian It's the over-the-top thrust from Microwarpdrives that is the real problem. I feel feint typing this, but thats the first thing you've posted that actually makes any sense. Originally by: Aleus Stygian Originally by: carleyjones And thats the problem with the anti-nano brigade. Your crying that nanos need tobe nerfed, or better yet removed from the game yet, you didnt even know that something as common knowledge as a muninn operates in a sniper role. Are you for real? Minmatar and artillery have enough problems as it is. The Muninn's a lousy nano-ship, but at least it gives you a range bonus that makes autocannons usable at a fast orbit, where you still don't have to get near enough to worry about webbers. DPS, you little **. True the muninn needs some loving and artys need looking at. But the muninn is first and foremost a sniper ship. It doesnt nano well because it isnt meant to be nano'd. The sniping role is something this ship is actually fairly good at. As for using autos and not worrying about webbers your joking right? right? Even with the ships bonuses the optimal of autocannons is well within webb range. Originally by:** Aleus Stygian Avoiding nano gangs is not easily done, since they've already proven themselves capable of venturing far into defended, supposedly secure, territory. Unless your unlucky enough to stumble into a nano gang by accident avoiding nano gangs is easy for anyone with a clue. Even if your in low sec/0.0 and too lazy to read the intel channels you should have local open. If a neutral/hostile enters local you get safe or at the very least be aligned and ready to warp for when local spikes. You do fly with local open? Originally by: Aleus Stygian Originally by: carleyjones So going by that logic i presume that ccp will be nerfing gate camps next then? Since they pick off what they can and then run when their scout reports any sizeable force coming for them. You're oversimplifying. Grossly. Not everybody even has scouts or is in a large corp, and with gatecamps you have a good chance of using tactics to turn things or getting out before you're toast. And not everybody reveals themselves when camping, or sits things out for a long time and in the open. And those channels keep check of far short of everything. Every gate camp has scouts unless their noobs and even if they dont, then its a mistake they will only make once. Oh btw - the bit ive underlined and put in bold could quite accurately be used to describe a nano gang. Both nano gangers and gate campers are out to get what they can while avoiding fights they cant win or the 'blob'. So, going by your logic, why is one party ok while the other should be removed from the game? As for nano gangs not teaching peeps about pvp. Nano & roaming gangs teach you more about pvp then any number of primary,secondary f1-f8 blobs.
Monticore D'Muertos Caldari Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:13:00 - [80] Greater mass, less agility, can't pulse MWD proper, scram turning off your MWD => Vaga way worse than it was pre-polycarbs this speed isnt a problem but the little extras they changed are.

Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:16:00 - [81] Originally by: Reem Fairchild Speed wasn't broken. Some people just have a weird sense of what should be reasonable speed. I mean, calling 3 km/s fast??? Once I was actually even acused of using a "nano-Drake" when I was doing 1 km/s. That's just a Drake with a mwd slapped on it, no speed mods. Well, yes. I do know that it seems unreasonable in some ways. But think about things like turning radius and weapons effectiveness, not to mention that we are supposed to be flying 900-meter, million-ton ships here. 3 km/s is fast with the EVE interface. And you should have to specialize to reach that sort of speed. And personally, I think that speed should not be the only way to outrun missiles. Create some sort of anti-missile ECM and let the element of speed help with making you uncatchable instead. It will make it easier to devise some different sort of counter, and will be an easier element to balance. So, you know, in short, to me your argument serves only to prove just how over-the-top MWDs are.
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:22:00 - [82] Originally by: Aleus Stygian Speed is broken without those mods. Still, it's clear that we have different definitions of what's a 'broken' speed. I'll just phrase it quickly... Speed isnt broken without those mods. Its those mods combined with the massive boost from mwds that have unbalanced nanos. Originally by: Aleus Stygian Anything but a 'ceptor or a fast frigate clocking around or past 2.5 km/s is broken from my point of view. They should slow things down overall for this reason. Wait aminute, my hurricane gank fitted without any speed mods goes nearly that fast. If it went any slower i might as well fly a bs instead. Originally by: Aleus Stygian Or make the drones unable to track the ships. So what your saying is that ships shouldnt go faster than 2.5 km/s and drones shouldnt be able to track those ships?
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 21:27:00 - [83] Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 03/08/2008 21:27:57 Originally by: carleyjones Speed isnt broken without those mods. Its those mods combined with the massive boost from mwds that have unbalanced nanos. I've never really said anything else. That's why I argue that they need to apply less nerf bat to the modules and implants, and much more to the MWD. Originally by: carleyjones Wait aminute, my hurricane gank fitted without any speed mods goes nearly that fast. If it went any slower i might as well fly a bs instead. Once again. I blame the MWDs. Originally by: carleyjones So what your saying is that ships shouldnt go faster than 2.5 km/s and drones shouldnt be able to track those ships? Well, yeah. But I think it's honestly more balanced to ignore their tracking and instead remove the MWDs from the drones and limit them to simple thruster speed. That way a fast enough Interceptor, Frigate or entirely speed-focused Cruiser can outrun them and keep out of their firing distance.
Scadoo	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:06:00 - [84] Edited by: Scadoo on 03/08/2008 23:07:05 Originally by: Scadoo Before anyone tells me that I am a noob, I'll admit to it first. My question is, why is it so hard just to reduce the effect of polycarbons and take snake implants out of the game altogether? Just give back the money that was spent for those who still own them and pretend they didn't exist? I have to say, just playing with the numbers in EFT, I don't much like the proposed patch because it seems too much like cutting off your arm to cure a hangnail. Originally by: Aleus Because what you're proposing would be just as extreme a measure, when simply reducing the efficiency and limiting the amount of modules and rigs of the same typ that can be mounted on a ship, or increasing the stacking penalty, is a much better way to address the problem without practically chopping certain players' fingers off, with all they have paid and missioned and skill trained for. Not to mention that the whole issue really stems from all these nano modules simply providing the underlying stacking percentage bonuses. It's the over-the-top thrust from Microwarpdrives that is the real problem. Well Aleus, I see the point you are trying to make, but I am not sure that I agree with it. I have trained, missioned and skilled for 8 months to get the isk and skills necessary to fly T2 ships without wasting my money, and quite honestly, if the patch goes through as is, will feel as if my training time has been wasted. Patience on my part (and others), in a game that is geared through training time to reward the patient, in this case, is not rewarded but totally disregarded and marginalized. I want to fly minmatar, not caldari, gallante or amarr. I am genuinely concerned that the one decent ewar capability of the minmatar (webifiers) is being gutted and that the unbroken speed of the minmatar ships is not enough to add up to a genuine tactical advantage. Like everyone, I have spent time in EFT working on what I can fly and what I want to fly, and the progression stops at the Sleipner for a very good reason. You will not get an argument from me that speed (in some cases) was abused to the point of being an exploit. It was. But realistically, how many high (or low) grade snake sets are there currently in the game? Those who had them and have lost their pods and implants got the benefit from them and lost them for whatever reason, those who have them could be compensated by CCP PLAY MONEY, and the implants removed or replaced at the player's choice. What isn't fair about that? Until the heavier Minmatar ships are given some love, it is my opinion that this patch ruins three of the six remaining ships heavy enough to be considered seriously for combat. Those six ships? Sleipner, Hurricane, Vagabond, Huginn, Rapier and Rupture. Play money costs CCP nothing, a figment of someone's imagination; our time in this game is REAL and should not be marginalized lightly.
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.03 23:28:00 - [85] Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 03/08/2008 23:29:59 Originally by: Scadoo Well Aleus, I see the point you are trying to make, but I am not sure that I agree with it. I have trained, missioned and skilled for 8 months to get the isk and skills necessary to fly T2 ships without wasting my money, and quite honestly, if the patch goes through as is, will feel as if my training time has been wasted. Patience on my part (and others), in a game that is geared through training time to reward the patient, in this case, is not rewarded but totally disregarded and marginalized. I want to fly minmatar, not caldari, gallante or amarr. I am genuinely concerned that the one decent ewar capability of the minmatar (webifiers) is being gutted and that the unbroken speed of the minmatar ships is not enough to add up to a genuine tactical advantage. Like everyone, I have spent time in EFT working on what I can fly and what I want to fly, and the progression stops at the Sleipner for a very good reason. You will not get an argument from me that speed (in some cases) was abused to the point of being an exploit. It was. But realistically, how many high (or low) grade snake sets are there currently in the game? Those who had them and have lost their pods and implants got the benefit from them and lost them for whatever reason, those who have them could be compensated by CCP PLAY MONEY, and the implants removed or replaced at the player's choice. What isn't fair about that? Until the heavier Minmatar ships are given some love, it is my opinion that this patch ruins three of the six remaining ships heavy enough to be considered seriously for combat. Those six ships? Sleipner, Hurricane, Vagabond, Huginn, Rapier and Rupture. Play money costs CCP nothing, a figment of someone's imagination; our time in this game is REAL and should not be marginalized lightly. Your concern for the effectiveness of Minmatar ships is not lost on me. But the ships you have mentioned do not, and will not suffer because of the nano nerf, but because of already inherent weaknesses. Minmatar tanks can compete with others. And Minmatar ships are faster, and when modules are toned down, base speeds will hopefully matter more, increasing that edge, if only by a slight amount. The real weaknesses of Minmatar ships as is, is the crappiness of artillery, the lack of a viability to the hit-and-run attack strategy, and the poor combinations of features and selection of EWAR types, and grid and slot layouts. The webifier nerf is quite understandable from one point of view as well, and whatever impact this has on Minmatar EWAR should not mean that people immediately decry it as unbalanced and inconsiderate. Rather, it means that we should look at increasing the usefulness of target painters or the bonuses of Minmatar EWAR ships. This is the overwhelming flaw in the argumentation of most who are either for or against the nano nerf patch. Nobody seems willing to make sacrifices, consider alternatives, and meet the opposition half-way. The Snake implants should not be taken out, but limited in their usefulness in precisely the manner they are being limited, and hopefully made less pricey and more available. Overdrives should not be nerfed so hard, if even at all. Nano structures, inertia stabilizers and polycarbs should be limited to one module of each type max for a ship, either through simply disallowing you to mount two modules of the same kind, or inducing stacking penalties that make mounting two modules a poor choice. And finally, MWDs, the greatest problem, should be removed and replaced by some other, more balanced speed-augmenting module, as I have previously proposed. One that shares the cap size/recharge and signature penalties, but for a reason, and which boosts the effectiveness of other modules and afterburners but in a manner far less extreme than that of the Microwarpdrive.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.04 01:25:00 - [86] Edited by: Esmenet on 04/08/2008 01:26:56 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Agreed. The thing about the whole nano vs blob thing that people talk about is bullshit. Nano gangs never fight and win against similar sized gangs. Nano gangs themselves are blobbing whatever they can catch and then running from the blob. To say nanos are a counter to blobs is not true. SBs with bombs, now that you can call a blob counter for example. People dont say its a counter to blobs. But it allows you to operate in enemy territory without immediately getting blobbed/hot droped to death. Vote against the nano nerf!
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.04 01:34:00 - [87] Originally by: Esmenet People dont say its a counter to blobs. But it allows you to operate in enemy territory without immediately getting blobbed/hot droped to death. It doesn't work against large enough blobs, and even when in enemy territory all you can do is pick off the poor bastards who are unlucky, like sniveling little opportunists and scavengers. It doesn't change anything major about the faction warfare in 0.0, and it makes lowsec even more of a hassle than it already is and should be. If you want to change and balance warfare in 0.0, look to the threads on Black Ops ships. And possibly those on making it so that MWD requires more skill training and better fits in order to work, to cut down on VCbee tactic effectiveness and the like.
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.08.04 01:46:00 - [88] Originally by: Scadoo Well Aleus, I see the point you are trying to make, but I am not sure that I agree with it. I have trained, missioned* and skilled for 8 months to get the isk and skills necessary to fly T2 ships without wasting my money, and quite honestly, if the patch goes through as is, will feel as if my training time has been wasted. Patience on my part (and others), in a game that is geared through training time to reward the patient, in this case, is not rewarded but totally disregarded and marginalized. I can understand this viewpoint. You feel that your training has been disregarded. However, you're seriously overrating the amount of training you've done - any generic support skills STILL stay with you. You've maybe wasted Minmatar cruiser V/Medium projectile turret V/med ac spec IV, and that's only if you refuse to fly the T1 platforms. All the support skills stick around. I could say that my training all the way up to T2 larges is wasted, too, but it isn't really - I made the choice to train them knowing that they are sub-par guns for battleships; anyway, if I decide to cross-train, all my support skills stick around. I tried making a Amarr alt at one point, only to be put off by the immense lack of support skills, which make a world of difference. If you have no desire to fly Minmatar anymore, you have wasted 3 months of training at most. Originally by: Scadoo Play money costs CCP nothing, a figment of someone's imagination; our time in this game is REAL and should not be marginalized lightly. But the issue is, you pay to have a right to play the game. The reward for your time in the game should not be uber ships or leetness, it should be fun. If you're not having fun in the game, but are playing it for achievement and rewards, then you should also start thinking economically - you invested everything in something extremely popular. This is almost always a bad idea. If fun is your goal, then you can still have it with Minmatar ships . If being the top dog is, then you will be restricted to be a fotm chaser, and lose every time something gets nerfed (well, until you train all 4 races, eheh). *I think missioning for T2 ships is the wrong approach honestly. Someone training for T2 ships should first have very extensive experience in T1 ship combat, and T1 v T2 ship combat. It saves a lot of embarrasing deaths later on, even if it takes longer to get the ISK. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint
Aleus Stygian	Posted - 2008.08.04 03:02:00 - [89] Originally by: Cpt Branko I could say that my training all the way up to T2 larges is wasted, too, but it isn't really - I made the choice to train them knowing that they are sub-par guns for battleships; anyway, if I decide to cross-train, all my support skills stick around. I tried making a Amarr alt at one point, only to be put off by the immense lack of support skills, which make a world of difference. If you have no desire to fly Minmatar anymore, you have wasted 3 months of training at most. Is that entirely true, when the only Minmatar Battleship that still has an edge and a use is the Typhoon? Anyway, Scadoo, I'd say that you've simply trained the wrong things for modules and effects that shouldn't be there in the first place. I'm not going to question what you've trained. I will say though that if you spend more than 4 months actually getting to the T2 Cruiser(s) you're aiming for, and it takes you an equally long time before you can even fly the thing effectively, you're doing it wrong.
goodby4u Valor Inc.	Posted - 2008.08.04 07:02:00 - [90] Originally by: NeoTheo before polycarbs existed were hacs utterly useless? in my opinion no... /Theo Before nanoing you didnt have tier 2 bcs, and bcs werent used very much(because of their crazy mass). Its an evolution deal that killed the hacs affectiveness.

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.