| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Dentate Girus
    |
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:21:00 -
[1]
Hi, I just want to share my thoughts about these wonderful devices. I think I play long enough to get a right impression (but if I'm wrong, just let me know). I beleive that warp core stabilizers are the most unbalanced thing in EVE. In fact there is almost no way to really use them, since all of them can save from scramblers with power 1. But for power 2 or even more you can't do anything. Plus not to forget, your targeting range is almost gone (especially if you use two stabilizers). That was for "good" guys.
However, if you are a "bad" guy, you can use warp scramblers without any penalty. You can even have scrambler strength 2 and it will cost you nothing.
I think this is not really fair, especially if you prefer to play as lonely wolf (not everybody wants to play in players copr or gang; and I know that I'm not alone in this opinion). For me it is no problem to lose my ship in a battle (1 against many), but when you can't win because it is simply impossible. I think it is kind of legal cheating.
I hope if this topic draw a lot of attention, than probably we will some balance changes.
|
Raguun
LDK
Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 13:10:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Raguun on 29/08/2008 13:11:10
WCS is not desiged to be used in pvp from the start. Its haulers and travel fitted ships module.
You suffer alot by using scrambler. You have shorter range. In fact shorter then web range, you are at risk of being webed and killed.
And last. Train EW and specialized ships to take more oponents. Dont suspect to take every1 in your crappy ship.
|
Dentate Girus
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 13:29:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Raguun
Edited by: Raguun on 29/08/2008 13:11:10
WCS is not desiged to be used in pvp from the start. Its haulers and travel fitted ships module.
You suffer alot by using scrambler. You have shorter range. In fact shorter then web range, you are at risk of being webed and killed.
And last. Train EW and specialized ships to take more oponents. Dont suspect to take every1 in your crappy ship.
A lot of things were not designed to be used in pvp in the beginning, but they are used a lot. And all what I want is to draw EVE dev team attention to this problem. I'm talking about adequate protection against such people and about logic in general.
It seems that we are talking about diffierent things, you can check Item DB and you'll see that there is no penalties for using scrambler, but there is range penalty for stabilizer.
I don't have a crappy ship, and as I mentioned before I don't do pvp. But I also accept that I can loose my "crappy" ship, it's just a game, however there should be a basic logic.
|
Irn Bruce
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 16:01:00 -
[4]
scramblers = designed to help destroy other ships
stabilisers = designed to help escape from other ships that want to destroy you.
to add any sort of drawback to scramblers that they don't already have would take away from their intended purpose. The drawbacks to stabilisers do not take away from their intended purpose, they just stop people from using them for UNINTENDED purposes, i.e. escaping from combat they've initiated as soon as they realise they're not going to win
|
Asno Malo
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 16:12:00 -
[5]
Greetings,
Originally by: Dentate Girus
Hi, I just want to share my thoughts about these wonderful devices. I think I play long enough to get a right impression (but if I'm wrong, just let me know). I beleive that warp core stabilizers are the most unbalanced thing in EVE.
Frankly, WCS are just about right as it stands. A single WCS will save you from a single WD, but not from a single WS. There are no paper penalties for the WS, but the range on them is so short that to be used effectively, you have to make yourself vulnerable to your target.
Additionally, unless something has changed recently, the WS as we know it now is about to get a major change. CCP is currently testing a change to WS so that it no longer affects warping, and instead affects only MWD. If this change goes through, then the WCS becomes a whole lot more effective.
|
Sheriff Jones
Amarr
Clinical Experiment
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 16:19:00 -
[6]
WCS, saving lowsec miners since 2003 
My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit. |
Asno Malo
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 16:27:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Sheriff Jones
WCS, saving lowsec miners since 2003
Heheh, you only got away cause I thought you had friends, so I had only a single WD on me at the time. ;)
|
Arvald
Caldari
Ninjas N Pirates
Pirate Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 18:43:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Dentate Girus
Originally by: Raguun
Edited by: Raguun on 29/08/2008 13:11:10
WCS is not desiged to be used in pvp from the start. Its haulers and travel fitted ships module.
You suffer alot by using scrambler. You have shorter range. In fact shorter then web range, you are at risk of being webed and killed.
And last. Train EW and specialized ships to take more oponents. Dont suspect to take every1 in your crappy ship.
A lot of things were not designed to be used in pvp in the beginning, but they are used a lot. And all what I want is to draw EVE dev team attention to this problem. I'm talking about adequate protection against such people and about logic in general.
It seems that we are talking about diffierent things, you can check Item DB and you'll see that there is no penalties for using scrambler, but there is range penalty for stabilizer.
I don't have a crappy ship, and as I mentioned before I don't do pvp. But I also accept that I can loose my "crappy" ship, it's just a game, however there should be a basic logic.
yes there is a penalty in using a scrabler, it takes a slot and it takes cpu, a slot that could be used for more tank/cap/other ewar and cpu that can be used for anything else, and no stabs are working as intended and dont need a chance, dont want to die in pvp then you turn down the suck and fly with friends/get better at pvp
 |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |