Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Benedict Garro
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 17:07:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Benedict Garro on 31/08/2008 17:08:13 The nano tears... i love them, more please!
But yeah i mean i remember when the need for speed patch came out.. all the nanoers shouting 'adapt or die noobs!' when everyone elses play style was stomped all over (read people who like to use slower gun boats, and blaster boats, AC boats, rendered obsolete by the need for speed).
WELL now that things are being balanced out to a more middle ground (and they are, you'll still be able to speed tank to some degree but like all kind of tanks it won't make you invincible (and don't shout about huginns/rapiers as a viable counter... flying one in gang warfare with nano's is a great way to be primaried by nano-isthars and speed tanking should be counterable by more than 2 ships) guess what i get to say back?...
Wait for it..
Adapt or die!
Ooo that felt good!
|
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 17:10:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Benedict Garro Edited by: Benedict Garro on 31/08/2008 17:08:13 The nano tears... i love them, more please!
But yeah i mean i remember when the need for speed patch came out.. all the nanoers shouting 'adapt or die noobs!' when everyone elses play style was stomped all over (read people who like to use slower gun boats, and blaster boats, AC boats, rendered obsolete by the need for speed).
WELL now that things are being balanced out to a more middle ground (and they are, you'll still be able to speed tank to some degree but like all kind of tanks it won't make you invincible (and don't shout about huginns/rapiers as a viable counter... flying one in gang warfare with nano's is a great way to be primaried by nano-isthars and speed tanking should be counterable by more than 2 ships) guess what i get to say back?...
Wait for it..
Adapt or die!
Ooo that felt good!
Noob alert.
|
Benedict Garro
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 17:14:00 -
[33]
Noob alert? please do backup your statement
|
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 17:30:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Benedict Garro Noob alert? please do backup your statement
This patch isn't a middleground. It obliterates nano hacs. It's so broad it also kicks blasterboats in the pants. It kicks Minmatar further into the ground, although projectiles get a slight boost compared to blasters, but still get destroyed by lasers/missiles. Missiles were so impacted by this patch that they're requiring another rebalance, so it's a bit hard to say whether they will remain overpowered or be nerfed too far (CCP rarely gets it just right).
Rather than this game being a huge shift from slow, to fast, from Minmatar, to Amarr, it'd be nice if CCP could balance something without swinging a sledgehammer and changing things around 180 degrees.
Suggesting nanos were invincible before is what's noobish in my mind, as there were numerous counters and nanos are far from invincible on Tranq. Some tweaking was needed, but that's tweaking, not obliterating, and adding more counters would always be a good thing (fix heavy precisions plz).
|
Benedict Garro
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 17:37:00 -
[35]
Counters maybe but the point stands that the only way to kill a nano hac gang atm is to either be in a faster nano hac gang or have a huginn/rapier in gang (more than one preferably).
Neuts can work but i've seen nano hacs escape scram range on inertia unless webbed.
Yes you can fight them off right now but as for actually killing one? well that's a whole different story.
Although i am inclined to agree that CCP have gone about this in a very bad way.
|
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 17:39:00 -
[36]
so the solution is to remove nanos completely!
|
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 17:50:00 -
[37]
Average joe nano's are definitely killable, and if you look around you will see lots of vagabond killmails that die to things that aren't faster than the vagabond. The problem right now if when people fit with faction+ gear/HG snakes/polycarbs and reach ludicrous speed. That also lets some ships reach high speeds that perhaps shouldn't be able to. But that could be fixed with some tweaking, and not broad nerfs. Adding more counters could help the anti-nano people to kill even more nano's. There are plenty of good ways to fix what is on Tranq in a way that everyone would be happy.
That said, just saying "nano nerf nyah nyah" makes you look like a noob and a little kid in my mind, haha. Even if you're a drake pilot, I wouldn't really be celebrating this patch, as it screws up way more than it fixes and just leads to less versatility and less PVP.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 18:36:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 31/08/2008 18:38:17
Originally by: Boz Well
This patch isn't a middleground. It obliterates nano hacs
Hacs are fast and agile enough even after patch. They now just dont reach redicilous speed tanking speeds where they avoid way too much danger and damage at will.
Originally by: Boz Well
It's so broad it also kicks blasterboats in the pants
No, it doesn't. If you're claiming that blaster boats had it easier in the era of nanos you are way off. Nano nerf actually helps blaster boats become viable again.
Originally by: Boz Well
It kicks Minmatar further into the ground, although projectiles get a slight boost compared to blasters, but still get destroyed by lasers/missiles
1. Laser aint destroying much when they hit the natural high em resists of the general minmatar ship. 2. Mimatar use missiles aswell to a certain extent and they are getting rebalanced anyway. geez. 3. Learn to adapt your fittings. Learn to fit a light tank even on faster ships. Adapt or die. Or do it like the nubs, cross train when you cant adapt.
Originally by: Boz Well
Suggesting nanos were invincible before is what's noobish in my mind, as there were numerous counters and nanos are far from invincible on Tranq. Some tweaking was needed, but that's tweaking, not obliterating, and adding more counters would always be a good thing (fix heavy precisions plz)
The problem was never that you could always pop a few nanos from a nano fleet in engagements. The problem was never single nano ships that were invincible. The problem was not that it was impossible to killed a couple of nano ships out of a nano gang in engagements. The problem was that nano fleets in general where too easy to fit, too cheap, too easily could get away from any engagement. It was a draw or win button. Whatever your flaw was, be it crappy fc, crappy skills, crappy fleet discipline, nano fleet was the answer for minimizing losses and fails. Well l2p because those times are soon gone.
And yada yada, yes I have flown nano zealot and nano sacs too, they are redicilously powerful and its almost impossible to lose one if you dont suck. I think Ive only lost one nano sac and Ive flown it quite often, even solo. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Support Barrage |
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 18:40:00 -
[39]
Easy to fit = 250m to evade some dps?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 18:42:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu Easy to fit = 250m to evade some dps?
Even non speedbonused hacs like zealot can reach 4km/s with tech 2 fits. Yeah that is EASY and CHEAP to fit. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Support Barrage |
|
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 18:49:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Even non speedbonused hacs like zealot can reach 4km/s with tech 2 fits. Yeah that is EASY and CHEAP to fit.
Doesn't seem that outrageous to me, tbh
Oh well, nano hacs have been removed from eve. 2km zealot with max skills and snake implants will not break the game!
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 19:02:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Even non speedbonused hacs like zealot can reach 4km/s with tech 2 fits. Yeah that is EASY and CHEAP to fit.
Doesn't seem that outrageous to me, tbh
Well, as I said. It's not a single ship that is the problem. The problem is that you can easily fit a nano fleet cheap and rarely lose ships if you dont make pilot errors. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Support Barrage |
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 19:09:00 -
[43]
Typical Lyria post. Those poor, poor disadvantaged Amarr.
Matar using missiles, so that's balanced? Unless you're counting the spare spots on ships like the cane, which are few in number and unbonused, there aren't many matar ships firing missiles. There's the phoon, which remains competitive in large part due to missiles, but that's about it. I can't think of any And lasers suffering because of resistances? Lol, please, lasers do just fine atm, and that's putting it lightly. Adapt is easy to say, but it has little to do with game balance, and saying that (although apparently trendy on EVE forums) is just a lowbrow way to avoid discussing actual balance.
As far as the problem with nanos, I don't agree it was just a draw or win button, as nanos suffered losses just like any gang does. The advantage to nano was, at the cost of your tank and gank, you have the chance at escaping. Having the ability to escape, having fights that you don't have to commit 100% to, is a good thing, as it encourages PVP in hostile areas that no one would fly a slow, tanked ship into. Tweaking the uber nano's would make them easier to kill, adding counters would give you more ways to kill them, but it was a good thing in my mind that nano ships didn't have to commit 100% to a fight, as that's the entire idea behind them.
And finally, as far as blasters go, while I do agree that trying to take a blaster up against a nano HAC would be a loser's endeavor, that does not equate to this patch being a boost to blasters, and suggesting so is just naive. Test how well blasters do with their new acceleration, and their new nerfed webs, and then say this was a buff. The impact is definitely less on smaller blaster ships, but I'd hardly call it a buff.
|
Kadoes Khan
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 21:22:00 -
[44]
Hmmm you can still speed tank, the thing is you no longer avoid ALL damage unless you screw up(or the other person is faster), you simply reduce the damage you take and increase your lifespan like any other form of tanking. I think if you really dislike it you should jump onto the test servers and try the changes and provide constructive feedback rather than "WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH". -=^=- "Someday the world will recognize the genius in my insanity." |
Atsuko Ratu
Caldari VSP Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 21:30:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Kadoes Khan "WAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH".
Yep, that's all everyone does, mmhm, yessir
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 21:36:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Well, as I said. It's not a single ship that is the problem. The problem is that you can easily fit a nano fleet cheap and rarely lose ships if you dont make pilot errors.
oh... dear...? - putting the gist back into logistics |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 22:06:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Roemy Schneider
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Well, as I said. It's not a single ship that is the problem. The problem is that you can easily fit a nano fleet cheap and rarely lose ships if you dont make pilot errors.
oh... dear...?
That is correct. In a nano hac you can survive 99% of combat situations as long as you dont make a pilot error. In a non nano ship there are alot of situations where you will die no matter what you do as a pilot. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Support Barrage |
Zadren Radek
Gallente Ghost in the Machine Tygris Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 22:12:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Boz Well
It's so broad it also kicks blasterboats in the pants
No, it doesn't. If you're claiming that blaster boats had it easier in the era of nanos you are way off. Nano nerf actually helps blaster boats become viable again.
Oh really? How? By allowing the MWD - the means of getting your blasterboat into combat range before you get popped, to be turned off and by nerfing webs so hard that the already bad blaster tracking then makes hitting anything a matter of luck? Blaster ships WERE pretty viable before, if used right. Without a pretty serious revision of these changes, blasters, and the ships that rely on them, will be confined to the trashcan.
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 23:23:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Atsuko Ratu
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: Alrich
not to all ships some ships go faster
AFs, and that's it. Still a nerf to speed, overall.
Cov ops got as boosted as AFs, actually.
Stealth bombers and EAFs too.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
AstroPhobic
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 23:52:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
- ship masses are all wrong - the Raven being lighter and better handling then Minmatar BS is rather broken.
lolwut?!
Minmatar battleships are capless, you obviously don't realize how that balances it against the raven.
|
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.08.31 23:59:00 -
[51]
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Originally by: Cpt Branko
- ship masses are all wrong - the Raven being lighter and better handling then Minmatar BS is rather broken.
lolwut?!
Minmatar battleships are capless, you obviously don't realize how that balances it against the raven.
Tbh, they need more verticality to be balanced.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 00:20:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Roemy Schneider
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Well, as I said. It's not a single ship that is the problem. The problem is that you can easily fit a nano fleet cheap and rarely lose ships if you dont make pilot errors.
oh... dear...?
That is correct. In a nano hac you can survive 99% of combat situations as long as you dont make a pilot error. In a non nano ship there are alot of situations where you will die no matter what you do as a pilot.
Do you SERIOUSLY think after nano nerf people will blindly rush into gatecamps and blobs with slow HACs/BS? No - they will still have 99% survival rate because they will pick much easier engagements (read: ganks) especially backed up by falcons.
As for "In a nano hac you can survive 99% of combat situations as long as you dont make a pilot error." So you say that player skill is irrevellant and setups should win fights? Or numbers? Because i always thought that pilot skill should be most important part not fit/ISK/SP. Seems you prefer to follow classic blob mentality in this one.
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 00:25:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Do you SERIOUSLY think after nano nerf people will blindly rush into gatecamps and blobs with slow HACs/BS? No - they will still have 99% survival rate because they will pick much easier engagements (read: ganks) especially backed up by falcons.
Well, yes, in theory. But you cannot always guarantee the engagement is going to be a easy one (unless you're really extremely paranoid, are willing to lose targets rather then attacking w/out perfect intel, and so on). At times you're forced to either forego a target or attack with 5 other neutrals in local - and if those neutrals turn out to be not so neutral (a not so uncommon scenario) you're boned in conventional ships.
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
As for "In a nano hac you can survive 99% of combat situations as long as you dont make a pilot error." So you say that player skill is irrevellant and setups should win fights? Or numbers? Because i always thought that pilot skill should be most important part not fit/ISK/SP. Seems you prefer to follow classic blob mentality in this one.
Well, yes, in theory - however, you forget one thing. If not making errors (which is not the equivalent of pilot skill, but we could call it that way) saves you in one ship fit, and doesn't save you in any other ship fit, then isn't something just a bit wrong there, in principle?
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 00:33:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Do you SERIOUSLY think after nano nerf people will blindly rush into gatecamps and blobs with slow HACs/BS? No - they will still have 99% survival rate because they will pick much easier engagements (read: ganks) especially backed up by falcons.
Well, yes, in theory. But you cannot always guarantee the engagement is going to be a easy one (unless you're really extremely paranoid, are willing to lose targets rather then attacking w/out perfect intel, and so on). At times you're forced to either forego a target or attack with 5 other neutrals in local - and if those neutrals turn out to be not so neutral (a not so uncommon scenario) you're boned in conventional ships.
I am paranoid - thus 34:1 kill/loss ratio (another reason is if you lose ship you need to move xyz jumps to get new one and im too lazy for this). Still - it leads to less engagements total = less pewpew.
Quote:
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
As for "In a nano hac you can survive 99% of combat situations as long as you dont make a pilot error." So you say that player skill is irrevellant and setups should win fights? Or numbers? Because i always thought that pilot skill should be most important part not fit/ISK/SP. Seems you prefer to follow classic blob mentality in this one.
Well, yes, in theory - however, you forget one thing. If not making errors (which is not the equivalent of pilot skill, but we could call it that way) saves you in one ship fit, and doesn't save you in any other ship fit, then isn't something just a bit wrong there, in principle?
Even nanohac can die if enemy is setup well. Thing is your typical "stay on gate, blob" will NOT kill nanohac. It wont kill titan either. But all you want is to get as easy kill as you get on BS applied to any other ship class.
Its exactly same as your 5 man rapier gang wont kill BS gang - because they are not setup properly. Should we whine to nerf BS because unless pilots make grave mistakes they will tank said rapiers? Are we going to nerf supercaps because you cant kill em w/o dictors?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 21:25:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
I am paranoid - thus 34:1 kill/loss ratio (another reason is if you lose ship you need to move xyz jumps to get new one and im too lazy for this). Still - it leads to less engagements total = less pewpew.
34:1 k/l ratio because you fly nanos and you rarely make mistakes, wich is exactly the point. If you dont make mistakes in a nano you DO NOT DIE. Oh and dont try to rename flawless nano flying to something else like "paranoia". You can get that k/l ratio by not sucking while flying and it has nothing to do with the hassles of getting a new ships. Im pretty sure your fancy doom buddies can carrier jump just about anything with great ease anywhere into 0.0 where you are active.
Oh and your analogies are pretty bogus at the end of your post. |
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 22:49:00 -
[56]
Lyria, you couldnt more prove how clueless you are , than by stating that blasterships will be /boosted/ by this mess of a patch.
They are getting wrecked. Taking up to 4x longer to approach due to mass, agility and MWD speed nerfs, is bad, but insignificant compared to the 400% tracking nerf brough on by reducing webs from 90% to 60%. This means blaster bs are now able to be kited at medium range AND out-tracked up close by smaller vessels, meaning their effective sweet-spot is: non-existant! It should be one OR the other - you kite a blaster ship, you out-track a laserboat. It also means a whopping effective DPS nerf on all sizes of blasterboat when shooting at the same size, not smaller.
|
Esmenet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 22:58:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer If you dont make mistakes in a nano you DO NOT DIE.
Lol. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 23:02:00 -
[58]
they said there would be a devblog comming soonÖ
that was like a month ago? |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 23:30:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Benedict Garro Noob alert? please do backup your statement
the bit about the need for speed patch and nanoers yelling adapt or die noobs. need for speed was about server/client efficiency.
I really miss nanos adding 20 m/s and reducing 20% mass or w/e it was |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 23:39:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 01/09/2008 23:41:47
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
I am paranoid - thus 34:1 kill/loss ratio (another reason is if you lose ship you need to move xyz jumps to get new one and im too lazy for this). Still - it leads to less engagements total = less pewpew.
34:1 k/l ratio because you fly nanos and you rarely make mistakes, wich is exactly the point. If you dont make mistakes in a nano you DO NOT DIE. Oh and dont try to rename flawless nano flying to something else like "paranoia". You can get that k/l ratio by not sucking while flying and it has nothing to do with the hassles of getting a new ships. Im pretty sure your fancy doom buddies can carrier jump just about anything with great ease anywhere into 0.0 where you are active.
Oh and your analogies are pretty bogus at the end of your post.
I hope you know that doom has only around 1/2-1/3 of my total kills? And about 50% of those kills were made with battleships and command ships - in plain old tanky version (including MWD-less ships aeons ago). Dont tell me i managed to "MWD away and run" in absolutions or geddons - because that doesnt work. It just means i commit to fight i can win and i have full intel about not blindly jumping into system with "5 neutrals who might not be so neutral as i thought".
As for logistics: i have my own carrier so can move stuff myself. Still it means i need to move my back to closest hub and buy needed mods which takes time. 15 minutes spent on trading is too much anyways.
EDIT: still you ignored the most important part - does it mean that you are for skilles blobbing and accept fact that PLAYER SKILL is irrevelant? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |