| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
dolmant
    |
Posted - 2008.09.01 23:51:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Deva Blackfire
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?
Ok, i have a question:
if the blob in question has 25 men on the gate, are you saying one man should be able to escape?
and how do you stop a nano hac (say, vaga) on a gate (we have inties, bs, bc and cruisers, say, thats a reasonable gatecamp)? What kit of fits do we need?
Also, i believe you had said earlier "important part not fit", so why should the blob need a different fit? it has 25/15/10 different fits, or are you saying all these people need are skills?
P.S. an extra 2 points:
1, are you suggesting a rapier gang CAN be setup properly to kill a bs gang?
2, the question is not should 5 rapiers be able to kill a bs gang, its should 5 rapiers be able to kill a bs? through shear firepower, yes! but 25 men cannot kill a nano hac because thats unfair? what?
(this is how I have read your argument, please clarify it if you meant something else) |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 00:02:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 02/09/2008 00:08:03
Originally by: dolmant
Ok, i have a question:
if the blob in question has 25 men on the gate, are you saying one man should be able to escape?
and how do you stop a nano hac (say, vaga) on a gate (we have inties, bs, bc and cruisers, say, thats a reasonable gatecamp)? What kit of fits do we need?
Yes he should be able to escape - because you are just holding on gate instead of being prepared to kill nano ship. Use large t2 bub + rapier = dead nano if he tries to run away - he can only try burn back. Thats for your most noobish gatecamp. But if you actually want to KILL nano you need to camp outgoing not incoming gate or do quick jump thru and bub both sides slowly grinding guy to death. Doable? Yes. Needs involvement? Yes. But guess its too much for average gatecamper who is just as intelligent as belt NPC (lock, fire, afk).
Quote:
Also, i believe you had said earlier "important part not fit", so why should the blob need a different fit? it has 25/15/10 different fits, or are you saying all these people need are skills?
As above. If you had skill you would know how to kill nano while camping. You dont and you run to whine that "xxx vs 1 numbers should ALWAYS kill it". No, they shouldnt.
Quote:
P.S. an extra 2 points:
1, are you suggesting a rapier gang CAN be setup properly to kill a bs gang?
2, the question is not should 5 rapiers be able to kill a bs gang, its should 5 rapiers be able to kill a bs? through shear firepower, yes! but 25 men cannot kill a nano hac because thats unfair? what?
All depends on both gangs fits/skills. If its your average "oi i have raven and im 2 months old" then rapiers prolly will make short work of em even having low dps. If its good tanky BS (with skills to back it up) or even small RR gang (2-3 rr ships) you wont be able to break it with rapiers.
But forget that point - it was late and tbh i now cant remember what i wanted to say anyways ;p
EDIT:
o yea im all for nano nerf. Just not killing whole ship class/playstyle. There were enough posts showing how it could be made in much more sensible way (even rewriting speed calculations) but CCP prefers to do thingys in a blunt smash-it-with-hammer way. |
Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 05:47:00 -
[63]
The 'rebalancing' (cause that's what it is, anything larger than a bread box going over 6km just isn't right) can't come sooner.
I want to be able to putz around in a battleship in a roaming gang and not a) feel like a liability and b) not be able to damage some of these muppets. |
dolmant
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 06:23:00 -
[64]
Edited by: dolmant on 02/09/2008 06:25:09
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 02/09/2008 00:08:03
Originally by: dolmant
Ok, i have a question:
if the blob in question has 25 men on the gate, are you saying one man should be able to escape?
and how do you stop a nano hac (say, vaga) on a gate (we have inties, bs, bc and cruisers, say, thats a reasonable gatecamp)? What kit of fits do we need?
Yes he should be able to escape - because you are just holding on gate instead of being prepared to kill nano ship. Use large t2 bub + rapier = dead nano if he tries to run away - he can only try burn back. Thats for your most noobish gatecamp. But if you actually want to KILL nano you need to camp outgoing not incoming gate or do quick jump thru and bub both sides slowly grinding guy to death. Doable? Yes. Needs involvement? Yes. But guess its too much for average gatecamper who is just as intelligent as belt NPC (lock, fire, afk).
Quote:
Also, i believe you had said earlier "important part not fit", so why should the blob need a different fit? it has 25/15/10 different fits, or are you saying all these people need are skills?
As above. If you had skill you would know how to kill nano while camping. You dont and you run to whine that "xxx vs 1 numbers should ALWAYS kill it". No, they shouldnt.
Quote:
P.S. an extra 2 points:
1, are you suggesting a rapier gang CAN be setup properly to kill a bs gang?
2, the question is not should 5 rapiers be able to kill a bs gang, its should 5 rapiers be able to kill a bs? through shear firepower, yes! but 25 men cannot kill a nano hac because thats unfair? what?
All depends on both gangs fits/skills. If its your average "oi i have raven and im 2 months old" then rapiers prolly will make short work of em even having low dps. If its good tanky BS (with skills to back it up) or even small RR gang (2-3 rr ships) you wont be able to break it with rapiers.
But forget that point - it was late and tbh i now cant remember what i wanted to say anyways ;p
EDIT:
o yea im all for nano nerf. Just not killing whole ship class/playstyle. There were enough posts showing how it could be made in much more sensible way (even rewriting speed calculations) but CCP prefers to do thingys in a blunt smash-it-with-hammer way.
EDIT OMG, i must have gone past a timer or something, i had to relog and i lost all my text ><. basically i agree with you, but for different reasons. vagas need to be slower, but still move faster than everything else (except inties). Blobs should win i think, cos they HAVE more of EVERYTHING than you, but they shouldnt pwn everything. Thnx for answering my questions and not being a troll. |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 11:30:00 -
[65]
Originally by: dolmant
EDIT OMG, i must have gone past a timer or something, i had to relog and i lost all my text ><. basically i agree with you, but for different reasons. vagas need to be slower, but still move faster than everything else (except inties). Blobs should win i think, cos they HAVE more of EVERYTHING than you, but they shouldnt pwn everything. Thnx for answering my questions and not being a troll.
This is still wrong assumption. We did show already that we can win against 2:1 or worse odds even when we are not using nano. In fact having around 70 snipers 30 nanos we managed to kill 200 man mostly-nanoed gang (around 150 dead rest ran). We did stuff other way round too - 100 nanos vs 200 snipers and we could win that one too. Tho looking at kb we had accident where 50-60 nanos vs 100-120 snipers went against us and we lost whole gang. All depends on player (this time FC) skill not on number of players.
As for speeds: for me topping 10k for vaga and 7-8k for other HACs is pretty ok IF you can get normal hac to 3km/s with rigs+t2 (so ishtar drops by 1km/s so does zealot) and vaga accordingly higher (know how to fit vaga and prolly how to fly as i used AC boats = but personally i detest that ship and wont fly it ever ;p). |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 11:35:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
EDIT:
o yea im all for nano nerf. Just not killing whole ship class/playstyle. There were enough posts showing how it could be made in much more sensible way (even rewriting speed calculations) but CCP prefers to do thingys in a blunt smash-it-with-hammer way.
Mmmhm. The nano-nerf in its current state is really overdone.
I like the general idea of the changes (more ship class differences, removal of mass reduction factor to make more lows!=more speed, limited pimpability), just don't like the end result being the complete murder of speed fittings (the OD + MWD nerf together really hammer them into the ground) with heavily nerfing interceptors and blaster fits on top.
|
The Djego
Minmatar
merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 12:17:00 -
[67]
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.
60% Web 
Shure Blaster ships are not effective vs Nano Ships(Navy Exequeror and Taranis done ok here) but can take on non nanoed Ships. With the current Tracking Mechanics and the 90% web they do ok, they donŠt do awsome. With the 60% Webs you can easylie see that the hole concept of getting close and hold a Target there(what makes Blasters preaty diffrent from other Turrets) is flawed by tracking/range in the beginning.
Catching a target is nice(and yeah Blaster ships are slower to now), but not realy usefull if you canŠt make a advantage of it any more.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 12:49:00 -
[68]
It'll be interesting to see how useful frigate gangs are after whatever form the patch takes. AFs, inties and EAS could fill the current nanocruiser style of play quite well... or light missiles and drones might just casually slaughter them.  |
BiggestT
Caldari
Space Oddysey
Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 12:56:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Boz Well
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).
This, this and mooooar of this |
BiggestT
Caldari
Space Oddysey
Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 12:57:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Gypsio III
... or light missiles and drones might just casually slaughter them.
sounds about right xD |
|
Xevious Baltar
Gallente
Dark Ministry
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 13:00:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
How can you NOT call it a nerf? Even if you feel the changes are justified, they are still one HELL of a nerf.
From certain perspectives ::cough Amarr/Caldari:: it's the biggest boost of their lives.
-Liang
You forget that Amarr were the most underpowered race for 2 years... |
Nerfmycap
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 13:12:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Nerfmycap on 02/09/2008 13:15:12
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
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)
But... Best counter to a nanogang being a bigger/better nanogang it's pretty ridiculous..
A really good remoterep can counter a nanogang but the nanogang can just warp off and pick another fight somewhere else, or just run through your bs blob..
The best counter I've found so far (and it's nowhere near foolproof or even good...):
Outnumber the hostile nanogang so that if it gets really close it will take losses. Combined with a couple of rapiers this blob will kill nanoships getting close and so the nanoships will only get close to "divebomb" or kill a light target. Ceptors are completely worthless for this.
By forcing the hostile nanogang to stay far away you decrease their DPS by a whooooooole lot. 4-5 logistics can easily repair most of the incoming damage from a nanogang of roundabout 50. Yes. 50. You'll take some losses but the nanoships are frkn expensive so it's a given.
So you basicly have to have a stronger fleet. Couple of rapiers/curses. A core of logistics/remotereppers that can reduce losses from the pitiful nanogang dps since they are forced to be at long range. 10ish longranged ships with pretty good tracking and dps that can 1: always dps, every second of the fight. 2: force recons/falcons to warp off. So they are VERY useful. With this you can effectively counter a hostile nanofleet but it does require higher firepower then the hostile fleet or they'll basicly stand on top of you and annihilate you while the couple of ppl that take damage zoom away and return after a few seconds to shoot you again. It works against Tri, so it should do it. Doesn't work well in small scales though :P
Nanogang is epic. Awesome and fun but a bit overpowered sure, but eve won't be the same without it. Good and bad. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 13:26:00 -
[73]
Away from the nano issue itself, I really like the idea of the Scrambler changes - it makes ABs viable and helps the survivability and fitting of smaller ships (no compulsory MWD, midslot freed up by move from MWD, web & disruptor to AB & scrambler).
The problem is that it probably still requires a web nerf to work properly, and a web nerf wrecks blaster ships. I'm not sure there's an easy way round this... 
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 13:30:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/09/2008 13:30:29
Originally by: Gypsio III
Away from the nano issue itself, I really like the idea of the Scrambler changes - it makes ABs viable and helps the survivability and fitting of smaller ships (no compulsory MWD, midslot freed up by move from MWD, web & disruptor to AB & scrambler).
The problem is that it probably still requires a web nerf to work properly, and a web nerf wrecks blaster ships. I'm not sure there's an easy way round this...
It'd still work reasonably well with nerfing webs to 75-80% rather then 60%. The critical part was always the ability of the bigger ship to use MWD to control transversal.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
BiggestT
Caldari
Space Oddysey
Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 13:32:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Gypsio III
Away from the nano issue itself, I really like the idea of the Scrambler changes - it makes ABs viable and helps the survivability and fitting of smaller ships (no compulsory MWD, midslot freed up by move from MWD, web & disruptor to AB & scrambler).
The problem is that it probably still requires a web nerf to work properly, and a web nerf wrecks blaster ships. I'm not sure there's an easy way round this...
well a simple but wierf solution may work..kind of contradictory to their names but meh here it is:
Make webs have point + web
make scrams only disble mwds, but negate the effect of warp core stabs (so a semi-point)
wierd but..meh cld be ok..
Proudly annoying FC's since 2007
Originally by: Sherrif Jones
*ding ding!*
Wrangler: Hello and w-
*ding ding!*
Wrangler: Damn nanowhiners...*goes back to reading*
|
kyrv
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 14:21:00 -
[76]
Personally mwd's should have the cut off under scramblers but also during there effect reduced agility for the ship, faster top speeds but lower acceleration and have a long duration with larger capacitor penatly (great for a ship like the thorax).
You would use a mwd to travel in a straight line to intercept slow ships, dog fighting of faster ships at crazy break neck speeds very hard.
I think the mechanics of Micro Warp Driving should look like this as you could only imagine a high tech module of pwn speeds should feel like, with subsequent draw backs.
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 15:11:00 -
[77]
Originally by: kyrv
also that a mwd should be reduced to in essence like the acceleration to warp catapulting a ship 200km's after a short warm up period afterburners for sub light dog fights, wich of course the main function of a mwd is, to escape.
The issue isn't that MWD is (or should be) a escape module. It's a module which also facilitates tackling (catching) people as well as combat maneuvering to get to your preffered range (see blasterboat / short range AC usage, for instance).
The current MWD + web combination does the job very well for purposes of tackling + holding the opponent relatively slow so that short-range weapon systems are usable.
What is really borked is how much tracking gets worse when you get up close, what creates issues when firing on ships of your own size using weapons with very short optimal ranges (blasters and ACs primarily). Without very strong webs and MWDs, tracking is simply broken.
To illustrate, at 0 metres it is (in EVE) impossible to hit a target, even though it's logically impossible to miss.
I see no fundamental issue with changing webs to 60%, with a accompanied fix to how tracking works.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
Mahu
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 15:51:00 -
[78]
I have a quick question regarding said nerf... I have pvpd for years and use various types of ship including but definately not exclusively nanoships. I've used then when solo to avoid the blobs at 0.0 entry points etc. Anyway what I wanted people's opinion on was this...isn't the nerf to speed going to be relative? In this I mean that my nano vaga with snakes will still be faster than most ships and therefore in the right situation should still be effective? Granted I might not be able to wizz back to a gate as quickly as before and people wont beable to out run missiles something I dont ever remember doing tbh but aren't speed tanking fitted hacs and recons still going to be possible because it still seems to me that they will.
Cheers for the replies in advance and this is a genuine question.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 15:56:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Mahu
I have a quick question regarding said nerf... I have pvpd for years and use various types of ship including but definately not exclusively nanoships. I've used then when solo to avoid the blobs at 0.0 entry points etc. Anyway what I wanted people's opinion on was this...isn't the nerf to speed going to be relative? In this I mean that my nano vaga with snakes will still be faster than most ships and therefore in the right situation should still be effective?
Yes and no.
As it stands now speed differences between ships dont matter. Problems are ship speed vs modules. So what that vaga is still "fastest" compared to other cruisers when battleship weapons suddenly can track it well (where they couldnt previously). Or that ceptors are still fastest in-game ships when all light weapons (drones/precission missiles) will obliterate them in 12-15 seconds (if you mwd to target you wont be able to align to planet/moon and warp before you die - io can assure you of this one :).
|
Mahu
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 15:58:00 -
[80]
cheers actually thats a pretty fair point.
I heard that a vaga will still do 4k with implants and max skills is that about right?
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |