Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 23 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Nemesor
Gallente Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 20:59:00 -
[541]
I am waiting until I test this (again) before complaining... except for the following: You appeared to be rather sneaky putting such an explosive nerf announcement into a live dev blog, where people could not view the details of the (supposedly) modified changes.
Almost like the American Congress trying to sneak legislation through a second time after being told by the public that they did not like it.
|
Nemesor
Gallente Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 20:59:00 -
[542]
I am waiting until I test this (again) before complaining... except for the following: You appeared to be rather sneaky putting such an explosive nerf announcement into a live dev blog, where people could not view the details of the (supposedly) modified changes.
Almost like the American Congress trying to sneak legislation through a second time after being told by the public that they did not like it.
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 21:35:00 -
[543]
For all the arguments about how it takes so much skill and dedication and isk to fly a nano boat, there are a few things that point to the need for this... ahem... adjustment that just can't be refuted.
First, no ship should be able to flat out-run the weapons that are meant to do damage to them. That means that you shouldn't be able to equip a cruiser to out-run heavy missiles and medium drones, and you shouldn't be able to equip a frig to out-run light missiles / drones. Using speed to mitigate damage? Sure. Using it to avoid damage altogether? Game breaking. Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking. Bottom line, you cannot completely avoid damage with traditional tanking, and you shouldn't be able to with speed tanking either. The two should provide (potentially) about the same mitigation.
Second, no fit should allow you to aggress and then disengage at will. That's why WCS were nerfed. It's an advantage that speed fits have that traditional tanking does not.
The two issues above have made speed fits the "ultimate" setup. You only need to look at the gang compositions of the "elite" PvP outfits in the game to see that clearly. Unless they're going to siege something, they're running nano/ecm gangs, almost exclusively. That's bad. There should be no "ultimate" setup in Eve. One of the strengths of the game has always been the ability to be creative, and use varying tactics and the element of surprise. There is damn little surprise out there these days, you get nanos, and then there are nanos, and then more nanos.
Don't worry about the whines CCP. It's right, you know it's right, just get it done. Once you do, the whining will die down and people will get back to playing the game.
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 21:35:00 -
[544]
For all the arguments about how it takes so much skill and dedication and isk to fly a nano boat, there are a few things that point to the need for this... ahem... adjustment that just can't be refuted.
First, no ship should be able to flat out-run the weapons that are meant to do damage to them. That means that you shouldn't be able to equip a cruiser to out-run heavy missiles and medium drones, and you shouldn't be able to equip a frig to out-run light missiles / drones. Using speed to mitigate damage? Sure. Using it to avoid damage altogether? Game breaking. Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking. Bottom line, you cannot completely avoid damage with traditional tanking, and you shouldn't be able to with speed tanking either. The two should provide (potentially) about the same mitigation.
Second, no fit should allow you to aggress and then disengage at will. That's why WCS were nerfed. It's an advantage that speed fits have that traditional tanking does not.
The two issues above have made speed fits the "ultimate" setup. You only need to look at the gang compositions of the "elite" PvP outfits in the game to see that clearly. Unless they're going to siege something, they're running nano/ecm gangs, almost exclusively. That's bad. There should be no "ultimate" setup in Eve. One of the strengths of the game has always been the ability to be creative, and use varying tactics and the element of surprise. There is damn little surprise out there these days, you get nanos, and then there are nanos, and then more nanos.
Don't worry about the whines CCP. It's right, you know it's right, just get it done. Once you do, the whining will die down and people will get back to playing the game.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 22:25:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking.
That is a blinkered and uneducated statement considering the ship types available in eve. Without speed as it is EVERY small ship is worthless in gang pvp. All frigates can be insta melted with a volley from a single ship let alone a focus of fire from a few let alone a gang and so can destroyers and cruisers.
Larger ships like BC or BS can RR each other because they have buffer tanks that can soak up the alpha dmg and hit they take between RR cycles. Smaller ships with this nerf can be hit and alpha'd to death by a volley from surprising small amounts of ships and in some cases single ships.
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine Second, no fit should allow you to aggress and then disengage at will. That's why WCS were nerfed. It's an advantage that speed fits have that traditional tanking does not.
Many fits give you the ability to disengage at will along with tactics:-
1. Sniping for instance is the easiest form of pvp that you can easily disengage as most standardly fitted ships cannot even lock at 180-249km let alone hit at that range and a sniper gang can warp off at will if any thing gets close. It is considerably easier to tackle a NANO ship than a aligned sniper as most NANO must slow and come in close to do DMG while the sniper need only watch his overview for closing ships.
2. Gate hugging and station hugging are THE 2 most popular tactics in eve and far beyond NANO in popularity tbh, and while it is possible to tackle a NANO ship as it closes and slows to deal dmg tackling a station or gate hugger is utterly pointless as you can dock and jump while tackled.
3. RR setups can tank and fight if they feel like it and de-agro while RRing if things go bad and then also dock or jump through a gate tackled or not.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 22:25:00 -
[546]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking.
That is a blinkered and uneducated statement considering the ship types available in eve. Without speed as it is EVERY small ship is worthless in gang pvp. All frigates can be insta melted with a volley from a single ship let alone a focus of fire from a few let alone a gang and so can destroyers and cruisers.
Larger ships like BC or BS can RR each other because they have buffer tanks that can soak up the alpha dmg and hit they take between RR cycles. Smaller ships with this nerf can be hit and alpha'd to death by a volley from surprising small amounts of ships and in some cases single ships.
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine Second, no fit should allow you to aggress and then disengage at will. That's why WCS were nerfed. It's an advantage that speed fits have that traditional tanking does not.
Many fits give you the ability to disengage at will along with tactics:-
1. Sniping for instance is the easiest form of pvp that you can easily disengage as most standardly fitted ships cannot even lock at 180-249km let alone hit at that range and a sniper gang can warp off at will if any thing gets close. It is considerably easier to tackle a NANO ship than a aligned sniper as most NANO must slow and come in close to do DMG while the sniper need only watch his overview for closing ships.
2. Gate hugging and station hugging are THE 2 most popular tactics in eve and far beyond NANO in popularity tbh, and while it is possible to tackle a NANO ship as it closes and slows to deal dmg tackling a station or gate hugger is utterly pointless as you can dock and jump while tackled.
3. RR setups can tank and fight if they feel like it and de-agro while RRing if things go bad and then also dock or jump through a gate tackled or not.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 22:38:00 -
[547]
Edited by: Murina on 13/10/2008 22:47:10
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine The two issues above have made speed fits the "ultimate" setup. There should be no "ultimate" setup in Eve. One of the strengths of the game has always been the ability to be creative, and use varying tactics and the element of surprise.
What you seem to think is that pvp should be as static and unimaginative as ratting, and i also notice that like a lot of the pro-nerf crowd you use words like "ultimate steup" when describing nano and it obviously is not as i have shown above.
While also using words like "tactics" and "creative" but explaining nothing and describing nothing of these great "tactical" and "creative" pvp battles that will become available if this nerf goes through. And honestly to me it seems like you have got nothing and just want speed removed because static slug fest pvp just like ratting is easier to do and f1-f8 to pop stuff is very basic and utterly simple compared to needing to actually tackle a ship to kill it.
Now id be glad for you to show me i am wrong by putting forth a great and detailed combat scenario that does not require speed (post nerf), but includes details on all the "tactics" and "creative" stuff you claim will burst forth with the removal of speed from the game.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 22:38:00 -
[548]
Edited by: Murina on 13/10/2008 22:47:10
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine The two issues above have made speed fits the "ultimate" setup. There should be no "ultimate" setup in Eve. One of the strengths of the game has always been the ability to be creative, and use varying tactics and the element of surprise.
What you seem to think is that pvp should be as static and unimaginative as ratting, and i also notice that like a lot of the pro-nerf crowd you use words like "ultimate steup" when describing nano and it obviously is not as i have shown above.
While also using words like "tactics" and "creative" but explaining nothing and describing nothing of these great "tactical" and "creative" pvp battles that will become available if this nerf goes through. And honestly to me it seems like you have got nothing and just want speed removed because static slug fest pvp just like ratting is easier to do and f1-f8 to pop stuff is very basic and utterly simple compared to needing to actually tackle a ship to kill it.
Now id be glad for you to show me i am wrong by putting forth a great and detailed combat scenario that does not require speed (post nerf), but includes details on all the "tactics" and "creative" stuff you claim will burst forth with the removal of speed from the game.
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 23:17:00 -
[549]
Edited by: Somealt Ofmine on 13/10/2008 23:20:36
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking.
That is a blinkered and uneducated statement considering the ship types available in eve. Without speed as it is EVERY small ship is worthless in gang pvp. All frigates can be insta melted with a volley from a single ship let alone a focus of fire from a few let alone a gang and so can destroyers and cruisers.
I've been playing for a while now, and I'm pretty sure small ships were in the game, and useful, before rigs were introduced and the nano craze hit.
Small ships should be able to get "under the guns" of larger ships with their speed/agility, but should readily take damage from weapons that are designed to damage them. That's how it was before rigs. It needs to get back there.
A ship, big or small, should be more or less as survivable with a traditional tank, or a speed. Some racial ships lend themselves more to speed tanking, but that shouldn't make them wildly more survivable than ships of the same class that rely on traditional tanking. Can anyone, the way things stand right now, argue that a Demios is as survivable as a Vaga or a nano ishtar? It's not even close.
Notice I said they should be equally viable options. Speed tanks should be viable, especially for the racial ships that depend on speed, but even for those, they shouldn't be wildly more viable than ships of the same class that rely on a traditional tank. That isn't true right now, and it needs to be.
It's going to get fixed. People are going to whine until it does. It's just too bad that CCP has drawn it (and the whines) out this long.
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.10.13 23:17:00 -
[550]
Edited by: Somealt Ofmine on 13/10/2008 23:20:36
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking.
That is a blinkered and uneducated statement considering the ship types available in eve. Without speed as it is EVERY small ship is worthless in gang pvp. All frigates can be insta melted with a volley from a single ship let alone a focus of fire from a few let alone a gang and so can destroyers and cruisers.
I've been playing for a while now, and I'm pretty sure small ships were in the game, and useful, before rigs were introduced and the nano craze hit.
Small ships should be able to get "under the guns" of larger ships with their speed/agility, but should readily take damage from weapons that are designed to damage them. That's how it was before rigs. It needs to get back there.
A ship, big or small, should be more or less as survivable with a traditional tank, or a speed. Some racial ships lend themselves more to speed tanking, but that shouldn't make them wildly more survivable than ships of the same class that rely on traditional tanking. Can anyone, the way things stand right now, argue that a Demios is as survivable as a Vaga or a nano ishtar? It's not even close.
Notice I said they should be equally viable options. Speed tanks should be viable, especially for the racial ships that depend on speed, but even for those, they shouldn't be wildly more viable than ships of the same class that rely on a traditional tank. That isn't true right now, and it needs to be.
It's going to get fixed. People are going to whine until it does. It's just too bad that CCP has drawn it (and the whines) out this long.
|
|
Carl Marcus
Gallente Galactic Waste Management
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 00:11:00 -
[551]
Well despite the well thought out rebutals to the "nano-nerf" im quite certain the brilliant minds that introduced us to nano warfare will find some equaly exhausting and untouchable ship set ups in the future. I have faith in you! Any way those ships that supposedly were intended for speed in the first place will still have speed and those ships "hvy assault cruisers" will no doubt find there place in the universe.Speed will still be a factor but guess what? You brilliant minds out there will find yourselves once again excersizing those gourgeous brain cells of yours to once again introduce us all to some new terror.
|
Carl Marcus
Gallente Galactic Waste Management
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 00:11:00 -
[552]
Well despite the well thought out rebutals to the "nano-nerf" im quite certain the brilliant minds that introduced us to nano warfare will find some equaly exhausting and untouchable ship set ups in the future. I have faith in you! Any way those ships that supposedly were intended for speed in the first place will still have speed and those ships "hvy assault cruisers" will no doubt find there place in the universe.Speed will still be a factor but guess what? You brilliant minds out there will find yourselves once again excersizing those gourgeous brain cells of yours to once again introduce us all to some new terror.
|
IR Scoutar
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 02:03:00 -
[553]
Originally by: Semkhet lots of stuff
can i has your babies ?
|
IR Scoutar
Caldari State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 02:03:00 -
[554]
Originally by: Semkhet lots of stuff
can i has your babies ?
|
Termopan
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 05:53:00 -
[555]
nano nerf = DONT TRAIN MINMATAR ...there bs are pretty usless compared to the other races ....there recons atm are very usefull as for there hac's but ..nerfing speed = dead vaga also for the web's nerf 60%chance etc and shit = usless rapier /huginn i tryed those web's on sisi webbed a rat frigate he was barelly slowing down so that says it all ...atm the minmatar bs's doing 1vs1 with other bs's from other races losse dramaticly ..if this nerf takes place ..all the players that trained minmatar could simply sell there char's cuz it will be a "dead race" and all of this because people cant adapt to the game you get owned by a vaga / huginn good dont go trolling in petitions that there fast nerf nerf ..learn to fly one and go own someone and feel good in it ..i did it ..and its hell of a fun then trolling around with nerfs and shit
|
Termopan
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 05:53:00 -
[556]
nano nerf = DONT TRAIN MINMATAR ...there bs are pretty usless compared to the other races ....there recons atm are very usefull as for there hac's but ..nerfing speed = dead vaga also for the web's nerf 60%chance etc and shit = usless rapier /huginn i tryed those web's on sisi webbed a rat frigate he was barelly slowing down so that says it all ...atm the minmatar bs's doing 1vs1 with other bs's from other races losse dramaticly ..if this nerf takes place ..all the players that trained minmatar could simply sell there char's cuz it will be a "dead race" and all of this because people cant adapt to the game you get owned by a vaga / huginn good dont go trolling in petitions that there fast nerf nerf ..learn to fly one and go own someone and feel good in it ..i did it ..and its hell of a fun then trolling around with nerfs and shit
|
Termopan
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 05:56:00 -
[557]
Edited by: Termopan on 14/10/2008 05:56:20 i think ccp should invent a option ..where it would show a question for instance : do you want to nerf nano ..then you explain what nerf consists in and people from the game to chose yes or no so the decision will be taken by eve players
|
Termopan
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 05:56:00 -
[558]
Edited by: Termopan on 14/10/2008 05:56:20 i think ccp should invent a option ..where it would show a question for instance : do you want to nerf nano ..then you explain what nerf consists in and people from the game to chose yes or no so the decision will be taken by eve players
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 08:22:00 -
[559]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking.
That is a blinkered and uneducated statement considering the ship types available in eve. Without speed as it is EVERY small ship is worthless in gang pvp. All frigates can be insta melted with a volley from a single ship let alone a focus of fire from a few let alone a gang and so can destroyers and cruisers.
I've been playing for a while now, and I'm pretty sure small ships were in the game, and useful, before rigs were introduced and the nano craze hit.
Small ships should be able to get "under the guns" of larger ships with their speed/agility, but should readily take damage from weapons that are designed to damage them. That's how it was before rigs. It needs to get back there.
Speed has been here for over 4 years the entire game from tracking to nerfs to new items and ships have taken it into account when they were implemented. Before those 4 years the player base of eve was not much larger that a couple of the largest alliances in the game right now, we did not have bubbles or dictors or jump bridges.
If you are "under the gins" of one ship you are in the sweet spot of ALL his gang mates and gonna get melted.
And no this is not how it was before rigs so please stop with the "days of yore", "when i was a lad" crap cos you know nothing about what you are talking about.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 08:22:00 -
[560]
Edited by: Murina on 14/10/2008 11:24:45
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Speed tanking should be a viable option, but it should not be superior to traditional tanking.
That is a blinkered and uneducated statement considering the ship types available in eve. Without speed as it is EVERY small ship is worthless in gang pvp. All frigates can be insta melted with a volley from a single ship let alone a focus of fire from a few let alone a gang and so can destroyers and cruisers.
I've been playing for a while now, and I'm pretty sure small ships were in the game, and useful, before rigs were introduced and the nano craze hit.
Small ships should be able to get "under the guns" of larger ships with their speed/agility, but should readily take damage from weapons that are designed to damage them. That's how it was before rigs. It needs to get back there.
Speed has been here for over 4 years not just with the introduction of rigs, and the entire game from tracking speeds to nerfs to new items and ships have taken it into account when they were implemented. Before those 4 years the player base of eve was not much larger than a couple of the largest alliances in the game right now let alone including their pets, we did not have bubbles or dictors or jump bridges or any of the other things ppl take for granted now.
If you are "under the guns" of one ship you are in the sweet spot of ALL his gang mates and gonna get insta melted.
And no this is not how it was before rigs so please stop with the "days of yore" and "when i was a lad" crap cos you know nothing about what you are talking about.
PS: I am still waiting for your detailed combat scenario on all the "tactics" and "creative" stuff you claim will burst forth with the removal of speed from the game.
|
|
Tehyarec
Erasers inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 12:06:00 -
[561]
Edited by: Tehyarec on 14/10/2008 12:10:08 I'm of two minds of these proposed nerfs.
I hate nanoships. It's a ******ed thing where you can only counter them with nanoships of your own or Minmatar recons (a fleet of them, since only a few of them will simply get swarmed and owned). So the way it is now, it certainly needs to stop.
If those that fly these nanoships can't see how overpowered and silly it is right now... take another look. Also it's no excuse that "I spent this and this much skillpoints to get here" - well guess what, I spent lots of skillpoints on blasters and gunnery in general, and your overspeeding ship is making those skillpoints useless. Sure, I could train for maxed nanoships myself, but I don't like that style, and forcing people to one single playstyle to be effective isn't right.
I'm sure everyone's trained for something that has since been nerfed or never was that good to begin with. That's not a reason to keep this speed problem in existence.
So there's a problem that needs fixing.
However, I'd say the speed problem should never have gotten this far to begin with. CCP should've seen - hell, KNOWN - where all the speed-increasing additions to the game would lead to. So the blame is on them in that sense.
I'll also say that some stuff they're proposing as the solution to this is plain bad. Disabling MWDs with a scrambler? Bye bye close range ships. Because this will hurt blaster ships more than nanoships most likely. Can't really fit both AB and MWD into something like a Deimos, and Gallente recons (especially combined with Minmater recons) could make entire blaster gangs for example stop dead in their tracks while long range support slaughters them. If this goes live, blasters simply won't be viable. Autocannons might perhaps stay viable up to a point with their better range (at least on ships with +falloff), but still a nerf to AC fits as well. Webs being nerfed... hard to say how that'll work out in the end. With how bad tracking is, probably not well, especially as I heard there's a nerf coming to hybrid gun tracking at least? Rails don't hit crap as it is, so when we can't use blasters either it's not going to be much fun.
And what comes to frigates, especially tackling ones, they'll of course be free kills with no MWD. I did 3,5km/s on my ceptors with no speed mods, and it was ok - I was able to do my job mostly, yet I was in no way untouchable. But with this change, I'd be stopped and killed in seconds.
So in essence, they could name the patch that will implement these changes to "Age of Missiles and the Rise of Gallente Recons". Suffice to say that I have 317k SP in missiles. I just don't see how they mean to keep close-range combat viable after this change. This scrambler change along with the ghost training change really are too much for me right now.
|
Tehyarec
Erasers inc. Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 12:06:00 -
[562]
Edited by: Tehyarec on 14/10/2008 12:17:42 I'm of two minds of these proposed nerfs.
I hate nanoships. It's a ******ed thing where you can only counter them with nanoships of your own or Minmatar recons (a fleet of them, since only a few of them will simply get swarmed and owned). So the way it is now, it certainly needs to stop.
If those that fly these nanoships can't see how overpowered and silly it is right now... take another look. Also it's no excuse that "I spent this and this much skillpoints to get here" - well guess what, I spent lots of skillpoints on blasters and gunnery in general, and your overspeeding ship is making those skillpoints useless. Sure, I could train for maxed nanoships myself, but I don't like that style, and forcing people to one single playstyle to be effective isn't right.
I'm sure everyone's trained for something that has since been nerfed or never was that good to begin with. That's not a reason to keep this speed problem in existence.
So there's a problem that needs fixing.
However, I'd say the speed problem should never have gotten this far to begin with. CCP should've seen - hell, KNOWN - where all the speed-increasing additions to the game would lead to. So the blame is on them in that sense.
I'll also say that some stuff they're proposing as the solution to this is plain bad. Mainly disabling MWDs with a scrambler. What the heck? Bye bye close range ships. Because this will hurt blaster ships more than nanoships most likely. Can't really fit both AB and MWD into something like a Deimos, and Gallente recons (especially combined with Minmater recons) could make entire blaster gangs for example stop dead in their tracks while long range support slaughters them. An AB won't make a difference. If this goes live, blasters simply won't be viable. Autocannons might perhaps stay viable up to a point with their better range (at least on ships with +falloff), but still a nerf to AC fits as well. Webs being nerfed... hard to say how that'll work out in the end. With how bad tracking is, probably not well, especially as I heard there's a nerf coming to hybrid gun tracking at least? Rails don't hit crap as it is, so when we can't use blasters either it's not going to be much fun.
And what comes to frigates, especially tackling ones, they'll of course be free kills with no MWD. I did 3,5km/s on my ceptors with no speed mods, and it was ok - I was able to do my job mostly, yet I was in no way untouchable. But with this change, I'd be stopped and killed in seconds.
So in essence, they could name the patch that will implement these changes to "Age of Missiles and the Rise of Gallente Recons". Suffice to say that I have 317k SP in missiles. I just don't see how they mean to keep close-range combat viable after this change. This scrambler change along with the ghost training change really are too much for me right now.
|
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 12:27:00 -
[563]
Okay for balancing out of the ships base speed is great I don't think anyone can complain there, it is long over due.
The only 2 things right now I am wondering about. Webber effectiveness going down. Scrambler - taking out the micro warp drive.
IF you scram somebody you don't need a webber unless you want to slow down an afterburner and for that purpose they really are over powered cause they were originally geared for the MWD drive and the result is the afterburner got the shaft. Okay fine I see the balance there.
The only thing about this is one class of ship (All the others are fine) that I wonder about and that is the intercepter. THis ship depends on speed. Maybe this is a mute issue maybe not but perhaps a closer look in order. The fix is simple if this ship class is hurt to much. Give them 1 or 2 points of stability like the blockade runner. One I think would be enough. Just a thought that would boast this class alone.
|
Korizan
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 12:27:00 -
[564]
Okay for balancing out of the ships base speed is great I don't think anyone can complain there, it is long over due.
The only 2 things right now I am wondering about. Webber effectiveness going down. Scrambler - taking out the micro warp drive.
IF you scram somebody you don't need a webber unless you want to slow down an afterburner and for that purpose they really are over powered cause they were originally geared for the MWD drive and the result is the afterburner got the shaft. Okay fine I see the balance there.
The only thing about this is one class of ship (All the others are fine) that I wonder about and that is the intercepter. THis ship depends on speed. Maybe this is a mute issue maybe not but perhaps a closer look in order. The fix is simple if this ship class is hurt to much. Give them 1 or 2 points of stability like the blockade runner. One I think would be enough. Just a thought that would boast this class alone.
|
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 12:54:00 -
[565]
Edited by: lebrata on 14/10/2008 12:55:37
Originally by: Korizan Okay for balancing out of the ships base speed is great I don't think anyone can complain there, it is long over due.
Actually 80% of the ppl think its a massively bad idea bud, and all the small classes of ships depend on speed from cruiser downwards, and the nerf makes them worthless.
|
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 12:54:00 -
[566]
Edited by: lebrata on 14/10/2008 12:55:37
Originally by: Korizan Okay for balancing out of the ships base speed is great I don't think anyone can complain there, it is long over due.
Actually 80% of the ppl think its a massively bad idea bud, and all the small classes of ships depend on speed from cruiser downwards, and the nerf makes them worthless.
|
Tehyarec
Erasers inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 13:06:00 -
[567]
Originally by: lebrata Actually 80% of the ppl think its a massively bad idea bud, and all the small classes of ships depend on speed from cruiser downwards, and the nerf makes them worthless.
80% of the people flying said nanoships due to their overpoweredness, sure. Who would want to give up their button of invincibility after all? Sadly since it's been the only effective way to fit a ship for ages now, the number of people flying this way is quite high. I'd rather fly conventionally and for that matter in a ship that doesn't cost up to and even over twenty times the hull's value (ceptors) in speed mods and rigs alone. Not everyone can even afford that even if they wanted to.
That said, I'll say again that the scrambler change simply is not the way to go about fixing anything. Nerfing speed alone via other means (like nerfing speed mods etc) doesn't make small ships worthless, but the scrambler change will.
|
Tehyarec
Erasers inc. Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 13:06:00 -
[568]
Originally by: lebrata Actually 80% of the ppl think its a massively bad idea bud, and all the small classes of ships depend on speed from cruiser downwards, and the nerf makes them worthless.
80% of the people flying said nanoships due to their overpoweredness, sure. Who would want to give up their button of invincibility after all? Sadly since it's been the only effective way to fit a ship for ages now, the number of people flying this way is quite high. I'd rather fly conventionally and for that matter in a ship that doesn't cost up to and even over twenty times the hull's value (ceptors) in speed mods and rigs alone. Not everyone can even afford that even if they wanted to.
That said, I'll say again that the scrambler change simply is not the way to go about fixing anything. Nerfing speed alone via other means (like nerfing speed mods etc) doesn't make small ships worthless, but the scrambler change will.
|
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 13:49:00 -
[569]
Edited by: lebrata on 14/10/2008 13:53:11
Originally by: Tehyarec
Originally by: lebrata Actually 80% of the ppl think its a massively bad idea bud, and all the small classes of ships depend on speed from cruiser downwards, and the nerf makes them worthless.
80% of the people flying said nanoships due to their overpoweredness, sure. Who would want to give up their button of invincibility after all?
Invincible against what?...ppl who wanna pvp in ratting and PVE setups maybe but against another pvp fitted and setup gang NANO is not overpowered in the slightest its quite weak.
If a nano is tackled its dead, if a RR BS or a member of a mixed gang with logistic support is tackled who cares its got a monster tank with all its buddies, wanna talk about invulnerability how about snipers, all standardly fitted ships cannot even lock them at the range they operate at let alone hit them and if you get close or summat drops out of warp near them they just warp.......
|
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 13:49:00 -
[570]
Edited by: lebrata on 14/10/2008 16:07:12
Originally by: Tehyarec
Originally by: lebrata Actually 80% of the ppl think its a massively bad idea bud, and all the small classes of ships depend on speed from cruiser downwards, and the nerf makes them worthless.
80% of the people flying said nanoships due to their overpoweredness, sure. Who would want to give up their button of invincibility after all?
Invincible against what?...ppl who wanna pvp in ratting and PVE setups maybe, but against another pvp fitted and setup gangs NANO is not overpowered in the slightest its quite weak.
Wanna talk about invulnerability?...
If a nano is tackled its dead, NANO melts when tackled.
If a RR BS is tackled who cares its got a monster tank with all its buddies, and if it does start to break it can de-agrro and jump or dock.
If a member of a mixed gang with logistic support is tackled who cares its got a monster tank with all its logistic buddies, and if it does start to break it can de-agrro and jump or dock.
How about snipers?
All standardly fitted ships cannot even lock them at the range snipers operate at let alone hit them and if you get close or summat drops out of warp near them they just warp.......ect ect.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 23 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |