Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eternum Praetorian
Tupperware Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 23:49:00 -
[91]
Here is a thought:
Jam warp....
Jam MWD...
Why not interdiction sphere to?
Then would that solve a few issues?
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 23:50:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Liang Nuren
I wasn't making reference to securing your territory, I was pointing out that the nano nerf is just going to bring about its own set of uniform ships and fits.
-Liang
Yes but won't there be more option available? You can't deny the new modules that will be seen after the patch, like warp scramblers and ABs on pvp fits. That's good, right?
We'll see ABs on PvP fits when it comes to small ships soloing in low-sec, or for solo Pilgrims/etc which get to pick their fights. They will still be largely unused for large ships, becuase they don't provide nearly enough boost to be useful.
If you think the nerf will remove the 'M for mandatory' MWD on anything but totally niche fits, you're being very unrealistic.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 23:51:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Here is a thought:
Jam warp....
Jam MWD...
Why not interdiction sphere to?
Then would that solve a few issues?
No, it'd just overpower interdiction spheres. How about one which prevents you from jumping back through a gate, too?
Or getting off grid until all the hostiles die? That sounds like what you want.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Eternum Praetorian
Tupperware Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 23:53:00 -
[94]
I guess I should have added random and time dependent. More like an ECM and less like a warp scram.
|
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 23:53:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Yes but won't there be more option available? You can't deny the new modules that will be seen after the patch, like warp scramblers and ABs on pvp fits. That's good, right?
Hmm, you're deluding yourself: MWDs are still mandatory because none of the reasons to fit them changed. Please remember that MWD does not equate to nano. And as for scrams... they'll be useful on frigs and Arazus, but overwhelmingly, they won't see use for a lack of range.
In the end, I think we're going to see alot more Pulse lasers and alot less blasters after the patch. Where's your vaunted "diversity" when you're nerfing two whole races into the ground to get it?
-Liang --
|
AZuMmI
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 00:38:00 -
[96]
I personally love nano and dont think it need nerfing at all lets face it there are a 100 ways to counter it hence why when you look at a killboard you see lots of nano ships on them (yes I know thats cos alot of people fly them). I mean a raven can take out a nano ishtar without much problems as long as the raven pilot has some common sense.
I also think the worst part about this nerf isnt the hamfisted way its being done its actually the title given to it its called rebalancing which quite franckly is a crock, and all of you who are saying that it will make so many ship viable look at the cost, you get AFs and loose HACs Dictors blaster ships AC ships the list goes on. everyone goes on about how hard minmitar will be hit but lets not forget gallente you lose speed and pretty much the only decent gallente ship left is a domi.
to sum up if ccp want to limit the amount of nano ships in game they need to get more creative than just nerf it. I personally think this is where T3 could come in( no i dont think ccp should dedicate T3 to anti nano)
another quick thought for you guys complaining about keeping your space safe what would you rather a nano gang ganking one of two ratters or a 20 man rr bs fleet jumping into your gate camp and when their finished with that moving onto your poses. I think the biggest point most of you are missing is that nano is good for one thing and thats roaming.
well my 2 cents are there on with the flaming.
|
adriaans
Amarr Ankaa.
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 00:47:00 -
[97]
personally i think the speed nerf is a bit too harsh (especially the web nerf), most nano ships are relatively ok to kill (and only need a very slight speed nerf, like 20%), it's when you get snaked faction fitted nano ships the problem lies, and even then i'd say a gang that has falcon(s) is still much much more harder to fight than a nano gang that uses faction fittings. -sig-
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr!
|
JVol
Amarr The IMorral MAjority Imorral Dragons
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 01:27:00 -
[98]
This may come as a surprise to those of you who just joined the community in the last 1.5 -2 years.. But.. Eve was fun and VERY playable BEFORE nanos were a glimmer in CCP's eye. Hacs were all over and feared, blobs were present ( not a new feature ) and you learned to use a scout or your scanner, or to die like a man. Eve will be fine when nanos are gone, and they WILL BE GONE, they are broke.
True pvpers will adapt and be just as deadly, altho they will have to learn to pick targets cause running wont be an option 95% of the time as it is now.
|
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 01:48:00 -
[99]
Originally by: JVol
This may come as a surprise to those of you who just joined the community in the last 1.5 -2 years.. But.. Eve was fun and VERY playable BEFORE nanos were a glimmer in CCP's eye. Hacs were all over and feared, blobs were present ( not a new feature ) and you learned to use a scout or your scanner, or to die like a man. Eve will be fine when nanos are gone, and they WILL BE GONE, they are broke.
True pvpers will adapt and be just as deadly, altho they will have to learn to pick targets cause running wont be an option 95% of the time as it is now.
Indeed - you know they gave us around a year to get prepared for it. I haven't wasted time in setting up my new schemes to kill people. ;-)
-Liang --
|
Vanthropy
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 01:50:00 -
[100]
i can't wait! everyone will be a newb again! "SPEED + GANK = SPANK... Spank that ***** up" |
|
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 09:44:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Myra2007
...
The good thing is its only half an hour probably they didn't want to waste a full 60minutes on this farce. Oh well sorry i'm in a bad mood. Caldari bs 5 coming soon.
Sigh, and there goes my last hopes that CCP actually pays attention. At least I've already got Cal BS5. :)
-Liang
CCP are a joke.
Al they are doing to balance is adjusting missiles. They didnt consider cs, hacs, blaster boats ac's etc.
Im dissapointed in you CCP. Awesome EVE history
Missiles ba-oom! |
Burn Mac
Minmatar The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 12:24:00 -
[102]
Nano-gangs will turn into hilariously large interceptor gangs w/ long range fittings and disruptors, ability to disengage >> Everything else :D
WTB Claw n Crusader
|
Xori Ruscuv
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:06:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 09/10/2008 13:07:20
Originally by: JVol
This may come as a surprise to those of you who just joined the community in the last 1.5 -2 years.. But.. Eve was fun and VERY playable BEFORE nanos were a glimmer in CCP's eye. Hacs were all over and feared, blobs were present ( not a new feature ) and you learned to use a scout or your scanner, or to die like a man. Eve will be fine when nanos are gone, and they WILL BE GONE, they are broke.
True pvpers will adapt and be just as deadly, altho they will have to learn to pick targets cause running wont be an option 95% of the time as it is now.
THIS man... he has the smarts.
... and he USES THEM!
People say "omg this will kill eve!" Well, if all the things people cried "eve is dieing!" about actually killed eve, eve would have been dead a looooooong time ago.
Unfortunately, I quite enjoyed my mega and my brutix. I'm training Amarr. This nerf definitely encourages FOTaMarr training.
|
Brother Welcome
Amarr Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:08:00 -
[104]
Edited by: Brother Welcome on 09/10/2008 13:10:35 Edited by: Brother Welcome on 09/10/2008 13:09:47
Originally by: Malcanis The whole "nerf nanos" thing was just lame. All that was really needed was a reduction in polycarbs' mass reduction, and a missile velocity/explosion velocity script for tracking computers. Maybe a rebalancing of snake set bonuses in line with the other pirate sets, to limit those "edge-case" game engine breaking speeds (or just make implant bonuses non-cumulative with gang bonuses).
My understanding is that what you say above is spot on.
/signed.
OTOH I love the web nerf and believe it will substantially improve fun. And the AB and Scram changes sound excellent!
-vk
|
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:47:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 09/10/2008 13:07:20
Originally by: JVol
This may come as a surprise to those of you who just joined the community in the last 1.5 -2 years.. But.. Eve was fun and VERY playable BEFORE nanos were a glimmer in CCP's eye. Hacs were all over and feared, blobs were present ( not a new feature ) and you learned to use a scout or your scanner, or to die like a man. Eve will be fine when nanos are gone, and they WILL BE GONE, they are broke.
True pvpers will adapt and be just as deadly, altho they will have to learn to pick targets cause running wont be an option 95% of the time as it is now.
THIS man... he has the smarts.
... and he USES THEM!
People say "omg this will kill eve!" Well, if all the things people cried "eve is dieing!" about actually killed eve, eve would have been dead a looooooong time ago.
Unfortunately, I quite enjoyed my mega and my brutix. I'm training Amarr. This nerf definitely encourages FOTaMarr training.
I never said anything about nanoes. What im annoyed about is that ccp's aim is to eliminate cookie cutter setups with mwd's. Fact is they cant eliminate it: their just nerfing it. Sure this removes nanoes, but it really gimps some of the heavier ships that are only marginal to fly e.g. tier 1 bc's, cs etc. Now every slow ship is simply gonna fit rr, use hics and utilise boring gate camp tactics as roaming is going to be that much harder. Wow, thanks. Awesome EVE history
Missiles ba-oom! |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:50:00 -
[106]
Quote: What im annoyed about is that ccp's aim is to eliminate cookie cutter setups with mwd's. Fact is they cant eliminate it: their just nerfing it. Sure this removes nanoes, but it really gimps some of the heavier ships that are only marginal to fly e.g. tier 1 bc's, cs etc.
It's not their aim to eliminate MWDs, and the effect on the heavier shpis is going to be pretty small really.
|
Esmenet
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:54:00 -
[107]
Originally by: JVol
This may come as a surprise to those of you who just joined the community in the last 1.5 -2 years.. But.. Eve was fun and VERY playable BEFORE nanos were a glimmer in CCP's eye. Hacs were all over and feared, blobs were present ( not a new feature ) and you learned to use a scout or your scanner, or to die like a man. Eve will be fine when nanos are gone, and they WILL BE GONE, they are broke.
True pvpers will adapt and be just as deadly, altho they will have to learn to pick targets cause running wont be an option 95% of the time as it is now.
This may come as a surprise to you but the 0.0 of today is very different from what it was way back when. The game will still be playable once nanos are nerfed but 0.0 will be a much more boring place unless your primary interest is ratting.
|
Esmenet
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:56:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Liang Nuren
I wasn't making reference to securing your territory, I was pointing out that the nano nerf is just going to bring about its own set of uniform ships and fits.
-Liang
Yes but won't there be more option available? You can't deny the new modules that will be seen after the patch, like warp scramblers and ABs on pvp fits. That's good, right?
Eh having scrams and AB viable on niche fits while practically killing off most hacs, blasterships, and forcing everyone into battleships or caps for everything does not promote diversity.
|
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:57:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Gypsio III
Quote: What im annoyed about is that ccp's aim is to eliminate cookie cutter setups with mwd's. Fact is they cant eliminate it: their just nerfing it. Sure this removes nanoes, but it really gimps some of the heavier ships that are only marginal to fly e.g. tier 1 bc's, cs etc.
It's not their aim to eliminate MWDs, and the effect on the heavier shpis is going to be pretty small really.
They want to remove cookie cutter setups, ie remove mods from ships that werent designed for them, such as bs and bc. The fact that the need for the mwd stays shows that this is just a superflous nerf that benefits nothing but boring gate camp tactics.
And yes they are effected big time: slower base speed +get mwd turned off by scramblers. I thinks thats a big change myself.. Awesome EVE history
Missiles ba-oom! |
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 13:58:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Liang Nuren
I wasn't making reference to securing your territory, I was pointing out that the nano nerf is just going to bring about its own set of uniform ships and fits.
-Liang
Yes but won't there be more option available? You can't deny the new modules that will be seen after the patch, like warp scramblers and ABs on pvp fits. That's good, right?
Eh having scrams and AB viable on niche fits while practically killing off most hacs, blasterships, and forcing everyone into battleships or caps for everything does not promote diversity.
This exactly Awesome EVE history
Missiles ba-oom! |
|
Xori Ruscuv
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:01:00 -
[111]
Eh, I missed the liveblog yesterday because I couldn't sneak out of work for it.
Is there a recording anywhere? Or a detailed writeup?
Thanks
|
Kaeten
Hybrid Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 15:52:00 -
[112]
lets say there are 7 ppl camping a gate with a bubble. And you jump through. Are you SUPPOSED to live through a gate camp with 7 ppl and a bubble? If you were to escape it and run away that would waste the meaning of this so called gate camp and 7 ppl's ability. Meaning the 7 ppl will moan and the nano'ist will laugh.
I must admit, I don't like gate camps. And to be honest. I think ccp shouldchange the way gates and system jumping is done. imo. ________________________ I'M POOR
|
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 16:10:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Kaeten lets say there are 7 ppl camping a gate with a bubble. And you jump through. Are you SUPPOSED to live through a gate camp with 7 ppl and a bubble? If you were to escape it and run away that would waste the meaning of this so called gate camp and 7 ppl's ability. Meaning the 7 ppl will moan and the nano'ist will laugh.
I must admit, I don't like gate camps. And to be honest. I think ccp shouldchange the way gates and system jumping is done. imo.
Im not really talking about that being the problem. The main problem is the need to use mwd for fleet ops, e.g. burning out of your OWN bubbles (liek anchorables), reproaching gates, burning to range etc Awesome EVE history
Missiles ba-oom! |
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 16:43:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Kaeten lets say there are 7 ppl camping a gate with a bubble. And you jump through. Are you SUPPOSED to live through a gate camp with 7 ppl and a bubble? If you were to escape it and run away that would waste the meaning of this so called gate camp and 7 ppl's ability. Meaning the 7 ppl will moan and the nano'ist will laugh.
I must admit, I don't like gate camps. And to be honest. I think ccp shouldchange the way gates and system jumping is done. imo.
On the flip side, does it mean that you're supposed to be *guaranteed* to die? What does that say about game mechanics, and what does it say about the "stealthy/speedy classes" of the game?
Simple: it says that the optimal solution is always to simply bring more numbers than your opponent - and preferably in battleships.
-Liang --
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 16:49:00 -
[115]
Originally by: BiggestT
Originally by: Gypsio III
Quote: What im annoyed about is that ccp's aim is to eliminate cookie cutter setups with mwd's. Fact is they cant eliminate it: their just nerfing it. Sure this removes nanoes, but it really gimps some of the heavier ships that are only marginal to fly e.g. tier 1 bc's, cs etc.
It's not their aim to eliminate MWDs, and the effect on the heavier shpis is going to be pretty small really.
They want to remove cookie cutter setups, ie remove mods from ships that werent designed for them, such as bs and bc. The fact that the need for the mwd stays shows that this is just a superflous nerf that benefits nothing but boring gate camp tactics.
And yes they are effected big time: slower base speed +get mwd turned off by scramblers. I thinks thats a big change myself..
They do not want to eliminate MWDs from BS and BCs and I don't understand why you think that that's the case. The scrambler changes are inconsequential in tackling heavy units - anything that will be able to get in range to scramble you would have been able to get within range to 90% web you.
|
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 03:34:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Gypsio III
They do not want to eliminate MWDs from BS and BCs and I don't understand why you think that that's the case. The scrambler changes are inconsequential in tackling heavy units - anything that will be able to get in range to scramble you would have been able to get within range to 90% web you.
This is exactly why the nerf shouldnt hapen. The need and requirement for mwd stays, while many ships such as blaster boats, minmi recons etc get shafted.
Awesome EVE history
Missiles ba-oom! |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 04:51:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Esmenet
Eh having scrams and AB viable on niche fits while practically killing off most hacs, blasterships, and forcing everyone into battleships or caps for everything does not promote diversity.
Killing off hacs? You really have to start playing this game. Utter nonsense. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 05:00:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Esmenet
Eh having scrams and AB viable on niche fits while practically killing off most hacs, blasterships, and forcing everyone into battleships or caps for everything does not promote diversity.
Killing off hacs? You really have to start playing this game. Utter nonsense.
Yeah, HACs like the Eagle, Zealot, and Sacrilege will survive. :)
-Liang
You might wanna add ishtar, cerb, muninn. They will DEFINATELY survive the changes. Hmm? Thats pretty much all hacs mate. |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 05:05:00 -
[119]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 10/10/2008 05:05:38
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer You might wanna add ishtar, cerb, muninn. They will DEFINATELY survive the changes. Hmm? Thats pretty much all hacs mate.
Muninn? Survive? That ship isn't even good NOW. How exaclty is it going to be even remotely useful post-patch? |
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 05:06:00 -
[120]
lol diemost |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |