EVE Search - CCP, what is going through your head?!?!

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP, what is going through your head?!?!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Arvalen Eno	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:05:00 - [61] Originally by: Aneu Angellus Look at it this way, CCP is planning on changing missiles so torps are slower, cruiser missiles are faster, heavies even faster and light missiles/rockets the fasest. Now all frigates apart from the Minmatar ones wont be able to outrun Cruise missiles with the missile update... and while orbiting they will slow down makign them even more vulnerable... so there is tackling out the window. Yup, that's what i meant when i said imo the missiles need to be looked at next. Especially with that MWD/AFB change coming. (some combination of Evasive Maneuvering and signature radius as defense check against missiles could work quite good here i think. Making them work like the turrets -- the 'bigger' the missile size, the easier it is to dodge by smaller ships) "Ignorance leads to fear, fear leads to anger; anger leads to hate... hate leads to nerfs."
Arvalen Eno	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:05:00 - [62] Originally by: Aneu Angellus Look at it this way, CCP is planning on changing missiles so torps are slower, cruiser missiles are faster, heavies even faster and light missiles/rockets the fasest. Now all frigates apart from the Minmatar ones wont be able to outrun Cruise missiles with the missile update... and while orbiting they will slow down makign them even more vulnerable... so there is tackling out the window. Yup, that's what i meant when i said imo the missiles need to be looked at next. Especially with that MWD/AFB change coming. (some combination of Evasive Maneuvering and signature radius as defense check against missiles could work quite good here i think. Making them work like the turrets -- the 'bigger' the missile size, the easier it is to dodge by smaller ships) "Ignorance leads to fear, fear leads to anger; anger leads to hate... hate leads to nerfs."
Piccilo	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:05:00 - [63] i fly maled most of the time- and i see almost an equal spread of ceptors/frigs (min ones prob being least common). why have it so everyone flys the same thing with the same setup?
Piccilo	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:05:00 - [64] i fly maled most of the time- and i see almost an equal spread of ceptors/frigs (min ones prob being least common). why have it so everyone flys the same thing with the same setup?
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:07:00 - [65] Aneu, I'd like to see where CCP have posted the details for that then. Because otherwise you're blowing smoke and we have to deal with what we have TODAY. And Joshua, look at indys "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:07:00 - [66] Aneu, I'd like to see where CCP have posted the details for that then. Because otherwise you're blowing smoke and we have to deal with what we have TODAY. And Joshua, look at indys "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:13:00 - [67] Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 23/10/2004 15:16:30 I'm no expert on flying industrials but you can't fit a cruiser-sized MWD on any of the ones that I can fly (I'm assuming Iteron 5 can fit a 10mn MWD if you fit some micro aux power cores/rcu II's) and fitting a 1MN MWD on such a heavy ship wouldn't work very well either. Maya, what do you mean? LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:13:00 - [68] Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 23/10/2004 15:16:30 I'm no expert on flying industrials but you can't fit a cruiser-sized MWD on any of the ones that I can fly (I'm assuming Iteron 5 can fit a 10mn MWD if you fit some micro aux power cores/rcu II's) and fitting a 1MN MWD on such a heavy ship wouldn't work very well either. Maya, what do you mean? LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Vex Seraphim	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:14:00 - [69] There is absolutely no sight in this game more beautiful than a missile-spamming dual-mwd'ing raven. . ------------------- :: finite horizon :: killboard :: :: bio :: blog ::
Vex Seraphim	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:14:00 - [70] There is absolutely no sight in this game more beautiful than a missile-spamming dual-mwd'ing raven. . ------------------- :: finite horizon :: killboard :: :: bio :: blog ::
Arud	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:16:00 - [71] Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus MWD 1mn take nothing to put on and can be run non-stop while dealing damage. MWD 10mn take a bit more and are able to be run non-stop and still deal out damage. MWD 100mn Takes alot to put on and requires alot to run, and cannot be run non-stop and be able to do damage - and dont look at it like an ass, try and understand what im saying here - you need to run it in bursts... There is enough nerfs on the MWD, they really dont need to make it so you cant fit two. Aneu Let me guess, you fly caldari ships? No, i mainly fly a tempest or an armageddon... ok, and still think that frigs using mwd can do damage? You've obviously never had 4 kestrels with damage mods on shooting at you then... their damage output is huge. Aneu exactly why I asked if you flew caldari ships since missile users are the only ones who benefit from using mwd's and doing damage at the same time
Arud	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:16:00 - [72] Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus MWD 1mn take nothing to put on and can be run non-stop while dealing damage. MWD 10mn take a bit more and are able to be run non-stop and still deal out damage. MWD 100mn Takes alot to put on and requires alot to run, and cannot be run non-stop and be able to do damage - and dont look at it like an ass, try and understand what im saying here - you need to run it in bursts... There is enough nerfs on the MWD, they really dont need to make it so you cant fit two. Aneu Let me guess, you fly caldari ships? No, i mainly fly a tempest or an armageddon... ok, and still think that frigs using mwd can do damage? You've obviously never had 4 kestrels with damage mods on shooting at you then... their damage output is huge. Aneu exactly why I asked if you flew caldari ships since missile users are the only ones who benefit from using mwd's and doing damage at the same time
Vex Seraphim	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:22:00 - [73] Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus MWD 1mn take nothing to put on and can be run non-stop while dealing damage. MWD 10mn take a bit more and are able to be run non-stop and still deal out damage. MWD 100mn Takes alot to put on and requires alot to run, and cannot be run non-stop and be able to do damage - and dont look at it like an ass, try and understand what im saying here - you need to run it in bursts... There is enough nerfs on the MWD, they really dont need to make it so you cant fit two. Aneu Let me guess, you fly caldari ships? No, i mainly fly a tempest or an armageddon... ok, and still think that frigs using mwd can do damage? You've obviously never had 4 kestrels with damage mods on shooting at you then... their damage output is huge. Aneu exactly why I asked if you flew caldari ships since missile users are the only ones who benefit from using mwd's and doing damage at the same time And only non-missile users benifit from instant damage, the damage you cannot warp away from before it hits you. Only non-missile users benifit from having a LOT more to counter frigates, since their guns actually do hit frigs, and missiles usually don't. So, what's your point mate? ------------------- :: finite horizon :: killboard :: :: bio :: blog ::
Vex Seraphim	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:22:00 - [74] Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus Originally by: Arud Originally by: Aneu Angellus MWD 1mn take nothing to put on and can be run non-stop while dealing damage. MWD 10mn take a bit more and are able to be run non-stop and still deal out damage. MWD 100mn Takes alot to put on and requires alot to run, and cannot be run non-stop and be able to do damage - and dont look at it like an ass, try and understand what im saying here - you need to run it in bursts... There is enough nerfs on the MWD, they really dont need to make it so you cant fit two. Aneu Let me guess, you fly caldari ships? No, i mainly fly a tempest or an armageddon... ok, and still think that frigs using mwd can do damage? You've obviously never had 4 kestrels with damage mods on shooting at you then... their damage output is huge. Aneu exactly why I asked if you flew caldari ships since missile users are the only ones who benefit from using mwd's and doing damage at the same time And only non-missile users benifit from instant damage, the damage you cannot warp away from before it hits you. Only non-missile users benifit from having a LOT more to counter frigates, since their guns actually do hit frigs, and missiles usually don't. So, what's your point mate? ------------------- :: finite horizon :: killboard :: :: bio :: blog ::
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:28:00 - [75] Stop the quoting Someone rustle up a Dev. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:28:00 - [76] Stop the quoting Someone rustle up a Dev. LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Seleene	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:34:00 - [77] Sorry guys, but dual MWD Ravens are fine with me. I love to fly them and know how to kill them as well. It's far from an impossible setup to deal with. Also, as I've said in other threads, running a dual-MWD setup makes you vunerable to all kinds of things. Your defense is ** and while you may be able to speed out of most situations, if you screw up or another pilot out-thinks you, it's a pod-ride home in most cases. I'm not going to lose my head if the 2x MWD rule gets changed, but I really think CCP needs to leave this one alone. As for the 'geddon issue, I disagree. It's bad ass and mean as hell, but it certianly won't win every engagement against any** foe. So... I'm in 50% agreement with Aneu on something. Scary. - T2 Weapons Testing in progress! Volunteer today!
Seleene	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:34:00 - [78] Sorry guys, but dual MWD Ravens are fine with me. I love to fly them and know how to kill them as well. It's far from an impossible setup to deal with. Also, as I've said in other threads, running a dual-MWD setup makes you vunerable to all kinds of things. Your defense is ** and while you may be able to speed out of most situations, if you screw up or another pilot out-thinks you, it's a pod-ride home in most cases. I'm not going to lose my head if the 2x MWD rule gets changed, but I really think CCP needs to leave this one alone. As for the 'geddon issue, I disagree. It's bad ass and mean as hell, but it certianly won't win every engagement against any** foe. So... I'm in 50% agreement with Aneu on something. Scary. - T2 Weapons Testing in progress! Volunteer today!
Arud	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:35:00 - [79] The point is that you dont have much idea how things go and more importantly every time there is a change to the game mechanics posts like this one start to appear. Whats so special is that they always die down when people see that the change isnt so bad and in most cases is actually pretty damn good. A crow for example can fit a 10mw AB and spam missiles like mad on other ships without getting it at all by turret users. Same goes for if he uses a 1mw mwd. Any turret user trying to do the same thing wont hit much. I used a crusader for fun against missile spawning npc's in a combat missions. Had a 10mw ab on, orbited at 2.5-5km range and fired. Sure they didnt hit me at all which was nice but I hardly hit at all as well. You also say that an armageddon is the uber in 1vs1. Sure its probably the best tier 1 battleship at that job. But against any ew using ship its toast. Even good interceptor pilots can take out a gankageddon. The reason why the armageddon doesnt need a nerf, as the devs have said already in dev chats is because it sacrifices all defensive capabilities in return for offensive ones. You can outfit an Apocalypse that does slightly less damage then an Armageddon but has more tanking capabilities. Is that unfair as well?
Arud	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:35:00 - [80] The point is that you dont have much idea how things go and more importantly every time there is a change to the game mechanics posts like this one start to appear. Whats so special is that they always die down when people see that the change isnt so bad and in most cases is actually pretty damn good. A crow for example can fit a 10mw AB and spam missiles like mad on other ships without getting it at all by turret users. Same goes for if he uses a 1mw mwd. Any turret user trying to do the same thing wont hit much. I used a crusader for fun against missile spawning npc's in a combat missions. Had a 10mw ab on, orbited at 2.5-5km range and fired. Sure they didnt hit me at all which was nice but I hardly hit at all as well. You also say that an armageddon is the uber in 1vs1. Sure its probably the best tier 1 battleship at that job. But against any ew using ship its toast. Even good interceptor pilots can take out a gankageddon. The reason why the armageddon doesnt need a nerf, as the devs have said already in dev chats is because it sacrifices all defensive capabilities in return for offensive ones. You can outfit an Apocalypse that does slightly less damage then an Armageddon but has more tanking capabilities. Is that unfair as well?
Aneu Angellus	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:44:00 - [81] Edited by: Aneu Angellus on 23/10/2004 15:49:24 Originally by: Arud The point is that you dont have much idea how things go and more importantly every time there is a change to the game mechanics posts like this one start to appear. Whats so special is that they always die down when people see that the change isnt so bad and in most cases is actually pretty damn good. A crow for example can fit a 10mw AB and spam missiles like mad on other ships without getting it at all by turret users. Same goes for if he uses a 1mw mwd. Any turret user trying to do the same thing wont hit much. I used a crusader for fun against missile spawning npc's in a combat missions. Had a 10mw ab on, orbited at 2.5-5km range and fired. Sure they didnt hit me at all which was nice but I hardly hit at all as well. You also say that an armageddon is the uber in 1vs1. Sure its probably the best tier 1 battleship at that job. But against any ew using ship its toast. Even good interceptor pilots can take out a gankageddon. The reason why the armageddon doesnt need a nerf, as the devs have said already in dev chats is because it sacrifices all defensive capabilities in return for offensive ones. You can outfit an Apocalypse that does slightly less damage then an Armageddon but has more tanking capabilities. Is that unfair as well? So what your saying is because it gives up all defence it means its fine, so a raven gives up more than an armageddon does 50% shields 50% cap and still thats not right? To be honest i dont care about an armageddon, it was just an example, but what i do care about is dual MWD, and its wrong to remove it. Also you say we dont know about things until their released, well we currently have a server running all these changes, and i gota admit, no dual MWD sux... Aneu ________________ Aneu Angellus Vengeance Of The Fallen - WolfPack Military Captain
Aneu Angellus	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:44:00 - [82] Edited by: Aneu Angellus on 23/10/2004 15:49:24 Originally by: Arud The point is that you dont have much idea how things go and more importantly every time there is a change to the game mechanics posts like this one start to appear. Whats so special is that they always die down when people see that the change isnt so bad and in most cases is actually pretty damn good. A crow for example can fit a 10mw AB and spam missiles like mad on other ships without getting it at all by turret users. Same goes for if he uses a 1mw mwd. Any turret user trying to do the same thing wont hit much. I used a crusader for fun against missile spawning npc's in a combat missions. Had a 10mw ab on, orbited at 2.5-5km range and fired. Sure they didnt hit me at all which was nice but I hardly hit at all as well. You also say that an armageddon is the uber in 1vs1. Sure its probably the best tier 1 battleship at that job. But against any ew using ship its toast. Even good interceptor pilots can take out a gankageddon. The reason why the armageddon doesnt need a nerf, as the devs have said already in dev chats is because it sacrifices all defensive capabilities in return for offensive ones. You can outfit an Apocalypse that does slightly less damage then an Armageddon but has more tanking capabilities. Is that unfair as well? So what your saying is because it gives up all defence it means its fine, so a raven gives up more than an armageddon does 50% shields 50% cap and still thats not right? To be honest i dont care about an armageddon, it was just an example, but what i do care about is dual MWD, and its wrong to remove it. Also you say we dont know about things until their released, well we currently have a server running all these changes, and i gota admit, no dual MWD sux... Aneu ________________ Aneu Angellus Vengeance Of The Fallen - WolfPack Military Captain
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:46:00 - [83] Originally by: Joshua Calvert Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 23/10/2004 15:16:30 I'm no expert on flying industrials but you can't fit a cruiser-sized MWD on any of the ones that I can fly (I'm assuming Iteron 5 can fit a 10mn MWD if you fit some micro aux power cores/rcu II's) and fitting a 1MN MWD on such a heavy ship wouldn't work very well either. Maya, what do you mean? 1 MN MWD's ARE used on them. You can't now combine 1MN MWD's with 10MN AB's either on them. Iteron 5 and Mammoth CAN mount 10MN MWD (with RCU and MAPC), but they're relatively high-end indies. (You can do others too, but that requires the stupidly expensive RCU2's...and if you can do that, you can learn to drive an itty 5 or a mammoth). The PROBLEM is that if you do you can't use any cargo expanders. So your cargo capacity plummets. "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2004.10.23 15:46:00 - [84] Originally by: Joshua Calvert Edited by: Joshua Calvert on 23/10/2004 15:16:30 I'm no expert on flying industrials but you can't fit a cruiser-sized MWD on any of the ones that I can fly (I'm assuming Iteron 5 can fit a 10mn MWD if you fit some micro aux power cores/rcu II's) and fitting a 1MN MWD on such a heavy ship wouldn't work very well either. Maya, what do you mean? 1 MN MWD's ARE used on them. You can't now combine 1MN MWD's with 10MN AB's either on them. Iteron 5 and Mammoth CAN mount 10MN MWD (with RCU and MAPC), but they're relatively high-end indies. (You can do others too, but that requires the stupidly expensive RCU2's...and if you can do that, you can learn to drive an itty 5 or a mammoth). The PROBLEM is that if you do you can't use any cargo expanders. So your cargo capacity plummets. "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Tobiaz	Posted - 2004.10.23 16:12:00 - [85] Edited by: Tobiaz on 23/10/2004 16:49:35 Quote: Battleships cost 400x the amount of a frigate and should be more usefull than a frigate... yet all their gona be good for soon is mining or sitting still and blasting eachother... how fun! Again that lame pricedifference argument. Where is it written that things that are really expensive automatically should always win against things that are cheap? It all comes down to tactics and using it for what it's meant to do. Battleships are for dealing massive amounts of damage against objects that have lots of hitpoints like stations or other battleships or attacking things over enourmous distances. Frigates are for fighting other frigates in escort duties, harrassing and jamming other larger ships so your battleships have an easy target or doing hit and run attacks against unprotected ships. And if those other larger ships are too stupid to either forgot to equip countermeasures or to bring along some escorts deserves to die, whether his ship is more expensive or not. In Pearl Harbour numerous battleships were destroyed by mere planes. Don't think one of the admirals was yelling "Not fair, even one battleship costed more then all those planes together!" I think it was more likely "Where the hell were our planes?!" About the MWD issue: I think double MWD ravens are just ridiculous. The battleship defence should be a lot of hitpoints and having a lot of slots for countermeasures and repairmodules, not speed: that's the domain of frigates.
Tobiaz	Posted - 2004.10.23 16:12:00 - [86] Edited by: Tobiaz on 23/10/2004 16:49:35 Quote: Battleships cost 400x the amount of a frigate and should be more usefull than a frigate... yet all their gona be good for soon is mining or sitting still and blasting eachother... how fun! Again that lame pricedifference argument. Where is it written that things that are really expensive automatically should always win against things that are cheap? It all comes down to tactics and using it for what it's meant to do. Battleships are for dealing massive amounts of damage against objects that have lots of hitpoints like stations or other battleships or attacking things over enourmous distances. Frigates are for fighting other frigates in escort duties, harrassing and jamming other larger ships so your battleships have an easy target or doing hit and run attacks against unprotected ships. And if those other larger ships are too stupid to either forgot to equip countermeasures or to bring along some escorts deserves to die, whether his ship is more expensive or not. In Pearl Harbour numerous battleships were destroyed by mere planes. Don't think one of the admirals was yelling "Not fair, even one battleship costed more then all those planes together!" I think it was more likely "Where the hell were our planes?!" About the MWD issue: I think double MWD ravens are just ridiculous. The battleship defence should be a lot of hitpoints and having a lot of slots for countermeasures and repairmodules, not speed: that's the domain of frigates.
Aneu Angellus	Posted - 2004.10.23 16:18:00 - [87] No Tobiaz, its meant to be bigger, badder and much better... Battleships are getting nerfed, but so are frigates, rememmber that... Aneu ________________ Aneu Angellus Vengeance Of The Fallen - WolfPack Military Captain
Aneu Angellus	Posted - 2004.10.23 16:18:00 - [88] No Tobiaz, its meant to be bigger, badder and much better... Battleships are getting nerfed, but so are frigates, rememmber that... Aneu ________________ Aneu Angellus Vengeance Of The Fallen - WolfPack Military Captain
mahhy	Posted - 2004.10.23 16:38:00 - [89] Originally by: Aneu Angellus So what your saying is because it gives up all defence it means its fine, so a raven gives up more than an armageddon does 50% shields 50% cap and still thats not right? The problem with that statement is that the Raven does not give up its defenses, it just exchanges them for a different type of defense. Speed. The gank'a'geddon doesn't have any defence, not even speed. Previously you stated that a 1v1 of a Dual MWD Raven versus another BS would be 50/50 outcome. I gotta disagree on that. Any turret based BS doesnt stand a chance to hit the Raven in any normal-ish setup. Stick 2 MWD's on an Arma or Apoc so it can catch the dang Raven it still needs to get within 10km to web it. At that point its webbed too (if the Raven has a web of course) and the previous bajillion cruise/torps the Ravens spewed out come crashing down on the other BS. Probably insta-annihilation. Of course 1v1 is never 100%, but the advantages of super speed and weapons that aren't affected by tracking mean the Raven would most likely win the vast majorty of those encounters. Gank'a'geddon versus Dual-MWD Raven I'd bet on the Raven personally
mahhy	Posted - 2004.10.23 16:38:00 - [90] Originally by: Aneu Angellus So what your saying is because it gives up all defence it means its fine, so a raven gives up more than an armageddon does 50% shields 50% cap and still thats not right? The problem with that statement is that the Raven does not give up its defenses, it just exchanges them for a different type of defense. Speed. The gank'a'geddon doesn't have any defence, not even speed. Previously you stated that a 1v1 of a Dual MWD Raven versus another BS would be 50/50 outcome. I gotta disagree on that. Any turret based BS doesnt stand a chance to hit the Raven in any normal-ish setup. Stick 2 MWD's on an Arma or Apoc so it can catch the dang Raven it still needs to get within 10km to web it. At that point its webbed too (if the Raven has a web of course) and the previous bajillion cruise/torps the Ravens spewed out come crashing down on the other BS. Probably insta-annihilation. Of course 1v1 is never 100%, but the advantages of super speed and weapons that aren't affected by tracking mean the Raven would most likely win the vast majorty of those encounters. Gank'a'geddon versus Dual-MWD Raven I'd bet on the Raven personally

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.