| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
fairimear
   |
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:32:00 -
[1]
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
|
fairimear
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:32:00 -
[2]
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
|
Weirda
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:40:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: fairimear
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
What a wonderfully well thought out nerf - because modules don't have enough nerfs... 
Maybe there should be a minimum of three nerfs per one bonus?
On less sarcastic note though Losing a low slot seem like a good enough nerf IWHO - you sure as hell never find one on Weirda's corpse...
Also - as far as blocade running go - not everyone have a station at their destination to refit... 
--
Thread Killer
<END TRANSMISSION> |
Weirda
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:40:00 -
[4]
Originally by: fairimear
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
What a wonderfully well thought out nerf - because modules don't have enough nerfs...
Maybe there should be a minimum of three nerfs per one bonus?
On less sarcastic note though Losing a low slot seem like a good enough nerf IWHO - you sure as hell never find one on Weirda's corpse...
Also - as far as blocade running go - not everyone have a station at their destination to refit...
--
Thread Killer
<END TRANSMISSION> |
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:43:00 -
[5]
Originally by: fairimear
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
Way to go would be to increase their requirements and make a max stack amount of maybe 4.
Atm a battleship only needs to sacrify very little to get a "2nd life" in most small or medium sized engagements, now if wcs stabs would need maybe 80/100 cpu ppl would think twice to make 4 wcs scorps or similar setups.
Also it would give the hunter a chance again, a 6 - 8 wcs ship, even for travel will run your first blockade and log off without giving your "gang" even if its a 10 ppl gang, time to catch up. 3-4 wcs maximum would allow 2-3 hunters to tie down a ship and get it, the whole purpose of camping (which gets abit tired if you see ppl passing by in a minutely fashion, only fitted with warpcores, instant jumps and some light tanking (dual mwd were thank god removed)
|
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:43:00 -
[6]
Originally by: fairimear
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
Way to go would be to increase their requirements and make a max stack amount of maybe 4.
Atm a battleship only needs to sacrify very little to get a "2nd life" in most small or medium sized engagements, now if wcs stabs would need maybe 80/100 cpu ppl would think twice to make 4 wcs scorps or similar setups.
Also it would give the hunter a chance again, a 6 - 8 wcs ship, even for travel will run your first blockade and log off without giving your "gang" even if its a 10 ppl gang, time to catch up. 3-4 wcs maximum would allow 2-3 hunters to tie down a ship and get it, the whole purpose of camping (which gets abit tired if you see ppl passing by in a minutely fashion, only fitted with warpcores, instant jumps and some light tanking (dual mwd were thank god removed)
|
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:52:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Weirda
..
Alot of ships have a few lowslots spare in most setups or can sacrify them.
The question is often enough "2 caprelays or a chance to get out" and for some ships its even worse.
4 wc stab scorps with cm / hvy nos and ecm/shieldbooster/whatever leaves just a bad taste, same would go for a raven and apocs.
The sacrify is simply too low to outweigh the chance of losing a ship and it takes the fun out of the battle if you see your enemy run every time how well or bad you fight, simply because you dont have the needed numbers on scrambling him (-4 or more i actually consider insane) and thats neither the ppl who dont wanna fight nor the ppl who are just passing by.
Especially with high insurance payouts you should grant the winner his price in a battle. a 17k item shouldnt have such a big influence. If you compare it, why fit a 320 mil armor repper + hardeners when 4 wcs basically gurantee you survive ( for less pg and same amount of cpu) and just cost 60k....
|
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 02:52:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Weirda
..
Alot of ships have a few lowslots spare in most setups or can sacrify them.
The question is often enough "2 caprelays or a chance to get out" and for some ships its even worse.
4 wc stab scorps with cm / hvy nos and ecm/shieldbooster/whatever leaves just a bad taste, same would go for a raven and apocs.
The sacrify is simply too low to outweigh the chance of losing a ship and it takes the fun out of the battle if you see your enemy run every time how well or bad you fight, simply because you dont have the needed numbers on scrambling him (-4 or more i actually consider insane) and thats neither the ppl who dont wanna fight nor the ppl who are just passing by.
Especially with high insurance payouts you should grant the winner his price in a battle. a 17k item shouldnt have such a big influence. If you compare it, why fit a 320 mil armor repper + hardeners when 4 wcs basically gurantee you survive ( for less pg and same amount of cpu) and just cost 60k....
|
Hellspawn666
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 06:09:00 -
[9]
WCS's are fine its still possiblee to get the target anyone fitting WCS is gonna have to seriously change his setup they are very high on CPU usage and losing a low slot often means weakening ure offence/defence by a fair amount. It is very difficult to get 2 on with a fighting setup that is effective. I just hope tech2 ones dont come out they are unfair if any module for not much more cpu can give 2 power. a geddon with 8 warp core stabs will stil die if caught in a mobile warp disruptor i would just like to see the bugs with mobile warp disruptors fixed they are a perfect comprimise.
|
Hellspawn666
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 06:09:00 -
[10]
WCS's are fine its still possiblee to get the target anyone fitting WCS is gonna have to seriously change his setup they are very high on CPU usage and losing a low slot often means weakening ure offence/defence by a fair amount. It is very difficult to get 2 on with a fighting setup that is effective. I just hope tech2 ones dont come out they are unfair if any module for not much more cpu can give 2 power. a geddon with 8 warp core stabs will stil die if caught in a mobile warp disruptor i would just like to see the bugs with mobile warp disruptors fixed they are a perfect comprimise.
|
Alowishus
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 07:03:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Alowishus on 21/12/2004 07:03:43
I'd like a Raven with 5x WCS, 6x Siege Launchers and crapload of sensor damps and warp disruptors. I call it the "hit and run". Lame? Yes.
Raven 4TW! Rank(1) SP: 243745/256000 |
Alowishus
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 07:03:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Alowishus on 21/12/2004 07:03:43
I'd like a Raven with 5x WCS, 6x Siege Launchers and crapload of sensor damps and warp disruptors. I call it the "hit and run". Lame? Yes.
Raven 4TW! Rank(1) SP: 243745/256000 |
Hellspawn666
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 07:59:00 -
[13]
a scorp wud beat it easy or a smartbombapoc tons of setups can beat it although i will admit that i guessed ravens/scorp setups can incorpet them but its still not gonna be that successful no abilty to catch the enemy since most people fit mwd hes not gonna have any trouble avoiding u.
|
Hellspawn666
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 07:59:00 -
[14]
a scorp wud beat it easy or a smartbombapoc tons of setups can beat it although i will admit that i guessed ravens/scorp setups can incorpet them but its still not gonna be that successful no abilty to catch the enemy since most people fit mwd hes not gonna have any trouble avoiding u.
|
Negotiator
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 08:08:00 -
[15]
move them to medslots. no ship in game can spare a medslot without really sacrificing alot in combat.
|
Negotiator
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 08:08:00 -
[16]
move them to medslots. no ship in game can spare a medslot without really sacrificing alot in combat.
|
Loka
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 08:18:00 -
[17]
let them how they are. Using WCS in a fight is like gambling. If your enemy has enough tackler they are useless and more tanking would have been better. If he dont have enough tackler you deserve to escape.
Its like the dual MWD. Sacrifice firepower for speed. In this case sacrifice firepower/tanking for a not 100% posibility to escape.
To Negotiator. I would gladly sacrifice 2 Medslots for 2 WCS. Imo low slots hurt much more.
_____________________________________
Dead or Alive
|
Loka
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 08:18:00 -
[18]
let them how they are. Using WCS in a fight is like gambling. If your enemy has enough tackler they are useless and more tanking would have been better. If he dont have enough tackler you deserve to escape.
Its like the dual MWD. Sacrifice firepower for speed. In this case sacrifice firepower/tanking for a not 100% posibility to escape.
To Negotiator. I would gladly sacrifice 2 Medslots for 2 WCS. Imo low slots hurt much more.
_____________________________________
Dead or Alive
|
Negotiator
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 10:26:00 -
[19]
btw, 2 mwds were a retarded feature, so are mass-warpcores. also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
|
Negotiator
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 10:26:00 -
[20]
btw, 2 mwds were a retarded feature, so are mass-warpcores. also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
|
Iratus Caelestis
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 10:43:00 -
[21]
I like the idea of them being midslot, the penalties would be equivelent to the gain if that were the case as. If you really want to fit 4 then you can't fight but you can travel real well. Perfect.
Personally I don't know why people love fitting them so much. It's basically advertising the fact that you are a girl and will run away given half the chance.
I'd rather go down in a righteous gank and get a gg from my opponent.
|
Iratus Caelestis
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 10:43:00 -
[22]
I like the idea of them being midslot, the penalties would be equivelent to the gain if that were the case as. If you really want to fit 4 then you can't fight but you can travel real well. Perfect.
Personally I don't know why people love fitting them so much. It's basically advertising the fact that you are a girl and will run away given half the chance.
I'd rather go down in a righteous gank and get a gg from my opponent.
|
Liquid Metal
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:01:00 -
[23]
mobile warp disrupters?
"A strong man stands tall against all others, everything else is just a delusion for the weak.."
|
Liquid Metal
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:01:00 -
[24]
mobile warp disrupters?
"A strong man stands tall against all others, everything else is just a delusion for the weak.."
|
Shirei
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:03:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Shirei on 21/12/2004 11:03:19
Originally by: Negotiator
btw, 2 mwds were a retarded feature, so are mass-warpcores. also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
E.g. Arma or any ship that mainly gets its strength from stacked dmg mods? 
|
Shirei
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:03:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Shirei on 21/12/2004 11:03:19
Originally by: Negotiator
btw, 2 mwds were a retarded feature, so are mass-warpcores. also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
E.g. Arma or any ship that mainly gets its strength from stacked dmg mods?
|
Jazz Bo
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:07:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Negotiator
also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
Any armor-tanked ship (including the Raven) except maybe the Blasterthron.
Originally by: DB Preacher
Celestial Apocalypse - Brave souls fighting the endless smak.
|
Jazz Bo
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:07:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Negotiator
also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
Any armor-tanked ship (including the Raven) except maybe the Blasterthron.
Originally by: DB Preacher
Celestial Apocalypse - Brave souls fighting the endless smak.
|
huong alt
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:47:00 -
[29]
while your at it then ban the use of multiple sensor boosters, sensor dampeners, multispectrals, etc, etc
honestly you guys, your not meant to get a 100% success rate and your supposed to have to work at it, not get it on a plate.
|
huong alt
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:47:00 -
[30]
while your at it then ban the use of multiple sensor boosters, sensor dampeners, multispectrals, etc, etc
honestly you guys, your not meant to get a 100% success rate and your supposed to have to work at it, not get it on a plate.
|
Loka
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:54:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Jazz Bo
Any armor-tanked ship (including the Raven) except maybe the Blasterthron.
agree.
But also Scorp could sacrifice 2 med slots, if you armor tank it. I mean Scorp for dmgdealing anyway
Only 6 Med needed for effective Jamming
_____________________________________
Dead or Alive
|
Loka
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 11:54:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Jazz Bo
Any armor-tanked ship (including the Raven) except maybe the Blasterthron.
agree.
But also Scorp could sacrifice 2 med slots, if you armor tank it. I mean Scorp for dmgdealing anyway
Only 6 Med needed for effective Jamming
_____________________________________
Dead or Alive
|
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 12:53:00 -
[33]
first of all the reasons for my suggestions again:
- Cpu increasements to make the sacrify harder (30 cpu is just laughable in most ships)
- Limit the max amount to 3-4 ( to give every chance the equal opportunity to escape and preventing ppl from using runaway setups)
The ppl who argue for the current setup of wcs are those who are generally just interested in swift ganks of weak targets and a cheap invulnerability.
why ?
A battleship in mass fleetbattles is often enough scrambled by -6 as there is plenty of support with 60 vs 60 fighting. As many ppl said sactifing the slots would bring a weakness which is replaced by the chance to get out against a smaller number of foes.
I for one dont advocate huge battles, lag and general "sitting at 80km and 40 ppl shooting the same dude" with a killratio of maybe 4-6 is not my thing.
My point is the ppl who want to fit warpcore stabs are travelers not gankers or opportunity pvpers who only fight if the situation fits them and still gives them a high survival time when i.e. flying solo.
take the scorp, it could with jammers escape up to 3 scramblers (-2) without problems same would go for a gankageddon. Long fights might be not its thing but a swift gank and a swift run....
In the end Wcs should still be an option, hey you are putting 100 mil + equipment on the line, but they should be no "second life button" or "run away" module.
PPl trying to pick holes, how is in a 5 vs 5 a group supposed to kill someone when the other side all fits 4+ warpcores and you do not land just "within 20km"?
Ive seen quiet some ravens and scorps with similar setups already alligning and preparing to warp whenever their overview told them more ppl were running in their 20km or 7.5km radius.
And keep in mind, they only need to kill -1- guy and they will run, because they are not really up for the fight (unless it goes really well for them) but instead just for a quick kill.
|
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 12:53:00 -
[34]
first of all the reasons for my suggestions again:
- Cpu increasements to make the sacrify harder (30 cpu is just laughable in most ships)
- Limit the max amount to 3-4 ( to give every chance the equal opportunity to escape and preventing ppl from using runaway setups)
The ppl who argue for the current setup of wcs are those who are generally just interested in swift ganks of weak targets and a cheap invulnerability.
why ?
A battleship in mass fleetbattles is often enough scrambled by -6 as there is plenty of support with 60 vs 60 fighting. As many ppl said sactifing the slots would bring a weakness which is replaced by the chance to get out against a smaller number of foes.
I for one dont advocate huge battles, lag and general "sitting at 80km and 40 ppl shooting the same dude" with a killratio of maybe 4-6 is not my thing.
My point is the ppl who want to fit warpcore stabs are travelers not gankers or opportunity pvpers who only fight if the situation fits them and still gives them a high survival time when i.e. flying solo.
take the scorp, it could with jammers escape up to 3 scramblers (-2) without problems same would go for a gankageddon. Long fights might be not its thing but a swift gank and a swift run....
In the end Wcs should still be an option, hey you are putting 100 mil + equipment on the line, but they should be no "second life button" or "run away" module.
PPl trying to pick holes, how is in a 5 vs 5 a group supposed to kill someone when the other side all fits 4+ warpcores and you do not land just "within 20km"?
Ive seen quiet some ravens and scorps with similar setups already alligning and preparing to warp whenever their overview told them more ppl were running in their 20km or 7.5km radius.
And keep in mind, they only need to kill -1- guy and they will run, because they are not really up for the fight (unless it goes really well for them) but instead just for a quick kill.
|
Joshua Foiritain
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 13:17:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Negotiator
move them to medslots. no ship in game can spare a medslot without really sacrificing alot in combat.
Id rather drop a T1 Cap Recharger (15% cap recharge) on my apoc then a Shield Power Relay (20% cap recharge)
---------------------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
Joshua Foiritain
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 13:17:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Negotiator
move them to medslots. no ship in game can spare a medslot without really sacrificing alot in combat.
Id rather drop a T1 Cap Recharger (15% cap recharge) on my apoc then a Shield Power Relay (20% cap recharge)
---------------------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
fairimear
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 13:30:00 -
[37]
the problem is the cost to a ships combat ability is alot less to the ship with 7 wcs than the ship sacrificing meds for the scrams to catch the wcs.
and so no matter if u have the full pvp or the scram setup the ship with wcs is either going to escape or win once scramed.
and thus the drastic step to no comabt ability with wcs is needed.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
|
fairimear
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 13:30:00 -
[38]
the problem is the cost to a ships combat ability is alot less to the ship with 7 wcs than the ship sacrificing meds for the scrams to catch the wcs.
and so no matter if u have the full pvp or the scram setup the ship with wcs is either going to escape or win once scramed.
and thus the drastic step to no comabt ability with wcs is needed.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
|
Eneroth
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 13:47:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Negotiator
move them to medslots. no ship in game can spare a medslot without really sacrificing alot in combat.
Ye thats the old school stuff. when they were in med slots and were active modules = better.
-Any fool can pull a trigger.- |
Eneroth
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 13:47:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Negotiator
move them to medslots. no ship in game can spare a medslot without really sacrificing alot in combat.
Ye thats the old school stuff. when they were in med slots and were active modules = better.
-Any fool can pull a trigger.- |
ArcticWolf
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 14:15:00 -
[41]
Theres nothing wrong with them, if u have WCS and your fighting agaisnt me, you have a 0% chance of winning, and im not*****y at all, they seriously gimp your setup. Even if i dont kill you, you will always have to run (your setup for running, not killing) So i still win, even if i dont have a monetary gain.
|
ArcticWolf
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 14:15:00 -
[42]
Theres nothing wrong with them, if u have WCS and your fighting agaisnt me, you have a 0% chance of winning, and im not*****y at all, they seriously gimp your setup. Even if i dont kill you, you will always have to run (your setup for running, not killing) So i still win, even if i dont have a monetary gain.
|
Johnson McCrae
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 14:52:00 -
[43]
Oh my God, somebody call the WAAAHmbulance case the Carebear Rats have a whine.
The answer is NO. Your not getting your way without YOU getting nerfed too.
Your suggested nerf will mean anybody mounting a scrambler/jammer won't be able to do anything either.
How does that sound. Don't like the shoe on the other foot? GOOD. Your a Rat. CCP is not going to do your job for you.
It ain't over till the fat lady falls on ya!
[ 2004.10.09 02:50:23 ] (combat) Your 425mm Compressed Coil Gun I perfectly strikes Guardian Sentry, wrecking for 747.3 damage.
|
Johnson McCrae
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 14:52:00 -
[44]
Oh my God, somebody call the WAAAHmbulance case the Carebear Rats have a whine.
The answer is NO. Your not getting your way without YOU getting nerfed too.
Your suggested nerf will mean anybody mounting a scrambler/jammer won't be able to do anything either.
How does that sound. Don't like the shoe on the other foot? GOOD. Your a Rat. CCP is not going to do your job for you.
It ain't over till the fat lady falls on ya!
[ 2004.10.09 02:50:23 ] (combat) Your 425mm Compressed Coil Gun I perfectly strikes Guardian Sentry, wrecking for 747.3 damage.
|
Shintai
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 15:23:00 -
[45]
Originally by: fairimear
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
It¦s it more likely the problem is within your ****ty bandwagon templates?
Asfar as I know scramblers do STACK. When warpcores was introduced in old days we started using 2-3 scramblers on fat indies.
Try think on how you counter more WCS instead of all the poo whines.
Bloody n00b wannabee PvPers
Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry |
Shintai
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 15:23:00 -
[46]
Originally by: fairimear
the only reasonable fix is that no ship with a WCS fitted can have a gun/missile or ECM online.
leaving pure blockade running intact.
It¦s it more likely the problem is within your ****ty bandwagon templates?
Asfar as I know scramblers do STACK. When warpcores was introduced in old days we started using 2-3 scramblers on fat indies.
Try think on how you counter more WCS instead of all the poo whines.
Bloody n00b wannabee PvPers
Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry |
Riddari
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 15:44:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Negotiator
btw, 2 mwds were a retarded feature, so are mass-warpcores. also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
Now this might be me going out on a limb but I would say... industrials!
Jeez guys, you are talking about WCS and battleships, spare some thought for the indies (who would actually benefit I guess since they can then mount expanders/stabilizers/overdrives in lows) and the other ships.
¼©¼
a history |
Riddari
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 15:44:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Negotiator
btw, 2 mwds were a retarded feature, so are mass-warpcores. also, which ship would be able to spare 2 meds for wcs if you don't mind me asking?
Now this might be me going out on a limb but I would say... industrials!
Jeez guys, you are talking about WCS and battleships, spare some thought for the indies (who would actually benefit I guess since they can then mount expanders/stabilizers/overdrives in lows) and the other ships.
¼©¼
a history |
Negotiator
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:25:00 -
[49]
what would be so bad about having to work for killing indies?
|
Negotiator
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 20:25:00 -
[50]
what would be so bad about having to work for killing indies?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |