EVE Search - A call for the rebalnacing for the most overpowered module.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

A call for the rebalnacing for the most overpowered module.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Golgrath	Posted - 2005.03.30 09:45:00 - [31] Edited by: Golgrath on 30/03/2005 09:48:40 Originally by: Elve Sorrow WCS -> Highslot. Gotta make a choice between offense and chicken tactics then. I agree. Industrials should get some more of those 'utility' high slots though.
Antoinette Civari	Posted - 2005.03.30 09:48:00 - [32] Originally by: Malken the new tech2 stabs should be high slots and the tech1 should be moved to midslots So people can fit wcs in med and highslots ? Bad idea tbh :F
Valentine Keen	Posted - 2005.03.30 09:50:00 - [33] Fine, make them midslot and we'll all just play the 'Caldari 4tw' merry-go-round again. It's bad enough that only 1 of the 2 'shield tanking' races can actually shield tank and that only 1 race can currently use EW at all, altering WCS would simply make EVE even more Caldari oriented. How many Amarr or Minmatar ships are going to escape with their 3 or so midslots, compared to the Caldari scorpion breezing through with 8? It really wouldn't change the problem, only the class of vessels that get to escape - at least low slot allocations are more equally balanced across the races.
Antoinette Civari	Posted - 2005.03.30 09:55:00 - [34] Thats why the better idea is to make them a highslot item Valentine
Chowdown	Posted - 2005.03.30 09:57:00 - [35] Originally by: Valentine Keen Fine, make them midslot and we'll all just play the 'Caldari 4tw' merry-go-round again. It's bad enough that only 1 of the 2 'shield tanking' races can actually shield tank and that only 1 race can currently use EW at all, altering WCS would simply make EVE even more Caldari oriented. How many Amarr or Minmatar ships are going to escape with their 3 or so midslots, compared to the Caldari scorpion breezing through with 8? It really wouldn't change the problem, only the class of vessels that get to escape - at least low slot allocations are more equally balanced across the races. WCS do not make you 4tw in combat, especially with ships that need to fight at relatively close range such as .......... missile ships! I agree with your point tho that it would be overly harsh on Amarr. So the answer must be having different classes of WCS depnding on ship size, and harsher penalties for fitting these modules. New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!!
Xeris	Posted - 2005.03.30 09:57:00 - [36] Originally by: Valentine Keen Fine, make them midslot and we'll all just play the 'Caldari 4tw' merry-go-round again. It's bad enough that only 1 of the 2 'shield tanking' races can actually shield tank and that only 1 race can currently use EW at all, altering WCS would simply make EVE even more Caldari oriented. How many Amarr or Minmatar ships are going to escape with their 3 or so midslots, compared to the Caldari scorpion breezing through with 8? It really wouldn't change the problem, only the class of vessels that get to escape - at least low slot allocations are more equally balanced across the races. Scorpion: 4 low slots Armageddon: 8 low slots Your point? Too lazy to get my sig changed
Avon	Posted - 2005.03.30 09:59:00 - [37] Originally by: Valentine Keen Fine, make them midslot and we'll all just play the 'Caldari 4tw' merry-go-round again. It's bad enough that only 1 of the 2 'shield tanking' races can actually shield tank and that only 1 race can currently use EW at all, altering WCS would simply make EVE even more Caldari oriented. How many Amarr or Minmatar ships are going to escape with their 3 or so midslots, compared to the Caldari scorpion breezing through with 8? It really wouldn't change the problem, only the class of vessels that get to escape - at least low slot allocations are more equally balanced across the races. WTB: 7/8 Low slot Raven / Scorp. ______________________________________________ Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience.
Valentine Keen	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:00:00 - [38] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Valentine Keen Fine, make them midslot and we'll all just play the 'Caldari 4tw' merry-go-round again. It's bad enough that only 1 of the 2 'shield tanking' races can actually shield tank and that only 1 race can currently use EW at all, altering WCS would simply make EVE even more Caldari oriented. How many Amarr or Minmatar ships are going to escape with their 3 or so midslots, compared to the Caldari scorpion breezing through with 8? It really wouldn't change the problem, only the class of vessels that get to escape - at least low slot allocations are more equally balanced across the races. WTB: 7/8 Low slot Raven / Scorp. Raven with 5 low is better than an apoc with 4 mid. As I said, they're better balanced.
Avon	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:03:00 - [39] And how many hi-slots do they both have? Now which slots are balanced? ______________________________________________ Never argue with idiots. They will just drag it down to their level, and then beat you through experience.
F'nog	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:12:00 - [40] Won't someone think of BE????? If WCSes are changed what will become of their corp? They'll have to disband and slink away to the shadows.
Valentine Keen	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:17:00 - [41] Edited by: Valentine Keen on 30/03/2005 10:34:51 Edited by: Valentine Keen on 30/03/2005 10:16:58 Originally by: Avon And how many hi-slots do they both have? Now which slots are balanced? All I said was low slots were better balanced than mid, in response to the idea of changing WCS to mid. I'd be happy to change WCS to high, provided EW were also high slot items. I'm happy for it to be a conscious choice for a player to try and escape, but so should it be a choice to catch, rather than simply load up the scramblers and jammers and fire a volley of torpedos knowing full well the target can't run and can't fire back. Edit: As an aside, due to an error with my autopilot and my own lack of attention I was ganked last night, which was fair enough, I lost my cheap travel frigate and my podding was unfortunat. Strangely I regret the loss of implants less than I thought - I'm free to fight more easily now and I have owned them since well before the current horrendous prices, so the loss was less, though I can't afford to replace them. I didn't complain, whine, smack in local, nor am I campaigning for change or security from my own blunders. Yet it did leave me wondering why? Is there any pvp thrill in a pair of scorpions immolating a Slasher Frigate? Hardly. Was there any loot? No, I carried nothing, not even a ship set up (I'd intended to travel a safe route, but one wrong click and a few minutes afk and well... never mind.) Was there any ransom? No, not even a single word as I was turned from pod pilot to corpse. So while I am happy for players to fight and it's right that I should face these risks if I make a mistake, I can't understand the reasoning why a player does it - it's simply not part of my own approach to the game, I simply don't comprehend where any benefit or gain was made through it.
Jaabaa Prime	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:30:00 - [42] I'll throw in another option, don't make 3 types make 4. Industrial Warp Core Stabilizer - Low slot item +1 (-2% cargo capacity) Frigate Warp Core Stabilizer - Mid slot item +1 (-4% power grid) Cruiser Warp Core Stabilizer - Mid slot item +1 (-2% power grid, -2% capacitor) Battleship Warp Core Stabilizer - Mid slot item +1 (-4% capacitor) All the modules have to be activated, no longer passive. All fitting penalties are stacking. This will nerf the combat ships if they want warp core stability and still nerf an industrial's cargo capacity. -- Intergalactic Teeth Pullers "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Jaabaa Prime	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:32:00 - [43] I forgot to add, each type won't be able to be fitted to another ship class. i.e. Indy WCS can only be fitted to industrial class ships: Haulers, Mining barges, etc.. Same for the other classes, let's not have CCP try to control fitting using the power/cpu useage only. -- Intergalactic Teeth Pullers "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Jin Entres	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:38:00 - [44] Seems like a decent idea. Also increasing signature radius when active would be a suggestion aswell.
Vince Draken	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:42:00 - [45] Edited by: Vince Draken on 30/03/2005 10:48:22 Originally by: Selena 001 Carebear - Leave them alone PvP (gankers) - Nerf them Seems fairly pointless. They work fine now, they do their job, and running shouldn't require you to sacrifice a good defence. Just cause u cant scramble the first Indy, or BS you come across, try fitting more Scramblers . Carebears fit multiple WCS', so you should fit multiple Scramblers to compensate... seems only logical. Who was it that said "Adapt to survive"? Hey, can I be the first to you? Most ganks are due to wcs *****s making pvp'ers need more firepower and more ships. As it stands, WCS have no downfall. Add: Before some asshat says that there is a penalty to fitting them (sacrficing slot), all mod fittings require slots to be used.
Gothmatar Ravenblade	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:48:00 - [46] I am not fine with any proposal made here. Here comes mine: For every WCS let's make the ship saying "meow" in a way of a 14 days old kitty, even audible for all like hull repairers. You will see using WCS becoming very embarrassing. Problem solved. j/k Seriously, WCS should need energy to be activated and becoming med or hi slot. Hi slot preferred (would be preferred if you own a Retribution).
Jaabaa Prime	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:53:00 - [47] Originally by: Jin Entres Also increasing signature radius when active would be a suggestion aswell. A cool second penalty. Originally by: Gothmatar Ravenblade For every WCS let's make the ship saying "meow" in a way of a 14 days old kitty, even audible for all like hull repairers. You will see using WCS becoming very embarrassing. Problem solved. j/k Not sure about the Meow, but making it audible is a great "embarrassment" factor -- Intergalactic Teeth Pullers "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Malken	Posted - 2005.03.30 10:57:00 - [48] Originally by: Antoinette Civari Originally by: Malken the new tech2 stabs should be high slots and the tech1 should be moved to midslots So people can fit wcs in med and highslots ? Bad idea tbh :F not if "any use of tech2 wcs nullifies effect of tech1 wcs" Originally by: Graelyn "We're at war with you, and you FIRED on us! I am so telling CONCORD!" Quote: [18:46:36] Weebear > WTS Electric Golf Cart, 1 careful owner. Phone Rome 555 6567
Xenu	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:03:00 - [49] Originally by: Jaabaa Prime I'll throw in another option, don't make 3 types make 4. Industrial Warp Core Stabilizer - Low slot item +1 (-2% cargo capacity) Frigate Warp Core Stabilizer - Mid slot item +1 (-4% power grid) Cruiser Warp Core Stabilizer - Mid slot item +1 (-2% power grid, -2% capacitor) Battleship Warp Core Stabilizer - Mid slot item +1 (-4% capacitor) All the modules have to be activated, no longer passive. All fitting penalties are stacking. This will nerf the combat ships if they want warp core stability and still nerf an industrial's cargo capacity.
Lars Henrikson	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:05:00 - [50] Originally by: Jaabaa Prime Not sure about the Meow, but making it audible is a great "embarrassment" factor Maybe CCP could optimise sound so that it doesn't cause a 15 frame per second performance drop when it's turned on while they're at it too.....
Chowdown	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:16:00 - [51] Originally by: Khal Dominicus I don't understand how you would publicly admit to having targets just 'warp away' from you. Suck it up, and find a counter measure for the problem you're having instead of getting people to change the game for the way you like to play. The thoughts of a kestrel pilot New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!!
Fuse	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:16:00 - [52] There is such a thing called a warp bubble. I wish the smaller ones had a bigger radius and were cheaper to make since I sell them. Well they only run about 7 million on the market. It seems to me youÆre perfectly fine with ganking and running away when it suits YOU. Throw down the bubbles and stop them you might loose them you may not but you will definitely stop the indies from getting away. 0.o It's not you... no wait it is you.
Khal Dominicus	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:16:00 - [53] I don't understand how you would publicly admit to having targets just 'warp away' from you. Suck it up, and find a counter measure for the problem you're having instead of getting people to change the game for the way you like to play.
Chowdown	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:18:00 - [54] Originally by: Fuse There is such a thing called a warp bubble. I wish the smaller ones had a bigger radius and were cheaper to make since I sell them. Well they only run about 7 million on the market. It seems to me youÆre perfectly fine with ganking and running away when it suits YOU. Throw down the bubbles and stop them you might loose them you may not but you will definitely stop the indies from getting away. Once again, warp bubbles are a good counter measure for travelling. This is not the problem. New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!!
lythos miralbar	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:19:00 - [55] Why not have them play a song from you ship? something like... "if you go down to the woods today your sure of a big surprise, If you go down to the woods today you wont believe your eyes, because todays the day the carebears have thier picnic" Have that playing from every ship with them fitted
capt	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:21:00 - [56] Edited by: capt on 30/03/2005 11:21:57 WAAA WAAA WAAA I can't get my kill WAAA WAAA WAAA People run away while I'm trying to kill them....... Uhm DUH??? Why not just ak for the devs to change the game so that your target becomes immobilized (can't move, warp, log off) when you have established a lock on them and that your target can't use his weapons, can't selfestruct etc. and basicly just sits there waiting for you to do something. Hmm while were at it maybe ask for a right-mouse click on target option saying "POP", after which the target in question just blows up. Easy enough for you guys?
Chowdown	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:24:00 - [57] Originally by: capt Edited by: capt on 30/03/2005 11:21:57 WAAA WAAA WAAA I can't get my kill WAAA WAAA WAAA People run away while I'm trying to kill them....... Uhm DUH??? Why not just ak for the devs to change the game so that your target becomes immobilized (can't move, warp, log off) when you have established a lock on them and that your target can't use his weapons, can't selfestruct etc. and basicly just sits there waiting for you to do something. Hmm while were at it maybe ask for a right-mouse click on target option saying "POP", after which the target in question just blows up. Easy enough for you guys? Ohh my a cowardly alt attack ........ I wonder what he has fitted on his low slots ...... New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!!
capt	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:26:00 - [58] Edited by: capt on 30/03/2005 11:29:29 Oh my, look my character up in game and see how much of an alt I am...... I don't hide behind alts. I fact I think all alts should be removed and only 1 character per account allowed, but thats an entirely different discussion alltogether. It just bugs me that you guys keep on whining that your targets aren't easy enough to kill...... that's just the whole point isn't it? The game would soon lose all intrest if you just had to lock and say "pop" and then the target of your choice would be no more..... The other party involved should have a fair chance of escaping unscathed, and it's up to you to find a way to reduce that chance to you can get your kill, but asking for the devs to change this or that is not the way......
Chowdown	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:29:00 - [59] Edited by: Chowdown on 30/03/2005 11:41:35 Edited by: Chowdown on 30/03/2005 11:40:59 Originally by: capt It just bugs me that you guys keep on whining that your targets aren't easy enough to kill...... that's just the whole point isn't it? The game would soon lose all intrest if you just had to lock and say "pop" and then the target of your choice would be no more..... The other party involved should have a fair chance of escaping unscathed, and it's up to you to find a way to reduce that chance to you can get your kill, but asking for the devs to change this or that is not the way...... My point is that it is currently an unfair chance of them escaping unscathed, minimal risk pvp= teh ghey. How can this game move forward if the community do not bring up obvious flaws in game design. New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!!
Jaabaa Prime	Posted - 2005.03.30 11:29:00 - [60] Chow, why even quote him/her/it It's a typical response from someone that has probably got 0 XPs in 0.0 combat, and thinks that the sun shines out of his ... People can be contructive in their ideas and also in their criticism if they have a little bit of respect for each other and enough intelligence to use it. How I miss the gemini forums. I think my idea () is uber BTW -- Intergalactic Teeth Pullers "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: 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.