| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Clipped Wings
   |
Posted - 2005.03.30 11:30:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Clipped Wings on 30/03/2005 11:33:49
 Originally by: F'nog
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.
Uh...Didn't they already do that when Dual mwd/Mwd+oversized AB was removed, around december?
I seem to remember some rant-filled posts from certain BE pilots about how unfair it was to their tactics of tackler tristans with warp core stabs+MWd+Oversized AB or something, and the subsequent reducing of members from what 25, to 5 alts, or something.
As for the stabs in general, I just hope that if you get enough scrambling points on one ship, from enough people, that the chance of the victim escaping is so miniscule that it'll only happen 1 in a 100 times.
Alternatively, how's about this: warp core stab: reduces lock range by 25% and decreases scan resolution by 25% per stab fitted.
Make up some techno-babble explanation, in short, rig it so that people either fit for fighting, or running. I know some people will object and say "but we always fight outnumbered, so we have to use stabs to be able to get away!", I guess the answer is "don't fight in situations so outnumbered that you have to use stabs".
Some ships are much too ideal to fit stabs on, and still retain killer setups. That doesn't seem entirely to fit with the concept of a warp core stab.
*edit*
Just a thought: How's about that fitting stabs on your ship would interfere with you using warp scramblers, some technobabble concept about fluctuations in the warp core making it too hazardous...Just the thought of people either choosing to be able to scramble, or to be able to (have a chance to) warp away?
-Clipped Wings of LFC
"I believe in the theoretical benevolence, and practical malignity of man."
~William Hazlitt
|
Arthur Guinness
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 11:32:00 -
[62]
Class specific size + fitting reqs are the solution imo:
BS size:
1000 - 1250MW, 75 - 100TF
Cruiser:
150 - 250MW, 30 - 50TF
Frig:
10 - 15MW, 10 - 20TF
They should be a module that prevents you from using any kind of offensive or tanking setup. They should be a pure travel module. |
Rich Head
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 11:37:00 -
[63]
I don't see a problem as it is. If someone wants to fit 5 WCS in their low slots, it's your tough luck. YOu simply picked the wrong guy to try and kill.
Get over it, if someone decides to fit defensively then good on them. You fit more than 1 offensive weapon on your ship, so it's ridiculous not to fit more than one defensive module.
If we want to go down the line of stopping people fitting lots of WCS, maybe we should start stopping people fitting say 6 siege on a raven or 3 zillion multispectral jammers on a scorp, etc etc......(And you guessed it, that's a ridiculous idea)
So, to finish, I'm for leaving things as is after the patch.
PS: BTW I have never used a WCS in the 5-6 months i've been playing.
|
Drunken Claptrap
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 11:38:00 -
[64]
Oops, alt posted by mistake. Do apologise.
Draft Beer Not People |
Tolan
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 11:44:00 -
[65]
Drop WCS all together.. give ships different inbuilt warp core protection factors(ie minmatar ship worst cos they made of wood and nails).
Warp core protection could then be skilled based to improve the chances of not being scrambled (CCP would like that)
the problem then goes away...pvp'ers might not be able to run away and indies might just not be able to run that blockade.
|
Edison Frisk
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:04:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Tolan
(ie minmatar ship worst cos they made of wood and nails).
now thats funny! 
|
Dabljuh
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:11:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Dabljuh on 30/03/2005 12:12:38
Now, what exactly is the problem with WCS?
Whats wrong with them?
This is a question I'm asking as a noob, folks, not rethorics
What I see is this:
WCStabs stacking prevent you from
- armor tanking
- doing notable damage through damage mods
- Having notable cap
- hauling notable amounts of goods
WCScramblers stacking prevent you from
- Shield tanking
- Instalocking
- Having notable cap
- Attacking with ECM
So, maybe they are used a lot. Wouldn't that just
reflect the judgement of a lot of people that they
would like to have the option to run?
And then there's Mobile warp field disruptor
generator thingies -that totally negate any warping
activity within their field of action, regardless
of any WCS fitted.
Seriously, I fail to see the problem
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:14:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Rod Blaine on 30/03/2005 12:16:54
Seriously. The answer is pretty damn easy tbh.
Put a max on warp core stability strength.
Say you can't get above +5, end of story, Wether you do that by fitting +2 WCS that cost 10 mill each or by +1's that cost 10K each is your decision.
+5 equals at least two tacklers tackling you long enough for you to die. that should imo constitute the maximum tackling power needed for any single ship.
Personally, I'd even say +4. But i guess reducing it to only one tackler needed is a bit harsh.
_______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know.
Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online
Solutions to your issues. |
MaiLina KaTar
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:21:00 -
[69]
Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 30/03/2005 12:25:52
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Edited by: Rod Blaine on 30/03/2005 12:16:54
Seriously. The answer is pretty damn easy tbh.
Put a max on warp core stability strength.
Say you can't get above +5, end of story, Wether you do that by fitting +2 WCS that cost 10 mill each or by +1's that cost 10K each is your decision.
+5 equals at least two tacklers tackling you long enough for you to die. that should imo constitute the maximum tackling power needed for any single ship.
Personally, I'd even say +4. But i guess reducing it to only one tackler needed is a bit harsh.
That would make 'em worthless. Two tacklers for any ship. No thinking involved, no counter, no variables and ultimately no use for WCS on your ship.
Any smalltime newb squad in Rifters will jam and pwn your ship worth hundreds of millions of isk.
Tbh I'm fine with the current system. I see so many indies going poof at gatecamps... WCS can't be all that uber. WCSed bships also do a lot less damage than properly fitted ships and they can still get jammed by dedicated inties/bb/scorp.
Mai's Idealog |
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:23:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Elve Sorrow
WCS -> Highslot. Gotta make a choice between offense and chicken tactics then.
This would make sense. Also, it would have to be activatable and the time it takes to work would be based on the warp scramble strength it has to overcome, that time being reduced by the number you have activated with a random factor thrown in for fun. See the chronicle named "Loser". He talks about activating his warp descrambler.
|
Roshan longshot
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:25:00 -
[71]
OH shut the pock up....rebalance this, re balance that....IF YOU CANT PLAY THE GAME THE WAY IT IS DISGNED...then maybe you should not play...
Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter,pirate[/i] or mixture of them all.
[i]As read from the original box and from this site.
|
Trooper B99
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:41:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Trooper B99 on 30/03/2005 12:41:43
Personally I'd say if it's gonna get changed, go for the class specific route with 100mn, 10mn and 1mn WCS. Leave the current WCS as the 1mn and have graded 10 and 100mn ones that you *will* have serious problems mounting say, 5 and your guns.
I would argue against making them mid slot again however, or even high slot. If the increase on grid and CPU uptake for Cruiser and BS sized WCS is done correctly they won't have the ability to fill their lows with WCS and still fit a full rack of guns given the Grid and CPU eaten up by the WCS.
This would allow the maxed out WCS people to still do what they do, but their weapon set-ups would be gimped to hell.
Possibly one way around it would be cruiser/BS penaltys rather than a whole new breed of WCS.
Cruiser penalty: WCS = + 50 grid + 70 CPU
BS Penalty: WCS = + 1000 grid + 500 CPU
?
Anyways, yes, maxed out WCS BS's do need a nerf. Chasing down 5 WCS ravens and 8 WCS 'geddons is an exercise in futility while their offensive capabilitys aren't effected
Wirykomi Team Racer - COLOSSUS Championships Year 106
|
Cinnander
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:43:00 -
[73]
Either don't change them and hope the EW "Fixes" fix them, or;
Activated module, max 2 per ship (say). Long cycle time. Activating uses 60% of the ships cap. When you're scrambled and you turn it on, there's a chance that it manages to stabilise your warp core and out you fly, merrily on your way. Otherwise your ship gets a quick trip to the scrapyard in the sky.
WCS: They're lame until they save your ass.
><))))Š> This is fishy .. You know what to do. |
Sarkos
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:50:00 -
[74]
Placing a WCS in the mid slot would eliminate anyone using Minmatar ships, which are mid slot deficient. Thus a bad idea.
The fact is with todays faster ships and short range STR:2 Disrupters, getting away with a single WCS is no longer guarenteed. Also consider that for each WCS loaded, that means less power, damage mods or armor repair/resistances.
If need be, simply make it an activated mod, similar to an small armor repair. Yes, it uses little power, but if a ship is drained or neutralized by NOS or Power Neutralizers as is common today, it can not warp.
Sarkos
Either free the slaves or we will come and get them.
|
Azure Skyclad
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 12:53:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Cinnander
WCS: They're lame until they save your ass.
Single most valuable line in this thread.
La Maison de tous Les Plaisirs
Star Fraction
http://www.voodoorockers.co.uk/ |
Trooper B99
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 13:00:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Trooper B99 on 30/03/2005 13:01:29
Originally by: Azure Skyclad
Originally by: Cinnander
WCS: They're lame until they save your ass.
Single most valuable line in this thread.
I don't think it's the use of them that people are complaining about, it's OVERuse and still being able to mount a full offensive set-up.
Wirykomi Team Racer - COLOSSUS Championships Year 106
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 13:05:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Chowdown
Originally by: Gissa
Originally by: Elve Sorrow
WCS -> Highslot. Gotta make a choice between offense and chicken tactics then.
What load of crap.
IŠll prefer to have 4 WCS i the lows rather being ganked 4-5 pilots.
If your trying to avoid being ganked, what does it matter which slot there in?
Because an Iteron has only on Hi-Slot? Maybe what you really want is the devs to install a beam weapon that will cut out their engines and cause a popup box that say "LOL OWNED"
Stop crying because a target got away and either use more tacklers or stop camping the same gate and try to get unexpecting haulers.
|
Alberta
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 13:06:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Xeris
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?
In some situations the scorps med slots would still give it the advantage. As an extreme example if the scorp has 6 multispec jammers fitted and both ships get attacked by 3 stiletto's all running -6. Sure, the 'geddon needs 2 of them to scramble it, but the scorp can jam all 3 of them once it has a lock. An extreme example as I said, but the point is that ECM can complement WCS and uses different slots. Make them high slots mods and the scorp increases its advantage.
Just rambling on for the point of it cos I'm bored at work. My main points I guess are that I still think a CPU usage increase is probably the easiest way forwards. Making them med slot mods would suck. Making them high slot mods would fix quite a few of the annoying things atm though.
My Thoughts on Game Balance |
Chowdown
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 13:11:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Dionysus Davinci
Originally by: Chowdown
Originally by: Gissa
Originally by: Elve Sorrow
WCS -> Highslot. Gotta make a choice between offense and chicken tactics then.
What load of crap.
IŠll prefer to have 4 WCS i the lows rather being ganked 4-5 pilots.
If your trying to avoid being ganked, what does it matter which slot there in?
Because an Iteron has only on Hi-Slot? Maybe what you really want is the devs to install a beam weapon that will cut out their engines and cause a popup box that say "LOL OWNED"
Stop crying because a target got away and either use more tacklers or stop camping the same gate and try to get unexpecting haulers.
I am not of the nature to cry about much, other than the inanly stupid, indies by there very nature should be slow, unmanuverable and die alot without escourt.
New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!! |
Latex Mistress
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 13:19:00 -
[80]
Well, if CCP is going to rework EW to have a sense of "randomness", then I don't see anything wrong with making WCS the same way.
And another vote for class-size WCS's... make it painful to load up 5 of them in a Raven.
If ECM is an act of aggression, why am I not on kill mails?
|
Hast
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 15:01:00 -
[81]
good firepower + teh invunerability of 5 warpcores + instaganking frigs with missiles = teh uberghey
|
aeti
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 15:12:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Kyle Caldrel
New EW makes WCS even more powerfull, because within optimal range scrambled dosent always = scrambled
and to counter that there is a chance you can scramble somebody with 8 wcs with 1 scrambler
|
Elve Sorrow
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 15:19:00 -
[83]
Edited by: Elve Sorrow on 30/03/2005 15:19:45
And the chance he gets scrambled again after the first successfull scramble is about nothing * nothing = nothing.
As small as the chance is that it scrambles the first time, the chance it happens twice in a row is chance^2.
/Elve
New Video out! Watch me!
|
Chowdown
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 15:23:00 -
[84]
For those which whinge
Please check the second most destroyed item on low slots. Now if we could have less, "ohh you just want to chane eve to suit you threads", and a bit more constructive critism, that would be great.
New Shinra Kill system, please be patient were still ironing out the finer points!! |
Face Lifter
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 17:48:00 -
[85]
I think Warp Core Stabilizer should be limited to 1 per ship, just like MWD.
However, if that is done, there should be a better version of WCS that has strength 2, but uses about 100 CPU
This would make things much better in terms of forcible PvP, while still providing decent flexibility for defense.
|
marioman
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 18:02:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Chowdown
For those which whinge
Please check the second most destroyed item on low slots. Now if we could have less, "ohh you just want to chane eve to suit you threads", and a bit more constructive critism, that would be great.
If yall have killed that many ppl with WCS fitted, it doesnt sound like theres a problem, as obviously they didnt get away 
|
capt
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 18:07:00 -
[87]
Originally by: marioman
If yall have killed that many ppl with WCS fitted, it doesnt sound like theres a problem, as obviously they didnt get away
word
|
Domalais
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 18:30:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Selena 001
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.
Ah but you are wrong. Right now, you have to sacrifice defense to equip warp core stabs. If they were high slot modules, you would have to sacrifice offense. This would actually help carebears, not hurt them. You could tank AND stab at the same time.
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 19:20:00 -
[89]
Highslots is the way to go.
________________________________________________________
|
Mark A
|
Posted - 2005.03.30 19:40:00 -
[90]
Dunno if anyone's suggested this, didn't read the whole thread, but a stacking nerf could work also, i.e.:
1xWCS = 1 point
2xWCS = 2 points
4xWCS = 3 points
8xWCS = 4 points
____________________________________
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |