| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
infused
   |
Posted - 2005.06.20 20:37:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: The Enslaver
Edited by: The Enslaver on 20/06/2005 11:33:36
Simple solution.
High slot, with more CPU use. Make them need 80 CPU, and take a high slot each. Possible a -10% range, tracking, cargo cap (else all indies will fit out with all stabs in high) and agility penalty also.
Upgrade the haulers to have 4 high slots each, same number of turrets etc so no change on that front.
Problem solved.
So how are you going to fit these on frigs again?
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
Corvus Dove
|
Posted - 2005.06.20 21:20:00 -
[62]
Originally by: infused
Originally by: The Enslaver
Edited by: The Enslaver on 20/06/2005 11:33:36
Simple solution.
High slot, with more CPU use. Make them need 80 CPU, and take a high slot each. Possible a -10% range, tracking, cargo cap (else all indies will fit out with all stabs in high) and agility penalty also.
Upgrade the haulers to have 4 high slots each, same number of turrets etc so no change on that front.
Problem solved.
So how are you going to fit these on frigs again?
WTF would a frig be doing with WCS on?
"You Griefer!!!" = "You Doodyhead!!!" |
Jayad
|
Posted - 2005.06.20 22:58:00 -
[63]
dont think nerfing there effectiveness is a good idea, that will also nerf industrialists quite a bit.
almost like the idea about making them high slots, but that will hit haulers quite badly, seriously slowing down 0.0 growth.
|
Hllaxiu
|
Posted - 2005.06.20 23:24:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Corvus Dove
WTF would a frig be doing with WCS on?
Running zydrine or anything else of value.
|
Jemdar C
|
Posted - 2005.06.20 23:54:00 -
[65]
From the "Log out tactics, CTD, Loss of Connection and new Half Hour timer relog"
Originally by: Oveur
First, it doesn't matter to the timer whether you scramble or not, it's the engagement that counts. It also doesn't matter where he warps for how long he stays. He will stay in space for 30 minutes.
This seams to be a good counter measure for WCS abusing. If they log off you can hunt them down with scanners. If they stay on ss'ing longer than you can stay on, they can log off. It seams balanced, time will tell and, you'll have to wait till the patch.
|
EvilDoomer
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 00:14:00 -
[66]
Leave the wcs alone.
Cry cry cry.
but the ones that are crying use them. 
When they need them.
Nerf the game so that only killers win.
Or nerf so that carebears win.
Where oh where does this stop.
if you get the correct people and equipment you can catch that ganker. 8 stabs or not.
Thanks
EvilDoomer
Chicago Mobsters
** Ghost Fleet Pilot **
|
Shaemell Buttleson
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 02:10:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Sarkos
We had that problem with a person that loved to use a Tempest to gank smaller ships. Eventual solution was having everyone equipt a scrambler. His 4 WCS did not work against a scramble strength of 14.
Agreed! 
|
Zezman
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 03:04:00 -
[68]
Sounds to me like their using a perfectly legitimate strategy.
Sun Tzu would be so proud.
|
nahtoh
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 03:26:00 -
[69]
Originally by: The Enslaver
Edited by: The Enslaver on 20/06/2005 11:33:36
Simple solution.
High slot, with more CPU use. Make them need 80 CPU, and take a high slot each. Possible a -10% range, tracking, cargo cap (else all indies will fit out with all stabs in high) and agility penalty also.
Problem solved.
Lets see...when you make em hislot for scamblers that slow you, higher CPU an cause a large sig bloom when in use...
But wait you use scramblers so that won't fly...
"I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but
why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the
problem solve itself" (credits to mcallister TCS)
|
Infantry Blue
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 03:59:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Aalekzander Sevvari
Quote:
High slot
Quote:
high slot
Quote:
High slot
Quote:
high slot
Quote:
High slot
No. Stop mentioning the high slot already. Are you all even thinking about logical ship structure? What are the high slots? They are mountable points or sunken points on the top level of the ship. Nowhere near the warp core of a ship. Middle slots are still not at the core of a ship, but instead embedded into the electronics areas. LOW SLOTS are the modules placed deepest within the, generally sitting right beside the powegrid and warp core.
Asking to put them in mid or high slots doesn't make any sense from a logical OR role playing point.
If I recall correctly, WCS's were originally a mid slot module and you had to activate it for them to work. Then they moved them to the low slot. Correct me if i'm wrong.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 04:15:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Infantry Blue
If I recall correctly, WCS's were originally a mid slot module and you had to activate it for them to work. Then they moved them to the low slot. Correct me if i'm wrong.
I don't recall them being mid slot. However, read the eve chronicle "Loser". It clearly details a fellow running some sort of active warp descrambler on his ship.
Since EW used to be a matter of having more jamming points than their sensor strength and they couldn't fire, all or nothing, I'm guessing warp core stabalisers and warp scramblers are next on the list to be converted to a scalable system for the sake of balance.
|
Sobeseki Pawi
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 04:28:00 -
[72]
How about limit the number of stabs you can have on a BS to 4?
That way all BSes can have the same ability to run...and be caught. Ironic that the Scorp would be setting that bar...dont you think?
~Sobe |
Fillmeup
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 06:09:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Derisor
I know before I have said that stacking WCS are a legit defence in the game but I have now seen them used to do some really cheesy things.
A certain alliance that will remain nameless uses a setup that makes them able to gank and nearly impossible to catch. They put WCS in all of their lower slots on their BSes and sit at sniping range aligned with safe spot and under full power. They then proceed to gank anyone that comes trough. Yes, they dont have the damage of instagank with one ship so they just use 7 or 8 of them.
The problem is there is no way to catch these guys. Even if we put a covops on them and jump right in on them with blasterthons, they simply warp out. You hear "one point, four points ... he warped." This is with outfitted instalocking tacklers. That is just bloody rediculous. It turns the game into cheapest ganker paradise.
Now stabs are legit to run cargo and so on but this cheeseball tactic has to go. We now have a whole alliance roaming around in our territory ganking 2 or 3 ships then doing this stuff when we get together to go nail them. As soon as we deploy scan probes they mass log off alltgether. They wont engage us in an even or even nearly even fight. They use what I would call coward tactics.
Stabs are legit for haulting cargo, running blockades and so on, but that people should be able to use them to facilitate ganking is stupid.
My reccomendation is that stabs totally fubar your tracking and locking. This can be RPed as the stabs generating EM interference that prevents the tracking from functioning. For each stab in your ship, you should be seeing a 10% reducting in locking speed and tracking. Put in 6 stabs and you wont be able to hit the broadside of a barn.
This preserves using stabs on haulers and blockade runners and kills the cheese tactic.
This has got to be one of the best suggestions I have seen for this problem. Keeps the usability for the intended use, and removes the problem highlighted ...
|
Typherin laidai
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 06:32:00 -
[74]
How many times are you crying little girls gunna make these threads ?
There is no problem FFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You give up offensive for defensive... anyone that claims you dont is a moron frankly.
now to the case brought up by the original poster...
if the ships where allready alligned then the stabs would make no difference at all. you wouldn't catch them... simple as that. Im fairly certain any non sleeping pilot can hit warp before you can - warp in - lock - scramble ... so shut up tbh
And yes a scorp only has 4 lows... but then your normal EW scorp can jam its tackler cant it...
Instead of moaning to get things nerfed that Aren't broken at all why not try and get something more usefull done... like cruisers 
Originally by: Eris Discordia
*gives Typherin some loving*
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 07:17:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Sobeseki Pawi
How about limit the number of stabs you can have on a BS to 4?
That way all BSes can have the same ability to run...and be caught. Ironic that the Scorp would be setting that bar...dont you think?
The problem with this suggestion is that it's just a silly artificial restriction. When you're fitting your ship, you know you can't add one more launcher because you've no more launcher hardpoints, that makes perfect sense. But what would you say if you saw "You can't fit more than 4 of this module" after trying to fit something? That's just silly. It has to have some kind of legitimate reason.
And also, like pretty much every suggestion in this thread, it's way too extreme. It's the big changes that will never be implemented. Ever.
|
Derisor
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 08:04:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Typherin laidai
How many times are you crying little girls gunna make these threads ?
There is no problem FFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but you appear to be in the minority.
Its quite simple, If CCP wants to boil down the game to sniper/runner ganking as an invulnerable pvp tactic then leave the WCS alone. If CCP wants there to be more variety to PvP than being instapopped on a gate and having the gankers run whenever a fleet shows up then nerf the stabs.
As for saying that they can get away with a sharp ambush tactis, that is wrong. We can equip assault frigs and intys with near instalock on them and they will have exactly 1 second to react. All we need to do then is have them distracted by potential prey and boom. We trade one empty hauler or frig for a 150 mil BS.
I NEVER give up the fight. People put up too many mental blocks saying they cant.
---------
The words "Exciting" and "Safe" are mutually exclusive; pick one. |
Derisor
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 08:06:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Typherin laidai
How many times are you crying little girls gunna make these threads ?
BTW I suppose we know what tactic you use now.
Sorry but your vehement and emotional reaction is practically a tech 2 target painter.
---------
The words "Exciting" and "Safe" are mutually exclusive; pick one. |
infused
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 08:52:00 -
[78]
I can't belive how crazy some of these suggestions are.
High slots? WTF are you smoking?
Turret penalty OMG...
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination. |
Gunstar Zero
|
Posted - 2005.06.21 08:58:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Nyphur
Originally by: Infantry Blue
If I recall correctly, WCS's were originally a mid slot module and you had to activate it for them to work. Then they moved them to the low slot. Correct me if i'm wrong.
I don't recall them being mid slot. However, read the eve chronicle "Loser". It clearly details a fellow running some sort of active warp descrambler on his ship.
Since EW used to be a matter of having more jamming points than their sensor strength and they couldn't fire, all or nothing, I'm guessing warp core stabalisers and warp scramblers are next on the list to be converted to a scalable system for the sake of balance.
yeah they were midslot & you had to activate them, but they gave you +2 to the warp core each.
I cant actually remember why it was changed, there was a good enough reason tho.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |