| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kalik Montclair
   |
Posted - 2005.11.15 01:19:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Jane Vladmir
90% of eve want them to be overpowered; 90% of eve doesn't want to have to take chances.
First fix the players, then you can fix the modules.
Sig Quality quote there......
Originally by: Jane Vladmir
90% of eve want them to be overpowered; 90% of eve doesn't want to have to take chances.
First fix the players, then you can fix the modules.
|
Nyxus
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 03:44:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Kara Kaprica
There is nothing wrong with this module. People who see them as the antichrist of EVE make me giggle. It gives you the ability to POSSIBLY get away from combat, for the price of REDUCED effectiveness in such combat. In combat, there is nothing you can fit in a low slot that has a lesser combat potential than a WCS, except that the stab MAY allow you to leave the combat.
Removing and/or nerfing WCS would have a massive effect on Industry in this game as alot of people would simply avoid certain areas because they woukd no longer feel remotely safe traveing through them.
Thats the issue. The opportunity costs for fitting wcs are absurdly low. What are you giving up? 2 slots out of 18? 60 cpu? The fact that 4 wcs+ are common should indicate how little opportunity costs you actually give up in comparison to the advantage you gain by mounting them.
And no one cares about travel setups with WCS. No one cares about industrialists with haulers using lots of WCS.
EVERYONE HATES BATTLESHIPS THAT STILL MOUNT MAJOR OFFENCE WHILE EASILY USING 4+ STABBIES.
Sorry for the shouting. But I thought it needed to be heard. And please don't even get me started on the sheer number of interceptors with stabbies that I have encountered recently.
Nyxus
Plasmatique> "Cry 'Cartiff' and let slip the dogs of war!" |
Berasus' Minion
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 04:51:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Berasus'' Minion on 15/11/2005 04:51:54
how about the jamming strength of a scrambler is cumulative?
so the strength of jamming on the target increases every cycle.
__________disruptor___Scrambler
Cycle 1_______1___________2
Cycle 2_______2___________4
Cycle 3_______3___________6
Cycle 4_______4___________8
Cycle 5_______5___________10
etc etc etc
ships using them to travel won't be effected since they'll be long gone by the time the scramblers gone through the 2nd cycle.
Ships using them in combat will still have a chance to use them to run at the very start if they act quickly, but if they stay they'll be sacrificing their chance to run since the scrambler will stack up enough to stop him.
|
Rexthor Hammerfists2
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 07:39:00 -
[64]
well said nyxus.
|
M3ta7h3ad
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 07:55:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Berasus' Minion
Edited by: Berasus'' Minion on 15/11/2005 04:51:54
how about the jamming strength of a scrambler is cumulative?
so the strength of jamming on the target increases every cycle.
__________disruptor___Scrambler
Cycle 1_______1___________2
Cycle 2_______2___________4
Cycle 3_______3___________6
Cycle 4_______4___________8
Cycle 5_______5___________10
etc etc etc
ships using them to travel won't be effected since they'll be long gone by the time the scramblers gone through the 2nd cycle.
Ships using them in combat will still have a chance to use them to run at the very start if they act quickly, but if they stay they'll be sacrificing their chance to run since the scrambler will stack up enough to stop him.
Thats actually a damn good idea.
Allows travel and nerfs it for combat. I like it!
Oh and now with the new insta removal thing, perhaps they should consider making WCS a little more effective. Maybe release those tech 2 WCS now? eh ccp?? :)
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 07:59:00 -
[66]
nerf wcs
________________________________________________________
|
Serret
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 08:04:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Nyxus
And no one cares about travel setups with WCS. No one cares about industrialists with haulers using lots of WCS.
EVERYONE HATES BATTLESHIPS THAT STILL MOUNT MAJOR OFFENCE WHILE EASILY USING 4+ STABBIES.
And, in fact, making WCS high-slots actually means that indies can fit full cargo expanders and still have a pair of WCS. How can ya complain about that?!?
--
<Deathwing> just say Amarr pwn cause DW is Amarr |
M3ta7h3ad
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 08:08:00 -
[68]
Because indies tend to have more low slots than high slots.
I prefer more security as opposed to more cargo space.
The guy above with the "cumulative effect" had the best idea I've heard of so far.
|
Agricola Augusta
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 08:26:00 -
[69]
/sarcasm mode
I can't destroy ships that fit WCS so they should be removed, or people using them should be penalized so they have no chance of defending themselves WHHHHHHHHAAAAAA!
I get destroyed at gates by pirates because they use sensor boosters to snipe me, remove sensor boosters or penalize them so badly they can't use them to snipe WHHHHHAAA!
I get killed in belts because pirates have scramblers and I have nothing to counter it with effectively, remove scramblers or penalize thier use so the pirates have no way to break the tank on my barge WWHHHHHHHHHAAAAA!
I can't pvp 1v1 because it's impossible to fit a scrambler/WCS and fight meaning he always warps away before I can win, put something in the game that allows me to prevent them from warping WHHHAAAAAAA!
/sarcasm mode off
And they call me a P***y for fitting WCS on my Raven?
All I see when someone calls for a nerf to WCS is "I didn't kill him because he had WCS, so please change the rules to satisfy my need to win."
People who call for a nerf to WCS= White Goodman (Dodgeball). My advice is to grab life by the balls and adapt!
|
Quentin Decker
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 08:48:00 -
[70]
Warp core stabilizers are fine as they are.
Why? For starters, any ship fitting warp core stabilizers is already severely penalized by occupying valuable low slots that might otherwise drastically improve the set-up. For example, a battleship with a standard PvP set-up is far more likely to defeat a pilot with equal skills in the same ship that decided to eat up one or two of his slots with stabilizers. Fitting WCSs may just be your ticket to bail you out of a bad situation, but it's also risky using them at the same time - they reduce the full potential of your set-up.
Additionally, pilots that wish to evade having their ships scrambled usually have to fit multiple stabilizers to counter the often high strengths of the modules attempting to scramble them. I don't understand why a module such as the WCS - something you often have to use in numbers for them to be effective - needs to be nerfed.
When I engage in PvP, a tenth or so of the ships I'll attempt to scramble will effectively counter it. That's right, 10% of them. Now just because a ship is able to stabilize its warp drive and get away from me does not give me the right to go to the opposite extreme... and say that just because the guy I wanted to blow up got away means that WCSs need to be nerfed, killed, removed. PvPers have an effective and almost guranteed method for shutting down the warp drives of their targets, and there is absolutely no reason why the targets do not reserve the right to have an effective counter. Or at least attempt to counter. Do I like to watch my targets get away? Heck no. But it is only fair. I try to shut their warp drive down, they try to keep it online.
There is nothing unreasonable about the warp core stabilizer. Using them can nerf your own set-up, yet they offer the ability to get away from unfavorable situations, in all fairness. If you wish to remove the WCS, remove the scramblers / disruptors as well. The simple fact is, players hate to see their prey mount an effective counter to their set-ups. But that's the way it works and should work.
My two cents, take or leave it.
-JP
-this space left intentionally blank- |
Ocean Soul
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 12:04:00 -
[71]
I ransom mostly for a living and WCS P****s me off when ppl escape. however it is part of the game and is just another factor for for us to work around. also WCS is the only thing thats going to encourage ppl out of lagville and into lower sec systems. if WCS is nerfed less people will leave high sec space as they are affraid to loose a ship. i think that it is purposly over powered and for this reason.
Live with it ladies and gentlmen i dont believe that it is going to change.
|
mOrdi
|
Posted - 2005.11.15 12:48:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Quentin Decker
There is nothing unreasonable about the warp core stabilizer. Using them can nerf your own set-up, yet they offer the ability to get away from unfavorable situations, in all fairness. If you wish to remove the WCS, remove the scramblers / disruptors as well. The simple fact is, players hate to see their prey mount an effective counter to their set-ups. But that's the way it works and should work.
totally got it one sir
its a counter for scrambers and they should be there for those who want to protect themselves
leave em alone ..havnt we had enuff nerfs latley without messing up things further?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |