EVE Search - Heavy Nosferatus...the pain.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Heavy Nosferatus...the pain.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 20 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jenny Spitfire	Posted - 2006.02.10 17:28:00 - [541] Originally by: smallgreenblur Give up guys... The thread's 20 pages long and contains less than a page of interesting argument... How about we post some of the ideas that came up in this thread on the game development forums? Then the forum warriors can move onto complaining about something else. sgb Like Ravens with Torps, NOS and WCS? ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT! RAWRRRRRRR!!1 - Imaran Wrangler, stealing Eris pink since a few days ago. We always knew you had a thing for pink - Vanamonde
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.02.10 17:50:00 - [542] Try prescision cruise, nos and WCS. For added funfun value! Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Weirda	Posted - 2006.02.10 18:15:00 - [543] Originally by: Maya Rkell Try prescision cruise, nos and WCS. For added funfun value! __ Weirda ...balanced NOS change... Fix Assault Ship 4th Bonus and More!
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.10 18:22:00 - [544] Originally by: Maya Rkell Try prescision cruise, nos and WCS. For added funfun value! Lets just all play the EVE : The Card Game so we can write and modify the rules as we see fit? Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
smallgreenblur	Posted - 2006.02.10 19:06:00 - [545] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: smallgreenblur Give up guys... The thread's 20 pages long and contains less than a page of interesting argument... How about we post some of the ideas that came up in this thread on the game development forums? Then the forum warriors can move onto complaining about something else. sgb Like Ravens with Torps, NOS and WCS? shhhhhh you'll give them ideas!! sgb
scarshapedstar	Posted - 2006.02.12 00:13:00 - [546] How it is: Frigate < Destroyer < Cruiser < BS < Frigate(s) How people want it to be: Everything < HAC
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.02.12 00:25:00 - [547] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 12/02/2006 00:26:04 Pfft. Taking slightly less cap drain is hardly much of an equaliser for HAC's. They will still, rapidly, lose theor cap and a heavu neut will still of course neuter them. Bring something new to bring to the argument, please Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 02:49:00 - [548] Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 12/02/2006 00:26:04 Pfft. Taking slightly less cap drain is hardly much of an equaliser for HAC's. They will still, rapidly, lose theor cap and a heavu neut will still of course neuter them. Bring something new to bring to the argument, please Are you forgetting that tacklers can tackle even nossed by 2 Heavy NOS? They can even defend themselves from drones. Smartbombs are pathetic frig/tackler defense. So your argument is that BSs taking a nerf with NoS isn't hurt their efficiency. Well how many NOS does it take to break a frigate from doing its job now? 2? 3? 4? So why do you even want a change? To make it easier to do something you feel should be your DEV given role. Using an argument about versatility against the NOS and not applying it to tackling equipment and Smartbombs is a bit arrogant and illogical. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.02.12 03:07:00 - [549] I am not using a versatility argument against YOUR argument. Against your argument... I want a change because Nos are the only modules* without an opportunity cost to use for short-range setups. (*prescision missiles also have none) Smartbombs have a huge opportunity cost - they are close-ranged, hit friends, can be suicidal in Empire, use a lot of energy, etc. They're fine. Tackling gear on frigates? Well, every module which can be fitted on all the classes has a higher opportunity cost on a frigate because they have less slots. All frigates realisticlly need a speed mod, and so mounting tackling gear (say a web and a scrambler) is ALL they can do with those midslots. Sacrificing all your avaliable midslots is most certainly an opportunitry cost given the other modules you can put there (capacitor, ECM, etc.) See, same logic applied. The nos sticks out like a sore thumb. A ceptor with little cap, even it can scramble, will NOT be using speed mods. That leaves them more vulnrable to other weapons like drones and missiles. But even a reduced nos effect will be more than suffiucient for this given the cap fragility of frigates. That paragraph wasn't even talking about interceptors, it was talking about HAC's. The versatility argument there is that most HAC's do things which cannot (easily, or even at all) be replicated by a battleship. And that changing the effect of a BS 100-energy nos on them to 75-80 (since many of them have a HIGHER sig radius than their T1 counterparts) against them will not make a huge difference - nos will still be one of the best defences against a HAC. And of course, the quick way to neutralise a HAC, the heavy neut, would be untouched. Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Levin Cavil	Posted - 2006.02.12 03:20:00 - [550] Just make the amount sucked based on signature radius. That way a MWDing ceptor gets it's cap sucked a lot but if MWD is off it has almost no effect, the advantage being that a ceptor without mwd going cant get away from drones. Battleships would still have an anti-frig defence but it requires more than just one or two nos and if you're going to be solo you have to carry some light drones as well. You might even see people starting to use ships like AFs more in pvp as well as interceptors that don't always have mwds fitted. ¼_¼
Darlan Flame	Posted - 2006.02.12 04:55:00 - [551] Almost every PVP setup these days has a Nos on it. If there is a module so good you might as well not even undock without it, there is a problem.
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 05:04:00 - [552] Originally by: Darlan Flame Almost every PVP setup these days has a Nos on it. If there is a module so good you might as well not even undock without it, there is a problem. And I don't know any frigate that undocks in PVP that doesn't have a scrambler and a webifier. So there is a problem there too? Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 05:12:00 - [553] Originally by: Maya Rkell A ceptor with little cap, even it can scramble, will NOT be using speed mods. That leaves them more vulnrable to other weapons like drones and missiles. But even a reduced nos effect will be more than suffiucient for this given the cap fragility of frigates. The Crow blows ever argument that might have made out of the water. It can tackle, damage, and navigate while having 2 Heavy NOS on it. Its called rocket launchers, small nos, and an afterburner. You rely so much on pilot skill to make arguments for you but cap management arguments against you are as if they don't exist. They do. I am sorry if there are some pilots out there that use 4 Heavy NOS. Hell I am one of them. But where does my damage come from? Drones... and launchers. And we all know how much Battleship launchers work on interceptors don't we? 2 - 20hp damage every 15 or so seconds x 3 maybe 4. And we all know what we have to do to make drones work on frigates don't we? 2 maybe 3 mids wasted to lock them down, slow them down, and increase their sig radius. Don't poor mouth me. Specialized BS pilots should always have the upperhand vs frigates and interceptors because it is specialized. Complain to the devs about them being low skill investments all you want... but the way they work are far from overbalanced. I would even go so far, and have, to point out tackling and other point modules need to be brought into conformity... NOT the other way around. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Mephistophilus	Posted - 2006.02.12 07:06:00 - [554] Edited by: Mephistophilus on 12/02/2006 07:07:27 cant be bothered
Lorth	Posted - 2006.02.12 07:11:00 - [555] Originally by: Mephistophilus WAAAAAAA i cant kill a battleship in my hac well boo effing hoo why should a battleship module be nurfed just cos you cant kill it in your smaller craft Wow that was a very well thought out and typed reply. How about instead of flaming people, you think and come up with perhaps an arguement of your own as to why you think this mod isn't overpowered. Perhaps if you do that in the future, you'll look a lot less foolish, then posting a thinly veiled flamed aimed at those you disagree with, yet lack the nessasary for-thought and intellagence to debate with.
Rafein	Posted - 2006.02.12 07:30:00 - [556] As I said before, NOS is a EW module, and no EW modules are sized based. If CCP decided to make all EW modules sized based, then fine, NOS should be size based. Until then, it is fine.
Aloysius Knight	Posted - 2006.02.12 09:44:00 - [557] make cap batterys protect aganst nos so if batty gives u 300 cap, that 300 cap can't be nosed all this talk of nerfing battleships ves smaller ships is all well and good, but it has to go both ways, frigs & crusers do less damg to a battleship so if u wan to kill a battleship u bring a battle ship, u want to kill frigs u bring a cruser or another frig so well will see more mixed fleets in a sort of pyramid style being more aobut a blanced fleet then just x amout of bs and x amount of frigs Haha can't touch this!
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 17:36:00 - [558] Originally by: Lorth Originally by: Mephistophilus WAAAAAAA i cant kill a battleship in my hac well boo effing hoo why should a battleship module be nurfed just cos you cant kill it in your smaller craft Wow that was a very well thought out and typed reply. How about instead of flaming people, you think and come up with perhaps an arguement of your own as to why you think this mod isn't overpowered. Perhaps if you do that in the future, you'll look a lot less foolish, then posting a thinly veiled flamed aimed at those you disagree with, yet lack the nessasary for-thought and intellagence to debate with. /agree however I would like to know why people think they should be able to kill a bs in a smaller ship. If the HAC has cap then it can get close and web, scram, shoot... Give a BS the inability to drain its cap completely, whithout giving it something to defend in return, makes the HAC able to toast a BS more times than not. Not to mention if the HAC brings tacklers then it can stay outside NOS range and use mid range weapons that get 4, usually, bonii to their guns/missiles and their resistances can tank the battleship. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Valea Silpha	Posted - 2006.02.12 18:03:00 - [559] People don't want to kill a big ship in a small ship. They just want a small ship to be able to tackle a big ship while other ships do the damage. Perfect case in point is interceptors. They are clearly designed to get close to distant enemies and stop them warping while the damage dealers warp to them and do the actaul fighting. The problem is SO bad on inties since they are certain to be mounting and MWd and so gimping their cap anyway.
Valea Silpha	Posted - 2006.02.12 18:07:00 - [560] Originally by: Aloysius Knight make cap batterys protect aganst nos so if batty gives u 300 cap, that 300 cap can't be nosed all this talk of nerfing battleships ves smaller ships is all well and good, but it has to go both ways, frigs & crusers do less damg to a battleship so if u wan to kill a battleship u bring a battle ship, u want to kill frigs u bring a cruser or another frig so well will see more mixed fleets in a sort of pyramid style being more aobut a blanced fleet then just x amout of bs and x amount of frigs Oh dear god no. It would force everyone into BS and make flavorless comabt. Plus theres no reason why frigs and cruisers should do less damage to BS, but theres plenty of reason why BS shouldn't do full damage to frigs.
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 18:08:00 - [561] Originally by: Valea Silpha People don't want to kill a big ship in a small ship. They just want a small ship to be able to tackle a big ship while other ships do the damage. Perfect case in point is interceptors. They are clearly designed to get close to distant enemies and stop them warping while the damage dealers warp to them and do the actaul fighting. The problem is SO bad on inties since they are certain to be mounting and MWd and so gimping their cap anyway. Jump out of the cookie cutter inty setups and put capacitor relays on. You know... that is like an every class module that also benefits a frigate more so than a BS since the recharge rate is low on a frig. Why shouldn't an interceptor have to specialize in tackling battleships if a battleship has to specialize at defending/hunting it? Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
j0sephine	Posted - 2006.02.12 18:11:00 - [562] Edited by: j0sephine on 12/02/2006 18:11:54 "however I would like to know why people think they should be able to kill a bs in a smaller ship." Because when the only thing able to kill the large ship is another large ship, and the large ships can't be harmed by anything else ... this effectively means you either fly a large ship just to be on par with everyone else, or might as well not bother until you get one. It becomes equivalent of level-based balance where either you're l.60, or just a source of cheap ganks for one until you grind your way there. (and both grind and everyone stuck in the same gear ain't fun)
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 19:11:00 - [563] Originally by: j0sephine Edited by: j0sephine on 12/02/2006 18:11:54 "however I would like to know why people think they should be able to kill a bs in a smaller ship." Because when the only thing able to kill the large ship is another large ship, and the large ships can't be harmed by anything else ... this effectively means you either fly a large ship just to be on par with everyone else, or might as well not bother until you get one. It becomes equivalent of level-based balance where either you're l.60, or just a source of cheap ganks for one until you grind your way there. (and both grind and everyone stuck in the same gear ain't fun) If that were the case I would agree. But that is not the case. If a small ship is able to kill a large ship one on one then you have revereted back into a level based grind in the grind was pointless and so were teh skill points to get there wasted. Why would anyone ever want to get into a battleships and specialize in it when one frigate with the ability to have less skill could come along and beat it. Might as well not bother to get a BS and specialize in frigates to teh max they allow, reroll another toon on teh same accoutn for production and max it out then reroll another toon and reroll another toon to laugh at everyone publically on the forum how much their battleships suck with a bit of privacy to your main. Frigates can already gank a battleship in numbers now and interceptors can take them on solo if the inty pilot is good enough. and fyi some people do find it fun to be in same gear and grind so that is your subjective oppinion Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Deja Thoris	Posted - 2006.02.12 19:31:00 - [564] Originally by: Kaylana Syi and fyi some people do find it fun to be in same gear and grind so that is your subjective oppinion I'm sure the dev's must have stated they didnt want EVE to be a grind game. So objectively, it should be avoided where possible.
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 20:01:00 - [565] Originally by: Deja Thoris Originally by: Kaylana Syi and fyi some people do find it fun to be in same gear and grind so that is your subjective oppinion I'm sure the dev's must have stated they didnt want EVE to be a grind game. So objectively, it should be avoided where possible. I am talking about it being an oppinion about THOSE types of games. Ofc. EVE isn't that type of game and shouldn't be. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
j0sephine	Posted - 2006.02.12 20:46:00 - [566] Edited by: j0sephine on 12/02/2006 20:46:46 "If a small ship is able to kill a large ship one on one then you have revereted back into a level based grind in the grind was pointless and so were teh skill points to get there wasted. Why would anyone ever want to get into a battleships and specialize in it when one frigate with the ability to have less skill could come along and beat it." The benefit of large ship when it comes to killing targets is mainly the convenience it offers, not exclusive ability to do these things. A frigate may be able to kill a battleship if it spends 10+ minutes doing so, with the margin of error narrow enough a single mistake can mean losing immediately the ship and gear. But the battleship doing the same task can pull it off much faster, can take far more beating while doing so and offers the pilot way more comfort when it comes to recovering from possible errors. This convenience can be large enough factor to make people indeed want to spend extra time training additional skills, and invest more isk. To use easy example, note how many people hunt the NPC spawns in 0.0 with frigate, as opposed to these doing it with battleship? While the PvP isn't that clear cut, its similar in this aspect. "Frigates can already gank a battleship in numbers now and interceptors can take them on solo if the inty pilot is good enough." Which is irrelevant, since your question i answered was, what makes people think they should be able to kill bs with smaller ship in the first place... "and fyi some people do find it fun to be in same gear and grind so that is your subjective oppinion* "* Can you actually point me to instance of someone saying they specifically enjoy grind and looking like everyone else? As far as i can tell, what people do enjoy is 'improvement of their character' i.e. getting increased attributes of played character and gear, as result of gameplay. But i have yet to see someone saying they enjoy the very act of repetitive beating on the same mobs for hours, for nothing but the sake of it... and that they love to see everyone else in game being exactly the same. (typically, it's rather these calling for 'same gear for everyone' are promptly sent to Counterstrike et all)
Wesley Harding	Posted - 2006.02.12 21:06:00 - [567] There's a bit of a grind when you try to get into Advanced learning skills first and foremost. I was stuck in a frig for over a month...
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2006.02.12 22:41:00 - [568] Originally by: j0sephine Edited by: j0sephine on 12/02/2006 20:46:46 "If a small ship is able to kill a large ship one on one then you have revereted back into a level based grind in the grind was pointless and so were teh skill points to get there wasted. Why would anyone ever want to get into a battleships and specialize in it when one frigate with the ability to have less skill could come along and beat it." The benefit of large ship when it comes to killing targets is mainly the convenience it offers, not exclusive ability to do these things. A frigate may be able to kill a battleship if it spends 10+ minutes doing so, with the margin of error narrow enough a single mistake can mean losing immediately the ship and gear. But the battleship doing the same task can pull it off much faster, can take far more beating while doing so and offers the pilot way more comfort when it comes to recovering from possible errors. This convenience can be large enough factor to make people indeed want to spend extra time training additional skills, and invest more isk. To use easy example, note how many people hunt the NPC spawns in 0.0 with frigate, as opposed to these doing it with battleship? While the PvP isn't that clear cut, its similar in this aspect. Almost everyone I see these days in 0.0 hunt in a wolf or an enyo in 0.0. They move up to HACs after that. Most of the BS pilots I know that pvE are mission runners. Now with Battlecruisers able to do what they do now, especially at bc 5, even BSs are becoming irrelevant in missions for newcomers plotting their SP to-do list. A Field Command ship almost makes a tech 1 battleships puppy in comparison. Quote: Can you actually point me to instance of someone saying they specifically enjoy grind and looking like everyone else? As far as i can tell, what people do enjoy is 'improvement of their character' i.e. getting increased attributes of played character and gear, as result of gameplay. But i have yet to see someone saying they enjoy the very act of repetitive beating on the same mobs for hours, for nothing but the sake of it... and that they love to see everyone else in game being exactly the same. (typically, it's rather these calling for 'same gear for everyone' are promptly sent to Counterstrike et all) I can name you a few from City of Heroes, Star Wars Galaxies, and World of Warcraft that do love the grind... the mindless repetition. I also enjoy killing sansha's over and over and over and over... ofc they killed my family... so I exact revenge whenever possible. PvP to me is the act of protecting me and mine... not conquest. When there isn't a need to protect me and mine... revenge is the mode I am in...and I grind away on NPCs. Albeit a lot less these days because I spend much much time at work... I am at work now... not working...<eve addiction> And that is a very poor definition of grind... since anything is a grind... just as anything is a niche. It is all your point of view... which is subjective. I like CoH/CoV, SWG when it was a PC game and not a console game, and WoW. I also like guild wars and hope RF Online pvp is worth it. They all have their grind and their min/max settings that kill diversity. But don't say EVE is without its grind... becuase mining is definately a grind... and directly attributes to your pocket which directly attributes to your attributes ( skills cost isk )... NPC missions are a grind which directly affect your attributes ( see skills and isk ). Lastly don't think EVE is without its same gear scenario with so many cookie cutter min/max ships these days... like a tackler with 1 scrambler and 1 web and afterburner/mwd... well... hopefully you get the drift. All I ask for is things get looked at overall... calling for the nerfing of one module because it kills diversity, or so they say, is a bit much and convoluted. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Matrices Reborn	Posted - 2006.02.13 00:32:00 - [569] You have to deal with a reality in this game: some substantial portion of it is always going to be rocks/papers/scissors. That's not so bad in a game like Battlefield 2 where you can just load a new round in 10 minutes on an even keel, but it can hurt the wallet and the ego pretty severely in a persistent game like this. However, there is no way around it 100% Here are two suggestions: 1. Fit a tactical analyzer. If the guy is carrying NOS, run away. 2. Create a new module, NOS Deflection Field. Gives you time to run and warp away in a smaller ship.
j0sephine	Posted - 2006.02.13 03:29:00 - [570] "Almost everyone I see these days in 0.0 hunt in a wolf or an enyo in 0.0. They move up to HACs after that." Possibly some sort of flavour of month in the area you operate? I can hardly draw this sort of simplification from the list of stuff that gets killed in everyday's encounters... nearly everything seems to be present, save maybe for logistics ships. Other than that, plenty of tech.1 ships of all kinds, tech.2 frigates and some HACs. Quite certainly no "wolf and enyo and HACs only" effect you describe. "Now with Battlecruisers able to do what they do now, especially at bc 5, even BSs are becoming irrelevant in missions for newcomers plotting their SP to-do list. A Field Command ship almost makes a tech 1 battleships puppy in comparison." A field command ship has also skill list that takes longer to train than the battleship, really, as well as higher defensive abilities. (and higher price due to nature of tech.2 market) So if you are saying they are to replace tech.1 battleships in mission running, this would only confirm what i said -- that people are still willing to spend extra isk and time to fly ships that offer them more comfort. Even though they could do the same task with something 'smaller'. (tech.1 battlecruisers may replace battleships while doing l.3 missions because they're overkill there already. For l.4, while some missions are doable in bc it's overall more trouble than it's worth so few people do it. It's either battleships or HAC i.e. again, extra skillpoints and isk spent on more safety and easier work) "I can name you a few from City of Heroes, Star Wars Galaxies, and World of Warcraft that do love the grind... the mindless repetition." No, can you point me specifically to a place where they actually said it "i love the grinding, and i don't care about the xp i get for it, or the next shiny piece of loot, i just love the feel of doing the very same thing over and over and over and over"? I hope you understand why am skeptical, when you bring up SWG i.e. pretty much _the_ game with 100% scripted bots grinding the xp for people while they're asleep or generally afk... "And that is a very poor definition of grind... since anything is a grind..." Any sort of repetitive, prolonged activity in MMO with very little variation to it (if any) is grind, yes. What is so poor about this definition, exactly? That it makes it rather obvious this is what most of these games is built upon? :s "But don't say EVE is without its grind..." I didn't say there's no grind in EVE; what i said was, tweaking game balance to point where bigger is always better, would make the grind more pronounced... to the point of being obligatory even for these who really dislike it. Currently you can very well play the game and have some impact on it right off the bat, without spending hours mining, hunting NPCs or doing agent missions. If this was changed, your chance to affect things would come only after grinding enough isk to buy and equip a battleship, and after getting all skills needed to fly it. More fun? maybe for these few (out of 5 mil) grind loving WoW players you mentioned... "Lastly don't think EVE is without its same gear scenario with so many cookie cutter min/max ships these days... like a tackler with 1 scrambler and 1 web and afterburner/mwd... well... hopefully you get the drift." Difference being, while various ship types can use number of standardized setups, there is actual variety in ship types and classes that are being used to begin with. As opposed to everyone flying just the battleship...

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 20 :: 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.