EVE Search - WC Penalty

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

WC Penalty

» 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 .. 14 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rei Toai	Posted - 2006.03.04 11:44:00 - [121] Edited by: Rei Toai on 04/03/2006 11:45:45 In some special ways WCS are a "must have" and exactly this fact makes it unbalanced in my opinion. Fleet A fitted no WCS - Fleet B has WCS fitted. Tackler from Fleet A try to pin down Fleet B - Ships from Fleet B can quite easily warp off to SS and repair - for further engagement. Tackler from Fleet B can easily pin down the ships from Fleet A - Fleet A can't warp to SS for repair in the end Fleet A gets destroyed - even if they did more damage than Fleet B - due to the fact that B can warp of and return after a few minutes - their ships can get down to structure and enter the battle allmost full repaired. This also means - Fleet A deals more damage but get lesser kills than B - B has become the winner of the battle. Next engagement - Fleet A also fits WCS to get an equilibrium. On a long enough timeline - everyone and his pet will fit WCS when they go to a fleetbattle. This makes WCS kinda unbalanced for me. No penalty for WCS usage - no reason why to fit armor plates for example. Would you rather use a ship with 5k armor which can warp off anytime it wants for repair - or would you use a ship with 15k armor which gets blown up because it hasn't fitted WCS?? In the end the old question "gank or tank" gets replaced by "fit WCS or die"
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2006.03.04 11:52:00 - [122] Edited by: Goberth Ludwig on 04/03/2006 11:55:02 Edited by: Goberth Ludwig on 04/03/2006 11:54:31 Originally by: Dark Shikari They already have penalties. Each WCS does one of the following: -20% cap recharge (INSANE penalty IMO) -10% RoF, -10% damage, for a total of about -20% damage (too much if anything) -20% to all armor resists or -55% to one (ouch) etc... (i.e. where you put a WCS, you could have just as well put something else...) introducing stacking nerf... when you alredy have 3 damage mods fitting 2 stabs doesnt really dampen your damage edit: now that i think of it, your argument is flawed, I could add that damage mods have a penalty of 20% cap and 55% armor resist aswell... so that "penalty" you are talking about actually applies to all modules in eve... duh - Gob (also known as Admiral Goberius)
Otakhar LesGaZ	Posted - 2006.03.04 11:58:00 - [123] lol you guys are just ridiculous.... crying you dont like game features so you cant harrass hother players... FORTUNATELY we have WCS, if you want counter them, just FITT MORE SCRAMBLERS! and after this what?behing able to scramble whitout any scrambling modules?lol
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2006.03.04 12:02:00 - [124] Originally by: Otakhar LesGaZ lol you guys are just ridiculous.... crying you dont like game features so you cant harrass hother players... FORTUNATELY we have WCS, if you want counter them, just FITT MORE SCRAMBLERS! and after this what?behing able to scramble whitout any scrambling modules?lol you miss the point the problem is wcs on pvp ships, and for that reason wcs force people to ganking - Gob (also known as Admiral Goberius)
quellious	Posted - 2006.03.04 12:04:00 - [125] Damn, please stop asking for WCS nerf each time you miss a target ! What will you want next ? Destruction of pilots in station when you are more than them, and moving all systems security status as 0.0 ? Be serious, fitt scramblers and learn how to use them. - > Order Falcon & Pilgrim > Colsup
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.03.04 12:17:00 - [126] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/03/2006 12:17:31 Originally by: quellious Damn, please stop asking for WCS nerf each time you miss a target! The problem is not to adapt to game mechanisms, it's how the use of game mechanisms forces you to adapt. It would be really foolish to think that people asking for changes to a game mechanism only want not to have to adapt to it, they might be perfectly able to adapt and at the same time not enjoy how adaptation changes the game. In fact, adaptation might even not be enjoyable for anyone. And that's true for about anything about game balance: the problem is not to adapt to what exist, it's that the mutual adaptation of behaviors lead to a situation where gameplay suffer. So, you might rather prefer defending how WCS are balanced as a defensive mods on pvp setups, instead of that parody of yours. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
dazedandconfused	Posted - 2006.03.04 12:21:00 - [127] Originally by: Fuujin Use more scramblers. Good idea :) Honestly I think WCS are fine atm. Jammers still have the edge imo. I would think 2 + 2 scramblers would be enough for almost all cases and the jammed would need to fit 2 WCS for ever + 2 scrambler. Is that really so bad? By bad I mean is it bad enough to where it needs change?
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2006.03.04 12:27:00 - [128] Originally by: dazedandconfused Originally by: Fuujin Use more scramblers. Good idea :) Honestly I think WCS are fine atm. Jammers still have the edge imo. I would think 2 + 2 scramblers would be enough for almost all cases and the jammed would need to fit 2 WCS for ever + 2 scrambler. Is that really so bad? By bad I mean is it bad enough to where it needs change? do you play the same game I do? do you see all the ganks ecc? - Gob (also known as Admiral Goberius)
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.03.04 12:29:00 - [129] Originally by: Maya Rkell Fine. Then you know what'd happen? That ship wouldn't have BEEN there in the first place, or it'd be pure stabs for movement. I'd rather kill 2 of 5 than 1 of 2. And we have a winner. Sure, it sucks to see geddons with 6 wcs or whatever flying around only going for the cheap kills at near to zero risk. But, consider what removing the use of wcs for this 'illegitimate' usage would do those that use them as intended (defensively only, travel setups, etc.) I have to agree with Maya, you don't want to lower player mobility any more then it already has been in this game. The consequences would be far worse then the boon you get from not being bothered by stab+ew+gun setups anymore. Power to the players !
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2006.03.04 12:31:00 - [130] blaine theres been plenty of suggestions to stop pvp stab setups without arming legimtimate travel setups and a geddon with 8 stabs is still easy to catch the big problem lies in vagabonds and ravens first of all - Gob (also known as Admiral Goberius)

Sky Hunter	Posted - 2006.03.04 15:40:00 - [131] Originally by: Goberth Ludwig blaine theres been plenty of suggestions to stop pvp stab setups without arming legimtimate travel setups and a geddon with 8 stabs is still easy to catch the big problem lies in vagabonds and ravens first of all Lemme guess, your not flying any of those ships you mentioned as problem ones? Well, since they are not the ones that are problem ones. The Geddons with 7 Megapulses / 3 Heatsinks / 5 WCS - problem. An a HAC with 1 WCS in low attacking a target with 15 gang mates in local is not a problem. More of that, WCS has alot of counters starting from tacklers and faction/officer disruptors/scramblers and ending with interdictors and bubbles. Like i said before...another thread created by someone who just tryed to gank someone. -=-
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2006.03.04 16:40:00 - [132] I fly vaga, altho I dont stab it, I never pvped in a stabbed raven lately but I npc in one. The reason I didnt include geddon is because 2 scrambler frigs will pin him down and he wont be able to hit them - on the other hand a vagabond with barrage (this I know for sure) or a raven with precision cruise (havent tested this tho, only heard of others) will mow the frigs/inty down quickly, thus making it impossible to get them tackled without ganking. You said its ok to wear one stab if fighting someone who has 15 friends in local, maybe if it wasnt possible to pvp stabbed there wouldnt be 15 in local to start with and you would see more folks flying alone looking for good fights. Its might be new to you but a lot of people dont care if they lose their ship as long as they lose it fighting and not ganked by 20 ppl... - Gob (also known as Admiral Goberius)
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2006.03.04 19:08:00 - [133] What i meant to say is not that geddons with stabs are an issue and other ships are not, or vice versa or whatever. What I;m trying to say is that any solution that involves too much loss of functionality for ships fitting wcs in any other setting then a 'lame' one (like the wcs+ew+cruise raven example you probably meant), will just do more harm then good as it affects others as well. That's what Maya indicated with her remark about rather killing 2/5 then 1/2. I'd rather see more people flying around then less, even if the less have no stabs fitted and the more do sometimes. You don't want that soloplayer that wants to take the risk of flying his BS fitted with some defense and stabs into alliance-dominated space to be penalised so much that he doesn't even try it anymore. That would mean less fun for all. Now it's just a question of some frustration when you fail to catch him cause he used stabs. And that's something I can live with tbh. Power to the players !
Dark Eulogy	Posted - 2006.03.04 19:19:00 - [134] Edited by: Dark Eulogy on 04/03/2006 19:19:38 You cant define everything at Dictionary.com Opportunity cost means both the combined cost of a selection (in this case a low slot) AND what you could have gained otherwise (+ cap OR + damage OR + armor, not all of the above like some others have made it appear) Since all items would take a low slot, the opportunity cost therefor is one of the previously mentioned bonuses.
Sky Hunter	Posted - 2006.03.04 19:24:00 - [135] Originally by: Goberth Ludwig I fly vaga, altho I dont stab it, I never pvped in a stabbed raven lately but I npc in one. The reason I didnt include geddon is because 2 scrambler frigs will pin him down and he wont be able to hit them - on the other hand a vagabond with barrage (this I know for sure) or a raven with precision cruise (havent tested this tho, only heard of others) will mow the frigs/inty down quickly, thus making it impossible to get them tackled without ganking. You said its ok to wear one stab if fighting someone who has 15 friends in local, maybe if it wasnt possible to pvp stabbed there wouldnt be 15 in local to start with and you would see more folks flying alone looking for good fights. Its might be new to you but a lot of people dont care if they lose their ship as long as they lose it fighting and not ganked by 20 ppl... Maybe its new to you but sometimes people live in systems, and when your entereing into one of hostile main systems with 20 people sitting there, you do need a stab otherwise youll have almost 120% chance of trading your ship for your target. Thanks, but i dont want a fight to turn into 'both in pod' every time i engage someone who got possible reinforcements. And im sure noone wants to get ganked everytime he ganks someone within target backup. More of that, if you say Vagabond can make it out from tacklers...yr just didnt seen any professional tacklers out there. -=-
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.04 19:34:00 - [136] I agree Vagas are an issue, because Barrage M lets them hit at 25km and have a full rack of WCS. This is why I suggested -10% range per WCS...with 2 WCS, your range suddenly becomes 20km...and with 5, 12.5km. Making them come into short range ships weapon and scramble range... (plus it nerfs snipers with racks of WCS) Sky Hunter, then scramblers need to stack too (so you'd need disruptors to hold down a heavily WCS'ed ship). Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
callonious	Posted - 2006.03.04 19:34:00 - [137] Why do you all assume stabs are an idustrial module, whats wrong for using them in pvp? Thats how they were intended, if you spent half the time you did complaining on fighting youd probaly be able to figure out how to kill stabed pilots or to not die from them. Whats they next thing after stabs? That pilot has an mwd on, those are only for industrials moving ore!!! NERF!!! ------------------------------------------------------------ Please resize your signature graphic to be smaller than 24,000 bytes in filesize - Jacques If I'm your manservant, how come I'm pwning you in your sig but you're nowhere near mine? - Wrangler
DrKira	Posted - 2006.03.04 19:34:00 - [138] What ever happened to "if you cant beat em, join em"????? If your a pirate and you are **ed that PvPer's are warping away then maybe they are just smarter then you, if you are **ed that PvEer's are getting away then use the freaking scramblers (hey how often do you guys use warp bubbles?) Dont blame CCP because your small brain is unable to comprehend a solution to your problems besides being the nerf police. Although i wouldnt mind seeing a more complicated system myself, I can honestly say i have no beef with either gankers or WCS'ers. Just think outside of the box. [i am posting with this char now because she is way hotter then my old char :]
Kyguard	Posted - 2006.03.04 19:38:00 - [139] Another problem with WCS is that in order to catch someone using you need to use blob tactics and that discourages solo playing. Now some of you will say that you just need to fit more scramblers in your midslots to catch wcs users; the whole 'adapt' response. We all know that midslots are far more precious that lowslots since most ships tend to have lows > meds. So fitting more scramblers will gimp your setup, remove the ability to fit any webifiers, sensor boosters etc. This is especially true for shield tankers who require most of their slots to have a decent tank. Furthermore, the lowest number of lowslots a BS has is 4. Most BS operate at a 10km - 20km range meaning that using 7.5km scramblers is not a good idea. So lets look at the BS list. Armageddon (3 Medslots) w/ Mega Pulse Laser I w/ MF crystals resulting in an optimal range of about 10km-20km Conc: Geddon logically won't get under 7.5km to use warp scramblers so it can at MAX fit 3x 20km disruptors (1 pt) resulting in 3pts of scrambling. This won't catch *ANY* of the BS if they have a full rack of WCS. Apocalypse (4 Medslots) w/ Mega Pulse Laser I w/ MF crystals resulting in an optimal range of about 10km-20km Conc: The Apoc also won't normally get under 7.5km to use warp scramblers so it can at MAX fit 4x 20km disruptors (1 pt) resulting in 4pts of scrambling. Same issue as the geddon. Railthron has the same issue as the apoc/geddon. Blasterthron may catch a Scorpion and Raven assuming that it requires one medslots for its MWD and fits 3x 7.5km scramblers (2 pt) resulting in 6pts of scrambling. Typhoon also suffers from the same layout as the Geddon, while the Dominix and Tempest are very versatile and can catch anything but a Geddon due to its 8 slots assuming that the Tempest/Dominix fit 4x 7.5km scramblers and an MWD. The shields tankers, Raven and Scorp I won't even get into. A Raven will have no tank if it hopes to catch a fully racked wcs-BS. While the Scorp has 8 medslots, it can be fitted with an MWD and 7x 7.5km scramblers (if it fits), but then it has no other role other than tackling. So what does this tell me? Blob Tactics ftw. Solo-pvp ftl. Oh and don't use a BS for solo pvp'ing. -\|- Join LFC, become someone, become family.
Sky Hunter	Posted - 2006.03.04 20:03:00 - [140] Edited by: Sky Hunter on 04/03/2006 20:03:12 Originally by: callonious Why do you all assume stabs are an idustrial module, whats wrong for using them in pvp? Thats how they were intended, if you spent half the time you did complaining on fighting youd probaly be able to figure out how to kill stabed pilots or to not die from them. Whats they next thing after stabs? That pilot has an mwd on, those are only for industrials moving ore!!! NERF!!! signed! Originally by: Maya Rkell I agree Vagas are an issue, because Barrage M lets them hit at 25km and have a full rack of WCS. This is why I suggested -10% range per WCS...with 2 WCS, your range suddenly becomes 20km...and with 5, 12.5km. Making them come into short range ships weapon and scramble range... (plus it nerfs snipers with racks of WCS) Sky Hunter, then scramblers need to stack too (so you'd need disruptors to hold down a heavily WCS'ed ship). Any ship can fit a 1 stab and still be able to deal with everything. And like i said. And expirienced tackler can hold down almost anything. And those who rush at 'hammer approach button' to close-range ships to tackle....deserve to get shot down. p.s. im all for WCS stacking penalty so those with lots(2+) of WCS get nerfed. But im fully against removing 1-2 WCS from setups that intended to be deep hit & run ops. Ok even not 2....one. edit: few spelling mistakes -=-

Grey Area	Posted - 2006.03.04 20:16:00 - [141] Originally by: Maya Rkell -10% optimal/falloff per stab works, for example. (and +10% explosion radius for missile ships) Never been your biggest fan Maya, but if there WAS to be a penalty for WCS, this is the best idea I've heard so far. It dishes out some gimp to the snipers who fit them too. Would it be possible to put a "reverse stacking penalty" on this as well, so that one WCS was -10%, two would be -10 for the first, -20 for the second (i.e. -30% total) etc, etc... The more I think about it, the more I like it. Wouldn't affect haulers who don't want to fire weapons anyway, and would result in hit and run squads having to get in close to do damage, which sounds like a fair tradeoff. Why the explosion radius penalty for missile ships though? Why not just reduce flight time in the same way? Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.04 20:22:00 - [142] Because flight time is often kinda moot. If your lock range is 60km, and your missile goes at 6km/s, then if your missile lasts 20s anything short of reducing it by over 50% won't matter. A speed penalty to the missiles might hurt, but you'd still be doung full damage and the turret ships wouldn't... Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Grey Area	Posted - 2006.03.04 20:28:00 - [143] Edited by: Grey Area on 04/03/2006 20:28:47 Originally by: Maya Rkell Because flight time is often kinda moot. If your lock range is 60km, and your missile goes at 6km/s, then if your missile lasts 20s anything short of reducing it by over 50% won't matter. A speed penalty to the missiles might hurt, but you'd still be doung full damage and the turret ships wouldn't... Point taken. I always forget that falloff reduces damage, not just an on/off switch for hits. I still think an explosion velocity penalty is too much though...at point blank range the missiles would still do less damage, whereas the turrets wouldn't. Speed reduction does sound like the happy medium - would make defenders and even smartbombs more of a viable defence... I would stress, I still don't actually think ANY balancing of WCS is required - just that your idea is the first one I've heard that approaches sensible. Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once."
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2006.03.04 20:32:00 - [144] Except for the fact that defenders would still be worthless in msot sotuations, and smartbombs have other drawbacks..the opportunity cost for them would still be way too high, and hence I can't take that suggestion seriously. Digital Communist> The Jin-Mei are probably more profficient in training for Tofu and Noodles than Spaceship Command
Goberth Ludwig	Posted - 2006.03.04 20:49:00 - [145] Sky: I have been in systems with 20 in local, you dont have to die to kill somebody else thats why you have an mwd and speed... Anyway you talk about professional tacklers, most of the time you can just save yourself by mwdin to the gate, and still, if you simply mwd away you can easily pop the ceptors with autocannons and outrun the rest: either they come close and get webbed and pwned, or they orbit far and get shredded by barrage range (again I am not making this stuff up, I have seen/done it ingame) Blaine: I do see your point but stabs force people to gank up in order to catch anything, because alone you cannot tackle another "stabbed" pvper without gimping your setup to no end. So all you can do is hope your enemy wont warp away as soon as his tank fails. That means in order to allow those solo battleships (those you mentioned) to happen you sacrifice a system where it would be possible to roam around looking for 1v1 fights in something bigger than a ceptor... which is currently not happening on TQ. In conclusion, to those pointing out stabs save you from ganks: wrong! stabs wont save anyone from a big group, so all they really accomplish is allowing you to disengage when the fight (to be more specific, a 1v1) is going bad, which imo is wrong. - Gob (also known as Admiral Goberius)
DigitalCommunist	Posted - 2006.03.04 21:49:00 - [146] Originally by: Opposition HAY GUYS STOP ASKING FOR CHANGES TO GAME MECHANICS BCOZ YOU DONT KNOW HOW TO USE SCRAMBLERS LOL!! LEARN 2 PLAY, AND FIT MORE LOL. WCS IS A COMBAT MODULE SO ITS PRETTY FINE, IF U CANT WIN U JUST SUCK AND NEED MORE FRIENDS. YOU JUST WANT TO GRIEF PEOPLE AND HARASS THEM, THERES NO LOGIC IN BALANCING TWO MODULES WHICH ARE FINE. ONE MAKES PEOPLE CRY, SO ITS ONLY FAIR IT SHOULD GET ALL THE PENALTIES. IT DOESNT MATTER THAT SMALL BATTLES ARE RUINED, BECAUSE I DONT PVP IN THOSE. I CANT WIN IN A 1V1 BCOZ I SUCK AND NEED MY FRIENDS, SO I ONLY FIGHT IN BLOBS. THEREFORE BLOBS SHOULD BE THE ONLY PVP, AND I CAN AVOID THAT TOO WITH THE USE OF MAP AND INSTAS LOLOL And there we have, ladies and gentlemen, the full extent of this argument. Purchasing Complex Fullerene Shards, contact me ingame.
Dexus	Posted - 2006.03.04 21:55:00 - [147] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Originally by: Opposition HAY GUYS STOP ASKING FOR CHANGES TO GAME MECHANICS BCOZ YOU DONT KNOW HOW TO USE SCRAMBLERS LOL!! LEARN 2 PLAY, AND FIT MORE LOL. WCS IS A COMBAT MODULE SO ITS PRETTY FINE, IF U CANT WIN U JUST SUCK AND NEED MORE FRIENDS. YOU JUST WANT TO GRIEF PEOPLE AND HARASS THEM, THERES NO LOGIC IN BALANCING TWO MODULES WHICH ARE FINE. ONE MAKES PEOPLE CRY, SO ITS ONLY FAIR IT SHOULD GET ALL THE PENALTIES. IT DOESNT MATTER THAT SMALL BATTLES ARE RUINED, BECAUSE I DONT PVP IN THOSE. I CANT WIN IN A 1V1 BCOZ I SUCK AND NEED MY FRIENDS, SO I ONLY FIGHT IN BLOBS. THEREFORE BLOBS SHOULD BE THE ONLY PVP, AND I CAN AVOID THAT TOO WITH THE USE OF MAP AND INSTAS LOLOL And there we have, ladies and gentlemen, the full extent of this argument. QFT
Dexus	Posted - 2006.03.04 22:32:00 - [148] Why are you attacking a ship with a tank you know your guns cant brake?
Kyguard	Posted - 2006.03.04 22:39:00 - [149] Originally by: Sky Hunter Yes, maybe your right. However....lets say...your attacking a target on a gate and its having a more then average tank. So it can absord your dmg for a few. Meanwhile, target screams in local for help. Usually not all in local rushing to help. But you can be almost certain that in next few secs youll see few inties or cruisers come in to help. In that case, you can get pretty much shot down if they will be able to overhelm you with numbers. Wich is exactly why im against any kind of penalties for single WCS module. Or for even 2 WCS. Point is to nerf those with 2+ WCS setups or more. That can jump into a hostile fleet and warp out. edit: typo again Speed and good agility should be enough for hit & run tactics. -\|- Join LFC, become someone, become family.
Sky Hunter	Posted - 2006.03.04 22:39:00 - [150] Originally by: Dexus Why are you attacking a ship with a tank you know your guns cant brake? read again. any ship can tank some dmg for some time. when you take on apoc for example, you surely know it will tank you for maybe minute? -=-



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: 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.