| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Gonada
   |
Posted - 2006.04.08 14:38:00 -
[181]
exactly, a pirate who whines about wcs is not a pirate but a pansy.
like the other day, i come across a gank in lowsec after jumping into a system, Caldari HAC, cldari inty, and a industrial.
course they tried to get me, course i had a bunch of wcs on
I got away, and got whined at in local 
they need WCS due to the nature of the gates.
-I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.-
|
James Snowscoran
|
Posted - 2006.04.08 16:32:00 -
[182]
Hehe. The discussion amuses me greatly.
WCS promote ganksquads with dedicated ships for tackling and damage dealing. Problem is, the way local channel functions any retard will notice your small blob entering system, and run for a safespot or station.
The current use (abuse) of WCS also encourage gatesniping over gatetanking and belt piracy, because no amount of stabs will save you from getting sniped, you need other stuff to get away from that.
WCS promotes the use of fast ships with several midslots for piracy, because getting 2 scramble points out of one module is very important when there are lots of stab users around. It also promotes armour tanking over shield tanking for hunters, and shield tanking over armour tanking for prey.
As mentioned earlier, pilots can minimize risk to an almost negligible level while mounting all wcs in lows. Combined with a shieldtank in mids, this makes the user almost invunerable as long as he or she has the sense to know when to warp out from a fight. You can even put in a scrambler, you won't be able to kill as many targets but you'll be able to do it without much risk.
Personally I'd like to see wcs be made into an active module with 20 second cycle time, and a slight passive decrease to the users' scan resolution. Mostly to prevent people from fighting with wcs fitted, ie fighting with the option of a riskfree getaway, while not making a significant impact on travelers (who should be able to warp inside the 20 second window).It would impair npcers slightly, but not much, because lock time isn't as important when ratting as in other pvp.
-----
|
snake03
|
Posted - 2006.04.23 18:40:00 -
[183]
 Originally by: Dexus
Edited by: Dexus on 04/03/2006 01:19:47
WCS are becomining a problem. within the last week, I can remember at least 6 out of 8 people having WCS. I even ran into a BC (cyclone) that had a full rack of WCS and was too cowerd to admit it (3 people were scambling him).
There has got to be some sort of penalty from using WCS. so lets post ideas and maybe ccp will read them 
-They can only be used around a set distance around Structures like Stargates and stations (maybe 150km so campers cant use them)
-Using them reduces your DPS and RoF, but a damage mod could cancel the penalty out
-compleatly make it impossible to fire when WCS are fitted 
-If you fire, WCS dont work
What do you think?
Dude, it's all part of the game so stop whining for the nerfbat
|
Jenny Spitfire
|
Posted - 2006.04.23 18:52:00 -
[184]
/me hugs my WCS bolster to bed. 
----------------
RecruitMe@NOINT!
RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran |
Zavernus Hamarabi
|
Posted - 2006.04.23 19:42:00 -
[185]
I dont quite understand the logic of "WCS creates gank squads"
Wouldnt a group with dedicated tacklers be just a regular well orginized group of players?
|
Jenny Spitfire
|
Posted - 2006.04.23 19:46:00 -
[186]
Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 23/04/2006 19:46:51
Originally by: Zavernus Hamarabi
I dont quite understand the logic of "WCS creates gank squads"
Wouldnt a group with dedicated tacklers be just a regular well orginized group of players?
A gank can be interpreted in various ways.
1. Killed by an overwhelming single alpha-strike.
2. Killed by an overwhelming gang alpha-strike.
3. Killed by an overwhelming gang of players, e.g. 1 vs 10. Getting scrambled, jammed, webbed, dampened, distrupted, etc.
WCS creates gank squads is closely related to 3 i.e. bring more tacklers. 
----------------
RecruitMe@NOINT!
RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran |
Medici
|
Posted - 2006.04.23 20:02:00 -
[187]
Edited by: Medici on 23/04/2006 20:04:36
James Snowscoran>- Quote:
Personally I'd like to see wcs be made into an active module with 20 second cycle time, and a slight passive decrease to the users' scan resolution. Mostly to prevent people from fighting with wcs fitted, ie fighting with the option of a riskfree getaway, while not making a significant impact on travelers (who should be able to warp inside the 20 second window).It would impair npcers slightly, but not much, because lock time isn't as important when ratting as in other pvp
Or perhaps make the WCS capactiror dependent?
,would allow raiders to attack WCS ability for a change.
|
abraheam
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 01:53:00 -
[188]
I think they are fine the way they are. I dont mind getting ganks by a gang in my hauler. It would really ****ed me off if I got ganked by a lone cruiser.
If every ship had the ability to scramle by itself every gate out of empire would be camped 24/7. That would also be ***. If that were the case a lot of people that live in 0.0(where you can use warp bubble) would simply go back to empire because the ganking would go up 10 fold.(I know I would)
The OP needs to go check out BF 2.
|
Isochecker
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 03:35:00 -
[189]
TBH I see more carebear pirates in my daily hunts then I do wcs fitted up the wazoo victims.
We attempted to destroy a gate gank squad and had all but one of the ships bug out, one being a geddon that had -6 strength scramblers on him. He has also been one of the more vocal nerf wcs whiners (not this OP, unfortunately), but his friend's approx 800 mil ship loss is enough embarassment for that crew. |
Lochmar Fiendhiem
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 05:20:00 -
[190]
Quote:
WCS: Somethings got to stop...
whining and b****ing about them perhaps?
|
fmercury
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 05:21:00 -
[191]
Originally by: Rellik B00n
So losing a low slot isnt enough of a penalty?
No, it's not.
|
Maximillian Pele
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 07:15:00 -
[192]
They can nerf stabs just as long as they apply the same nerf to scrams: want WCS to be stackable? Then make WS stackable as well.
The penalty in fitting either stabs or scrams is that they take up a slot that could be used for a different module.
The reason PvP is rare in Eve is the same reason PvP is rare in most MMORGs: you are rarely offered a fair fight to begin with. No one will fight when they don't have a chance, with the exceptions being those players with enough resources that losing a ship and being podded is a minor inconvenience.
If you want to nerf WCS, disable any WCS fitted to the side that initiates PvP - including gang members. You want PvP? Then you canĘt run away pal!
Eve is all about finding advantages. Pirates have the advantage that they usually get to choose the time and place where PvP will occur, and can set their ships up accordingly.
The victim is forced to take precautions to avoid ambushes: fitting WCS is one such precaution.
No one has sympathy for the victim of a ganking who flew dumb. No one should have any sympathy for the lazy pirate who wants all of the advantages and none of the penalties.
Piracy is a fact of Eve - as soon as you undock you are accepting that risk. But everyone - pirate and victim alike - has the right to use every trick available to gain an advantage.
If people want PvP, then set up a mechanism for setting up duels between players who want PvP. Just don't jump people in your t2 uber ship and expect some noob not to run if they can.
PvP is an aspect of Eve, as is PvE, mining, research, trading, etc. PvP is not paramount.
|
Daiv Streck
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 11:45:00 -
[193]
Gah. This whole discussion is stupid.
The only thing stupider is the fact that I bumped this thread to say so 
|
Neon Genesis
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 12:05:00 -
[194]
Originally by: MadGaz
Make them highslot, end of problem.
No, this = everyone in eve with at least 2, which is pretty much what we have now.
There, i just contributed nothing to your thread |
Bishop 5
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 17:51:00 -
[195]
zomg, skip to the end of wcs whine
bump em you muppet or bring a mate with lots of points.
*sigh*
-------------
|
mamolian
|
Posted - 2006.04.24 18:10:00 -
[196]
Hmm maybe its just me.. but ive yet to actually fight someone who uses more than 1 wcs..
I guess your better off just moving to an area that has better "enemies" and stop trying to gank people who arnt interested in fighting you.
-------------------------------
|
Ghengis Khan
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 11:53:00 -
[197]
what about scrams and webbers have a percentage chance of working , same as jammers,. that seems the best option to me
|
Jamaka
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 14:39:00 -
[198]
Yeah, nerf the scramblers and webbers! Finally!
|
ian666
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 16:49:00 -
[199]
One way would be to make the ship dictate the amount of WCS it needs, say in the Info some are harder to scramble and have a built in + strength like some T2 Haulers? or by race? or the size of the ship e.g frigate only needs one to have a +1 strength to avoid a 1x 20km +1 Scram but a BS would require 2x or even 4x to avoid 1x 20k Scram as its size and amount of slots are larger.
Another method is to make WCS a Med slot, this has been talked about before and would make it the same as Scrams which take a mid slot, this would certainly hurt most ship setups, and if your not happy with that maybe make 1/2 strength WCS for the lows as well so you need 2 low slots to avoid a 20k Scram and giving you the option to decided.
WCS are over powered and I use them my self and also have been on the receiving side and do need to be looked at for the next patch.
|
Jaos Nekri
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 18:41:00 -
[200]
Originally by: mamolian
Hmm maybe its just me.. but ive yet to actually fight someone who uses more than 1 wcs..
I guess your better off just moving to an area that has better "enemies" and stop trying to gank people who arnt interested in fighting you.
A good solution. Or, perhaps even better, switch to a ship which isn't mid-slot dependent (like armor tankers), and put on 3 scrams. That will counter 5 stabs with little effort, and you won't gimp your setup quite as much.
|
Nyabinghi
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 19:13:00 -
[201]
From a ship designer/builder perspective you'd prabably be looking at your most defensless ships like miners and haulers and goin..."Hmmm...Maybe the best defense we have is in WCS...perhaps even better than armor..." So you'd make the ships with plenty of low slots to accomodate such or design the most effective WCS. If piracy is rampant in low sec systems and low sec systems is where all the good ore is then it only makes sense that miners/haulers/industry ships be somewhat pirate proof.
|
Odet
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 19:49:00 -
[202]
The amount of ingorance and trolls in this thread can start an enirely new forum.
If you're going to post make it constructive and not a "boohoo whiners". explain why you think that way.
For those of you that see no problem with being able to fit 7 wcs on a ship and have no real penalty(a poor setup isnt a real penalty its your own choice), theres no hope for you, dont bother posting your trash and flames here and let the grown ups have a discussion.
Moving on....
Like all modules in eve there are penalties for adding many to your ship.
-Damadge mods after installing 3 they are nearly usless.
-nanofibers you end up with no hull hp after placing too many.
-etc.
So how is it balanced that you can fit a full rack of wcs with no penalty?
so you argue that the hunters should fit more scramblers?
or that the hunters should use bubbles?
or interdictors?
I'll use my own personal experiences for an example here.
A while ago we planned to enage a group of 3 Burn eden battleshipsand a few interceptors.
3x ravens =15 wcs + 15 multi specs + 2nos.
you need a bare minimum of 3 sthilettos with -6 scramble strength to lock them down, assuming your interceptors dont get killed before they get to them by their precision cruise, or get nosed to death and killed by drones while they're attempting to keep them locked down,or get target jammed and become utterly usless in the engament or dont get killed by their support intercceptors.
now that you know you need a small fleet of interceptors to only lock them down, lets move on to battleships.
You need atleast a bare minimum of 3 bs's to kill their 3 bs.
Again ssuuming you dont get target jammed and shot at for 100% damadge as there is no penalty for fitting all lows with wcs.
But now realistically speaking, to kill those 5 people(3 bs 2 inties)
you need atleast 8 interceptors (some full tacklers and some inty killers) just to get them lcoked down without getting completely and utterly destroyed.
Now you need about 5 or so bs to kill them fast enough while getting target jammed before they kill your inties and simply warp out.(this also assuming you get a perfect warp in using a covertops)
so lets see now you need a bare minimum of 13(or 14 with cov opsfor perfect warp in) people to even attempt an attack against 3 bs, while also expecting losses. That seem balanced to you?
_______I podded a Dev and all I got was this lousy Implant_______
=This podding has been brought to you by Odet, the only way to fry.= |
Verone
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 20:38:00 -
[203]
Odet makes me happeh in the pants 
VETO MEMBER MOVIES
|
Mangold
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 21:11:00 -
[204]
Well said Odet.
Totally agree.
|
Drokar Gazer
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 21:27:00 -
[205]
Originally by: MadGaz
Make them highslot, end of problem.
PERIOD.
Some answers are so simple and obvious, yet they are ignored. Best solution ever. PERIOD.
_________________________________________
Drokar Gazer
CORSETS and CAREBEARS [BDSM]
|
Ninjja
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 21:29:00 -
[206]
Im just gunna bump every WCS thread. maybe then we will get the attentin we need to nerf this mod! yes!
Clicky: Eve Most Wanted List
|
Malka Badi'a
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 21:40:00 -
[207]
Edited by: Malka Badi''a on 25/04/2006 21:40:50
Quote:
What's next? Pay CCP $5 and get to add another low slot to any ship so you can mount one more jammer or one more stab and finally be the end-all of Eve? The whole thing's just idiotic.
CCP, WTB 8 midslot absolution.
--------------
|
Psycarne
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 21:52:00 -
[208]
If they nerf WCS they have to nerf/fix/make EW sensible. Getting jammed in every 1v1 and not being able to warp out/shoot/send your enemy Devvo songs via Ladar sensors, makes stabs warm honey.
-------------
Order of the Wombles: Recycling those untidy modules on your ship.
|
Dynast
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 01:54:00 -
[209]
Why do people feel entitled to loot or a frozen corpse if they shoot someone's ship up? Especially given that so many fights are at greatly unbalanced odds.
It's not as if removing WCS would improve the situation. The idea that removing the option to run more easily would encourage 1v1 or otherwise "fair" fights is utterly silly, not to mention directly contradicted by the way players behave in other online games which do not have a "warp out" equivalent. People like having an advantage, like easy kills, hunt in packs, and talk smack after 5v1's across the board.
If anything, removing WCS or making them unuseable would encourage people to take less risks and gravitate towards sniping or large gangs.
|
Dexus
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 02:08:00 -
[210]
 Good to see this thread still going!...in a way ;o
btw, theres so many contradictions and...well, your post is full of **** (no offence?) im not going to bother wasting my time writing a full response, alt.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |