EVE Search - OMGOMGOMG WCS Nerf

All Channels

Ships and Modules

OMGOMGOMG WCS Nerf

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 18:37:00 - [1] Range. It makes sense.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 18:47:00 - [2] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 22/07/2006 18:48:30 Ah, missed that. Missile explosion radius penalty too. And tbh no ship will be immune to a hefty range penalty. Certainly not the two REALLY abusive uses of range, the T2 snipers and the 5 WCS Barrage M Vagabonds. Revenal, weapon range - optimal and falloff both (as they're important in different proportions for different weapons, nerfing both is the only possible way to be fair). Lockrange you can overcome easily with sensor boosters. Weapon range...is a lot harder.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 19:49:00 - [3] Originally by: cytomatrix RoF penatly. :P Yea, like snipers will care...they can still alpha you.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 20:07:00 - [4] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 22/07/2006 20:08:36 Originally by: Tyler Lowe Put a +7.5% grid and cpu penalty on all weapons per WCS, and see... ...snipers STILL able to fit 4WCS :/ Yep Deja, that's why I want 10% range. Sure, you can "counter" that. 1 mid each for a tracking computer. And the stacking penalty will mean after 1 that won't keep up either..
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 20:19:00 - [5] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 22/07/2006 20:20:49 Andreask14, That means it counters itself, because the point of WCS is that it allows you to escape. Modules which counter themselves are not good.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 20:44:00 - [6] Originally by: lollerskates Originally by: Maya Rkell because the point of WCS is that it allows you to escape. Exactly, WCS are supposed to let you avoid pvp... Yes, the comment was on an idea to make them up ships mass, thus making them counter themselves. I disagree with the rest of the comment as I allways have. With a reasonable penalty, things will be fine. Sforza, slashing 50% for 5WCS off sniper and Vaga range will make a HUGE difference.. and the 5WCS raven won't be doing much damage. DigitalCommunist, maybe the penaltys are designed to ALLOW a few to be used in combat? Ah yes, they are. I don't agree with them, though, because as you note various ships can ignore much of the effect of them in various situations. Range..can't be ignored. By anyone. lollerskates, yea, I'm seeing a pattern. People wanting a time back which never was. Starting to sound like bleeding Greenpeace.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 20:55:00 - [7] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 22/07/2006 20:55:48 No, that the thinking that making WCS unusuable in conbat will in any way "improve" combat, when it's just likely to make fighting setups less common, and allow people who are trying to evade camps to use a rack of WCS and a rack of nanos or cargo expanders.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 21:02:00 - [8] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 22/07/2006 21:04:52 Andreask14, They are designed to allow you to be more able to leave a hostile situation. By adding mass, they make you less likely to leave a hostile situation. They counter themselves. This is NEVER good. You're deliverately trying to make them a liability, which was NEVER the intention. In many situations, the added mass will KILL you, since the interceptors will ram you...and you'd of been long gone into warp otherwise. It's a terrible and short sighted "soloution" which is intended to kill their use entirely. lollerskates, no, right now he can have stabs OR nanos. Moreover, making nos/neuts warp scramblers is a terrible idea. Nos/Neuts are allready overpowered on many setups - see the *****ing about Domis. Sforza, they're thinking that options in combat are good.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 22:43:00 - [9] Originally by: Andreask14 Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 22/07/2006 21:06:14 stuff Yes, increasing ship mass with WCS will make them more difficult to use and might get you killed more. That is exactly what is wanted, to make WCS less of a now brainer. It makes them MORE no-brained. As in, brain dead to use them. The modules SOLE purpose is to let you leave hostile situations. If it makes it harder, they screw their OWN function over. "Oh, they work against scramb.." No, that's the effect. Their PURPOSE is to let you leave hostile situations. There is a critical difference you seem to be ignoring there. "added MASS via WCS gives the tacklers more TIME, and if you choose to add WCS to a combat setup, you would have to plan your retreat more carefully" Yes, because you get to PLAN when you jump into a camp. ... Oh wait, you don't! Nerfing the non-combat ship uses of WCS is something nobody else in this thread is asking for, I'd note. If you want them removed from the game, be honest and ask for that. Don't try and pretend that a module which nerfs itself is a good idea. Again, how often do you use a capacitor flux coil?
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.22 22:55:00 - [10] Originally by: xplosiv there needs to be no half mesures with this, WCS are for running, weapons are for fighting, you should't have both, 1 or the other and i fully welcome a totaly ban to WCS online at the same time as any ECM, NOST or NEUT, GUN and MISSILES. Okay. You won't be able to online any defence, cap or grid modules with a scrambler fitted of course. ... Yes, of COURSE both changes are ridiculous, but when you start making exceptions to the Eve rules for modules you don't like, you open a door which you'd really be far better off not opening. Moreover, I disagree with your assertion. With a reasonable penalty, it'll be fine.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.23 17:32:00 - [11] Sarmaul, Yes, signal amps might need addressing. Tyler Lowe, A system where you can fit 2 WCS, 1 fitting mod and still have a normal sniper weapon/damage mod fit...meh. Same goes for just making CPU much higher. It's not enough of a penalty. They can't as easily counter a range one..it's 1:1 with midslots, which are fewer... fairimear, Given I'm advocating a specific nerf...heh. The "merit" of a total nerf to combat fitting REQUIRES that there be a far higher cost to fit scramblers than today. You can't cherry-pick systems and take them drastically out of line with their counters. And no, I don't use WCS. But I don't want to lose the 25%+ of people I kill who fight me AND have WCS on their ships. If they stop fighting entirely (as most would), then I lose a lot of kills. Don't assume. Overall, that would be a drastic change and you'll take all those people and the people they (try and) protect out of 0.0/lowsec. This is NOT desireable. A reasonable bonus will fix things! Heck, change T1 destroyers so they have a hefty bonus to warp scrambling rather than setting on AF's toes in the frigate killing department.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.23 20:13:00 - [12] Originally by: Masta Killa I'd like stabs to be removed altogether, life would be so sweet then Sure. Warp scrambers would take 100% cap and work for 10s, but hey.
Maya Rkell Corsets and Carebears	Posted - 2006.07.23 22:50:00 - [13] Originally by: Ghelp Keep them the way they are, however, make them high slot modules. That would reduce the ability of ships that are using it to enhance their PVP instead of trying to avoid it. Again, how does this touch a sniper with 6 1400's, 2 WCS, tank and damage mods? Snipers don't NEED those secondary weapons. Tyler Lowe, well my goal with the range pelanty is to give a meaingful penalty which is very hard to counter or ignore, while leaving it as an option if you're willing to make the sacrifice. I disagree strongly that letting industrials carry much cargo AND multiple points of WCS is good, incidentally...it's strongly abusive, indeed. And making WCS max 1 point limits both the need for tacklers and is insufficient for those people who use them to keep using them at ALL - you'll end up driving even more people out of 0.0/lowsec since even travel setups can't carry a deacent number of WCS.

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.