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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ryysa Total Failure	Posted - 2006.07.23 01:38:00 - [91] if they get nerfed on pvp setup ships, then they should also be nerfed enough for carebear setup ships. That's just imo... instasafespotting carebears with 2+ wcs and cloak are just so sad. All about target jamming
eLLioTT wave Art of War Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.07.23 02:16:00 - [92] Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 23/07/2006 02:16:46 -50% targetting range + -50% tracking penalty + -50% missile&turret rof + -50% missile&turret damage + -50% range on ALL ew modules + -50% chance of ecm working + -50% chance of drones engaging target when told to... PER WCS MODULE no stacking penalty :D
murder one Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.23 02:18:00 - [93] Originally by: eLLioTT wave Edited by: eLLioTT wave on 23/07/2006 02:16:46 -50% targetting range + -50% tracking penalty + -50% missile&turret rof + -50% missile&turret damage + -50% range on ALL ew modules + -50% chance of ecm working + -50% chance of drones engaging target when told to... PER WCS MODULE no stacking penalty :D works for me =] Because I said so...
eLLioTT wave Art of War Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.07.23 02:20:00 - [94] forgot to add... + 1% chance of warp core operating inside a bubble :p cmon gotta give them stab monkeys something back :P for balance and all that
Pepperami Art of War Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.07.23 02:24:00 - [95] Good suggestions elliot.. but shouldn't you be on holiday? [Art of War][- V -]
Jezeret	Posted - 2006.07.23 03:20:00 - [96] I think the Sig Radius idea is not going to be popular at all, for the reasons mentioned here, it actually places more risk on thin-hulled haulers and the like than combat ships who are designed to tank out for a while. Pilots will still jump in, snipe, and warp out when their shields or armor are down, it will mean they are there for about 5-10 seconds less, i.e. the total time saved in gaining a lock, it still means they can warp out when the mood so takes them. I think the Cap-based idea is probably going to be more viable in the long run.
Zanarkand Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.23 03:34:00 - [97] WCS if fine. WCS is fine. WCS if fine. Don't fix something that isn't broken.
Greystar Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 03:40:00 - [98] Diddnt read all 4 pages so sorry if i nicked someones idea but. Make WCS take like 100 CPU each or something. Haulers have hella CPU so they can still use em, and so can other ships setup for traveling. But for combat, it would gimp you. Also make them a highslot item. terrorist, ingame to
Gray Carmicheal Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 03:55:00 - [99] Originally by: Greystar Diddnt read all 4 pages so sorry if i nicked someones idea but. Make WCS take like 100 CPU each or something. Haulers have hella CPU so they can still use em, and so can other ships setup for traveling. But for combat, it would gimp you. Also make them a highslot item. I agree, this prolly would work out best, to make them highs or midslots that cost CPU by the boatload. Only one sig image please - Cathath
Gray Carmicheal Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 03:55:00 - [100] Edited by: Gray Carmicheal on 23/07/2006 03:55:29 Oops Only one sig image please - Cathath
gfldex	Posted - 2006.07.23 04:40:00 - [101] The changes still dont take into account that shield tanked ships can have stabbers and field a propper tank while this is not possible for armor tanks. Maybe the same penalty as cap relays would help here. But we then have to take the jammer tanks into account. You still dont have to tank your enemy if he cant shoot you and if he shoots you say good by and warp off. Jammers have to be effected then too. A flat CPU increase would make this balancing issue even worse. I would like to see that WCS switch modules like scramblers, webbers and ECM off. I cant hold me so you cant hold me either. -- $ perl -n -e 'print "Stop blameing pirates! Oveur is the root of all evil!\n" if m/podkill\|lost my ship\|gank\|gate camp\|Verone/;'
Father Weebles Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 04:44:00 - [102] or how bout WCS take up high slots?
gfldex	Posted - 2006.07.23 04:52:00 - [103] Originally by: Father Weebles or how bout WCS take up high slots? Two WCS for a hauler sounds not so good to me. And Burn Eden would have to train for minmatar ships. That would be a bit to harsh. -- $ perl -n -e 'print "Stop blameing pirates! Oveur is the root of all evil!\n" if m/podkill\|lost my ship\|gank\|gate camp\|Verone/;'
Tribunal Darkblade Technologies Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.07.23 06:08:00 - [104] Eh, I would expect warp scramblers to gain the same kind of negative. "We can't all be heroes, because somebody has to sit on the curb and applaud when they go by." - Will Rogers
Da'Neth Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.23 06:11:00 - [105] Edited by: Da''Neth on 23/07/2006 06:14:25 Edited by: Da''Neth on 23/07/2006 06:13:41 Originally by: Xeios Its probably been suggested before, an you all prolly didnt like it, but surely if you were to leave them as they are but limit the number a ship can fit to say 2 at most,it would still allow them to be used for skirmishing, hauling etc. It would also mean that its alot easier to scram someone that uses them if you are expecting it. If you really feel that that isnt enough, something as simple as making them an active module again (but in the low slot this time) and have them use an ammount of cap. wcs are not broken but if it must be fixed her is a good way to do it I like this but with a few changes. ok we all agree taht making the sig biger for hallers is hardly fair it big enuff as it is. so make 2 versons of WCS one will be like thay are now but give it a big cpu needed to fit then give a bonis to hallers for the cpu need. or make this verson only abul to fit to the hallers. the second verson wuld be an active WCS in low or mid slot dose not matter. now it wuld not do much to the snipers or hit and run person( I have seen them go down ez enuff). but it will help counter the I will fight for a bit and if I am not winning I will run(we all agre this is more anoying. and this usaly hapens when thay run out of cap) so if you run out of cap you cant worp off.make them cost like running an actife tank. or make them a hi slot and active. if you whant to use them use up the wepons slot to do so. or make them so you just insta worp the directon you are faceing for 50k at the cost of all your cap that is the inportant part it cost you all your cap. ok this one is not so good but the others are good. --- join the DA click above
BlackHorizon	Posted - 2006.07.23 06:40:00 - [106] Edited by: BlackHorizon on 23/07/2006 06:43:17 The main issue with WCS is that it gives close-range shield tanking ships an unfair advantage. Snipers with a full rack of stabs, are a problem too, but to a lesser extent. My solution: make WCS simply half "anti-power diagnostic units" -3.75% shield recharge rate -3.75% capacitor recharge -2.5% grid -2% shield hp -2% capacitor capacity per WCS with no stacking penalty. This has little to no penalty for haulers. RP-wise, it's clear the ship's capacitor, shield and reactor grid must be diverted to keep the warp core stablized. Also, increase CPU usage from 30 to 40 per WCS, with named variants taking -3 CPU per grade. A raven with 5 stabs would then have 18% slower shield recharge rate, 18% slower capacitor recharge, 12% less grid, 10% less shields, and 10% less capacitor capacity, and require 50 more CPU to fit.
eLLioTT wave Art of War Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.07.23 07:04:00 - [107] Originally by: Pepperami Good suggestions elliot.. but shouldn't you be on holiday? Yup, just hired a plane this morning and went for a fly with my brother in law around Sydney harbour, a few orbits around the city and down the coast a bit (hes a pilot) lots of fun. Seriously with my idea, i know 50% is too extreme for a lot of people (even though it would be really good) but what about a 10% version or something, just to make it more fun for all. Think about the tournament and how much fun that looked, now think about having that sort of fun normally and to keep your target in place u only needed one scrambler. how much nicer is that! Idealy people would have honor and when they engaged in a fight they would fight to the end not try to warp off if it turns against them. But as most people don't have said honor we need scramblers but really should only need 1. Please see recent crying ecm thread also as these two issues are probably the most important factors that ruin peoples fun in eve currently. CCP PLEASE RESPOND (we love it when you post in a thread cos it shows us you care about our fun!)
hellwarrior Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 07:37:00 - [108] Originally by: Zanarkand WCS if fine. WCS is fine. WCS if fine. Don't fix something that isn't broken. S T F U wcs are broken and so is your brain. GO MINE SOME VELDSPAR yarrrr
Thud	Posted - 2006.07.23 08:09:00 - [109] Best solution that i ever heard is that you cant fit warp disruptors/srambler and WCS at the same time. So,there would be mutch less combat fittings with wcs.
HippoKing Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 09:17:00 - [110] Originally by: Thud Best solution that i ever heard is that you cant fit warp disruptors/srambler and WCS at the same time. So,there would be mutch less combat fittings with wcs. I'd do that and a -20% lock range.
HippoKing Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 09:17:00 - [111] Originally by: gfldex Originally by: Father Weebles or how bout WCS take up high slots? Two WCS for a hauler sounds not so good to me. And Burn Eden would have to train for minmatar ships. That would be a bit to harsh. Possibly give the haulers another 2 utility highs. As for Burn Eden, ravens have 2 spare highs you know
Thud	Posted - 2006.07.23 09:35:00 - [112] Originally by: HippoKing Originally by: Thud Best solution that i ever heard is that you cant fit warp disruptors/srambler and WCS at the same time. So,there would be mutch less combat fittings with wcs. I'd do that and a -20% lock range. Jep,that should work fine.
Sarmaul 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.07.23 09:44:00 - [113] Something you seem to be forgetting is that it is only the T1 indies that have crap-loads of CPU - the T2 ones have far less. TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS - In Rust We Trust -
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.23 09:49:00 - [114] Originally by: Thud Best solution that i ever heard is that you cant fit warp disruptors/srambler and WCS at the same time. So,there would be mutch less combat fittings with wcs. Its not really a good solution. In a small gang, only the tackler would be unable to fit wcs. The rest could, and we would be back to the same situation as before with people running away. It would affect solo pvp'ers, thats about it. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Rexthor Hammerfists Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.07.23 09:53:00 - [115] making wcs medslots owuld ruin every combatwcssetup, but at the same time it would b a good thing for industrialists. imo making them medslots is the best thing. - Purple Conquered The World, We the Universe.
Ling Xiao	Posted - 2006.07.23 09:58:00 - [116] CCP, why are you nerfing legit use on indies more than abuse on pvp ships?
Grimpak Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.23 10:00:00 - [117] Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists making wcs medslots owuld ruin every combatwcssetup, but at the same time it would b a good thing for industrialists. imo making them medslots is the best thing. I agree with this one. ------- Originally by: Abdalion Originally by: Jebidus Skari What, in EVE, is a Tyrant? Me. Especially when it comes to troll threads.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.07.23 10:29:00 - [118] Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 23/07/2006 10:29:17 lots of good suggestions for penalties, I am not sure which is best, but what is clear is that, the current changes are not good enough. This does not really hinder people using WCS's in combat, please Dev's listen to the suggestions in this thread and make the needed changes. Edit: my typing sux. <Kurenin> Oh hello Christopher Exploitisanti!
turnschuh Eye of God	Posted - 2006.07.23 10:59:00 - [119] Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists making wcs medslots owuld ruin every combatwcssetup, but at the same time it would b a good thing for industrialists. imo making them medslots is the best thing. No, it would be unfair because badger could fit 6 WCS and still cargo expanders. The hole idea of making it a different slot modules is stupid, its against the hole module concept and would not work. Its a low slot module and that will never change. period.
turnschuh Eye of God	Posted - 2006.07.23 10:59:00 - [120] Edited by: turnschuh on 23/07/2006 10:59:44 <double post>

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: 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.