Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
000Hunter000
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.29 21:28:00 -
[31]
Lets not Banner will be updated shortly |
Shadowsword
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.29 21:31:00 -
[32]
Dual MWD was basically an invulnerability mode for missile ships, and impotency mode for gunships. Just thinking about reverting to this is retarded.
------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy. |
Captin Biltmore
Amarr
|
Posted - 2006.07.29 21:45:00 -
[33]
I think it should be brought back as well...however with some fitting/usage nerf. This would help bring fleet combat back to a closer range instead of this 200km warp in warp out crap. But to be perfectly honest....lag issues with fleet battles need to be addressed first, because that's another BIG reason fleet combat has gone the way of the sniper.
Assasin For Hire - Contact in game |
Captin Biltmore
Amarr
|
Posted - 2006.07.29 21:48:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Shadowsword Dual MWD was basically an invulnerability mode for missile ships, and impotency mode for gunships. Just thinking about reverting to this is retarded.
This is so true...and I think the sig radius penalty should be exponential when using dual MWD. This sounds bad, but think of a Dual MWD crow, how long will it be in range anyhow? You might get one volly off. He should have just as much of a chance of getting away as you do 1 volly popping him. This will also stop people from Dual MWD'ing towards a sniper, they still must keep the transversial up to get in range.
Assasin For Hire - Contact in game |
Tar om
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.29 23:27:00 -
[35]
It wasn't just missiles that the fast ships used. Small Neutron blasters were very deadly too (on cruisers). Anyway, it was the last time that cruisers were front line PvP ships. HAC's don't count, they weren't ingame then. -- We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net
"The belief in the possibility of a short decisive war appears to be one of the most ancient and dangerous of human illusions." |
Espen
Shinra Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 00:59:00 -
[36]
No thnx
|
Darax Thulain
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 05:35:00 -
[37]
Dual mwd, no thanks. Bomber ravens was teh ****. On the other hand, mwd+oversized ab was lots of fun, that I want back.
|
anotleam
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 05:47:00 -
[38]
as much as i miss my 80km/sec megathron, i must say bad idea. So much speed was absurd :P
|
Hellspawn666
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 08:36:00 -
[39]
Originally by: anotleam as much as i miss my 80km/sec megathron, i must say bad idea. So much speed was absurd :P
Well tbh that was never viable in any situation when you wernt fittign 3 mwds and a cap booster.
They day they took dual speed modules out i died a little more inside :(. At there state then they were overpowered but takign them out completly just sent eve back to a look i have a higher dps then you *lock* F1-8 *boom*. Those of you who hate the idea havent flown a dual mwd raven before. They are very fun to fly but were only overpowered back then because the raven generally was. Nowadays frigs being so much more effective it would be very easy to stay on top of a dual mwd raven without being hit so hard. CCP wont ever put it back in the game since the winage from all the old CA hateclub would be to heavy but its at least nice to think about the good old days.
Bottom line nowadays thou is that HACs and dual ab is rediculaslyl overpowered. A vagabond would go insanly fast and have a very small sig making it insane, I remember having a wet dream about the idea of a sacrilige with dual oversize AB, although they wernt released yet the stats for HACs were. TBH dual Ab was far more overpowered then dual mwd. 3k/s in a cyclone and no-one in the world being able to hit me anless i get webed... imagine that in a slepnir.
|
Drakxter
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 11:11:00 -
[40]
Funny thing is, I asked the GMs about it some time ago.. I was told it was not an exploit if you could get out of high sec by for example using an insta before CONCORD would nail you.
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Dr Depression
Originally by: HippoKing
Originally by: Dr Depression althought it unable poeple to exploit it a little with concord it th e benifit soo outway the disavantages. Plus you can always jsut add a penalty
you can avoid concord in a crow. You just get banned for it. Problem solved
Not dying to concord is an exploit.
is it not dieign or just not allowing concord to stop you from doing the thing that concord is trign to kill you for. because I bet if you get awya but stop popl noobs ccp will never notice
If CONCORD is after you and you do not die to them, it's an exploit, because you're NOT suppose to survive them period.
-------------
|
|
Nadia Kerensky
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 19:29:00 -
[41]
I lost my first Raven to a dual MWD tristan. My small drones couldnt hit it, and it outran my cruise missles.
Imagine how i felt losing my 160 million isk Battleship to a 600,000 isk friggie
oh yeah, i even webbed the bastard
damn you burn eden
|
Rivek
Sniggerdly
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 21:46:00 -
[42]
The era of eve combat characterized by Dual MWD/AB setups was THE MOST FUN combat this game has ever seen. Player piloting ability meant quite a bit, setups were varied, skirmish tactics involved speed modules and cap recharge instead of warp core stabs and ECM.
Since the banning of these setups, we have seen the rise and fall of pure gank BS fleets with multiple sensor boosters and max damage mods (slow ships were now easy targets), and later, with DPS setup nerfing and tanking improvements, the rise of the era of stabs, ecm, and nos.
I suppose it is down to personal preference, but I enjoyed the dogfighting and fast paced combat of the speed era far more than both the instaganking era or the ecm/nos/stab/tanking slugfest that has followed. |
Nafri
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 21:57:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Nadia Kerensky I lost my first Raven to a dual MWD tristan. My small drones couldnt hit it, and it outran my cruise missles.
Imagine how i felt losing my 160 million isk Battleship to a 600,000 isk friggie
oh yeah, i even webbed the bastard
damn you burn eden
a tristan couldnt support dual mwds at all, especially not including running a warp scrambler or even staying in range for it.
From Dusk till Dawn Sig removed, e-mail us if you'd like to know why. -ReverendM ([email protected]) |
Grey Area
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 23:21:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Grey Area on 30/07/2006 23:22:29
Originally by: Ithildin The only ships that could pack a punch were the missile ships, because they staggered their missiles into a lethal alpha strike. Other than that, they were just annoying and impossible to catch.
Isn't this great? Everyone complains that missile ships are "easy mode" and require "no tactics", yet when they DID use a tactic, they complained about THAT too.
Monty Pythons spoof of the EVE Forums; Palin: "Is this the right room for an argument?" Cleese: "I've told you once." |
Mr Peanut
The New Empire R i s e
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 23:39:00 -
[45]
What about bringin back dual AB/MWD but add a massive stacking penalty so that enthusiasts can have their way without shocking the game?
|
Cohkka
LoneWolf Mining R i s e
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 01:35:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Grey Area Edited by: Grey Area on 30/07/2006 23:22:29
Originally by: Ithildin The only ships that could pack a punch were the missile ships, because they staggered their missiles into a lethal alpha strike. Other than that, they were just annoying and impossible to catch.
Isn't this great? Everyone complains that missile ships are "easy mode" and require "no tactics", yet when they DID use a tactic, they complained about THAT too.
And what exactly do you want to say? Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5... |
Shin Ra
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 05:35:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Nadia Kerensky I lost my first Raven to a dual MWD tristan. My small drones couldnt hit it, and it outran my cruise missles.
Imagine how i felt losing my 160 million isk Battleship to a 600,000 isk friggie
oh yeah, i even webbed the bastard
damn you burn eden
I think he means the dual AB tristan setup the the old BE used to use. a tristan couldnt support dual mwds at all, especially not including running a warp scrambler or even staying in range for it.
|
Nadia Kerensky
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 13:17:00 -
[48]
Im talking waaaaaaaaay back in the day here. I was able to fit twin mwd's on an incursus in the pre exodus days.
thank gawd the era of 12,000 m/s + are gone
|
Boonaki
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 13:20:00 -
[49]
If you bring back duel MWD's, I want my python mines back.
Fear the Ibis of doom! |
Dr Depression
|
Posted - 2006.08.01 19:09:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Boonaki If you bring back duel MWD's, I want my python mines back.
Don't be evil
|
|
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2006.08.01 20:27:00 -
[51]
Perhaps the "riggings" that were described in a dev blog not to long ago will allow you to link modules without a stacking penalty:
Allow some ships to use the said "linking" modules. Say a certain "rig" gives a ship one linking module slot. In the fitting screen you grab your linking module and slide it inbetween two midslots and those midslots can now house two of the same module that could not be run simultaneously without the linking mod. The downside? This link could not be removed (just like implants) and would limit your ship to 'uber' use for one or 2 applications, but make you think twice about taking it out for anything else.
Of course some modules would have to be omitted from the ability to "link" up or you might just have the ubersolopwnbbqwtfmobile. I'm betting you guys get the idea.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |