EVE Search - Bring Back dual MWD !!

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Bring Back dual MWD !!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cartiff Euphoria Released Euphoria Unleashed	Posted - 2006.07.29 06:18:00 - [1] Goddam they were fun days. I remember the old fleet battles, none of this warp in, shoot shoot warp out bollox. You'd warp in, and MANOUVER using your speed, no 2 lines of ships neatly shooting each other in their optimal. You'd fly your ass in there, fly about at mofo speed and have a damn good laugh. I remember a moo ceptor chasing my rifter, 1 mwd on, fire 2 cruise missiles, then kick in the other mwd and burn away, good fun, surprised the moo guy Anyway, bring back dual MWD, them were the days. ----------------------------------- "Uggs386 > omfg i like little boys" Originally by: Milivikal DeWrar GoonSwarm: powered by static electricty from polysci and law nerds rubbing stubble in thought.
Scott McClellan Forum Posters Anonymous	Posted - 2006.07.29 06:24:00 - [2] 8 MWD scorp ftw
Dao 2 Species 5618 Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.07.29 06:31:00 - [3] aye bring em back! ;p ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Dr Depression	Posted - 2006.07.29 06:49:00 - [4] 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
Ernest Graefenberg Minmatar	Posted - 2006.07.29 06:52:00 - [5] Boost afterburners and reduce MWD capacitor useage/penalty, instead of going back to imbatown. That alone would suffice to make movement have a bigger role again.
Dr Depression	Posted - 2006.07.29 07:15:00 - [6] how about jsut improve the general speed ofall the ships in the game?
BlackHawk177 Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.07.29 07:20:00 - [7] Originally by: Cartiff bring back dual MWD yes plz
Awox Awox Inc.	Posted - 2006.07.29 07:47:00 - [8] Originally by: Dr Depression how about jsut improve the general speed ofall the ships in the game? Screw that. Increase all the Minmatar ships base speeds by 10% and you're on to something. - nerf 0.5+
Dr Depression	Posted - 2006.07.29 08:00:00 - [9] Originally by: Awox Originally by: Dr Depression how about jsut improve the general speed ofall the ships in the game? Screw that. Increase all the Minmatar ships base speeds by 10% and you're on to something. okay I agree on that
HippoKing Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 08:22:00 - [10] 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.
Dr Depression	Posted - 2006.07.29 08:27:00 - [11] 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
HippoKing Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 08:29:00 - [12] 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
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2006.07.29 08:56:00 - [13] 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 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 I think what he is trying to say is this: Don't drink and post! --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Imperial Coercion	Posted - 2006.07.29 09:06:00 - [14] Better increase the tracking and fall off of all gun classes by 500% then
Nafri Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 09:39:00 - [15] I loved it From Dusk till Dawn Sig removed, e-mail us if you'd like to know why. -ReverendM ([email protected])
Kazaam Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 10:08:00 - [16] Originally by: Imperial Coercion Better increase the tracking and fall off of all gun classes by 500% then Or either increase Web stats like range 75km and -99% speed ( for T1 unmodded ofc ) _________________________________________
Tar om Minmatar	Posted - 2006.07.29 10:17:00 - [17] Bring back the wideboy rupture with dual 100MN ABs. That was a really fun ship. Its not like it would be uber these days with so many NOS on BS already... -- 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."
Dred 'Morte Minmatar	Posted - 2006.07.29 10:24:00 - [18] /signed Signature made by Mr Floppykickners
mr h4ppy	Posted - 2006.07.29 14:55:00 - [19] 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 CCP could just increase the speed of concord inty's etc and give them 50km webbers that reduce speed by 95%.
Ithildin Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.29 15:06:00 - [20] I remember those days. No thanks. 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. Yes, those wre the days. When combat was annoying rather than boring. When battleships were faster than interceptors. When fleet combat was still two lines of (or should I write clouds?) battleships pounding each other from the distance. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
Montero Black Omega Security E.R.A	Posted - 2006.07.29 15:06:00 - [21] It was 2 years ago. Get the **** over it. --------- Scrapheap Challenge
Mangus Thermopyle Chosen Path Center for Disease Creation	Posted - 2006.07.29 16:30:00 - [22] Fleet battles would definitely be more fun if the tacklers could reach the enemies in a few seconds. As it is now, as soon as one sides tacklers get close, the other side just warp away unless they are clearly outnumbering the enemies. But instead of allowing dual mwd, I would like to see AB and MWD get a 100% speed increase, but no change in tracking, sig radius, etc (you have to turn off MWD in a timely fashion).
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:19:00 - [23] 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.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:22:00 - [24] Originally by: Mangus Thermopyle Fleet battles would definitely be more fun if the tacklers could reach the enemies in a few seconds. As it is now, as soon as one sides tacklers get close, the other side just warp away unless they are clearly outnumbering the enemies. But instead of allowing dual mwd, I would like to see AB and MWD get a 100% speed increase, but no change in tracking, sig radius, etc (you have to turn off MWD in a timely fashion). DOUBLE AB and MWD speed? No. While it'd be fun to use a 1mn AB II on my Harpy and go about 1200m/s, just no. I know people hate missiles, but you'd be able to AB a BS and avoid the majority of torp dmg, just as most cruisers would ab and avoid heavy missile dmg. AB and MWD are fine. We don't need inties going 30km/s, or the average cruiser going inty speed with a mwd.
Shamis Orzoz SniggWaffe	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:44:00 - [25] Anything that requires too much real life skill eventually gets removed from eve...and usuaully doesn't come back. People with lots of skillpoints get really upset when they are limited by their weak minds, and they complain to ccp. CCP then adds in game skills to replace the real life skills.
Ichabod Crane Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:48:00 - [26] A vagabond is fast enough with one MWD kthx -
LeviUK Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:59:00 - [27] Good lord no, I remember trying to fight CA's dual-mwd Raven fleets and it was just silly - that and trying to catch Ruptures and Thoraxes was like ****ing in the wind unless you had an equally fast ship. -
Nira Li Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.07.29 19:32:00 - [28] I used a dual web caracal and took out dual mwd cruisers in 2 volleys which was kinda fun but I rather not have dual mwd back You Will Cry My Name Funny Guys
Novarei Ninth Column	Posted - 2006.07.29 19:57:00 - [29] Bomber ravens and 10km/s punishers, i miss those days. --------------------
VonKaplanek III Confederation of Red Moon Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.07.29 20:40:00 - [30] Edited by: VonKaplanek III on 29/07/2006 20:40:28 Originally by: LeviUK Good lord no, I remember trying to fight CA's dual-mwd Raven fleets and it was just silly - that and trying to catch Ruptures and Thoraxes was like ****ing in the wind unless you had an equally fast ship. LoL EvilDOomer leading the way in his dual mwd Rupture and 30 dual mwd raven following....Led by Duke... The impass invasions!! and 50 of us huddling/guarding the station... Yeah...those were the days!
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]

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.