EVE Search - its time ! FIX TEH MWD !

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

its time ! FIX TEH MWD !

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
wierchas noobhunter Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:57:00 - [31] Originally by: Dixon Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: Verus Potestas Edited by: Verus Potestas on 04/12/2006 17:43:17 Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: turnschuh sure lets buff up gallente blaster 99999dps ships even more well if u even knew eve pvp situation atm Is this the situation where gallente blasterships outdamage the minmatar ACs everywhere inside scramble range? Yeah, I know it sure looks like u are da BIG pro here I've never understood why minmatar AC boats are always singled out as blaster-victims. Blasters pwn everything inside scramble range. The only ship that can give them a run for their money is a well tanked raven. point is not that mega > tempest point is that with all those tanking changes all turret based ships having hard time now and that we need to do somethink to change this ♥ Exekias
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2006.12.04 17:58:00 - [32] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn if MWD has not penalty, why would you ever fit an afterburner? thread over. ehm huge cap use ? sig increase ? I think his point is that people already fit mwds before anything else, even with the penalties it is the default module on most ships that aren't long range setup. So your idea would just make ABs that much less worth having. ~Thor Xian, Material Administrator "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
wierchas noobhunter Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:00:00 - [33] Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn if MWD has not penalty, why would you ever fit an afterburner? thread over. Pretty much agree with you here. If the problem with the MWD cap penalty is that NOS dominates pvp as sir noobhunter pointed out then I'd just suggest nerfing nos (can of worms has been opened). and how i gona get in my 1k optimal with afterburner ? ♥ Exekias
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:04:00 - [34] Personally I just see the need for two changes, both skill based: - High Speed Maneuvering changed from 5% to a 10% MWD cap use bonus--which would happen to bring it in line with Fuel Conservation's AB bonus. - New Navigation skill, Microwarp Piloting. Rank 5 probably. 3-5% Agility bonus to ship while MWD is active. (Kinda seems like these two skills should have their names switched.) Most other ideas I don't like so much. MWDs are already incredibly powerful, people are just blinded by the disadvantages. Also any reduction in sig radius or cap penalty is going to be an enormous benefit to Intys--and they don't need it. * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Emperor D'Hoffryn No Quarter.	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:05:00 - [35] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn if MWD has not penalty, why would you ever fit an afterburner? thread over. ehm huge cap use ? sig increase ? MWDs are pretty much a required pvp mod at this point, despite the current penalties. when was the last time you saw an interceptor without a mwd? The only time I maybe DONT fit a MWD is if im in a sniper BS as part of a huge fleet...and even then a mwd is very useful for getting to sniper position quickly without warping off and getting out of bubbles. A lowslot mod/rig to reduce the cap penalty would be interesting. a huge buff to mwd is not needed. Originally by: Tuxford Yes we don't play on our main accounts simply because you would lose all respect for us
Templer Relleg FATAL REVELATIONS Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:06:00 - [36] Edited by: Templer Relleg on 04/12/2006 18:08:10 I would like that. It would pimp my claw even more! Yet i dont see the big need, for it. Its hardly a must, on any ships, but frigates, and the thorax, and some cruisers. Its stupid to fit it on a Battleship, but the nanodomi!
Verus Potestas Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:14:00 - [37] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn if MWD has not penalty, why would you ever fit an afterburner? thread over. Pretty much agree with you here. If the problem with the MWD cap penalty is that NOS dominates pvp as sir noobhunter pointed out then I'd just suggest nerfing nos (can of worms has been opened). and how i gona get in my 1k optimal with afterburner ? You fight in 1km optimal? Between corps atm, the NPC one is strictly a temporary thing. RAWR!111 Sig Hijackz0r!!11 - Immy
wierchas noobhunter Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:16:00 - [38] don't get me wrong guys its last desperate attempt to save solo pvp those changes wont effect group pvp that much its just way to save poor dieing blaster mega pilots ♥ Exekias
wierchas noobhunter Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:17:00 - [39] Originally by: Verus Potestas Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Originally by: Emperor D'Hoffryn if MWD has not penalty, why would you ever fit an afterburner? thread over. Pretty much agree with you here. If the problem with the MWD cap penalty is that NOS dominates pvp as sir noobhunter pointed out then I'd just suggest nerfing nos (can of worms has been opened). and how i gona get in my 1k optimal with afterburner ? You fight in 1km optimal? 1k = 1000 ♥ Exekias
xeom Veto.	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:17:00 - [40] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: turnschuh sure lets buff up gallente blaster 99999dps ships even more well if u even knew eve pvp situation atm Yea his mega can't solopwn everything anymore ='(((( --- "Those nuclear missiles are for domestic heating." - Scagga

Max Hardcase Art of War Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:45:00 - [41] Edited by: Max Hardcase on 04/12/2006 18:47:22 Edited by: Max Hardcase on 04/12/2006 18:47:10 You could argue either way for the cap penalty. Its true that one of the reasons ( multi mwd) has been removed and the sig penalty can be quite dangerous ( missiles exp radius effects, turret tracking etc ) but the fact remains that the MWD still provides hefty tactical mobility benefits. I could see a smaller cap penalty for MWD's (somewhere in the 10% range) or an increased bonus of the cap use reducing skill for MWD's as decent "fix". Thorax MWD cap bonus changed to : a bonus to High speed maneuvering skill (7.5%/lvl) and MWD mass reduction(20%/lvl). On a side note, I do think that Afterburner Max speed bonus is a tad low for the fitting. 200% seems a much nicer base figure.
Venkhar Krard	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:48:00 - [42] I use mwd every day in pvp. Its very powerful and the penalty is ok. We dont need another I-Win mod.
Phoenix Jones	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:57:00 - [43] Edited by: Phoenix Jones on 04/12/2006 18:59:17 I disagree. Keep the Penalty on the module, else all ships will equip em. What I would suggest though, is to select a few ships and make their training attribute Negate the MWD penalties.. For instance, On a Thorax, each level of cruiser you attain reduces the negative cap penalty by 20%, and reduces the sig penalty by 80%. This increases every level. Thorax Level 1 (+20% to capacitor capacity when MWD equipped, -80% signature radius) Thorax Level 2 (+40% to capacitor capacity when MWD equipped, -160% signature radius) Thorax Level 3 (+60% to capacitor capacity when MWD equipped, -240% signature radius) Thorax Level 4 (+80% to capacitor capacity when MWD equipped, -320% signature radius) Thorax Level 5 (+100% to capacitor capacity when MWD equipped, -400% signature radius) So basically, once you get Cruiser 5, the Thorax no longer gets any "Negative to Cap" penalty when they equip a MWD, and the signature boost from the MWD module is reduced down to a 100% boost, instead of the 500% it is now. I'd probably do the same for the Brutix and the Hyperion (which needs something like this desparately). The close range amarr, caldari and minmatar ships should get similar bonuses. ---------------The Low Sec Issue------------- Gatecamps that kill all who pass with no remorse and in many cases, no possible way of retaliation, is not PVP.
wierchas noobhunter Caldari The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.12.04 18:59:00 - [44] so plz explain me why mwd are overpowered ? i am WIERCHAS i am like UBER and stuff
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:04:00 - [45] no, don't drop cap penalty. It has one right now and yet people still fit mwd, must mean the mod is desired despite the penalty to cap. (Yeah this is already mentioned in thread, i'm just emphasizing.) Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:05:00 - [46] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter so plz explain me why mwd are overpowered ? They don't need a nerf, but they don't need a boost either. Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
kublai Short Attention Span	Posted - 2006.12.04 19:59:00 - [47] I'm sorry i'm abit slow here but, when did they take away 90% of our capacitor usage? Or is it just that all the whiners with little or no talent for a half brained ship setup came out to jump the nerf-us band wagon? Nos is fine. Mwd's are fine. All is well in the kingdom of denmark. And yes, Kublai flies gallente, I am a thorax GOD and I own a vigilant. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:04:00 - [48] I support this post. The cap penalty was implemented to stop ppl from using multiple mwds at the same time. If memory serves me correctly you could overfit em better back then too. You can no longer fit 4 100MN MWDs in a cruiser anymore, so the purpose of the cap penalty is long gone. As such it should be abolished as redundant and the ships that get MWD should get a mass reduction bonus when using MWD to keep em the best MWD ships... Flame on! ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Brother Todd	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:21:00 - [49] Originally by: kublai And yes, Kublai flies gallente, I am a thorax GOD and I own a vigilant. Kinda sounds like you fly amarr Originally by: kublai They have serious cap issues and some ships do have utterly **** tracking, but every race has its disadvantages, and if you're willing to work on the bad things..well my harbinger tore 17k shields off a ferox in seconds that ship makes me wet myself, i'm spending a few hundred mill on my new pilgrim, just because I love it and wanto baby it!
kublai Short Attention Span	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:24:00 - [50] Originally by: Brother Todd Originally by: kublai And yes, Kublai flies gallente, I am a thorax GOD and I own a vigilant. Kinda sounds like you fly amarr Originally by: kublai They have serious cap issues and some ships do have utterly **** tracking, but every race has its disadvantages, and if you're willing to work on the bad things..well my harbinger tore 17k shields off a ferox in seconds that ship makes me wet myself, i'm spending a few hundred mill on my new pilgrim, just because I love it and wanto baby it! I have two characters, a 25m sp amarr and kublai who's 18m sp gallente (and caldari ceptor). Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes

AnarkiTheStorm Tender Loving Care Muffins of Mayhem	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:26:00 - [51] I will also settle for blasters taking no cap to fire and having a better acceleration with plates. --- Rararar....
Brother Todd	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:26:00 - [52] Originally by: kublai I have two characters, a 25m sp amarr and kublai who's 18m sp gallente (and caldari ceptor). sure pal
kublai Short Attention Span	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:33:00 - [53] Originally by: Brother Todd Originally by: kublai I have two characters, a 25m sp amarr and kublai who's 18m sp gallente (and caldari ceptor). sure pal Jonny 101 and Kublai, eve-mail me anytime. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
Verus Potestas Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2006.12.04 20:36:00 - [54] Originally by: Brother Todd Originally by: kublai I have two characters, a 25m sp amarr and kublai who's 18m sp gallente (and caldari ceptor). sure pal Well, a quick visit to google seems to confirm that Between corps atm, the NPC one is strictly a temporary thing. RAWR!111 Sig Hijackz0r!!11 - Immy
Brother Todd	Posted - 2006.12.04 21:40:00 - [55] Originally by: Verus Potestas Originally by: Brother Todd Originally by: kublai I have two characters, a 25m sp amarr and kublai who's 18m sp gallente (and caldari ceptor). sure pal Well, a quick visit to google seems to confirm that Logic and reason has never persuaded me... and never will!
Durethia Nubs. Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.12.04 21:42:00 - [56] Edited by: Durethia on 04/12/2006 21:45:02 Originally by: Akita T On top of it all, the "blasterships" with -5% penality to maxcap should get +5% to MWD thrust instead (and cut the MWD -25% maxcap penality). signed I think it should be +10% to MWD thrust for blaster ships, and NO sig radius penalty.
Lilani Kuzma Gallente Brass Monkeys Society The SUdden Death Squad	Posted - 2006.12.04 21:53:00 - [57] ohh yeahh
BlackMoon Thrawn the Organ Grinder and Company	Posted - 2006.12.04 22:07:00 - [58] No thanks, I'm kinda fine with gank megas not being fotm for awhile.
Ezra Gallente Calista Industries	Posted - 2006.12.04 22:31:00 - [59] Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: Dark Shikari No, don't keep the MWD bonus, instead replace it with a bonus to MWD cap usage. yes keep them its makes some ships more unique and more fun to fly and in time like this when nos is a king of the hill we need those changes badly Um, no. If the cap penalty is removed, the current MWD cap penalty reduction bonus becomes 100% useless. It would be nice to replace it with an MWD/afterburner speed bonus if the cap penalty is removed. IT MUST APPLY TO AFTERBURNERS or the ships also need a special role ability allowing them to use MWD in deadspace. ------------ Ezra Cornell pe0n, Calista Industries
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation The Corporation Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.04 22:39:00 - [60] Edited by: Ithildin on 04/12/2006 22:39:34 Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: wierchas noobhunter Originally by: Dark Shikari No, don't keep the MWD bonus, instead replace it with a bonus to MWD cap usage. yes keep them its makes some ships more unique and more fun to fly and in time like this when nos is a king of the hill we need those changes badly But if there's no MWD cap penalty, a bonus to MWD cap penalty won't do anything Yes, it will. CCP is basically lying when they say "5% reduction in MWD capacitor capacity reduction" or whatever. What it actually DOES is "+5% capacitor capacity when MWD is fitted". So at level 5 you get (100% + 25%) - 25% = 100%1.250.75 = 93.75% But then again, the MWD penalty was introduced because MWDs without the penalty were silly beyond reason. I was there at the end of MWD non-nerfed time, and it was insane. What I think is needed for the MWD bonused ships is a true 20% reduction in MWD penalties. In other words, at level 5 no capacitor capacity nerf and no signature nerf. The ships* with these bonuses aren't exactly terrific at the moment. * Meaning the non-faction ships, of course! - EVE is sick.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: 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.