EVE Search - Imbalance ... the Nano-Inertial Battleships

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Imbalance ... the Nano-Inertial Battleships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.27 03:08:00 - [1] One thing I'd like to see added to the game is a specialised anti-'superspeed ship' platform. Maybe an alternative tech II destroyer which has a ridiculous tracking bonus or fires missiles which go very fast and have very high explosion velocities. Naturally the munition would have to be weak so as only to effect Interceptors and what not. Alternatively reverse its bonuses so the faster a target goes the better it hits. That'd bugger things up
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 13:37:00 - [2] Originally by: Levin Cavil As far as I'm concerned nanos/Istabs are the new WCS. WCS were overpowered because they allowed the user to disengage from a fight at will, the risk was effectively removed from PvP. Nanos and istabs accomplish the same things now. To all of those people saying "Don't nerf speed battleships, they are just a smart/clever way to fit your ship." That's bull, nanos/istabs are no-brains modules. Fitting the same thing everyone else fits does not make you smart or clever, it makes you a lemming. EVE is an open place and I am as opposed to fitting restrcitions as anyone else but nanos are effectively a fitting restriction on every non-nano ship. There is vitrually no effective counter to a nano ship other than more nano ships or huginns + luck. There are counters to nano s hips but they are very restricting and limit the gangs ability to do anything other than kill nano ships. It's an imbalanced setup and it's breaking the game. Anyone who uses it is simply too lazy to use a ship that requires thought and teamwork. To those of you who can't stand the thought of losing your precious speed ships I have one piece of advice: adapt. Have to agree with this. As far as I'm concerned nano'd/I-stabbed ships provide just a bit too much invulnerability at the moment. I'm quite happy for them to continue to exist as they are but currently there is no useful counter measure other than a ship of equivalent stature. This is not what Eve is about, in Eve there is a counter to everything and it keeps you on your toes. Theres danger ships and they need to be neutralised fast and effectively otherwise you may die. Nano ships don't really face this danger at the moment. As Soros said nos is a very large part of the problem but it is an integral part of the game now. Caution needs to be taken with making any adjustments, you may fix one thing but create a whole load more problems elsewhere.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 14:49:00 - [3] Originally by: Aurora Mahair Has anyone stopped to think that this is actually a counter to something else. This is the counter to 3 bubble gatecamps that sit 20+ members around a gate and then one volly anything that jumps through with no chance for the other person to do anything but die. Im sorry that Nanophoons are used in such a mannor to grief but guess what so are Vaga's and currently other than a nano ship Phoons are basicly usless for pvp. We need to all take a step back and look at the crux of the problem and that is that people are using these ships to grief and get away. I dont understand how this is any different than a good Scorp Pilot that will let you beast on him til he feels like he wants to leave and then jam and warp. No, the counter to a gate camped by 20+ ships with bubbles is a fleet. Not one travelling ship who doesn't have a scout.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:06:00 - [4] Originally by: Aurora Mahair Originally by: welsh wizard No, the counter to a gate camped by 20+ ships with bubbles is a fleet. Not one travelling ship who doesn't have a scout. That is like saying that a web is the counter to a nanoship. If a "fleet" is the counter then it is an inaffective one as it would require a huge group most likely larger in number than the gate camp its self. that is like saying that, "if you had a 2 Hugs and a Crow you can beat any nano pilot." So you think a single ship should be able to go anywhere and do anything? Bust through any gatecamp it wants? This is a multiplayer game, you don't get to do anything you want unless you're willing to work with other people. Gate camps shouldn't be breakable unless you're willing to put the isk on the line. If you aren't, go around. If you can't go around, tough.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:24:00 - [5] Change webbing drones, give them light drone status with 5 equivalent to a 90% web. It'll help to eliminate the use of bigger ships going insanely fast. They'll be able to catch them on the turn but won't be such a potent threat against interceptors and the like.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:29:00 - [6] Edited by: welsh wizard on 28/01/2007 15:27:29 Originally by: Aurora Mahair Originally by: welsh wizard So you think a single ship should be able to go anywhere and do anything? Bust through any gatecamp it wants? This is a multiplayer game, you don't get to do anything you want unless you're willing to work with other people. Gate camps shouldn't be breakable unless you're willing to put the isk on the line. If you aren't, go around. If you can't go around, tough. So you have a problem with a ship that is specificly fitted to be able to get out of a situation such as a gate camp is a bad thing? I mean honestly everyone on her has said that EvE is about specific fittings designed to fit situations and also trying to find a good balance for day to day. I understand that some people think that this is "overpowered" but what i am trying to say is that it is no more over powered then any setup that is specific to one thing in its field. There are counters to Nanoships and those are ships specificly set up to take them down. Other ships can go fast too if they are fitted accordingly. Gate camps in my opinion should have vonerability and I say that it is Nanoships. I think the idea that a person should jump into a gate camp with to scout and die just to be able to give an acurate picture of the ship strength of said gate camp then put to gether a fleet to move to the gate camp and clear it is inaffective at best. You can disagree but but dont act as though a Nanophoon is not putting the ISK on the line, because our setups are quite expensive and have only one purpose and that is speed. I have lost one Nanophoon to a well layed out gatecamp by BOB in 1-SMEB. The idea is that if you set up your camp to defend agianst nanoships it is possible to stop them. You just cannot go on autokill mode at the gate camp like people are used too. My plee is for people to stop saying that the Nanoships are overpowered and get off there lazy *** and build your camp to defend for it. The Typhoon is currently capable of taking on silly odds. It can also overcome any battleship in the game at no risk. It's a 60million isk tier 1 battleship, its just as bad as the lame domi setups were if not worse. Half my corp flies Nano phoons, they're damn useful to have about but it is silly. There is no counter other than a specially prepared gang. This means you have to be aware that you're chasing nano-phoons doesn't it? I don't have a built-in 'nano-phoon approaching 3 jumps away' sensor unfortunately. They're overpowered and you only disagree because you fly the things. It's that simple I'm afraid. The nos is the crux of the problem. It disables the enemy ship at greater than web range and there is nothing they can do about it. No defence... Overpowered.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:40:00 - [7] Edited by: welsh wizard on 28/01/2007 15:37:09 Originally by: Aurora Mahair Originally by: welsh wizard The Typhoon is currently capable of taking on silly odds. It can also overcome any battleship in the game at no risk. It's a 60million isk tier 1 battleship, its just as bad as the lame domi setups were if not worse. Half my corp flies Nano phoons, they're damn useful to have about but it is silly. There is no counter other than a specially prepared gang. This means you have to be aware that you're chasing nano-phoons doesn't it? I don't have a built-in 'nano-phoon approaching 3 jumps away' sensor unfortunately. They're overpowered and you only disagree because you fly the things. It's that simple I'm afraid. The nos is the crux of the problem. It disables the enemy ship at greater than web range and there is nothing they can do about it. No defence... Overpowered. By that thinking you are saying its overpowered because you dont. Please do not attempt to discredit my point of view this way as it is not a valid point. Well if thats how you see it then evidently I'm engaged in a ridiculous e-argument with someone who will never look at the evidence objectively. Tell me, does 2 + 2 = 5? Thought so. Good day.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.29 16:52:00 - [8] Edited by: welsh wizard on 29/01/2007 16:53:14 lo skunk o/ Nos is the crux of the problem still. It's the nos that makes them almost impossible to tackle alone. 'We' were discussing this last night and came to the conclusion that the only lone ships that stand a chance of killing a nanophoon with any regularity are a Huginn with a faction disruptor (you'll still need to tank 4 cruise/siege and drones) and a double web nano domi thats lucky enough to land about 5k from the phoon. Of course this isn't absolute, human error plays a massive part in proceedings as always (notice the bit in bold). It is able to do battle with any ship it pleases, it either wins or withdraws. What other vessel can do this? The Crow? lol
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.30 14:28:00 - [9] The point everyone is unhappy with is that the Typhoon and to a lesser extent the Dominix get the option of reduced risk pvp. No other ships can so effectively put damage on the target and have such a great chance to come out victorius or at the very least, get out with their ship intact. This used to be the case with the Vagabond and is why the prices went so wild. Everyone wanted one because they rarely died when fitted with with the cookie cutter setup. I think the only other ship capable of this is the Crow but the Crow isn't a battleship. Currently I think this is the single biggest advantage anyone could hope for in pvp. A massive chance to win every fight you engage in and even if you don't win you get to keep your ship. This isn't what Eve is supposed to be about. Minimal risk, high reward. Awesome for Typhoon pilots but not everyone wants to fly a Typhoon.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.30 16:40:00 - [10] "Zero chance" Who said anything about zero chance? If you want to play this game its reasonable to expect to have to take a few risks if you want to win. Am I wrong? The Typhoon crosses the line and blurs the risk/reward factor. Thats why we're suddenly inundated with 5 nano-phoons in every fleet.

welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.11 13:15:00 - [11] Edited by: welsh wizard on 11/02/2007 13:12:25 I think all this analysis is unnecessary. It's really quite simple, the Typhoon can engage as its pleases, it either wins the fight, leaves or stands a miniscule chance of death just like a Crow. The difference is that it has battleship hitpoints and battleship firepower. Thats why its broken, nothing else matters. It ****es on risk versus reward. End.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.13 18:04:00 - [12] Originally by: Xurx The sad part is that after 28 pages, and countles other threads, there is still no word from ccp... I think we're in for a long run with this one... Well they stickied it so I reckon they accept that its something to be looked at. Fingers crossed.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.15 20:01:00 - [13] Edited by: welsh wizard on 15/02/2007 19:57:48 Originally by: Nicocat Originally by: welsh wizard Originally by: Xurx The sad part is that after 28 pages, and countles other threads, there is still no word from ccp... I think we're in for a long run with this one... Well they stickied it so I reckon they accept that its something to be looked at. Fingers crossed. They stickied it because they were sick of having 20 threads a day on the subject. That's not saying they'll actually notice it now. Also, update: Yep, they're still fun. I warp jammed a rather slow sader with my 28km scrambler and kept him in range with it long enough to catch up and nos him dead. He had a Psuedoelecton DCU. I love those! Also, I fought my worst nightmare as part of a mini-fleet op: A big ol' gang of BCs. Why are those scary? Well, as I stated, medium guns (even long range ones) can track a nanophoon and blast it at least enough to drive it away, if not to outright kill it. They even had a flycatcher I only noticed halfway in that could have webbed me without me even noticing him! But they didn't fire on me, so all's well and we got some nice kills out of it. But boy, the loot they'd have if they decided to actually go for me (I was in web range half the time, I'd be toast) devblog disagrees.

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.