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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.25 23:02:00 - [271] Originally by: Rachel Vend 1. Their damage is total crap. 4 heavy nos + 4 siege + 5 heavy drones != crap damage Quote: 2. If they get webbed, they are on the express train to the clone bay. At gatecamps they are on the express train to the gate, where their inertia will take them even if they get webebd as soon as they uncloak. Elsewhere they need to make pilot errors so you are able to web them. Dumb piloting kills anything, it's no balance argument. Quote: 3. The better (faster) setups are just as expensive as the faction/officer tank setups, and just as hard to kill. Not really. A nanosetup can easily survive a 10 people gatecamp. Feel free to try making a 2.5 bil officer tank which can survive that.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.25 23:12:00 - [272] Originally by: Rachel Vend 1. Their damage is total crap. a. Wrong. b. Even if it were true that a nano BS had poor damage output... having a ship with approximately 8k shields, 8k armor, a sizable drone bay, damage output greater than a cruiser, and the ability to travel around 4k to 5k a sec is simply gamebreaking. That you cannot/will not see that is utterly incomprehensible to me. Originally by: Rachel Vend 2. If they get webbed, they are on the express train to the clone bay. This has already been proven to be completely false and you continue to ignore it. Originally by: Rachel Vend 3. The better (faster) setups are just as expensive as the faction/officer tank setups, and just as hard to kill. A high cost does not balance an unbalanced ship. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 02:28:00 - [273] battleship any of a class of warships that are the most heavily armored and are equipped with the most powerful armament. interceptor a fast maneuverable fighter plane designed to intercept enemy aircraft in EVE, the battleship goes faster nanobs are overpowered for many reasons, whilst they sacrifice much of their firepower they: 1- have the option to run whenever they please in 95% of situations, whereas a standard battleship does not, even a blasterthron 2- work as heavy tacklers, being just as fast as interceptors in some cases whilst dishing out the damage of a BC 3- can escape gatecamps with almost total immunity, with their "combat" setup in short, nanoships are THE solopwnmobile of choice at current. unless the pilot makes a serious mistake which its target is ready for, it simply isnt possible to down one solo and extremely difficult if you have friends, as they can run whenever they feel like it nanobs are also capable of downing any non-capital ship ingame, despite the practically non-existant risk of flying them, when compared to normal ships. however if there is to be a fix for them it SHOULD NOT BE TO MAKE WEBBERS WORK INSTANTLY. currently its possible to evade smaller camps by MWDing back to the gate without the use of nanos at all, but you're far from unkillable. insta-webbing would simply mean that 1 instalocking huginn would guarentee lockdown of any ship that jumps in, giving even inties little chance of survival, which would be bad for the game.
Jonathan Peterbilt Caldari Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2007.01.26 03:28:00 - [274] Battleships faster then Interceptors just dont make sense. I guess BS at 6 km/s can do a much better job tackling Nerf them and bring the balance back in the game.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2007.01.26 04:01:00 - [275] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 26/01/2007 03:59:45 There are two problems here: 1) The battleship-class nos that insta-drains any tacklers that try to get close. "Fly an interceptor" sounds good in theory, except for the fact that you'll be cap dead the moment you get in scramble/web range. Unfortunately the solution to this isn't easy, as it causes some harsh splash damage on other ships. 2) The huge momentum of the ship allowing it to coast out of range even when webbed. The solution here is much easier: decreased mass and increased agility already improve acceleration, so make it have the same effect on slowing down. So you can have your instant acceleration, but the moment someone drops a web on you, you're back down to zero. It makes perfect sense by real-world physics, F=M*A doesn't care if you're dealing with forward engine force or backward web force.
Echo4 19	Posted - 2007.01.26 04:51:00 - [276] nanobses are like very expensive interceptors that manuver worse and die if they get webbed. Sheesh, if someone is willing to drop 100m on one of these, let them.
Jonathan Peterbilt Caldari Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2007.01.26 06:51:00 - [277] Edited by: Jonathan Peterbilt on 26/01/2007 06:49:09 Meh never mind its going to get nerfed anyway....
skepsiss	Posted - 2007.01.26 06:57:00 - [278] Originally by: Jonathan Peterbilt Edited by: Jonathan Peterbilt on 26/01/2007 06:49:09 Meh never mind its going to get nerfed anyway.... That's unless CCP has no clue what they screwed up ( for more example see cyano vs cloak example). So CCP, how long do we have to still put up with this bug ? after all it took you months to fix a damned mail bug ... heh ...
mematar The Raven Warriors	Posted - 2007.01.26 08:02:00 - [279] Originally by: Echo4 19 nanobses are like very expensive interceptors that manuver worse and die if they get webbed. Sheesh, if someone is willing to drop 100m on one of these, let them. 100m is far from enough for nanobs fit. The MWD alone is ~150m, add rigs, implants etc to that, easily over 1b.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 09:58:00 - [280] MAybe just nerfing the NOS we can get them to be really threatened by interceptors. But iI still think nanofiber speed bonus should be a percentage of ships speed (10-15% for example) Would keep frigates and cruisers with rougly same speed, BC with smaller speed and BS with worthless speed gain. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!

Nicholai Pestot Gallente Havoc Inc	Posted - 2007.01.26 10:36:00 - [281] Edited by: Nicholai Pestot on 26/01/2007 10:33:18 Fittings cost is not relevant as an argument for one-man pwnmobiles The cost of a load out which is based so heavily on a player driven market should not determine its effectiveness. Should a CNR with full faction kit be able to beat its market value in tech II equipped standard ravens? No it shouldn't (and it can't) because its cost is artificially high due to competition for high-end ships and equipment. The cost of the fittings is not a valid argument for keeping nano-battleships in their current unbalanced incarnation
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.26 10:43:00 - [282] I'll thought I would just add once again for the people that DONT read. You cannot catch a nano/istab ship with webbers cause there agility makes then more then capable of moving our of range with inercia! (hugins again have problems also) Battleships should not be able to move and have the agility of a interceptor, too many times have I seen battleships with I-stabs **** all over ceptors.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.26 11:55:00 - [283] Originally by: Wizzkidy I'll thought I would just add once again for the people that DONT read. You cannot catch a nano/istab ship with webbers cause there agility makes then more then capable of moving our of range with inercia! (hugins again have problems also) Battleships should not be able to move and have the agility of a interceptor, too many times have I seen battleships with I-stabs **** all over ceptors. Actually, it's not agility, it's inertia which is caused by the heavy mass... Try bumping a ceptor with a nanobs, see what happens. N.F.F. Recruitment
Solar Blade	Posted - 2007.01.26 12:06:00 - [284] its not a bug, its been in the game for ages, and give me 1 damn good reason why it shouldn't be allowed, you see an enemy that you don't know how to counter effectivly and right away people start to scream BUG, EXPLOIT, FIRE, HELL, DOOM!!! Its a tactic that only got known untill recently when someone took a typhoon and invented a new defence for battleship, speed defence. This is called game mechanics people. If I fit a battleship with a huge amount of stuff to make it go faster then it does indeed go faster than a cepter, do the same to the intercepter and chances are it can go faster than the battleship. the only difference is that battleships have more slots powergrid, cpu and dronespace. than cepters. besides If I spend half a billion or a billion on my ship I expect it to be able to stay alive. for the same money I could have bought a carrier or a damn powerfull tanking ship with named modules for Armor or shield tank. several ways to counter them, use dampners, it makes them needing to come closer coming into the range of your webbers. Use passiveshield tanks and missiles while someone else uses for example a rapier to web them at long range. Nos them right back, takes care of your nos problem. And maybe the Devs can find a way to introduce a module that can work as a different approach to counter nano battleships because NOS, NANO's and I-STABS are also used in missions. It might be a powerfull setup, but after this is nerfed there will be something else that will have to be nerfed. lets look at the following: -Missiles (allways hitting targets are full power) = NERFED -Drones (where capable of taking out frigate sized ships to fast... NERFED) -Warp Core Stabilizers (used to evade battle... crappy tactics but still...NERFED) -ECM (Was capable of keeping people out of battle for about the entire duration of the fight, NERFED TO THE POINT OF BEING NEARLY USELESS) and now its the turn for NOS and NANO's on battleships. Its fairly simple, when you people wanted missles to be depending on sig radius fast ships became stronger. this became so even more when ECM was nerfed cause now theres no effective way of making scrambling them. add up the improved drone AI people have been crying about for ages. Drones now autoattack enemy's that are using EW as they're primairy target. so yes, fast ships did get stronger. but its by far a bug. Its hard to counter with standard setups but if I spend a billion on a ship that can tank I expect its tank to be quite strong. If I spend a billion on a ship that can go fast to evade damage then I expect it to EVADE that damage. Stop Whining and Adapt to your advisaries.
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.26 12:35:00 - [285] Originally by: Solar Blade Stop Whining and Adapt to your advisaries. Please tell me why we have interceptors in the game if a BS can out do a ceptor? it makes little sence As far as I am concerned BS where never ment to travel this fast, infact they are suppose to be heavy hitting and slow moving (to a point) I understand minmitar are suppose to have faster ships alround but come on there BIG and HEAVY! no matter what you fit they should NOT be more agile then a damn ceptor it makes no sence at all to have this in game and IS unbalanced that is all.
Charlie Seriya	Posted - 2007.01.26 12:38:00 - [286] This thread was too long for me to read in a hurry, however, my 2c is that a key problem is that it's far too easy for these battleships to deal with smaller tacklers, primarily due to Nos. As long as fitting Nos means every big ship automaticly destroys a smaller ship that comes into Nos range, this kind of thing will be an issue. There may also be other issues that need addressing - BSs should not be outmanoveuring Intys!
Nicholai Pestot Gallente Havoc Inc	Posted - 2007.01.26 12:48:00 - [287] Originally by: Solar Blade If I spend a billion on a ship that can go fast to evade damage then I expect it to EVADE that damage. Stop Whining and Adapt to your advisaries. I will say it again. The cost of a setup is not a valid argument for its I-WIN nature. There is a point at which you can no longer realistically adapt to a certain ship.Making a minmatar recon ship a necessity for every combat wing you form is already past that point. We are now (with the rigs) at the point whereby a nano-ships inertia makes it almost immune to even that counter. To catch and kill a competent nano-battleship your only recourse now is to have your own nano-battleship with better equipment OR a team of 4 people specifically geared to catch such a ship,sacrificing their ability to effectivly engage anyone else. I'm not asking for much, just that if a nano-ship IS caught by a webber (getting the webber on target is and should be my problem)its inertia isn't enough to still carry it away out of web range faster than anything can follow.
Lakotnik	Posted - 2007.01.26 13:18:00 - [288] Well, any heavy tank can be broken. Use a scorp with ECM (yea, nerfed a lot, but not much worse than it used to be on ships that fit ew rigs and lowslot modules - just you cant tank and jam at the same time), heavy nos and one smartbomb to kill drones. Ship will be scrambled, webbed, jammed, nossed and when its nossed down use drones to kill it. Slow but works. Thats a foolproof way. Standard way with gank setup works as well most of the time. And you do not need billions for either of setups. Nanobs cant be countered that way. Officer webs? And officer scrams as well perhaps. Well lets say i use 3 webs and 1 scram (as good as it gets on amarr ships cept recons). I bet that ship still has enough speed due to inertia that it can flee. Nanobs old? Nope, old nanobs were mostly ok. Very agile and quite fast, can flee any gatecamp. But in space it didnt outclass ceptors or vagas, it was more like a travel setup. Its the new i-stab thats making some balance problems here. Besides about nerfs be4 - name one that actually hurts gameplay more than it improves it. Smile, tomorrow will be worse.
Keitaro Baka Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises Babylon Project	Posted - 2007.01.26 13:34:00 - [289] As many people have said before, you will not see many more nanoBS if you make inertia stabs highly stacked. Heck make em like the MWD only one and active module that causes some annoying stuff for big ships. Maybe webbers should work on a volume percentage? Maybe Nos should be nerfed? omg people are willing to change multiple other mods to 'fix' the effect of one mod?? And some people wonder why the devs are playing a game of Nerf nerf nerf goose? I have no problems with BS giving up any type of tank to zoom across the battlefield. I don't care they are getting away all the time. So what's the problem? They do too much dmg for the tactic? Any BS with heavy nos should be able to escape a frigging tackling inty! But should it also be able to kill all sorts of targets?.. The problem here is the combination of the lower weapon types with the speed. You don't see nano abaddons with mega pulse.. you don't see nano megathrons with blasters... big surprise, those ships won't hit for frell. No, we see the domi's with drones, the typhoons (and maybe rokhs) with the missiles.. Are you gonna be able to make it so that people won't use that? Don't think so and honestly I don't hope so.. stacking penalty on istabs maybe, nano's aren't the problem, the problem is the mass+mwd combo... hands off the rest please. All the stuff above does not necessarily reflect my corp, my alliance or even me.. Drone guide..
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific	Posted - 2007.01.26 13:37:00 - [290] Two things that can be done that doesn't screw over smaller ships that much at the same time. 1: give all webs more kick in slowing ships down. 2: Cut the thrust of the 100mn MWD by 20%.

Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.26 13:39:00 - [291] Originally by: Keitaro Baka the problem is the mass+mwd combo... hands off the rest please. Agreed. It's no use nerf'ing anything else bar this because this is the main problem, all those people saying nerf NOS etc are living in a fantacy world (although the NOS nerf will come one day for other reasons)
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 14:07:00 - [292] Originally by: Keitaro Baka As many people have said before, you will not see many more nanoBS if you make inertia stabs highly stacked. Heck make em like the MWD only one and active module that causes some annoying stuff for big ships. Maybe webbers should work on a volume percentage? Maybe Nos should be nerfed? omg people are willing to change multiple other mods to 'fix' the effect of one mod?? And some people wonder why the devs are playing a game of Nerf nerf nerf goose? I have no problems with BS giving up any type of tank to zoom across the battlefield. I don't care they are getting away all the time. So what's the problem? They do too much dmg for the tactic? Any BS with heavy nos should be able to escape a frigging tackling inty! But should it also be able to kill all sorts of targets?.. The problem here is the combination of the lower weapon types with the speed. You don't see nano abaddons with mega pulse.. you don't see nano megathrons with blasters... big surprise, those ships won't hit for frell. No, we see the domi's with drones, the typhoons (and maybe rokhs) with the missiles.. Are you gonna be able to make it so that people won't use that? Don't think so and honestly I don't hope so.. stacking penalty on istabs maybe, nano's aren't the problem, the problem is the mass+mwd combo... hands off the rest please. are you trying top be stupid or are you tryinbg to make us think you are one? Cause have been stated several times taht the ONLY 1 of cannot be the solution because it hampers ships that have speed as a valid tactic!!! And Istabs are ALREADY STACK NERFED FOR GOD'S SAKE! If you want to try presenting a solution check how things are and think on side effects on other ships!!! And remember that a lot of people like playing different form you so you must think out of the box of you point of view! If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.26 14:11:00 - [293] Originally by: Kagura Nikon And Istabs are ALREADY STACK NERFED FOR GOD'S SAKE! I'll think your find they are not on the mass side of things mate.
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 14:49:00 - [294] anyone who thinks current nanobs are balanced needs to step back out of their fantasy world and think for a bit tbh also, arguments like "fit an officer web" "use a huginn" "omg bump it with ur own nanobs" arnt really applicable, as it shouldnt require a 600mil module, minmatar recon or another of the same to stand any chance of being caught. the cost factor is also not really applicable. sure, if you spend 1bil on it it'l fly at 4k/sec, but you can get it to 2.5k/sec, which is more than fast enough for only 200mil, which is still nigh invincible in almost every situation. simply put, nanobs are the new win buttons, and better than ever. ecm and stab-based setups of pre-kali are nothing compared to these, which is why they're so popular how to fix it? simple, kill the acceleration bonus that these modules give - that way you're not a)overpowering webs by making them stop ships dead immediately (as some people have suggested) or b)nerfing another module for the wrong reasons. the nanobs would still go 4k/sec, but it'd take quite some time to reach that velocity and wouldn't be able to orbit at over 1k/sec generally, which-lets face it, is STILL more than fast enough for a battleship.
Kunming Outcasts	Posted - 2007.01.26 14:55:00 - [295] Nerf NOS! - without constant cap supply no nano-ship can run around forever, we'll probably have vagabond style nano-ships which use hit and run tactics and probably only on minmatar ships - without being able to take out any tackler support with ur NOS getting webbed wont become something impossible Dont nerf nanos or i-stabs, nerf NOS as its the core of the problem. Quote: READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.26 15:07:00 - [296] Originally by: Kunming nerf NOS as its the core of the problem. Why do you bother not to read! NOS is NOT the problem, NOS is not the problem, Does having no NOS stop the issue of BS flying around like a ceptor NO Does nerfing NOS stop BS from turning like a ceptor NO Does nerfing NOS stop a i-stabbed BS from continuing to break bubble camps when there suppose to be big and heavy (and hard hitting) NO PLEASE THINK before you post. nerfing NOS will NOT stop the PROBLEM!
MrDisposable	Posted - 2007.01.26 15:35:00 - [297] Originally by: Wizzkidy Originally by: Kunming nerf NOS as its the core of the problem. Why do you bother not to read! NOS is NOT the problem, NOS is not the problem, Does having no NOS stop the issue of BS flying around like a ceptor NO Does nerfing NOS stop BS from turning like a ceptor NO Does nerfing NOS stop a i-stabbed BS from continuing to break bubble camps when there suppose to be big and heavy (and hard hitting) NO PLEASE THINK before you post. nerfing NOS will NOT stop the PROBLEM! Nano setups do very very poor dmg.... and they are not cap stable. without NOS they cannot work. Look at your average nano-boat. They have two things in common. Weapon systems non-reliant on tracking (missles and drones) and a bunch of NOS. Limit NOS to 1 per ship except for specialized ships.
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.26 16:44:00 - [298] Edited by: Wizzkidy on 26/01/2007 16:41:32 Originally by: MrDisposable Originally by: Wizzkidy Originally by: Kunming nerf NOS as its the core of the problem. Won't work, you can still run a nano BS without NOS for awhile - OK maybe not as long but it can still be run. All you guys saying "dont nerf i-stabs" are only after a BS that can out run ceptors and cause huge unbalance to the game, BS should not be able to do what they can currently do with speed/agility - there is no argument to that.
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.26 16:52:00 - [299] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 26/01/2007 16:48:44 Look here for a good solution to this problem http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863 the nanoships have all right to excist as long as they can be countered or at least made vulnerable. thats the thought I used to think up the Remote Graviton Generator module (or EW Type) simply put: this form of Electronical warfar increased the mass of a ship by filling up unused space inside a ship with Gravity fields on a moleculiar scale. however, once all the space the module can find is filled up the ship can gain any more mass. more effective modules like T2 might be able to find a little more space to fill up but in the end the mass increase will never excede 110%-120% read more about it in this thread and please comment. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863 changes to the numbers can be made but I find it pretty balanced as it is. not completely making a nanoship dead in the water but at the same making them vurneble to webbers or forcing them to take a higher orbiting range increasing your chance of hitting them and disabeling they're NOS. Please don't rant on this thread. Its something I thought up to balance this issue without having to nerf modules that are not only used for PVP but also for PVE + adding an extra form of tactics to the game. The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Valea Silpha Death Monkey's With Knives Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 16:52:00 - [300] I'd say the biggest problem does come from the combination of thrust and momentum. Atm, nanobs are immune to webs for the first few seconds of their movement, which is more than enough for them to escape web range or pull to a gate. The three arguments regarding countering a nano-bs just don't hold water. In a solo fight, they either win or run away, and neither way is hugely preferable. In the situation of a gang hitting them with a gate bubble, the nano bs runs. In the situation of the nanobs pilot being stupid and getting caught by a dozen inties and a dozen snipers as well as a dictor to stop it warping immediately... well nothing lives through that so meh ... although it would waste a few inties before it went down. So c'mon... what is a viable offensive tactic against a nanobs ... i fly a huginn and i cna't stop them fast enough to stop them fleeing back to gates. <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: 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.