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)
Sh'irna	Posted - 2007.01.23 05:32:00 - [1] Edited by: Sh''irna on 23/01/2007 05:33:39 The new super weapon of eve is the nano domi-phoon-multi low slot heavy ship of your choice. Toss on some cruises or, even better, some drones and killing you is near impossible. With the drones you can swoop in close and put drones on and then back off at interceptor speeds and let the drones finish it. With a missile boat you can swoop in and launch missiles while confidently escaping. All you have to do is stay out of webber range and you are good to go with the super weapon. "So go tackle them with ceptors!" you say? Not likely. 2 or 3 medium or heavy nos or energy neutralizers and the cepy has no power, no point, no web, no MWD and a new clone. In addition no one of these pilots is likely to geti n range of large ships that can tank the nos and web them. This is SERIOUSLY messed up. There should be SOME KIND of cap to the inertial boost that is given to these modules. Doing 500km per second in a BS is bad enough. Doing 4500 m/s in a typhoon is bloody rediculous. Dont get me worng people, while it is legal, go ahead and use it but it should be nerfed for the health of the game. It is imbalanced in the frig vs BS realm and imbalanced amoung battleships, heavily favoring those with many low slots.
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2007.01.23 05:37:00 - [2] Was yet another new thread on this subject really necessary?
Sh'irna	Posted - 2007.01.23 05:38:00 - [3] Originally by: Azerrad InExile Was yet another new thread on this subject really necessary? Given it hasnt been hotfixed .. yes ... flame elsewhere pls.
Forum Troll	Posted - 2007.01.23 05:40:00 - [4] Originally by: Azerrad InExile Was yet another new thread on this subject really necessary? Yes, and I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that nanos are nerfed in the patch at the end of this month. Finally.
Sh'irna	Posted - 2007.01.23 05:43:00 - [5] Originally by: Forum Troll Originally by: Azerrad InExile Was yet another new thread on this subject really necessary? Yes, and I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that nanos are nerfed in the patch at the end of this month. Finally. It is not nanos causing the problem but inertial stabilizers. The effect of reduced mass is good but there needs to be a cap to it so that these speeds can not be done with a BS.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 05:45:00 - [6] Edited by: Rachel Vend on 23/01/2007 05:41:31 Solution to nanos.
hotgirl933	Posted - 2007.01.23 05:50:00 - [7] its a fun ship its balanced not many can fly em
Anila's Delight	Posted - 2007.01.23 06:09:00 - [8] another thread on this? Its an imaginative setup created by someone who has the skills to fly it. If CCP nerfed everything when someone posted NERF THIS AND NERF that eve would be very boring. Someone has created an immaginative setup that is popular because it is effective whilst soloing. Its good, but not perfect. There is bound to be some kind of weakness and it encourages new tactics to be defeated. People just dont like it because they cant have it for themselves or dont like something different that they cant beat. The good thing about set ups in eve is that you never know what to expect. Before you flame me, no, i dont have the skills to fly one.
Topaz Skydiver	Posted - 2007.01.23 07:52:00 - [9] Thanks to nanos and inertial stabs, something like the hurricane is actually fun to fly. And the speed fits to the optics of the ship and the race.
Noluck Ned FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:11:00 - [10] Stop whining and adapt....a Huggin or two should slow em down. Besides why are you being killed, you will find that the nanoship often gets out of range of its own scramblers, specially if you stay alligned and spam warp to x object. So before coming on here with a whine do some thinking about options FFS. F4T4L - Recruitment

Ice Conch	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:12:00 - [11] Originally by: Rachel Vend Edited by: Rachel Vend on 23/01/2007 05:41:31 Solution to nanos. thanks for giving me my new sig
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:17:00 - [12] Autopest > nanophoon That is all.
MysticNZ Solstice Systems Development Concourse	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:21:00 - [13] Meh, go away. The amount of isk to pull off a good nano setup is ridiculous, hotfix, jesus, go fire up wow. -=====-
Xendie Forsaken Empire The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:33:00 - [14] adapt or die. after 3 years ive found a really fun ship to fly and ppl start whining about it of course. train to use a huginn or rapier. Quote: Nertzius > having fun being incompetitent? Quote: jake sisko > its f-e's bob dev alt making lag
Grash Freedom Gallente MAZA Solutions	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:34:00 - [15] I do not see your point If you think something is to good, then simple do it yourself keep in mind that those ships you mensioned are ships that cannot be used for any other purpose, If you whine about inertials, then why don't you whine about snipers as well, its the same thing really the only difference is that snipers do damage from 200kms away and not 20kms, snipers are very hard to kill(if the pilots has a clue), so.....
Mangold Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:43:00 - [16] Originally by: AKULA UrQuan Autopest > nanophoon That is all. true, but you need to get the nanoship to stay and not warp off...
Thaneal Swiftbird	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:44:00 - [17] Yeah, everything smart in a MMOG, everything tactical, needs to be nerfed! I demand a Jita convention, like the Yulai one but better. Jita convention has to ban all shiptypes and modules, except the starter-frigs and civillian mods. You should get them for free, so we do not need that disgusting market anymore. Or the even more disgusting producers. Or the disgusting pod-pilots... erm no, wait... Nerf teh universe! And may the shwartz be with you. Thaneal Swiftbird
MysticNZ Solstice Systems Development Concourse	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:45:00 - [18] Originally by: Xendie adapt or die. after 3 years ive found a really fun ship to fly and ppl start whining about it of course. train to use a huginn or rapier. Exactly, Rapier would let you tear it a new butt hole. -=====-
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 08:46:00 - [19] I hate when people say that. Its ignorant. I have worked with my Huginn. THREE Domination Webbers, thats as good as they get. And I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run. Because nothing will stop that inital burst of his MWD, near instalty getting him to 1500 meters per second. He then glide to the gate no matter how many Huginn's you have. For the sake of fun we tried catching the same one with two Huginn's (Huginni ? Huginnseses ?) - no difference. If a Nano-Ship doesnt want to fight, you are NOT going to get it to fight. And THAT is what needs fixing. Originally by: Noluck Ned Stop whining and adapt....a Huggin or two should slow em down. Besides why are you being killed, you will find that the nanoship often gets out of range of its own scramblers, specially if you stay alligned and spam warp to x object. So before coming on here with a whine do some thinking about options FFS.
Thaneal Swiftbird	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:00:00 - [20] Originally by: Montaire I hate when people say that. Its ignorant. I have worked with my Huginn. THREE Domination Webbers, thats as good as they get. And I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run. Because nothing will stop that inital burst of his MWD, near instalty getting him to 1500 meters per second. He then glide to the gate no matter how many Huginn's you have. For the sake of fun we tried catching the same one with two Huginn's (Huginni ? Huginnseses ?) - no difference. If a Nano-Ship doesnt want to fight, you are NOT going to get it to fight. And THAT is what needs fixing. Dunno if this would work, but did you try bumping them out of jumprange (not with the Huginn of course)? No one forbids you to counter a nano-bs with its own poison. Should be far easier then keeping someone out of the docking range of a station... And nanoships have a serious backdraw. They got no or near no tanking ability. Lots of money floating around and easy to kill if you get them right.

Ashiana	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:00:00 - [21] Originally by: Sh'irna Originally by: Azerrad InExile Was yet another new thread on this subject really necessary? Given it hasnt been hotfixed .. yes ... flame elsewhere pls. 24.01.06 Small patch that addresses some minor balancing issues 1) All minmatar pilots have been deleted this something like what you're after?
maarud Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:02:00 - [22] Originally by: Montaire I hate when people say that. Its ignorant. I have worked with my Huginn. THREE Domination Webbers, thats as good as they get. And I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run. Because nothing will stop that inital burst of his MWD, near instalty getting him to 1500 meters per second. He then glide to the gate no matter how many Huginn's you have. For the sake of fun we tried catching the same one with two Huginn's (Huginni ? Huginnseses ?) - no difference. If a Nano-Ship doesnt want to fight, you are NOT going to get it to fight. And THAT is what needs fixing. Originally by: Noluck Ned Stop whining and adapt....a Huggin or two should slow em down. Besides why are you being killed, you will find that the nanoship often gets out of range of its own scramblers, specially if you stay alligned and spam warp to x object. So before coming on here with a whine do some thinking about options FFS. How about being clever then, actualy having another ship on the gate to approach said nano-ship and bump it, so it can't glide to the gate? Maarud. Proudly a Ex-BYDI member
Rawthorm Gallente The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:08:00 - [23] The Nanophoon/dommie isnt the brain child of a few smart people. It's a rehash of the old Cavalry ravens and may I remind people that the Cavalry ravens of old were nerfed (The multi-MWD) for being near invincible. Fact of the matter is this new trend can not be allowed. Its one counter (the web) isnt effective as these ships have enough interia still to get out of range and warp off. Not to mention they can outrun anything that could possibly try to get a web on it. Only way these setups can stay in game is if webs have an imeditate effect in halting your ship, instead of letting it cruise down to its now lowered speed with inertia.
Vim Spiritus Draconis Endless Horizon	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:11:00 - [24] /me polishes huginn in hangar while waiting for the last of the skills. I myself have nothing against setups that allow you to escape if things are about to go bad, as well as nanoships have counters if you fit for them, same as most everything have counters... if you fit for them. Or do we realy want combat in eve to be two ships sitting still at 0m/s and both being in their optimal range regardless of weaponry, no warp scramblers required since its a hazzle and no use since if you get into a fight you cannot leave until you die or win. Sadly enough nanoships are The thing around right now and as such people should expect to see them and atleast pretend to try fit to do something about them ^_^ /* Teach a rookie today watch him takedown a battleship tomorrow... */
Rawthorm Gallente The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:13:00 - [25] Edited by: Rawthorm on 23/01/2007 09:13:14 Originally by: Vim /me polishes huginn in hangar while waiting for the last of the skills. I myself have nothing against setups that allow you to escape if things are about to go bad, as well as nanoships have counters if you fit for them, same as most everything have counters... if you fit for them. Or do we realy want combat in eve to be two ships sitting still at 0m/s and both being in their optimal range regardless of weaponry, no warp scramblers required since its a hazzle and no use since if you get into a fight you cannot leave until you die or win. Sadly enough nanoships are The thing around right now and as such people should expect to see them and atleast pretend to try fit to do something about them ^_^ Try webbing a nano-intera ship, then come back and comment on how we should fit to kill them. Webs DONT work on them and then if they did why should this whole nano setup craze be counterable by only 1 ship, the hugin?
Vim Spiritus Draconis Endless Horizon	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:22:00 - [26] Originally by: Rawthorm Edited by: Rawthorm on 23/01/2007 09:13:14 Originally by: Vim /me polishes huginn in hangar while waiting for the last of the skills. I myself have nothing against setups that allow you to escape if things are about to go bad, as well as nanoships have counters if you fit for them, same as most everything have counters... if you fit for them. Or do we realy want combat in eve to be two ships sitting still at 0m/s and both being in their optimal range regardless of weaponry, no warp scramblers required since its a hazzle and no use since if you get into a fight you cannot leave until you die or win. Sadly enough nanoships are The thing around right now and as such people should expect to see them and atleast pretend to try fit to do something about them ^_^ Try webbing a nano-intera ship, then come back and comment on how we should fit to kill them. Webs DONT work on them and then if they did why should this whole nano setup craze be counterable by only 1 ship, the hugin? I'am ranting about people wanting things to stand still, have no chance to escape once its a fight and preferably you wont even have to fit a scrambler because they will fight the fight out and if they run away somehow they cheated mentality =) But yes, that is the sad tidbit that battleships will manage to slide out of webs a wee bit to easily. /* Teach a rookie today watch him takedown a battleship tomorrow... */
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:23:00 - [27] Impossible. Tried that many times. It doesnt work because you dont know where they are going to appear from the jump in. So you have over a 50% chance of bieng on the OTHER side of the gate and have to navigate around / through it. In addition, by the time you've moved any reasonable distance hes within range and the Session Change is done. Regardless, its downright idiotic that people continue to post things like this. "Get a Huginn" - "Try bumping them" -- ignorance. Nano ship need a huge change, and they will get it. People who think otherwise are living in Oz. They arent in touch with how the meta-game is moving. Nano ships are so overpowered right now, there is no effective counter. Whever that situation exists, the developers step in and make a fundamental change. Just a matter of time. How about being clever then, actualy having another ship on the gate to approach said nano-ship and bump it, so it can't glide to the gate?
DunNa	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:36:00 - [28] I've been trying my best to use a ceptor to get up to a nano ship and web/scram it. This works aslong as I have a friend jamming him so he can't nosf. We then need another ship to actually pop the bastard. That said to even be able to do this I have to have a rather pimped ceptor (your average ceptor setup goes around 3-4k maybe abit above. For this to work you need your inty atleast able to hit 5k hopefully more and even then aginst someone who goes all the way there is just no hope. For those interested in what I'm using.. Malediction 4x small nosf mwd, scam, web nano, istab, small rep Its based entirely around getting to a nano ship and tackling it. The really bad part about this is A, it doesn't always get the tackle because the nanoship can outrun it B, It requires atleast one other person with ecm (and praying that he gets good dice rolls) C, even then its still more than possible to get screwed. The fact its taking 2 (normally three for a decent chance) to even take on one ship, thats even considering those 2-3 ships are completely fitted/working together to stop that ship type (without themselves becoming nanoBS *****s). The huggin/rapier idea while novel just doesn't work and still requires another ship more often than not since multiple heavy nosf make poor little huggin cry. You will also need an arazu or very fast scrammers to scram the nanoship so it doesn't run.
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:42:00 - [29] Edited by: Laboratus on 23/01/2007 09:40:52 I-stabs will propably get a stacking penaly, since that is the only way of slowing down the 7-8km/s battleships without nerfing interceptors as well. Since I-stabs are supposed to make ceptors go fastah. It's kinda funny what kind of proportions the threads have gotten. The same implants and the same level of gear that makes a speed tank for a BS could also make a ceptor go 10-14km/s. It's faction implans and gear. With the T1/T2 gear, the speeds wont exceed 2-3km, and that is still not problematic. Anyways, the whole thread is pointless, as eve is a multiplayer game and should not be balanced around 1vs1 scenarios. An I-stab/nano battleship contributes nothing in gangs larger than 5-10, since any sized sniper squad will eat them alive before they have a chance to do anything. Oh, right. And for a perfect counter: Fit some sensor damps. You can easily damp it to around 7km lock range. Since the speedBS is moving in and out of range to avoid being webbed, it will never get to lock you. The time it takes to lock someone with 3 or 4 damps on you > time spent in lock range. Have a nice day and ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Siltan	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:47:00 - [30] Originally by: Rawthorm The Nanophoon/dommie isnt the brain child of a few smart people. It's a rehash of the old Cavalry ravens and may I remind people that the Cavalry ravens of old were nerfed (The multi-MWD) for being near invincible. Fact of the matter is this new trend can not be allowed. Its one counter (the web) isnt effective as these ships have enough interia still to get out of range and warp off. Not to mention they can outrun anything that could possibly try to get a web on it. Only way these setups can stay in game is if webs have an imeditate effect in halting your ship, instead of letting it cruise down to its now lowered speed with inertia. I thaught the main problem with the calvery ravens was the 4 vollys of torps that all hit thier target at exactly the same time, which resulted in elimiating any chance of using repairers and pretty much 1 hit kill of players. As to nanophoons etc, anyone tried using webbing drones?

Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:51:00 - [31] Originally by: Siltan I thaught the main problem with the calvery ravens was the 4 vollys of torps that all hit thier target at exactly the same time, which resulted in elimiating any chance of using repairers and pretty much 1 hit kill of players. As to nanophoons etc, anyone tried using webbing drones? Webbing drones are very effective as long as the target is going under 2km/s, but those ships are not excactly the "problem". The ones going -7km/s are. The webbing drones go 1500m/s + skills, so they don't do wonders. With skills and a few drone navigation mods, you could prolly get it to around 2km/s+... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:53:00 - [32] Originally by: Siltan As to nanophoons etc, anyone tried using webbing drones? Last I checked, my webber drones didn't go 5 km/s or more. ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:57:00 - [33] Originally by: Laboratus With the T1/T2 gear, the speeds wont exceed 2-3km, and that is still not problematic. Pre-kali they did. Now they do not thanks to he new instabs and more importantly MWD speed rigs. 3 of those give a 45% speed boost. Quote: An I-stab/nano battleship contributes nothing in gangs larger than 5-10, since any sized sniper squad will eat them alive before they have a chance to do anything. Thats not really an balancing argument since the same is the case for any closerange ship. Also, small nanoship gangs work just fine.
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 09:59:00 - [34] Webbing doesnt work against nano ships. Read my previous posts. No amount of drones is goign to be better than 3x Domination Webs on a Huginn Repeat after me : Webbing is not the answer. No matter what, they can get enough inertia to get to the gate. You will NEVER catch a nanodomi that doesnt want to fight. And dont even get me started on how horribly ineffective fighters were. Originally by: Siltan Originally by: Rawthorm The Nanophoon/dommie isnt the brain child of a few smart people. It's a rehash of the old Cavalry ravens and may I remind people that the Cavalry ravens of old were nerfed (The multi-MWD) for being near invincible. Fact of the matter is this new trend can not be allowed. Its one counter (the web) isnt effective as these ships have enough interia still to get out of range and warp off. Not to mention they can outrun anything that could possibly try to get a web on it. Only way these setups can stay in game is if webs have an imeditate effect in halting your ship, instead of letting it cruise down to its now lowered speed with inertia. I thaught the main problem with the calvery ravens was the 4 vollys of torps that all hit thier target at exactly the same time, which resulted in elimiating any chance of using repairers and pretty much 1 hit kill of players. As to nanophoons etc, anyone tried using webbing drones?
mematar The Raven Warriors	Posted - 2007.01.23 10:10:00 - [35] Learn to ******* play! Even if they go at mad speeds there are a lot of weapons out there that can hit them, a lot of things that can stop them. Just learn to play and stop whining! (Had to open up finaly)
Kharriga Caldari	Posted - 2007.01.23 10:10:00 - [36] lets just remove all low and middle slots from all battleships and be done with it? reading the forums for about a year thats the direction we are heading to anyway - "I'm scissors. Paper is fine. Nerf rock!"
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 10:16:00 - [37] Ahh thank the gods that Mematar FINALLY came to our rescue! These are the things I personally have tried multiple times. Please pick an item NOT on this list and tell us your VAST experience in defeating nano-inertial ships. 1. Webbing 2. Bumping 3. Nos-ing 4. Shooting with Missiles 5. Shooting with Projectile Guns 6. Shooting with Hybrids 7. Shooting with Drones 8. Using fighters 9. Small, Medium and Large warp disruptor bubbles 10. Interdiction spheres I for one am SO GLAD you have come to our rescue. I eagerly await your enlightening response. Originally by: mematar Learn to ******* play! Even if they go at mad speeds there are a lot of weapons out there that can hit them, a lot of things that can stop them. Just learn to play and stop whining! (Had to open up finaly)
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 10:57:00 - [38] Originally by: Aramendel Pre-kali they did. Now they do not thanks to he new instabs and more importantly MWD speed rigs. 3 of those give a 45% speed boost. Please do share your setup. Without a snake set and a full rack of nanos/I-stabs my domi goes a touch over 2km/s. With a snake set and speed hardwiring plus ofcourse a full faction fit it goes about 4. Do share. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Relnala	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:01:00 - [39] You can't stop a nanophoon with webbers. I've been in 0.0 dealing with them for a while now and their mass carries them right past a webber without really getting slowed by it at all. As was stated before, the only way to actually stop them would be perhaps to web them before they could get the MWD on, which might happen if they're AFK... They can't really be nossed as its hard to get close to them with anything but another nanophoon or interceptor, they're hard to hit with most large guns and mediums dont have the range if they don't want you to hit them. Warp bubbles don't really stop them either, seeing as how they at 5-6kms as some of the ones I've seen lately are can make it to a gate in mere seconds even through a large bubble. Not to mention nanophoons are easily capable of picking off people at a bubble camp because they can knock Tier 3 battleships 50-60km away from their friends. I've never really said anything was unbalanced before, but 6kms in a battleship, even a minmatar one, is kinda excessive. Originally by: Montaire Ahh thank the gods that Mematar FINALLY came to our rescue! These are the things I personally have tried multiple times. Please pick an item NOT on this list and tell us your VAST experience in defeating nano-inertial ships. 1. Webbing 2. Bumping 3. Nos-ing 4. Shooting with Missiles 5. Shooting with Projectile Guns 6. Shooting with Hybrids 7. Shooting with Drones 8. Using fighters 9. Small, Medium and Large warp disruptor bubbles 10. Interdiction spheres I for one am SO GLAD you have come to our rescue. I eagerly await your enlightening response. Originally by: mematar Learn to ******* play! Even if they go at mad speeds there are a lot of weapons out there that can hit them, a lot of things that can stop them. Just learn to play and stop whining! (Had to open up finaly)
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:07:00 - [40] NERF SPEED TANKS!!!11 Make shield and armor the only way to tank! rabble rabble rabble - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?

Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:08:00 - [41] Originally by: Relnala Warp bubbles don't really stop them either, seeing as how they at 5-6kms as some of the ones I've seen lately are can make it to a gate in mere seconds even through a large bubble. Then you seem to have a problem with the placement of the bubble. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Victor Ramirez	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:09:00 - [42] Stack 3 damps on it and warp away?
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:09:00 - [43] Im not quite certian you can get as high as he says you can. But let me try 3 Local Hull Conversion Inertial Stab 3 Local Hull Conversion Nanofiber 3 Speed Rigs for MWD Boost 100 mn Gisti MWD Full set of Snake's Skill Hardwiring Thats about 4200 m/s if my numbers are right. The % boost from the MWD and the I-Stabs interact in a way I dont fully understand. However, I think your average Nanodomi goes about 1600. Its more than enough to pulse at a gate when he jumps through and get to the gate before you can hurt him. Thats the point, he can at his leisure decide he doesnt want to fight and you simply cannot stop him. Here's the typical scenario : 1. Intel reports a Nano-Domi (Damn you Harpo) in a system 3 jumps away. 2. Mobilize the forces on hand, get about 8 people and get the gate camp going, including bubble. 3. He jumps in (We're the next station system). We are ready with an ambush. 4. He simply hits his MWD (deactivating his cloak) and hits "approach" on the gate" 5. I lock him in under 1 second and hit him with the 3 best named Webs, reducing his max speed to 4. 6. He gets to the gate before we kill him based on inertia. By the time we jump through, since he's all nano'd up and his align is lightning, he is gone. We seriously do this 4 or 5 times a week easy, so we've had PLENTY of time to test the damned thing. We've also tried chasing him, haveing double camps set, you name it. Originally by: Laboratus Originally by: Aramendel Pre-kali they did. Now they do not thanks to he new instabs and more importantly MWD speed rigs. 3 of those give a 45% speed boost. Please do share your setup. Without a snake set and a full rack of nanos/I-stabs my domi goes a touch over 2km/s. With a snake set and speed hardwiring plus ofcourse a full faction fit it goes about 4. Do share.
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:20:00 - [44] Originally by: Montaire Thats the point, he can at his leisure decide he doesnt want to fight and you simply cannot stop him. Here's the typical scenario : 1. Intel reports a Nano-Domi (Damn you Harpo) in a system 3 jumps away. 2. Mobilize the forces on hand, get about 8 people and get the gate camp going, including bubble. 3. He jumps in (We're the next station system). We are ready with an ambush. 4. He simply hits his MWD (deactivating his cloak) and hits "approach" on the gate" 5. I lock him in under 1 second and hit him with the 3 best named Webs, reducing his max speed to 4. 6. He gets to the gate before we kill him based on inertia. By the time we jump through, since he's all nano'd up and his align is lightning, he is gone. We seriously do this 4 or 5 times a week easy, so we've had PLENTY of time to test the damned thing. We've also tried chasing him, haveing double camps set, you name it. Have you deployd the bubble on the gate, or off it? You can, by placing your bubble and tacklers right pull him well off the gate and make him either travel to the gate webbed and distrupted, or fly through the whole bubble. Either way, you will have a good while to shoot at him. I've managed to pull ppl 40km off the gate. Some of my corp mates say they have pulled ppl 100km off the gate by placing the bubble right, but I've never managed to do that. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:31:00 - [45] Doesnt work. Because to do that you have to be in the system he is in, at the gate he wants to warp to. He has to : A) Warp straight to the gate without scanning B) Warp from Gate A to Gate B directly without safespotting Both of those are only somthing an idiot is going to do. If we are going to base our defense on our opponents bieng idiots we might as well put up a sign that says "No good stuff past this point" and hope they fall for it. The only way to ambush him is to catch him unawares on the OTHER side of a gate or to get him to take some bait and follow the bait through to the next system. But its a good thought, we tried it though. The 100km thing does work, Sparta does it in F7C all the time. Originally by: Laboratus Have you deployd the bubble on the gate, or off it? You can, by placing your bubble and tacklers right pull him well off the gate and make him either travel to the gate webbed and distrupted, or fly through the whole bubble. Either way, you will have a good while to shoot at him. I've managed to pull ppl 40km off the gate. Some of my corp mates say they have pulled ppl 100km off the gate by placing the bubble right, but I've never managed to do that.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:42:00 - [46] Originally by: Laboratus Please do share your setup. Without a snake set and a full rack of nanos/I-stabs my domi goes a touch over 2km/s. With a snake set and speed hardwiring plus ofcourse a full faction fit it goes about 4. Do share. Bolded it for you this time. "Pre-kali they did. Now they do not thanks to he new instabs and more importantly MWD speed rigs. 3 of those give a 45% speed boost." Also, considering I can get an Armageddon - which is HEAVIER than a domi - to 2.8 km/s with 4 LH nanos, 2 LH instabs and a t2 100MN MWD maybe you should start training nav and acc con past lvl 2 and stop using t1 equipment. With 3 vent rigs this goes up to 4100 m/s.
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:43:00 - [47] Originally by: Montaire Doesnt work. Because to do that you have to be in the system he is in, at the gate he wants to warp to. He has to : A) Warp straight to the gate without scanning B) Warp from Gate A to Gate B directly without safespotting Both of those are only somthing an idiot is going to do. If we are going to base our defense on our opponents bieng idiots we might as well put up a sign that says "No good stuff past this point" and hope they fall for it. The only way to ambush him is to catch him unawares on the OTHER side of a gate or to get him to take some bait and follow the bait through to the next system. But its a good thought, we tried it though. The 100km thing does work, Sparta does it in F7C all the time. [ I've found out it pretty much depens on what the system layout is. (wov, one of the few situations where eve has tactical situations based on "terrain"). In systems where gates are not on planets, but somewhere on their own orbit around the sun, you only have one vector of approach. Also depends on how tightly the planets are grouped together. You can also try putting up 2 or more bubbles for different vectors. Rarely there are more then 4. Ofcourse, if the guy has been around the general area for longer, he will have offgrid bookmarks both above the gate and below, so it will not work in that case. Bubblecamping has become a tad easier, since no new deep space BMs can be made with long range probes, that enable easy alternative vectors. I've found that bubble placement is an art. And it very much depends on where it is done. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:49:00 - [48] Originally by: Aramendel Bolded it for you this time. "Pre-kali they did. Now they do not thanks to he new instabs and more importantly MWD speed rigs. 3 of those give a 45% speed boost." Also, considering I can get an Armageddon - which is HEAVIER than a domi - to 2.8 km/s with 4 LH nanos, 2 LH instabs and a t2 100MN MWD maybe you should start training nav and acc con past lvl 2 and stop using t1 equipment. With 3 vent rigs this goes up to 4100 m/s. Thank you. I'm not much of a fan of rigs at this time, Especially as 3 rigs will cost more then the hull and the rest of the fit combined. And yes, I go for expendable, since It's been months that I've seen a gank squad smaller than 5 members, so the expected life of a lone pvp ship is rather short:) ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 11:56:00 - [49] Edited by: Aramendel on 23/01/2007 11:58:57 It is, exept for a proper setup nanoship, because they are extremly hard to kill, as Montaire explained multiple times. Yes, it onvolves a bit of isk to set it up, but it's far far less than the "OMG 2 BIL!!!111" people tend to shout here. About 200 mil, in fact. And it gives nanosetups a considerably bigger boost than any other ship gets with that amount of isk. Bar frigates, that is, but those tend not to have the dps, nospower and range of nanoBS. Originally by: Laboratus In systems where gates are not on planets, but somewhere on their own orbit around the sun, you only have one vector of approach. When you see 10 people in local and do not find them on scanner anywhere in the system, would you fly to the single other object which is out of scan range?
Victor Ramirez	Posted - 2007.01.23 12:09:00 - [50] Edited by: Victor Ramirez on 23/01/2007 12:06:25 Originally by: Aramendel When you see 10 people in local and do not find them on scanner anywhere in the system, would you fly to the single other object which is out of scan range? If you've already flown 30 jumps and you're way past the point of turning around then the only reasonable thing to do is to put on your viking helmet, buckle up, yell geronimooooo and charge the gate like your ship's insured and you didn't forget to jump to your +3 implant free clone earlier.

Larkonis Trassler Beyond Divinity Inc Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 13:05:00 - [51] Originally by: Montaire I hate when people say that. Its ignorant. I have worked with my Huginn. THREE Domination Webbers, thats as good as they get. And I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run. Like Interceptors can eh? Hell I've seen MWDing throns do it too. Boohoo your gatecamp can't catch everyone. You drove him back, he hasn't penetrated your space, still a win, no? (You could always try engaging nanophoons away from gates you know). ------------ Crow Squad... An Audio and Visual Joygasm by Larkonis Trassler
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 13:20:00 - [52] Inties tend not to have the dps, nospower and range of nanoBS. Blasterthrons tend not to warp so fast that you need a sensorboosted inty to have a chance to catch them.
Larkonis Trassler Beyond Divinity Inc Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 13:33:00 - [53] Originally by: Aramendel Inties tend not to have the dps, nospower and range of nanoBS. Blasterthrons tend not to warp so fast that you need a sensorboosted inty to have a chance to catch them. He's whinging about ships escaping his gatecamps by MWDing back to the gate and jumping back through, not the other supposed imbalences of nanoBS. ------------ Crow Squad... An Audio and Visual Joygasm by Larkonis Trassler
DunNa	Posted - 2007.01.23 13:42:00 - [54] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler He's whinging about ships escaping his gatecamps by MWDing back to the gate and jumping back through, not the other supposed imbalences of nanoBS. Hes complaining about the ship type as a whole. Saying "well and inty can do it" doesn't mean much what exactly is an inty going to do to most things? pew pew it for afew hours and hope it can break its tank before a friend shows up with a web? A nanobs can on the other hand really put out some serious hurt while ALSO being impossible to kill/catch.

Ivan Kirilenkov Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2007.01.23 13:42:00 - [55] Right. I'm cleaning this thread, and I've applied some glue, and this is the thread to use if you want to discuss whether or not this kind of setups/ships should be changed. However, I am going to strongly urge all posters to keep it constructive, and civil. Flames and non-constructive posts will be removed, and appropriate action taken. Other threads on this issue in other forums will be locked and pointed here. I'd also like to point out that stickying this thread is a way of dealing with the large amount of threads on this topic, and not an endorsement from CRC that it is an issue. The Devs makes the call on that, we don't. forum rules \| [email protected] \| Our Website

Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.23 14:07:00 - [56] Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Like Interceptors can eh? Hell I've seen MWDing throns do it too. Boohoo your gatecamp can't catch everyone. You drove him back, he hasn't penetrated your space, still a win, no? (You could always try engaging nanophoons away from gates you know). Agreed. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.23 14:14:00 - [57] People, They will nerf i-stabs and nano's eventually its inevitable. BS should not be as agile as a ceptor simple as that (that does not mean they should not be able to go as fast as one, im talking about agility) which at the moment is way way way over powered.
Troubadour Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.01.23 14:47:00 - [58] Everyone on here that is talking arguing about how the rapier and huggin will stop a nanobs is frankly beating a dead horse. They can't. There is too much inertia. Unless the rapier or huggin can go 5-7km/s and stay locked on the bs out of nos range, it isn't happening. Amarr beamships and damping ships are the ships I fear the most in my nanodom. I went up against 2 harbingers before and about 45 seconds later found myself running away in 50% armor. They always hit because of my ****** sig and they tank pretty well themselves. Zealots, Harbingers, some beam-geddons(with a tracking comp or 2), they all BURN without webbing or any other EW involved, but painting does help.
Valdir Mustafar TEMPTATION INC.	Posted - 2007.01.23 14:57:00 - [59] Since this discussion has become a sticky i believe must give my support for the Nano's and Inertias since my setups are based on being fast. These modules are the building fundamental in all minmatar ships (at least for me) since speed is their biggest advantage (all our other advantages are lame compared to other races). So i just want to make sure the Devs now that if they totally nerf the Nano's and Inertias, the minmatar race will really become useless in many ways... NO NERF PLEASE!!! :) (And i'm of course talking PvP since there is no use for the lame module in PVE) ------------------------------------------------ Arr! I stab at thee
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 15:26:00 - [60] The only issue with nanofiber is that the number of low slots is more relevant to the final speed of ship than its mass or base speed. And that is wrong. An ammar ship with 8 low slots wil be faster than a matarian ship with 6 low slots. And that is wrong. Since some BS have LOTS of low slots, this open up a lot of space to speed inprovment. Changing the SPEED bonus from a fixed value (20ms) (that is for example 10% of a cruiser speed and about 18% of a BS speed) to a fixed percentage value. So if for example a nanofiber gives 10% increase to speed. It would still give same speed bonus to a cruiser, but MUCH lower speed bonus to a Battleship. And that woudl also focus the nanosetups into minmatar ships, and not on the ones that have more low slots. Its so simple and so effective that I really can't understand if CCp do anything different than that. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!

Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.23 15:27:00 - [61] Originally by: Troubadour Everyone on here that is talking arguing about how the rapier and huggin will stop a nanobs is frankly beating a dead horse. They can't. There is too much inertia. Unless the rapier or huggin can go 5-7km/s and stay locked on the bs out of nos range, it isn't happening. Amarr beamships and damping ships are the ships I fear the most in my nanodom. I went up against 2 harbingers before and about 45 seconds later found myself running away in 50% armor. They always hit because of my ****** sig and they tank pretty well themselves. Zealots, Harbingers, some beam-geddons(with a tracking comp or 2), they all BURN without webbing or any other EW involved, but painting does help. It was probably a tech 2 fitted pulse geddon. That being said, "being able to drive you off" should not be the best option a group or person has. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Pinky Denmark	Posted - 2007.01.23 15:36:00 - [62] Those fast ships are all fun to fly and they should still be - but game balance isn't setup to deal with 2-3k m/s Battleships (and up to 4-7k m/s with naughty stuff). Battleships is not supposed to be faster than smaller ships based alone on number of lowslots. 1-1,5k m/s for a fast Battleship should be a maximum and handle no better than a battlecruiser. Pinky
Evengard Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 15:42:00 - [63] Nanos / i-stabs are just counter version of tanking and not best one... I tested nano-phoon against tank-o-phoon and nano had no chances against me. With cruise / AC's / drons raping his shilds, he had no other options then warp away. And he barely got thorough 15% of my armor. And also pulse lasers can hit orbiting nano-BS quite well. So they can be used effective only vs smaller ships, snipers, or outnumbering. (and so any other BS can do great 2 vs 1) ___________________ Recon and Intercept
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.01.23 15:44:00 - [64] Top speed nano-Battleship I've seen was a 10km/sec Typhoon albeit on Sisi, but is that really healthy for the game? especially considering large weapon systems/drones are really balanced for sub km/sec speeds... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.01.23 15:44:00 - [65] I have found the answer to nano ships: Medium guns. That's right. I was startled when I was orbitting my CEO at a scant 3000m/s (my top speed in an orbit, better when going straight) at about 22km away. He was using a brutix with rails. He hit me reliably time and again with the things and eventually wore down my shields. It took a while, but he did it, reportedly with lead charges. So I thought: Medium rails can hit at a higher orbit. Heavy missiles still kinda hurt (more than torps do, at any rate). Noone's tried assault launchers (not HAMs). Medium T2 autocannons hurt like a ***. Blasters... are still screwed. Medium drones can catch up. Might need T2 minmatar ones, though. Noone uses lasers, so I haven't tested them ;) So there you have it. When fighting a ship with no tank, medium guns work fine. ---------------------------- Originally by:** Splagada SEED ME DADDY WTB: Friggin' portrait
Manishkaa	Posted - 2007.01.23 16:18:00 - [66] anyone remembers the guy asking for more speed at the fanfest and more importantly the devs expression in the face; they were just looking caught sorry for the bad english
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 16:22:00 - [67] Originally by: Nicocat He was using a brutix with rails. He hit me reliably time and again with the things and eventually wore down my shields. Read "eventually". Was he doing this while getting nossed/heavy droned/torped (if phoon) by you or while you were just orbiting him doing nothing?
Popsikle Caffeine Commodities Company	Posted - 2007.01.23 16:48:00 - [68] Edited by: Popsikle on 23/01/2007 16:49:16 Originally by: Montaire Webbing doesnt work against nano ships. Read my previous posts. No amount of drones is goign to be better than 3x Domination Webs on a Huginn Repeat after me : Webbing is not the answer. No matter what, they can get enough inertia to get to the gate. You will NEVER catch a nanodomi that doesnt want to fight. And dont even get me started on how horribly ineffective fighters were. Its pretty simple really... Use a rapier, wait for them to start to move away from the gate, decloak, lock triple web and get an inty to put a scram on it. Your not going to catch a nano ship heading to the gate, but you can catch it heading away from the gate, pretty simple I might add. If you want to not adapt, and suck at PvP thats fine, but pvp is about evolving and learning to counter setups. Besides, Its more of a "I dont want to fight" fit, and it does not hold its own if it does want to fight against anything BC/HAC and bigger... so Its kinda a trade off. In a nano setup you can dodge gate camps, but once your thru the camp you cant kill naything bigger then a ruppie....
OldPueblo Gallente The Fantastically Pantless Sporkmen	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:03:00 - [69] Just run away? As someone said before, you can't catch a sniper either without the proper setup, and they can hit you without you being able to hit them. Isn't the concept the same? If you want to kill a nano-bs, attack it with another nano-bs, just like sniping a sniper. Is everyone just mad because they can't kill them? You can't touch an interceptor either if he just keeps evading you. There are plenty of setups that can't be locked down and killed, and in return they aren't very effective at fighting either. Think outside the box like they are.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:07:00 - [70] Because nanoBS operate within warp disrupting distance? If they couldn't keep a target from warping away I personally wouldn't have much of a problem with them.

MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:14:00 - [71] Of course the nanno ships need to be nerfed. Anyone who says different is A) A pilot of these ships and likes risk-free pvp or B) has never had to fight them on a regular basis and is ignorant about their lack of counters. I agree that a very expensive and very specialized ship with a highly skilled pilot should be very hard to kill. However, there should be some way to kill it. As it stands the best you can do against them is survive and pop a few of their drones before they warp off. I can't think of any other setup that has such a lack of a counter tactic. Some have been proposed here, but, as stated, they do not work in practice. Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:15:00 - [72] Uhm. Your average 2500m/s nanodomi/phoon can be stopped by webbers. What can not be stopped that easily, is a faction pimped domi/phoon with mwd/ab speed rigs. To clarify something, MWD/AB speed rigs don't neccessarily give you a 45% speed boost. It's a bit more complex than that. To calculate the max speed of your ship, you need to use this formula: (max normal speed) * (1 + (mwd maxboost * (thrust / mass))) Now, the exact amount an mwd/ab speed rig would boost your speed by really depends on the mass of the ship. 3 mwd/ab speed rigs would multiply your max mwd speed by 1.52 (1.15^3). So it's not quite as simple as you describe. Mind you, mwd/ab speed rigs are a bit overpowered due to the way speed has no stacking penalties. My Core X-Type MWD gives me 1250% max speed boost. Even without my snake set, i already tend to break 5km/s. So i'd say a non-faction / faction implant pimped phoon will start to break 4-4.5km/s by only using said rigs. (Mine goes 8km/s). Domis are slightly slower. You also must remember, 3x mwd/ab speed rigs cost 150m atm on the market and are non-insurable. My nanophoon currently costs about 600m and implants are around 1b. I could deasily invest this much isk in a pimped out faction machariel, and no nanophoon could even touch me (25% tracking bonus + autocannons + officer gear...). So my point being right now, is that a lot of nanophoons that go 5km/s+ have faction gear and a lot of other expensive stuff. Now... for issues with the current nanobs . I am sure everyone remembers WCS, and the problems with them, and the way they got nerfed. The main problem was, that while they were used for travel setups, one could fit a bunch of them and still kill things in pvp very effectively. We have the same thing with nanobs. I remember using nanos on all my BS a very long time ago, just for travelling purposes. So, the issue at hand is, that we have ships, which in a theoretically travel-only setup are able to kill a lot of things. On the other hand, "the gatecamp" shouldn't be able to stop everything. There should be pvp capable ships able to escape it. The best way to get a nanoship right now is by making a trap for it with a cloaked nanorapier and a slightly untraditional ratting setup on a raven for example (got damps?). The second problem with nanoships, is that they are hurting role ships very bad. There is a reason CCP made interceptors and the vagabond class HAC. These ships should be doing exactly what the nanoships are doing right now, but in squads. As it currently stands, one nanophoon is more effective than 4-5 inties or 2 vagabonds at taking stuff down. That, while not even being a T2 ship or a ship that is meant for that role. So, I guess we can all agree that nanobs, the way they currently are break certain things: 1) They allow travelsetups to kill large amounts. 2) They make role ships (interceptors, vagabonds) useless. Now let's see, what makes nanobs work. 1) NOS 2) Trackingless weapons (missiles/drones) 3) No stacking penalties on agility. NOS deffo needs a nerf, and it would kill all nanoBS setups instantly. Drones and Missiles have been around since ages, and are fine as it is. A Stacking penalty on agility would make nanoships a lot more vulnerable. And now the question... Why does everyone fly nanoships? The reason is, that game mechanics in eve are currently very broken. "The gatecamp" which i call BvP (Blob vs Player), is an easy and skillless way to kill stuff. Most stuff that jumps into a decently set up gatecamp always dies. Smarter people use scouts, dumber people don't. The entire problem is, that since population in eve is increasing, so are concentrations of players on certain spots. It's nearly impossible to do small scale pvp in 0.0 anymore without getting chased by "the blob". All in all, I'd say that nanoships are a combination of broken game mechanics in a broken environment. Jamming & Logoffski
OldPueblo Gallente The Fantastically Pantless Sporkmen	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:23:00 - [73] Edited by: OldPueblo on 23/01/2007 17:21:02 So seriously, why not fight a nano-bs with another nano-bs? Even if you can't catch him, that means he can't catch you right? So you've foiled his evil plot and made it less fun for him. Nothing stops anyone from doing the same thing except maybe pride. I mean what if I thought using NOS was only for pansies and real men fight with guns only? Guess what, it's my choice to not adapt to that fighting style and to get raped by a NOS boat. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I just haven't seen anyone explain why they don't just fight fire with fire. If anything you at least cancel them out and then nobody has the upper hand. Also mentioned earlier was hitting them with sensor dampeners, an excellent idea I think. They can't fly all over the place because they'd never lock you. If they put drones on you, then you just kill their drones while they're flying around watching. "But I don't want to fit damps!" Well that's your choice isn't it?
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:35:00 - [74] The "risk free" assertion and current counters to nanoBS. If you want to catch a nanoBS at a gatecamp, you must be a bit smarter. Don't let everyone just aggro the thing, have your interdictor and one EW ship not aggress (besides dropping bubble) and jump on other side of gate if said nanoship mwd's back to gate. Once on other side, and nanoship tries to get away from gate, let interdictor chase him and web him and EW ship disable the nos ability of the nanoship. Then rest comes in for the gank... I am not saying you should have 5+ ships to stop one ship, I am just saying that a nanoship is based on breaking through gatecamps, and a ship that is specialized to do that, shouldn't be that easy to stop. Then again, here arises the question... should a BS which has an ability to kill things be easily able to break gatecamps? Now about the risk free factor. If you are a good pilot, no matter what ship you fly... if you are using the scanner it's very hard to die. The times you die mostly, is in a bigger gang engagement, where you get called primary and you simply can not do anything to survive. If you go out with a covops/recon/inty alt with a battleship, you won't die any more than you would with a nano bs. You might have to bail a bit earlier sometimes, but that's about it. Also you won't be able to run past gatecamps, but currently nanobs can't do it either, he has to go back to the gate and jump back out. So he can not pass. A normal BS with a scout - the scout would tell the BS that there is a camp. An inty scout will still make it back to the gate (please don't tell me that inty is overpowered because your gatecamp can't kill inty). And the BS would never jump in. It would head the other way. NanoBS are paper thin. If you ever get webbed, you will die... as soon as you start fighting in an environment with more than one target, it's very easy to get killed. It requires a lot of skill to stay alive in those situations with nanobs. And i'd personally take a tanked ship over a nanoship in a bigger scale engagement. Jamming & Logoffski
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:43:00 - [75] Originally by: Ryysa 3 mwd/ab speed rigs would multiply your max mwd speed by 1.52 (1.15^3). Actually, no, they don't. The increase the effeciency of your MWD by 52%. This isn't the same as you MWD speed, however, because on top of this speed boost you get also your normal speed. So the effective speed boost you get is less than this. How much it is depends how large the boost from the MWD gets in percentages (and how low the ships mass gets). On a nanodomi with 2 instabs and a t2 MWD it's about 46%. On a typhoon with a core-x, 3 instabs and the 2 5% MWD speed implants the effective boost will be probably more around 50%. For example: assume for simplicities sake a ship mass of 100k tons (for 100mn MWD = 100% effeciency), t2 MWD, lvl 4 acc con With rigs: 100% + 550% * 1.2 * 1.52 -> 1103% of base speed Without rigs: 100% + 550% * 1.2 -> 760% of base speed 1103/760 -> setup with rigs has 1.45 times the speed of the setup without them. --------- I would agree with your general conclusions, though.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:51:00 - [76] Edited by: Ryysa on 23/01/2007 17:51:17 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Ryysa 3 mwd/ab speed rigs would multiply your max mwd speed by 1.52 (1.15^3). Actually, no, they don't. The increase the effeciency of your MWD by 52%. This isn't the same as you MWD speed, however, because on top of this speed boost you get also your normal speed. So the effective speed boost you get is less than this. How much it is depends how large the boost from the MWD gets in percentages (and how low the ships mass gets). On a nanodomi with 2 instabs and a t2 MWD it's about 46%. On a typhoon with a core-x, 3 instabs and the 2 5% MWD speed implants the effective boost will be probably more around 50%. For example: assume for simplicities sake a ship mass of 100k tons (for 100mn MWD = 100% effeciency), t2 MWD, lvl 4 acc con With rigs: 100% + 550% * 1.2 * 1.52 -> 1103% of base speed Without rigs: 100% + 550% * 1.2 -> 760% of base speed 1103/760 -> setup with rigs has 1.45 times the speed of the setup without them. --------- I would agree with your general conclusions, though. Why do you match mass etc to just support your theory? You wrote previously: Quote: and more importantly MWD speed rigs. 3 of those give a 45% speed boost. They don't. Plain and simple, they don't give 45% SPEED boost. They don't even give 45% to the MWD unless you do some number matching. Your statement was mathematically false. Please accept that you were wrong. I outlined the formula for you, and exactly what the multiplier was. How much the 3 mwd/ab speed rigs affect the speed is heavily dependant on mass and some other factors. My wording was a bit incorrect, what I meant was, that they will mulitply your max mwd speed boost amount by 1.52, I'll edit my previous post to correct it. P.S. Performing addition except of empowering could be considered a fairly grave mathematical mistake :P Jamming & Logoffski
Blind Man Kemono.	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:56:00 - [77] just nerf them, its not worth filling up the forums with pointless whines
Hananakajima	Posted - 2007.01.23 17:57:00 - [78] How fast can a nano setp go without a slave set. Afaik (could be wrong) the nano setup is dangerous till you have a snake set. Then you become too fast for anyone to hold.
Galactic Overlord	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:01:00 - [79] Originally by: Hananakajima How fast can a nano setp go without a slave set. Afaik (could be wrong) the nano setup is dangerous till you have a snake set. Then you become too fast for anyone to hold. Just like a ton of other ships with the same fitting concept.
Anni Bonney	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:07:00 - [80] I agree, small an dfast ships lose they role.

Drasked North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:14:00 - [81] WTS Nano rapier, with faction mwd and a high grade snake implant set. And besides that i can't understand why such a bad post could be made sticky, at least use one of the better written whines.. sheeees.. the person that is responsible for making this a sticky should be slapped (or killed AGAIN with a nanoship).
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:15:00 - [82] Originally by: Hananakajima How fast can a nano setp go without a slave set. Afaik (could be wrong) the nano setup is dangerous till you have a snake set. Then you become too fast for anyone to hold. Slave set gives armour. Snake set gives speed. Typhoon with T2 MWD, 3x MWD/AB speed rigs, 2x Local Hull Istabs, 3x Local Hull Nanos, navigation lvl5 and acceleration control lvl4 would go: (1501.25 + 243) * (1 + (5.5 * 1.25 * 1.15^3 * (150 000 000 / ((50 000 000 + 100 000 000)(1-0.15)(1-(0.15*0.87)))))) = 3930.76m/s Hope this satisfies you :) Jamming & Logoffski
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:16:00 - [83] I've heard the ranting, but not experienced it first hand. Anyone feel like fitting out a 'phoon with 'freely available' stuff, and seeing how it fares? E.g. named stuff + rigs, leaving out the snakes. I did a quick test when I realised I couldn't fly minnie BS, and got a raven clocking 2.3km/sec. Which ain't that great, but it's not that sloppy either. So, let's have some empirical evidence please. How fast can you make your nano/istab phoon go, without snakes or faction gear.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:23:00 - [84] Originally by: James Lyrus I've heard the ranting, but not experienced it first hand. Anyone feel like fitting out a 'phoon with 'freely available' stuff, and seeing how it fares? E.g. named stuff + rigs, leaving out the snakes. I did a quick test when I realised I couldn't fly minnie BS, and got a raven clocking 2.3km/sec. Which ain't that great, but it's not that sloppy either. So, let's have some empirical evidence please. How fast can you make your nano/istab phoon go, without snakes or faction gear. READ THE POST ABOVE YOURS? rofl. Jamming & Logoffski
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:37:00 - [85] Lets nerf the armor repairers ,one time i was almost killing one guy and he managed to repairer it self....
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 18:45:00 - [86] Edited by: Aramendel on 23/01/2007 18:42:31 Originally by: Ryysa Why do you match mass etc to just support your theory? Because it is easier to make an easy-to-understand example this way. And it is not theory, it is plain out fact. I am/was quite aware that the effective speed boost is not exactly 45%, but lies between 45 and 50% depending on what setup you use. I used 45% (the lower number of this range) and not 46.745262% or 50% because I didn't want to overexeggerate things and wanted to keep it simple. But, since you insist, a "real world" example: Typhoon, LH 4 nanos, 2 instabs, t2 MWD, lvl 4 acc con, lvl 5 navigation, 5% speed and 3% MWD effeciency implant Base speed: 322.9 m/s ((150 + 424) 1.25 * 1.05) MWD effeciency: 679.8% (550 * 1.2 * 1.03) Mass: 73.9k t (100kt * 0.85 * (1 - 0.15 * 0.87)) Mass with MWD: 110.9kt ((100kt + 50kt)* 0.85 * (1 - 0.15 * 0.87)) So the "real effeciency" of the MWD is 679.8% * (150/110.9) -> 919.5%. On top comes the base speed (100%) so we get a MWD Speed of 322.9 * 10.195 -> 3292. Which is exactly what happens in practise. With 3 vent rigs MWD speed is 4838, btw, 46.9% more than without them.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:01:00 - [87] Edited by: Ryysa on 23/01/2007 19:03:47 Edited by: Ryysa on 23/01/2007 18:58:38 Nah, actually you wrote 45% at start because you did 3*15%, that's all. You're just too proud to admit it, but it's funny how you nitpick on my numbers :) Cute. I will correct it to make you happy however. Oh and it's not 4045m/s if I make the skill bonus affect the nanofibers as well, it's 4203m/s :D So me > you still :P Jamming & Logoffski
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:02:00 - [88] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Nicocat He was using a brutix with rails. He hit me reliably time and again with the things and eventually wore down my shields. Read "eventually". Was he doing this while getting nossed/heavy droned/torped (if phoon) by you or while you were just orbiting him doing nothing? Well, it was a fire test. I was orbitting him and nossing him, and he was able to fire for a good long while. However, I would certainly hope I could out-DPS a battlecruiser with a set of sentries and torpedoes. Further, he was using lead, not something that actually, you know... hurt. Or his drones. Or a cap booster. Now, as for the Sleipnir I tested this on, that thing ripped me apart. That hurt ;.; My point stands, though. Get some medium guns on whatever you want to put medium guns on, and they can track and damage a nanoship, and will probably outright kill it if you web it. Considering the difference in price of a nanoship versus a couple of cruisers, I think this is a pretty valid exchange. ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY WTB: Friggin' portrait
Jet Collins Dynamic Endeavors	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:09:00 - [89] Edited by: Jet Collins on 23/01/2007 19:10:45 Originally by: Montaire Ahh thank the gods that Mematar FINALLY came to our rescue! These are the things I personally have tried multiple times. Please pick an item NOT on this list and tell us your VAST experience in defeating nano-inertial ships. 1. Webbing 2. Bumping 3. Nos-ing 4. Shooting with Missiles 5. Shooting with Projectile Guns 6. Shooting with Hybrids 7. Shooting with Drones 8. Using fighters 9. Small, Medium and Large warp disruptor bubbles 10. Interdiction spheres I for one am SO GLAD you have come to our rescue. I eagerly await your enlightening response. snip - removed reference to deleted post. -Ivan K Sorry but you sound like are one of the large gate campers. So what your complaining about is that there is finally a ship that can avoid large gate camps? Ohh heaven forbid. You say webbers do not work at a gate. Ok sure. anyone hour there tried going after a I-stab phoon in a cloaked reaper? Get right ontop of him uncloak and web. Just wondering will the phoon people able to get <24 km away from the reaper before the webbers slow it down to speeds that he will eb ripped apart. Also the sensor dampeners seem like a pretty good opption to me as well. I think people just need to think out of the box a little more. Dynamic Endeavors is now Recuiting.!! Contact me in game for deatails about the corp. Mostly a PvE corp, with Jump clones avaiale in Empire and 0.0.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:22:00 - [90] Originally by: Jet Collins Sorry but you sound like are one of the large gate campers. So what your complaining about is that there is finally a ship that can avoid large gate camps? Ohh heaven forbid. You say webbers do not work at a gate. Ok sure. anyone hour there tried going after a I-stab phoon in a cloaked reaper? Get right ontop of him uncloak and web. Just wondering will the phoon people able to get <24 km away from the reaper before the webbers slow it down to speeds that he will eb ripped apart. Also the sensor dampeners seem like a pretty good opption to me as well. I think people just need to think out of the box a little more. First of all, reaper is a noobship, the ship you have in mind is the Rapier. I'd really love to see how you get a rapier on top of a nanoship, nanoships aren't really known for staying in one place very long. What you can do, is make a small bait trap for the nanoship with cloaked mwd nanorapier, that will most likely mean the demise of the nanoship. Jamming & Logoffski

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:28:00 - [91] Edited by: Aramendel on 23/01/2007 19:30:35 Originally by: Ryysa Nah, actually you wrote 45% at start because you did 315%, that's all. You're just too proud to admit it, but it's funny how you nitpick on my numbers :) Cute. Whatever floats your boat. Quote:* Oh and it's not 4045m/s if I make the skill bonus affect the nanofibers as well, it's 4203m/s :D So me > you still :P Then you probably have another error somewhere in that calculation, the one of the sped mods is only the one I saw with a first glance. Because this is the number I got on sisi in active testing with exactly that setup. Ah, wait, let me login there again, just in case I made a dumb error (which I do ocassionally indeed, but not here so far). Jepp, still 4045 m/s. Want a screenshot? Or, lets do the math. Base speed: 277.5 m/s ((150 + 324) 1.25) MWD effeciency: 1003.8% (550 * 1.2 * 1.15^3) Mass: 73.9k t (100kt * 0.85 * (1 - 0.15 * 0.87)) Mass with MWD: 110.9kt ((100kt + 50kt)* 0.85 * (1 - 0.15 * 0.87)) Real MWD effeciency: 1003.8% * (150/110.9) -> 1357.7%. MWD speed: 277.5 * ((1357.7 + 100)/100) -> (still) 4045 Arrogance is a useful little thing, but one should never assume one does not make errors. It could be embarrassing.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:37:00 - [92] You want to know what it's really about? When people find a setup that the pvp'er's can't beat or have a hard time beating because they have to use their heads, the pvp'ers flood the forums with whines that this setup is too powerful. Look what happened with scan probes, it was the other way around, the carebears whined and whined about getting ganked in low sec in deadspace missions while the pvp'ers just said "tough luck" all of the time. The pvp'ers are now whining that they arent killing 50 people a day, but only 25 people a day. What an outrage! Give us a counter to the bubblecamps which do not include: 1. Trial account alt scout, or alt scout at all. 2. Instantly logging. 3. 500 people in gang with you to crash the system. Nanoships are the ONLY counter to bubble camps, I guess it's not fun losing victims huh. In EVE, there is no pvp. It's PVPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:40:00 - [93] Edited by: Ryysa on 23/01/2007 19:38:28 Originally by: Aramendel Arrogance is a useful little thing, but one should never assume one does not make errors. It could be embarrassing. There are no errors in the calculation. There is however an error between the assumed text and the calculation. In the calculation there's acceleration control lvl5 while in the text there is acceleration control lvl4. My mistake. But I suggest you check out formula first before blaming math ;) Also just to annoy you an extra tiny bit. % expr (150 + 243)1.25 * (1+(5.51.21.151.151.15(150000000/((50000000+100000000)(1-0.15)(1-0.150.87))))) 4046.3767209 % So it's 4046m/s :) At least according to the math. Meaning that eve does some rounding at some point within the calculation. You see - arrogance has nothing to do with it, teasing someone who tries to be extremely pedantic, while making a simple mistake, yet having issues admitting it has everything to do with it. I have no problem with saying I made a mistake ;) But anyhow, this thread is here not for personal grudges, but to discuss the issue at hand. And I think we both agree on the majority of the points made. Discussing decimal point precision hardly matters in this issue. Oh and, initial post edited to reflect acceleration control lvl5. Jamming & Logoffski
OldPueblo Gallente The Fantastically Pantless Sporkmen	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:46:00 - [94] Lol at math PVP.
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:54:00 - [95] First thanks for replying. You have some real good points. 1. Im JUST FINE with there bieng ships a well run gate defense cannot stop. Im just not fine with those bieng battleships. Interceptors and ships like the Vaga give up their battleship class weapons, battleship class stats and battleship class fittings for that speed. 2. The very concept of Nanoships makes it near impossible to 'sneak' up on them. They move too fast all the time, they are never just sitting there. 3. Dont look so far down on gate defense. Most combat occurs around strategic points like gates, stations or moons. Let me assure you that you cannot let these things get behind your lines, they will wreak havoc you have got to try and stop them as soon as you see them. The closest I've ever come was with an occator trap. Set it up with a webber and a scrambler, HUUUGE lowslot armor tank (Really, it was a thing of beauty) and a energy nuet in the high slot. Even then, with a 8 man hit fleet one jump away waiting, I couldnt hold him, he moved out of my range too fast once he noticed somthing was odd (Hey, why is the barge locking me... oh crap!) He said in local "You dont see that every day" The take home today : Its okay for ships to be able to run blockades, move ludicrously fast and zip around the battlefield. Its not okay for those ships to be battleships. Originally by: Jet Collins Sorry but you sound like are one of the large gate campers. So what your complaining about is that there is finally a ship that can avoid large gate camps? Ohh heaven forbid. You say webbers do not work at a gate. Ok sure. anyone hour there tried going after a I-stab phoon in a cloaked reaper? Get right ontop of him uncloak and web. Just wondering will the phoon people able to get <24 km away from the reaper before the webbers slow it down to speeds that he will eb ripped apart. Also the sensor dampeners seem like a pretty good opption to me as well. I think people just need to think out of the box a little more.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:55:00 - [96] Originally by: Ryysa So it's 4046m/s :) At least according to the math. Meaning that eve does some rounding at some point within the calculation. Not eve, but you. The additional 0.5 in your calculation come from using the 0.87 mod for diminishing returns in your calculation, which is rounded up from the "real" 0.869119842 mod (which is probably a rounded version itself). Quote: You see - arrogance has nothing to do with it, teasing someone who tries to be extremely pedantic, while making a simple mistake, yet having issues admitting it has everything to do with it. I have no problem with saying I made a mistake ;) Yes, one only needs to prove it twice to you. Quote: And I think we both agree on the majority of the points made. Discussing decimal point precision hardly matters in this issue. Agreed there. However, I wasn't the person who started this bickering. Just because one result looks like a milkmaids calculation at first glance to you does not mean it so so.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 19:58:00 - [97] Edited by: Ryysa on 23/01/2007 19:57:23 Originally by: Aramendel Agreed there. However, I wasn't the person who started this bickering. Just because one result looks like a milkmaids calculation at first glance to you does not mean it so so. The question who started it, is not relevant, the relevant thing is that we both went along with it, and I am sure it looks fairly amusing from a third person perspective. And I could say the same about "proving it to you twice". But I'll just leave it be, there are more important things to discuss in this thread. Originally by: Montaire The take home today : Its okay for ships to be able to run blockades, move ludicrously fast and zip around the battlefield. Its not okay for those ships to be battleships. QFT Jamming & Logoffski
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:12:00 - [98] So, back to normal responses. Originally by: Nicocat My point stands, though. Get some medium guns on whatever you want to put medium guns on, and they can track and damage a nanoship, and will probably outright kill it if you web it. Considering the difference in price of a nanoship versus a couple of cruisers, I think this is a pretty valid exchange. Yes, multiple cruisers will prolly be able to cause it some problems. What will happen in reality, however, is the nanoship killing one cruiser and then flying away was some armor damage at worst. You really need to make a dumb error to get within webbing distance by something less agile and 25% as fast as you. And, again, driving off != killing. The problem is that a nanophoon or dommi has 100% of the firepower of a normally tanked version of it while having the speed and agility of a ceptor. It has no real disadvantage. Originally by: Rachel Vend When people find a setup that the pvp'er's can't beat or have a hard time beating because they have to use their heads, the pvp'ers flood the forums with whines that this setup is too powerful. While I certainly agree that blob camps are rather boring what it is really about is balance. You don't have a ship which does twice as much dps, tanks twice as well and is twice as fast than other ships, right? Because this would wreck the balance and eventually everyone would fly this ship. Let's take a 08/15 BS setup. Good firepower, good tank, lousy speed. A nanoBS has good dps (no, it's no gankgeddon, but it has not less dps than setups without nanos of the same ship), a lousy normal tank and great speed. Which would be fine, exept that it's speed effeciently gives it a great tank too. It would be no problem if nanoBS would be an alternative to "normal" BS. But they aren't because they are way more effecient - they are a replacement.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:13:00 - [99] Originally by: Montaire The take home today : Its okay for ships to be able to run blockades, move ludicrously fast and zip around the battlefield. Its not okay for those ships to be battleships. So then it's okay as long as you can kill them with one shot anyway?
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:21:00 - [100] No, thats not what I said. And if you have a "Kill Vagabond in 1 shot" setup your my new hero. The idea of balance is that you trade advantages and disadvantages. Vagabonds cant use large guns or 5 heavy drones. Interceptors cant use medium or large guns, and can barely field a few light drones, forget about larges. The nanoships are unbalanced because they are BETTER than an interceptor. They are BETTER than a Vagabond (Also I think Eagle and Muninn are in this "Fast Attack HAC" class) They also lack any effective counter. This is the very definition of "unbalanced" and it DOES need fixing. Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Montaire The take home today : Its okay for ships to be able to run blockades, move ludicrously fast and zip around the battlefield. Its not okay for those ships to be battleships. So then it's okay as long as you can kill them with one shot anyway?

Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:24:00 - [101] I think this NanoBS thing is funny. But it should be nerfed, next thing you know...NanoDreads! ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:26:00 - [102] Edited by: Ryysa on 23/01/2007 20:22:51 Originally by: Thor Xian I think this NanoBS thing is funny. But it should be nerfed, next thing you know...NanoDreads! You need 1000mn MWD for nanodread :) The thing is, it would never be viable, because you need cynos to move them around ;) Jamming & Logoffski
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:26:00 - [103] Edited by: Rachel Vend on 23/01/2007 20:23:16 Originally by: Montaire No, thats not what I said. And if you have a "Kill Vagabond in 1 shot" setup your my new hero. The idea of balance is that you trade advantages and disadvantages. Vagabonds cant use large guns or 5 heavy drones. Interceptors cant use medium or large guns, and can barely field a few light drones, forget about larges. The nanoships are unbalanced because they are BETTER than an interceptor. They are BETTER than a Vagabond (Also I think Eagle and Muninn are in this "Fast Attack HAC" class) They also lack any effective counter. This is the very definition of "unbalanced" and it DOES need fixing. Whats the effective counter to bubble camps? Remember kids: 1. No 100 man gangs 2. No alt scuts 2. No logging 4. Your in a BS.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:27:00 - [104] Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Montaire No, thats not what I said. And if you have a "Kill Vagabond in 1 shot" setup your my new hero. The idea of balance is that you trade advantages and disadvantages. Vagabonds cant use large guns or 5 heavy drones. Interceptors cant use medium or large guns, and can barely field a few light drones, forget about larges. The nanoships are unbalanced because they are BETTER than an interceptor. They are BETTER than a Vagabond (Also I think Eagle and Muninn are in this "Fast Attack HAC" class) They also lack any effective counter. This is the very definition of "unbalanced" and it DOES need fixing. Whats the effective counter to bubble camps? BBB(tm) - Bring Bigger Blob or Vagabond+Inty gang. Jamming & Logoffski
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:29:00 - [105] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Montaire No, thats not what I said. And if you have a "Kill Vagabond in 1 shot" setup your my new hero. The idea of balance is that you trade advantages and disadvantages. Vagabonds cant use large guns or 5 heavy drones. Interceptors cant use medium or large guns, and can barely field a few light drones, forget about larges. The nanoships are unbalanced because they are BETTER than an interceptor. They are BETTER than a Vagabond (Also I think Eagle and Muninn are in this "Fast Attack HAC" class) They also lack any effective counter. This is the very definition of "unbalanced" and it DOES need fixing. Whats the effective counter to bubble camps? BBB(tm) - Bring Bigger Blob or Vagabond+Inty gang. So then if your SOLO, you should die 100% of the time when you jump into a bubble camp. That's nice.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:34:00 - [106] Originally by: Rachel Vend Edited by: Rachel Vend on 23/01/2007 20:26:29 Originally by: Montaire No, thats not what I said. And if you have a "Kill Vagabond in 1 shot" setup your my new hero. The idea of balance is that you trade advantages and disadvantages. Vagabonds cant use large guns or 5 heavy drones. Interceptors cant use medium or large guns, and can barely field a few light drones, forget about larges. The nanoships are unbalanced because they are BETTER than an interceptor. They are BETTER than a Vagabond (Also I think Eagle and Muninn are in this "Fast Attack HAC" class) They also lack any effective counter. This is the very definition of "unbalanced" and it DOES need fixing. Whats the effective counter to bubble camps? Remember kids: 1. No 100 man gangs 2. No alt scouts 2. No logging 4. Your in a BS. 1) Kill them all 2) Go around 3) What? You cant go around? You dont have friends? What the hell are you doing in soverign 0.0 space? You have chat channels for a reason... Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Montaire The take home today : Its okay for ships to be able to run blockades, move ludicrously fast and zip around the battlefield. Its not okay for those ships to be battleships. So then it's okay as long as you can kill them with one shot anyway? If the single attack isnt blatant strawman, then sure, why not. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:37:00 - [107] Originally by: Rachel Vend Whats the effective counter to bubble camps? Remember kids: 1. No 100 man gangs 2. No alt scouts 2. No logging 4. Your in a BS. Blobs suck, but you do not make a right with 2 wrongs. One might as well ask: Whats the effective counter to nanoships? Remember kids: 1. No gangs 2. No med guns 2. Not more nosses 4. You are in a BS
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:39:00 - [108] Edited by: Goumindong on 23/01/2007 20:36:25 Originally by: Rachel Vend So then if your SOLO, you should die 100% of the time when you jump into a bubble camp. That's nice. Lets rewrite this: "So then, if you're solo, you should die 100% of the time when you jump into a larger group of ships with a tactical advantage and a system setup to catch people like you doing exactly what you are doing?" Yes, you pretty much should, unless you are in a ship that is either A "designed to get out of situations like that" or B "small and fast" For a BS this means that a full travel setup, incacable of doing much else, is nessesary to really be balanced against a larger group of people intent on stopping you from doing explicitly what you are attempting to do, and for smaller ships it means less effort to do so, but still effort. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:42:00 - [109] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Rachel Vend Whats the effective counter to bubble camps? Remember kids: 1. No 100 man gangs 2. No alt scouts 2. No logging 4. Your in a BS. Blobs suck, but you do not make a right with 2 wrongs. One might as well ask: Whats the effective counter to nanoships? Remember kids: 1. No gangs 2. No med guns 2. Not more nosses 4. You are in a BS A nanoship which is faster than his nanoship, and bring some webs.
Kristie INTAKI UNION	Posted - 2007.01.23 20:48:00 - [110] It only takes 1 Huginn to ruin a nano BS's day...nope they are not that powerful. The only ships I ever see nanoBS kill are ships with a **** poor tank or ships who are not intending to pvp. I'll keep my double large armor reps thank you ^_^

Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:04:00 - [111] Originally by: Kristie It only takes 1 Huginn to ruin a nano BS's day...nope they are not that powerful. The only ships I ever see nanoBS kill are ships with a **** poor tank or ships who are not intending to pvp. I'll keep my double large armor reps thank you ^_^ Wrong 1 huginn will NOT, I repeat NOT stop a nanoBS from escaping. This tactic DOES NOT WORK (most of the time)the inersia the BS gets from the MWD means it will get away.
Kolwrath	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:08:00 - [112] Edited by: Kolwrath on 23/01/2007 21:06:42 Well Well I believe I have read all of the posts so far ... and yeah I agree with others that the nano thingy is a bit unfair. If you need four guys, all in special and specific roles, just to kill one battleship well that dosen't seem right. On the other hand its nice to see a ship that can defeat a blob bubble camp. Just my 2 cents, wouldn't a much over due NOS nerf be the simplest solution? make it so NOS effectiveness is proportional to signature radius? (like missiles i.e. bigger sig vs small sig = not really effective) This has been suggested a billion times in a billion NOS=overpowered threads, and a few times in this thread. If NOS suffered signature radius penalties then an interceptor, with its tiny signature radius, would be unaffected by a battleship class nos and thus would be able to catch and slow down a nano-whatever. Sounds like a simple solution to me. Thoughts? [edited for grammar]
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:09:00 - [113] Originally by: Wizzkidy Originally by: Kristie It only takes 1 Huginn to ruin a nano BS's day...nope they are not that powerful. The only ships I ever see nanoBS kill are ships with a **** poor tank or ships who are not intending to pvp. I'll keep my double large armor reps thank you ^_^ Wrong 1 huginn will NOT, I repeat NOT stop a nanoBS from escaping. This tactic DOES NOT WORK (most of the time)the inersia the BS gets from the MWD means it will get away. That was not what i tested out with some of my friends.But hey if you say it cant be done maybe we are all magicians :)
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:10:00 - [114] Originally by: Wizzkidy Originally by: Kristie It only takes 1 Huginn to ruin a nano BS's day...nope they are not that powerful. The only ships I ever see nanoBS kill are ships with a **** poor tank or ships who are not intending to pvp. I'll keep my double large armor reps thank you ^_^ Wrong 1 huginn will NOT, I repeat NOT stop a nanoBS from escaping. This tactic DOES NOT WORK (most of the time)the inersia the BS gets from the MWD means it will get away. OH NO IT WILL GET AWAY AND CAUSE YOU ABSOLUTELY NO LOSSES OMG OMG HOW HORRIBLE!!!!
Andreya	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:12:00 - [115] Ok, i have read enough of these posts. maybe these istabs are makin gyour battleships and battlecruisers fun to fly, myself being a inty/dictor pilot, has definately not made the game more fun to me.. dealing with heavy nos is one thing, but when the damn ships are going just as fast or FASTER than and everyday inty, it makes it pretty lame for us poeple who specc'd in small ships
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:13:00 - [116] Originally by: Andreya Ok, i have read enough of these posts. maybe these istabs are makin gyour battleships and battlecruisers fun to fly, myself being a inty/dictor pilot, has definately not made the game more fun to me.. dealing with heavy nos is one thing, but when the damn ships are going just as fast or FASTER than and everyday inty, it makes it pretty lame for us poeple who specc'd in small ships Make the inties faster then.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:13:00 - [117] The people saying 'Adapt or Die' are criminally out of touch with reality and apparently do not have enough sense to logically look at the issue here. The person who actually suggested that there is no problem with nano-setups because anyone can use the same setup against them is sadly lacking the ability to see the laughable reasoning (or lack thereof) with that argument. A very simple indicator for when something is out of balance in a game is when you find a ship/setup/module/etc becoming such an incredibly popular choice that it becomes a trend at the exclusion of other alternatives. This particular issue crossed that line a while back. Inertial Stabs exacerbated the problem. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:16:00 - [118] Originally by: Tovarishch The people saying 'Adapt or Die' are criminally out of touch with reality and apparently do not have enough sense to logically look at the issue here. The person who actually suggested that there is no problem with nano-setups because anyone can use the same setup against them is sadly lacking the ability to see the laughable reasoning (or lack thereof) with that argument. A very simple indicator for when something is out of balance in a game is when you find a ship/setup/module/etc becoming such an incredibly popular choice that it becomes a trend at the exclusion of other alternatives. This particular issue crossed that line a while back. Inertial Stabs exacerbated the problem. Hmm... That's funny, coming from a Caldari player. Considering all NPC runners use RAVENS, how come your not trying to get RAVENS nerfed? EVERYBODY uses Ravens to NPC and do missions in. So that must mean RAVENS are overpowered!
Gort Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:17:00 - [119] People, you really need to forget the "Huginn/Rapier is the answer" line of argument. I have boatloads of kills in both those ships and use one or the other almost every day -- with exceptionally good gear and good results, too. Except they won't stop a nanobs worth a hoot. Forget it. Nada. Living in a dream world, etc. etc. Based on my experience, the Op's point of view takes the blue ribbon. He's right. Forget all the whining about whining. His point is not a whine. Those ships are just broken in the game. And yes, I'm exclusively Matari spec'ed and I like speed. But not in unbalancingly insane amounts in a BS class ship. My 0.02, Gorty Low-tech sig: "When in doubt, empty the magazine."
Domalais Equilibrium LLC United Confederation of Corporations	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:18:00 - [120] Originally by: Popsikle Its pretty simple really... Use a rapier, wait for them to start to move away from the gate, decloak, lock triple web and get an inty to put a scram on it. 6 second timer after uncloak before you can lock. In that time the nanoship will be either A) in warp or B) 100km away from you.

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:19:00 - [121] Originally by: Rachel Vend A nanoship which is faster than his nanoship, and bring some webs. So in order to counter a blob you need a bigger blob. Basically, nanoships have exactly the same problem which you describe with blobs. You need to bring the same thing & "more" of it to counter it. Quote: Before anyone else asks, yes, I fly a nanoship. It does crap damage (it took me over 10 minutes to take out a mission running raven that had no tank), and it's a VERY expensive setup, I'm talking about over 4 billion ISK has been spent on it. I don't think it should be easy peasy weasy to kill something that has so much ISK invested into it, it should require some... OH MY GOD... EFFORT. Exept you can make a 5 km/s setup for 300 mil without any problem. And you can counter a 4 bil setup with a normal tank quite easily - just bring more nos than it has with you. Which works against a nanoBS, too, with the little difference that it will force it to disengage. The normal tank 4 bil setup will just die. Quote: some long range webs will solve their speed real fast. Which do not exist exept some 2 bil officer ones or a huginn. and, no the price does not justify it, because, as said: - you can setup a nonoBS for a LOT less isk. - you can invest the isk in any other faction setup and do not get a similar effeciency out of it If it would be similar for an officer tank there would be no regular heavy nos - the only one would be officer dropped - and of med nos only the one of the curse would effect it because it has an immunity vs everything else.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:23:00 - [122] Edited by: Tovarishch on 23/01/2007 21:19:41 Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Tovarishch The people saying 'Adapt or Die' are criminally out of touch with reality and apparently do not have enough sense to logically look at the issue here. The person who actually suggested that there is no problem with nano-setups because anyone can use the same setup against them is sadly lacking the ability to see the laughable reasoning (or lack thereof) with that argument. A very simple indicator for when something is out of balance in a game is when you find a ship/setup/module/etc becoming such an incredibly popular choice that it becomes a trend at the exclusion of other alternatives. This particular issue crossed that line a while back. Inertial Stabs exacerbated the problem. Hmm... That's funny, coming from a Caldari player. Considering all NPC runners use RAVENS, how come your not trying to get RAVENS nerfed? EVERYBODY uses Ravens to NPC and do missions in. So that must mean RAVENS are overpowered! Firstly, since you are either new here and jump to conclusions, or are uninformed - a pilot of any race can fly ships of any other race. My being Caldari is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Secondly, your point regarding Ravens could easily be argued... and you might even have a good point if you could brush up on your logic. However, once again... you are completely off topic. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:29:00 - [123] Edited by: Rachel Vend on 23/01/2007 21:32:05 One point I am trying to make is the fact that if the nanoship wants to fight, it's not that hard to kill them when you get some webs on him. If a nanoship pilot is fitting NOS (which he will have to in order to maintain the MWD), he will need to be within 25k of his victim. If he's within 25k, several inties can get on him and web him, or a hugin or however you spell it could just web him to death. The problem isnt that though. The problem is them getting away from a fight, and the empty feeling you have inside knowing you just missed out on a flashing mail icon and a kill mail to post on your fancy killboard, I mean, after all everything that goes into a bubble camp should just automatically explode before they even see the solarsystem name. You know what, I have an idea that will make you guys happy. Change the bubbles so that when there is a bubble on the other side of the gate, the stargate shows "Stargate (Clone Vat Bay)", and if someone jumps thru, the campers just see a wreck and a corpse. The victim wakes up in a new clone.
F Apparition Minmatar MAFIA Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:35:00 - [124] This is the ideal place to show off my s****y signature!
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:36:00 - [125] Originally by: F Apparition This is the ideal place to show off my s****y signature!
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:41:00 - [126] Edited by: Tovarishch on 23/01/2007 21:40:06 Originally by: Rachel Vend One point I am trying to make is the fact that if the nanoship wants to fight, it's not that hard to kill them when you get some webs on him. If a nanoship pilot is fitting NOS (which he will have to in order to maintain the MWD), he will need to be within 25k of his victim. If he's within 25k, several inties can get on him and web him, or a hugin or however you spell it could just web him to death. The problem isnt that though. The problem is them getting away from a fight... In one statement (bolded for clarity) you completely contradicted your entire post. Any ship with loads of nanos and inertial stabs in it's low slots is very, very difficult to catch. Catching them at a gate is essentially impossible because they can make it to the gate while webbed... and do the same thing on the other side, ad nauseam, until the tacklers give up and decide to leave. The problem indeed is the fact that it is hard to kill them. It's absolutely no coincidence to me that this nano phenomenon took place as a result of the WCS nerf... because it is the next most efficient way to make a ship incredibly difficult to kill. Explain to us why you are flying around a 4 bill isk ship that is EASY to kill, please. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:41:00 - [127] Originally by: Rachel Vend One point I am trying to make is the fact that if the nanoship wants to fight, it's not that hard to kill them when you get some webs on him. If a nanoship pilot is fitting NOS (which he will have to in order to maintain the MWD), he will need to be within 25k of his victim. If he's within 25k, several inties can get on him and web him, or a hugin or however you spell it could just web him to death. The problem isnt that though. The problem is them getting away from a fight, and the empty feeling you have inside knowing you just missed out on a flashing mail icon and a kill mail to post on your fancy killboard, I mean, after all everything that goes into a bubble camp should just automatically explode before they even see the solarsystem name. You know what, I have an idea that will make you guys happy. Change the bubbles so that when there is a bubble on the other side of the gate, the stargate shows "Stargate (Clone Vat Bay)", and if someone jumps thru, the campers just see a wreck and a corpse. 1) Yes, if you have several interceptors that are not NOS'd dry by the nano ship[Keep in mind, most interceptors dont web, because webbing means you can be webed, and if you are webed, then its game over for the most part], and the nano ship wants to fit. And the nanoship doesnt change his mind mid battle and leave, then you can kill a nanoship. 2) Please strawman the issue more with regards to bubble camps. They can be run by small ships, they ought to be able to be run by dedicated bubble running ships, they should not be able to be run by combat fitted battleships capable of taking on multipule ships at the same time and able to leave the battlefield near whenever they please. Heck, i have seen em go down a few times, the issue is the difficulty nessesary for a single ship that engages multipule other ships of the same size. There is a problem with that. When we mobilize against a typical battleship or command ship or hac pilot[except a vagabond] the trick is catching them and engaging. With a nano-bs the trick is catching them and then trying to kill them once engaged. With interceptors we can field specialized setups to take them down with near certianty. This is not possible with nano-bs's. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:48:00 - [128] Originally by: Tovarishch The problem very much is the fact that it is hard to kill them. Explain to us why you are flying around a 4 bill isk ship that is EASY to kill, please. I would love too, first I'll say that I have been using this setup for a very long time now, back when WCS were king and everyone and their dog had instas. I never used instas. I never used WCS. I don't log off in a fight. Instead, I thought of another way, that was more "honorable" than using WCS, or using instas, or logging off in a fight. So, I spent a considerable amount of income on a very different setup. It worked, and it has it's downside. It takes 5 minutes to kill a rookie ship. It's purely travel. I still don't log off, I still dont use instas (dont have to now haha), and I still don't use WCS. I use this setup because quite frankly, I don't want to die to a 50 vs 1 fight. I don't want to be lame and log off in a fight, I'm trying to counter things using REAL game mechanics, not metagame 'exploits' like logging off to save your ship. You on the other hand, just want everything you see to die instantly without any chance whatsoever.
Evengard Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:53:00 - [129] Originally by: Aramendel nanophoon or dommi has 100% of the firepower of a normally tanked version of it while having the speed and agility of a ceptor. It has no real disadvantage. Let's take a 08/15 BS setup. Good firepower, good tank, lousy speed. A nanoBS has good dps (no, it's no gankgeddon, but it has not less dps than setups without nanos of the same ship), a lousy normal tank and great speed. Which would be fine, exept that it's speed effeciently gives it a great tank too. None of nano ships have 100% firepower over average BS... Nano-Typhoon: 4 torp / Cruise, 3-4 nos, No damage modes, 5k of armor 8k shields with normal resistances. Price 500-600 million isks with rigs, and High End stuff. Battlephoon: 4 torp / Cruise, 4 AC, 2 damage mods (gyro+ballistic), 22k Armor with 60-70% resistances, 8k shield. Price 110-120 millions, No rigs. Wanna test who wins ?? Originally by: Aramendel It would be no problem if nanoBS would be an alternative to "normal" BS. But they aren't because they are way more effecient - they are a replacement. They are not replacement, they are just expencive "solo NPCer gankmobile". They are useless in normal fleet ops. HAC can kill BS - NERF HACS! Command can kill BS - NERF COMMANDS. Nerf ALL and leave 1 ship with 1 turret. There allways be use of modules in a way they are not ment for... This is why i love EVE, you can make somethiung noone expects from you... Like fit XLarge AC on Abaddon :) ___________________ Recon and Intercept
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.23 21:53:00 - [130] Originally by: Rachel Vend It takes 5 minutes to kill a rookie ship. It's purely travel. Your penchant for wild exaggeration is making your posts look more ridiculous... and you're losing the little credibility you have left saying such things. Quote: I don't want to die to a 50 vs 1 fight. Any ship should die in a 50 v 1 fight. You making this statement actually proves my point. Nano setups are VERY difficult to kill... and you are flying an expensive setup around because you understand that fact. Thanks. Quote: You on the other hand, just want everything you see to die instantly without any chance whatsoever. Yes, our corp is famous for just wanting things to blow up instead of putting ourselves at risk and having fun... even if outnumbered. Flawless logic once again. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.

Lord Violent Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.23 22:36:00 - [131] BS with frig agility and ceptor speed is pap for gameplay anyway you put it. Solution?: remove cap capacity penalty on 100mn MWD's, Increase MWD cap usage. Allows BT's et al to still travel 20km and arrive with the same amount of cap, ends silly BS fad by killing MWD sustainability.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 22:38:00 - [132] Originally by: Tovarishch Originally by: Rachel Vend It takes 5 minutes to kill a rookie ship. It's purely travel. Your penchant for wild exaggeration is making your posts look more ridiculous... and you're losing the little credibility you have left by saying such things. Wow, yes itÆs an exaggeration. But the fact remains, if you die to a nanoship, you have bigger problems. Their damage potential isnÆt that great and can be tanked. Originally by: Tovarishch Quote: Instead, I thought of another way, that was more "honorable" than using WCS, or using instas, or logging off in a fight. This statement provides solid proof of the idea that people are using these setups as a replacement for WCS... which were nerfed for a reason. Nano setups provide similar escape advantages as WCS... without the penalties. They were nerfed because of whiners were not getting as many targets as they wanted. Now the targets found a new way, and the whiners are back whining. What a glorious cycle! Originally by: Tovarishch Quote: I don't want to die to a 50 vs 1 fight. Any ship should die in a 50 v 1 fight. You making this statement again proves my point. Nano setups are VERY difficult to kill... and you are flying an expensive setup around because you understand that fact. Thanks. Maybe you should be on the receiving end of a 50 vs 1 fight a few times, oh right, youÆre the one of the 50 in the blob and you want a kill mail!
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.23 22:39:00 - [133] Originally by: Evengard None of nano ships have 100% firepower over average BS... Nano-Typhoon: 4 torp / Cruise, 3-4 nos, No damage modes, 5k of armor 8k shields with normal resistances. Price 500-600 million isks with rigs, and High End stuff. Battlephoon: 4 torp / Cruise, 4 AC, 2 damage mods (gyro+ballistic), 22k Armor with 60-70% resistances, 8k shield. Price 110-120 millions, No rigs. Wanna test who wins ?? The 4 heavy nos of a nanophoon does more damage vs an targets tank than 4 ACs can ever do. And what makes you think it cannot have damagemods? A nanophhon does not need to fill ALL of it's slots with speed mods. You can use 3 LH nanos and 2 LH instabs and still get 4.5km/s with rigs and cheap (~30 mil total) implants while having 2 lows free. And testing who wins...it can prolly drive the nanoBS off, no doubt. However, it will be totally useless for guarding a mining op vs nanoBS or preventing the nanoBS from attacking when it just has 2 NPC BS on it. Because it can try again, and again, and again. A normal BS (or hac or bc) screws up, it dies. Quote: They are not replacement, they are just expencive "solo NPCer gankmobile". They are useless in normal fleet ops. HAC can kill BS - NERF HACS! Command can kill BS - NERF COMMANDS. HACs are not so effective that one would be stupid flying anything else. Commands are not so effective that one would be stupid flying anything else. Normal Battleships are not so effective that one would be stupid flying anything else. NanoBSs, on the other hand, are.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.23 22:39:00 - [134] Edited by: Tovarishch on 23/01/2007 22:36:23 I want to make one quick addition to this thread... just to state my opinion. I do not think nanos are wildly unbalanced or game-breaking... the same goes for intertial stabs. However, I do think they need a small tweak. They augment some ships very well, particularly Minmatar ships... and allow for some really interesting setups. But... the issue comes into play when people start saying that anyone should be able to escape any fight anytime they please... and that bubble camps and interdictor spheres should essentially only kill people that apparently want to be killed. The world of EVE is a dangerous place... and the heavy sense of loss is what makes this game so amazing. If you want to be safe and partake only in consentual PVP... then stay in 0.5 and up. Dictor spheres and bubbles aren't even an issue until you hit 0.0... and by then you better be damn willing to put some money on the line. Any setup or ship that offers a 'Get out of jail free' card for bubble camps of any sort needs to be nerfed... period. Even blockade running Transport Ships are not invulnerable to such camps... and they have no combat ability. If you want invulnerability... bring friends. Do not rely on modules or setups. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.23 22:47:00 - [135] Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Tovarishch This statement provides solid proof of the idea that people are using these setups as a replacement for WCS... which were nerfed for a reason. Nano setups provide similar escape advantages as WCS... without the penalties. They were nerfed because of whiners were not getting as many targets as they wanted. Now the targets found a new way, and the whiners are back whining. What a glorious cycle! So, what you are saying is that the devs at CCP have no ability to balance the game on their own and simply bend to the whims of whiners? Riiiiiiiiiight. WCS were nerfed because they long needed a nerf... long before you began playing this game. Your agenda is to continue to keep your favored setup powerful... an interest that obviously has nothing to do with game balance. Not one person in this thread has provided a solid argument or counter for the issue here. Some of us truly enjoy seeing the game balanced... see my above post. Also... I'm not sure why you continue to resort to childish comments regarding wanting killmails. Stick to the topic and present some arguments please. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Marikhal	Posted - 2007.01.23 23:48:00 - [136] These ships make Interceptors useless. Might as well get rid of interceptors and name the nano-battleships interceptor battleships.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.23 23:59:00 - [137] Originally by: Tovarishch WCS were nerfed because they long needed a nerf... long before you began playing this game. Your agenda is to continue to keep your favored setup powerful... an interest that obviously has nothing to do with game balance. You have stated in this thread that any single player should be able to escape any single gang or camp at any given time... which leads to the concept of 'You cannot kill me unless I want to be killed'. What you want is hand-held safety all the time. Please read my above post. OT: In case you havent noticed yet, this is an alt. You have been playing EVE for a less than a day longer than me. You CAN kill nanoships, you just have to THINK of a way to do it. Since your having a bit of difficulty, you assume it's overpowered. I had great difficulty thinking of a way to get out of bubble camps without using WCS or instas, or logging. So, obviously, you might have a bit of difficulty thinking of a counter to my setup. But once you do, if you can think of a counter, everyone and their dog will do it. Personally, rather than nerfing the nanos, I'd rather see them just come up with a slightly better counter, maybe a task for Tech 2 webs.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:09:00 - [138] Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Tovarishch WCS were nerfed because they long needed a nerf... long before you began playing this game. Your agenda is to continue to keep your favored setup powerful... an interest that obviously has nothing to do with game balance. You have stated in this thread that any single player should be able to escape any single gang or camp at any given time... which leads to the concept of 'You cannot kill me unless I want to be killed'. What you want is hand-held safety all the time. Please read my above post. OT: In case you havent noticed yet, this is an alt. You have been playing EVE for a less than a day longer than me. You CAN kill nanoships, you just have to THINK of a way to do it. Since your having a bit of difficulty, you assume it's overpowered. I had great difficulty thinking of a way to get out of bubble camps without using WCS or instas, or logging. So, obviously, you might have a bit of difficulty thinking of a counter to my setup. But once you do, if you can think of a counter, everyone and their dog will do it. Personally, rather than nerfing the nanos, I'd rather see them just come up with a slightly better counter, maybe a task for Tech 2 webs. A. You can say you are posting with an alt... but until you post with your main it's talk. B. As an MC pilot I'm a full-time PVPer. I'm very aware of counters to nano setups. Once again, that isn't point. WCS advocates said the exact same thing, 'Adapt or Die' or 'Just use your brain and counter it'. It's not a matter of counters... it's a matter what sort of setups have been created using a nano/inertial stab combos... and the fact that battleships are now breaking interceptor speeds. It's safe to assume that this was never the intention when battleships were created. Regardless, as you mentioned, you don't want to lose a battleship to a 50 man gang. Any single ship/setup in this game that allows the ability to do that is unbalanced. Period. This isn't a matter of counters... this is a matter of module and ship balancing. Having a couple counters to a module and ship/seup does NOT equate to balance. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:09:00 - [139] Originally by: Rachel Vend Originally by: Tovarishch WCS were nerfed because they long needed a nerf... long before you began playing this game. Your agenda is to continue to keep your favored setup powerful... an interest that obviously has nothing to do with game balance. You have stated in this thread that any single player should be able to escape any single gang or camp at any given time... which leads to the concept of 'You cannot kill me unless I want to be killed'. What you want is hand-held safety all the time. Please read my above post. OT: In case you havent noticed yet, this is an alt. You have been playing EVE for a less than a day longer than me. You CAN kill nanoships, you just have to THINK of a way to do it. Since your having a bit of difficulty, you assume it's overpowered. I had great difficulty thinking of a way to get out of bubble camps without using WCS or instas, or logging. So, obviously, you might have a bit of difficulty thinking of a counter to my setup. But once you do, if you can think of a counter, everyone and their dog will do it. Personally, rather than nerfing the nanos, I'd rather see them just come up with a slightly better counter, maybe a task for Tech 2 webs. See, the problem is we thought up a counter, and it was a nano-bs. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:14:00 - [140] Originally by: Rachel Vend You CAN kill nanoships, you just have to THINK of a way to do it. The only reliable way to kill a nano is to either be in a nano or blob. Thats it. 1 v 1 - Nano wins or runs. 2 v 2 - Same 5 v 5 - 2 nano domi's, 1 nano phoon, 1 nanocurse and 1 nanovaga. What 5 ships are going to be able to match those 5? I have recently seen gangs of 10+ nanos out hunting. Unless you outnumber them 2 to 1 you won't reliably kill anything. And even then you need to surround them or they will simply run off at 4000km+ speeds. Dual mwd was nerfed for a reason. This is just another iteration of same thing. I have no problem seeing ceptors go fast. Even Vagas really. But when domi's and phoons are going faster and are more agil than ceptors it's a gamebreaking issue. Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships. - Golan Trevize

Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:18:00 - [141] Not directly related to NanoBS, but check out this topic. ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
Berrik Radhok GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:19:00 - [142] Nano battleships are annoying, but not really all that dangerous. Originally by: Khavi Vetali Oh don't worry, the goons are just as suicidal with their battleships as they are with their frigates.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:25:00 - [143] Originally by: Berrik Radhok Nano battleships are annoying, but not really all that dangerous. An industrial that went 5k/sec, had 10k armor and shields, drone space, and +4 to warp strength wouldn't be dangerous either. It also wouldn't be balanced. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:31:00 - [144] Originally by: Tovarishch Regardless, as you mentioned, you don't want to lose a battleship to a 50 man gang. Any single ship/setup in this game that allows the ability to do that is unbalanced. Period. This isn't a matter of counters... this is a matter of module and ship balancing. To play devils advocate - inties can do that. Cov ops and to a lesser extend force recons, too. Of cource, they cannot engage the gang without getting blown to really small bits. Although a nanoBS cannot really either, at least vs a 50 man gang. Vs a 5-10 man thats another thing, though. And of cource inties do not have the firepower, range (well, sans missilecrow) or nospower of a nanoBS. And pop a "little" bit faster. Cov ops cannot kill anything on their own. Force recons..are actually not that different to nanoBS from the principle, but again much more vulnerable once they engage (or get decloaked by a good ceptor).
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:34:00 - [145] Edited by: Tovarishch on 24/01/2007 00:30:37 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Tovarishch Regardless, as you mentioned, you don't want to lose a battleship to a 50 man gang. Any single ship/setup in this game that allows the ability to do that is unbalanced. Period. This isn't a matter of counters... this is a matter of module and ship balancing. To play devils advocate - inties can do that. Cov ops and to a lesser extend force recons, too. Of cource, they cannot engage the gang without getting blown to really small bits. Although a nanoBS cannot really either, at least vs a 50 man gang. Vs a 5-10 man thats another thing, though. And of cource inties do not have the firepower, range (well, sans missilecrow) or nospower of a nanoBS. And pop a "little" bit faster. Cov ops cannot kill anything on their own. Force recons..are actually not that different to nanoBS from the principle, but again much more vulnerable once they engage (or get decloaked by a good ceptor). You went on in your post to make my point for me. Intys do not pose the same threat as nano battleships. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:39:00 - [146] Originally by: Tovarishch You went on in your post to make my point for me. Intys do not pose the same threat as nano battleships. A nano BS that runs away is a threat?
Strong Badd	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:42:00 - [147] The solution shouldnt be to nerf nanobs, but should just boost webs so that inertia won't carry the bs out of range/to the gate. Just make webs reduce to the lowered speed immediately instead of the current effect.
Warrio	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:52:00 - [148] Countering Nano BS's: You will need; 1 high slot and 3 mid slots. You will also need; 1 Large Smart Bomb and 3 Sensor Damps Smartbomb makes the drones say goodnight. Damps deal with missiles and nos's. The rest shouldn't be too hard to figure out. It's not the size of the dog in the fight that matters, it's the number of dogs you warp in with.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.24 00:54:00 - [149] Originally by: Warrio Countering Nano BS's: You will need; 1 high slot and 3 mid slots. You will also need; 1 Large Smart Bomb and 3 Sensor Damps You will also need IQ over 5. Smartbomb makes the drones say goodnight. Damps deal with missiles and nos's. The rest shouldn't be too hard to figure out. Fixed.
Marikhal	Posted - 2007.01.24 01:07:00 - [150] You are all incredibly unintelligent if you think CCP's aim was to make a battleship go faster than an interceptor. Just make it so battleships can't fit more than one nano and inertial stabilizer, and cap their speed. That is all.

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.24 01:12:00 - [151] Edited by: Aramendel on 24/01/2007 01:11:08 Originally by: Rachel Vend A nano BS that runs away is a threat? Yes, it is. Not to a 50 man blob, of cource. However, to a smaller gang or single player most definately. It can attack your gang, kill one of your support, retreat with some armor damage. Come back 5 mins later, kill another one. And repeat. Or a single BS - if it has the right fitting - can drive a nanoBS away, yes. However, it can do absolutely nothing to prevent the nanoBS coming back when it has 2 big rats on it or is supposed to guard a few barges. In short, when a "normal" bs has bitten moren than it can chew it's future career is usually a wreck. A nanoBS can try again, and again, and again. It can soak enough damage and has enough dps to kill a target or two and retreat, even against considerably superior forces. In this aspect it is unique in the game. Sniping BSs could be compared to it, but those need cov ops support to make sniping spots, cannot prevent targets from warping away and do less dps. And neither are as mobile as nanoBS and die horribly if they jump into a gatecamp.
korrey Taurus Inc	Posted - 2007.01.24 01:17:00 - [152] Originally by: Ashiana Originally by: Sh'irna Originally by: Azerrad InExile Was yet another new thread on this subject really necessary? Given it hasnt been hotfixed .. yes ... flame elsewhere pls. 24.01.06 Small patch that addresses some minor balancing issues 1) All minmatar pilots have been deleted this something like what you're after? Can I steal that as a sig?
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.24 01:24:00 - [153] Edited by: j0sephine on 24/01/2007 01:20:46 Just a small point re: "fit the stacked dampeners" advice. Give it a serious thought and answer thruthfully -- will the game be fun for you when people do exactly that? And when you will have no viable targets whatsoever, because anything you try to attack will just dampen you to heck, turns your lock time into triple digits and either kills you or warps off? Because we've already been there, more or less. The nerf to ECM that happened not too long ago is the direct effect of that -- people discovered the obvious, that being unable to attack anything because it just ends in stalemate of EW war and broken locks with no kills whatsoever... simply isn't fun. There isn't at the moment any real incentive to run with abundance of dampeners (although it's probably a matter of time but that's another story) ... but if you keep screaming for people to equip them and keep pushing them to do that, you might just get your wish. Is this really what you want the game to be like? o.(
voogru Gallente Massive Damage	Posted - 2007.01.24 01:31:00 - [154] Edited by: voogru on 24/01/2007 01:50:22 It seems like a lot of the people against nanoships, part of their argument is they are effective at killing solo pilots. If nanoships are overpowered I have one of the most overpowered nanoship in the game, with a top speed of 13,800 meters per second, and yes it's a BS. I went on SISI and started to engage people in the "FREE FOR ALL" area, I have a very typical high slot layout for a nanoship which is 4 nos and 4 torps. I found a victim and I warp scrambled him. The victim was a shield tanking raven. Heres what happened: 1. He couldnt do anything to me, his javelin torps hit me doing 0.0 damage. 2. I could damage him with my 4 torpedo launchers, but he easily tanked them. I sat there for over 20 minutes orbiting him, and he just kept tanking the damage, even with 4 nos on. He acknowledged to me that it would take me a significant amount of time to kill him. Now, in a real scenario, if this was at a 50 man gate camp, and I engaged ANYONE, I would have to maintain a range of 25km from the target, this would put me in range of all of his buddies which would totally r@pe me. If he was solo, he would just slowboat to the gate laughing at me, or call his friends for help cause he would have plenty of time. FYI, the speed when I orbitted him was 7km/s. So, the argument where the nanoships are still effective fighters is pretty much a moot point. The real argument is the fact that they are just good at escaping gatecamps, which a previous poster noted that cloaks, recon ships, etc are also very effective at. If nanoships get nerfed, people will fit cloaks instead. And then people will be whining about cloaks being too powerful and theres no counter for them, and when cloaks get nerfed people will find another way to escape from a gatecamp, and the whiners will be back here again. FYI, I use nanoships to put farmers out of comission for hours at a time, it's an essential tool I use to prevent farmers from... farming, and I'd rather not lose it. Update: Heres some logs, this was from another engagement I did on the test server, the target already had his shields down: First event: [ 2007.01.24 01:36:51 ] (notify) You have started trying to warp scramble ElweSingollo [STLNC]. Last event: [ 2007.01.24 01:43:30 ] (combat) <color=0xffbbbb00>Your Bane Torpedo hits ElweSingollo [STLNC], doing 504.9 damage. Total time: 6 minutes and 39 seconds, and remember, he didn't have any shields when I started. If this was at a gate camp with 50 people, and I tried to shoot someone, it would take me at least 7 minutes to take out another BS. I don't think I would last that long.
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.24 01:57:00 - [155] Edited by: j0sephine on 24/01/2007 01:54:44 "For all those out there who compare nanos to WCS, you are idiots. If you fit nanofibers in your lowslots, guess what? YOU DON'T HAVE ANY TANK OTHER THAN YOUR SPEED!" When you fit WCS in your lowslots, guess what? You don't even have speed to protect you from damage. People still fit them anyway, because the tank just wasn't deemed important enough to outweight the alternative use of these low slots (increased escape ability)
ElweSingollo The Vanyar	Posted - 2007.01.24 01:57:00 - [156] Reserved to post setup and logs.
Arele Minmatar Teeth Of The Hydra	Posted - 2007.01.24 02:03:00 - [157] Originally by: Evengard None of nano ships have 100% firepower over average BS... Nano-Typhoon: 4 torp / Cruise, 3-4 nos, No damage modes, 5k of armor 8k shields with normal resistances. Price 500-600 million isks with rigs, and High End stuff. Battlephoon: 4 torp / Cruise, 4 AC, 2 damage mods (gyro+ballistic), 22k Armor with 60-70% resistances, 8k shield. Price 110-120 millions, No rigs. Wanna test who wins ?? So you're trying to compare a combatphoon setup that relies on it's target to stay till death, orbit at slow speeds and stay within range with a nanophoon that relies on high transversal speeds, cap destruction and dumbfire weapons, with the ability to turn and bail if things even look slightly bad while your slow beast takes 5x longer to align and warp after him? This isn't SISI where people stand 10 paces off and F1-F8 untill someone dies.
HankMurphy Pelennor Swarm Eternal Rangers of Terror	Posted - 2007.01.24 03:14:00 - [158] Edited by: HankMurphy on 24/01/2007 03:12:18 heh, it got a sticky. so you KNOW its gonna get nerfed right? well, i have voiced my opinion in other threads on this topic. imo what it boils down to is if they gonna nerf it, i hope they do so carefully. Do i think its overpowered? Not really (thats not a 'NO' its a 'not really'). I say this because there is a direct correlation to be made between the ability of a nano ship, and the isk that a pilot put into the ship setup and his clone. Is there a gray area between the extreme speeds and the slower nano ships? Sure. Are Istabs not exactly what they should be? I'll believe that. and CCP will address it, but hopefully they will not go overboard w/ the bat (they seem to have trouble swinging that puppy sometimes) That aside, the best argument for a nerf would be the relationship being made between wcs and nano setups. Fact is, one does not equal the other. What p/o's ppl is watching someone pick their battles. They fly a ship that can only really gank and cannot hold up a sustained fight, but these ppl feel that if ever outnumbered, their prey should just die, and not have an option of getting away. It burns them up they didn't get a kill (whether they actually suffered any loss at all) and dont want to have to address a strategy that goes beyond the bubble + ceptor gate camp. Now, lets be rational, put aside the hundreds of millions/ billions of isk setups. Put away the snake implants. What are you left w/ ? A fast, agile ship that CAN BE CAUGHT! Yes! It can! I will repeat: there is a direct correlation to be made between the ability of a nano ship, and the isk that a pilot put into the ship setup and his clone. Wait! dont hit reply yet! dont flame! It can be done. NOTHING in eve is impossible, though sometimes you might have to put as much effort and isk into the counter as your target put into his strategy. If someone puts billions of isk into his implants and his ship setup, i dont wanna hear how you cant counter it w/ a 30million isk ceptor and a hundred million isk recon. Go invest what he invested, pwn his arse, and know you won a fair fight. All that being said, i imagine the agility of the battleships will be slightly nerfed. Fine w/ me. But if the community see's an overkill nerf to speed ships... there will be ppl that will just give you their stuff and go home. Ppl cried about the vagabond, the nanophoon has been around FOR AGES. Those cries were the same ones we are hearing here, just now from istabs its across the board w/ any ship you wanna nano up. Just as long as they dont overkill w/ the nerf and make speed an inconsequential factor in pvp, it will only have bad results. It is the essence of the Matar fighting style, excellent strategy for small gangs that are frequently outnumbered and for gods sakes, if ya wanna start a witch hunt, why not start by looking into drone ships fitting full racks of nos and spewing t2 drones, a marrage of offensive and defensive capabilities no other race can achieve (not to mention i think half the issue of countering nanosetups is more NOS capabilities than it is speed, but thats an argument for another thread ) Just my opinion. Flame on!
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.24 03:24:00 - [159] Originally by: HankMurphy If someone puts billions of isk into his implants and his ship setup, i dont wanna hear how you cant counter it w/ a 30million isk ceptor and a hundred million isk recon. Go invest what he invested, pwn his arse, and know you won a fair fight. NOOOO!! We can't do that! Then we are putting ISK at risk, we want to kill the guys with multi-billion ISK ships with ships worth 30 million ISK, because theres more profit in that and we don't want to risk our precious ISK on setups to counter their expensive setups!
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.24 03:41:00 - [160] Look, the problem is the following. If you want to get away from camps and do what nanobs do right now, train vagabond or interceptor. Yes you can't solo pwn almost anything, you need to bring some buddies, but 2 vaga + 2 inty or so can be lethal roaming squad. The thing is, those ships are role specialized, and they have disadvantages. Vagabond doesn't have a too great tank for a hac and has tracking issues at too high speeds + can be owned by nos. Inties are very nos vulnerable and are paperthin. NanoBS: 1) Doesn't require specialization training. Nav skills are not specialization, every ship needs them 2) Has more nos than average ship => immune to nos because of injector. 3) Has BS size weapons that have no problem doing full damage to target. There's nothing wrong with specialized role ships being hard to catch. - Expensive, skill intensive, with flaws. But there's everything wrong with your average joe having 200m isk and half a brain getting invincimode. Nanoships are a combination of: 1) Trackingless weapons 2) Nos 3) nanos/istabs 4) rigs Nos and nanos/istabs/rigs need some kind of heavier stacking penalty. = Adieu nanoships. Do I fly nanoships? Yes, nanophoon is my most used solo hunting platform atm. Do I acknowledge that they are overpowered? Yes. Do I use them? yes, because solo there is no other ship I can possibly get more ganks on carebears with. For any "real" fight situation, I prefer some other ships. Basically nanoships are an issue because they can infiltrate alliance territory and gank their carebears who are too dumb to warp to safe when they see them in local. They can then choose to run away with the loot without fear of dying. Again, the above paragraph is fine in context of inty ganksquads or specialized ships, because they were made for it, it's not fine when a battleship can win eve solo. Jamming & Logoffski

Zaethiel Murder-Death-Kill X-PACT	Posted - 2007.01.24 05:45:00 - [161] I hope everyone realizes that nano setups arent limited to phoons hurricanes and domis. I've killed and fought vs nano geddons, megas, myrmidons, hurricanes, curses, pilgrims, phoons, domis, Hyperions, abaddons, rohks, scorpions, ravens, tempests, cyclones, slepnirs, and astartes. Its hard to think of what else i've seen nanoed but theres some of them. Followed with all frigates of course. Im waiting to se nano vexors and ishtars but have yet to see any personally. Nanos need a nerfing definitely. Inertia is a problem. you can web a phoon doing 6km/s but its not going to hit 1m/s until its 300km away. You will never stop a nano ship thats heavy from running back to a gate and jumping through. By the time they decloak they hit 1km/s webs are useless, you have to bump them and of course the best ship to do it with is another nano ship. All in all since everyone in eve seems to be using nano ships they should be nerfed. _________________________________________
Father Weebles Repo Industries	Posted - 2007.01.24 05:55:00 - [162] A question to my fellow eve'rs, what's worse, a Nos-Domi or Nano-Domi "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."
ScreamingLord Sutch Hand in Mouth	Posted - 2007.01.24 07:06:00 - [163] Originally by: Thaneal Swiftbird No one forbids you to counter a nano-bs with its own poison. Should be far easier then keeping someone out of the docking range of a station... And nanoships have a serious backdraw. They got no or near no tanking ability. Lots of money floating around and easy to kill if you get them right. When the only counter to something is "more of the same" then you know it's unbalanced.
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.24 07:44:00 - [164] Nerf Blobs!
kessah Caldari Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.01.24 07:48:00 - [165] Stacking penalty will solve the problem i believe. -------------------------------------------------------- Forever Pirate 2
Evengard Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 08:30:00 - [166] Originally by: Zaethiel Nanos need a nerfing definitely. Inertia is a problem. you can web a phoon doing 6km/s but its not going to hit 1m/s until its 300km away. Man, nano inertia work both ways ... If ship goes fast and have low mass, it is easyer to stop him with webs. He gaining spped fast, and looses it fast also ... Just you cannot keep with him. Much harded stop dual / triple plated BS that MWDing. Originally by: Zaethiel You will never stop a nano ship thats heavy from running back to a gate and jumping through. By the time they decloak they hit 1km/s webs are useless, you have to bump them and of course the best ship to do it with is another nano ship. And what the problem?? chase him to other side. Be smarter, not just lock F1-F8 Originally by: Zaethiel All in all since everyone in eve seems to be using nano ships they should be nerfed. All useing Battleships - nerf them. Cruiser can't kill dreadnought - neft dread... Why you should able to kill all with 1 gun ?? Especially then the thing you counter is worth 3 times more ?? ___________________ Recon and Intercept
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.01.24 08:32:00 - [167] Either a stacking penalty, or tweak it so you need to use overdrives to get such extreme speeds, with the corresponding drop in agility, you'd be limited more to 'high speed passes' at a target. Lets face it, it does look pretty stupid seeing a Battleship orbiting at multi-km/sec... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'

Ivan Kirilenkov Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2007.01.24 08:36:00 - [168] Thread cleaned - stay on topic, and keep it constructive. And no, just because this got a sticky it doesn't mean that it will be nerfed or changed in any way; that is for the Devs to decide. The sticky was simply a way of dealing with a high number of threads about one issue. forum rules \| [email protected] \| Our Website

Sadist Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.01.24 09:41:00 - [169] Originally by: Tomb A battleship is NOT and SHOULD NOT BE a SOLO-pwnmobile. (with the exception of Instab whoring on the typhoon or dominix) òòòòòòòòòòòò VIP member of the [23] Quote: - Numbers alone do not win a battle - No, but I bet they help.
voogru Gallente Massive Damage	Posted - 2007.01.24 09:54:00 - [170] Originally by: Sadist Originally by: Tomb A battleship is NOT and SHOULD NOT BE a SOLO-pwnmobile. (with the exception of Instab whoring on the typhoon or dominix) Originally by: voogru Using combat logger, I did 16,646 points of damage, over 6 minutes 39 seconds, that comes out to a WHOOPING 41.71 DPS! 41.71 DPS != SOLO-pwnmobile

Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.24 10:08:00 - [171] Edited by: Wizzkidy on 24/01/2007 10:04:21 I'll say it again, A BS going FAST is NOT a problem A BS going FAST and having the agility to out do a interceptor in turning is plain WRONG Having a battleship doing high speed is not the problem!!!!!
Khes	Posted - 2007.01.24 10:12:00 - [172] Edited by: Khes on 24/01/2007 10:08:49 Originally by: Wizzkidy Edited by: Wizzkidy on 24/01/2007 10:04:21 I'll say it again, A BS going FAST is NOT a problem A BS going FAST and having the agility to out do a interceptor in turning is plain WRONG Having a battleship doing high speed is not the problem!!!!! QFT!
Logan Roi	Posted - 2007.01.24 10:13:00 - [173] If you can get one why not use an officer webber, yes they use lots of grid, yes there expensive, yes there harder to find than a nano domi/phoon. But once he starts orbitting and is away from the gate you can use the officer webber to slow him down and rip him a new one. Obviously using officer modules as a solution to a problem shouldn't have to be the case, nanoinertia bs's are imbalanced and they should be fixed. The gain on the nano's/inerta's should be related to the mass of the ship there on so a BS would benefit less from having a nano fitted in comparison to a frigate.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 10:31:00 - [174] My god people stop an pay attention. Try to really realise on what is the real problem. Think (and think is not answering the first thing that comes to your head.. try to find all the causes).. why do we have nano typhoons complaints and no Nanomaelstrom complaints? Why we have Nano GHurricanes and not nano Cyclones. Answer that.. you shall have the exact problem. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Sadist Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.01.24 11:08:00 - [175] Edited by: Sadist on 24/01/2007 11:04:56 Originally by: voogru Originally by: Sadist Originally by: Tomb A battleship is NOT and SHOULD NOT BE a SOLO-pwnmobile. (with the exception of Instab whoring on the typhoon or dominix) Originally by: voogru Using combat logger, I did 16,646 points of damage, over 6 minutes 39 seconds, that comes out to a WHOOPING 41.71 DPS! 41.71 DPS != SOLO-pwnmobile Aside from you being a clueless moron and stating dps after resists and without drones (you know they dont show drone damage in the log, right?), you also forget the 4 heavy nos that the battleship has on your opponent, eradicating any possibility of a tank, even with injector. If you have to use 3rd party programs to calculate your DPS, then, well, you're obviously incompetent to make any judgements about balance. How about you give us the real dps? Or ask for help in calculating it. òòòòòòòòòòòò VIP member of the [23] Quote: - Numbers alone do not win a battle - No, but I bet they help.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.24 11:08:00 - [176] Edited by: Aramendel on 24/01/2007 11:05:24 Originally by: HankMurphy I say this because there is a direct correlation to be made between the ability of a nano ship, and the isk that a pilot put into the ship setup and his clone. For the x-th time: - you can make a very viable nanoship for 300 mil, you most definately do not need billions for it - isk invested does not make an imblance ok, because, guess what, it is still there. Compare a 300mil setup vs a t2 fitted cerberus, which costs about the same. Or an t2 fitted sniper rokh. Or take an pimped 3 bil setup and try to make something equally effecient for the same money. The effect for money invested for nanoships is too strong, it does not matter at all if you spent 300 mil or 3 bil there, it is imbalanced vs other setups worth as much. "It costs much, so it is balanced" is worth nothing as argument because of this.
fire 59 Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.24 11:26:00 - [177] It seems imo that nano steups are the new stabs for people who want to gank with minimal risk to themselve's. I had only seen a few on my travel's personally and i don't even bother engaging becasue there's absolutely nothing i could do against one solo. Came across a gang in empire though which was all nano bs, domi's i think it was and it was retarded.Bs going 8kms is just ridiculous. I think there should be a max ceiling for the speed of bs or something so this insanity stops. We had a pimped out vagabond tackling a nanophoon doing almost 9kms and he still managed to get away, nothing can get near if the ship chooses not to fight which is what he did. I was going 5.5kms and the bs just hammered past me like i was sitting still. This reminds me of the invincible dual mwd raven scenario of yonder. People say that no ship should be i-win etc, well currently if you pad up with nano's and stuff, you win, simple as that. If they don'twant to fight, they can leave at any time. It's definately an imbalance and hopefully in all ccp's wisdom, they will adress it to how it should be
Thud Caldari Mad-Warping-Maniacs	Posted - 2007.01.24 12:21:00 - [178] The problem are nos,nothing else,fix nos and dozends off imbalanced i-win fittings will disapear. All those nanophoon,nanodomi,nanocurse with damps, nanoeverything fittings,they all need nos to work. Only ships that are build to be fast,like the vaga,dont need em. Fix nos like this and there will be no more problems with nano setups. In my opinion,the main problem with nos is that they drain cap AND give it to you. Thats like 2 weapons in one,and since cap is mutch more important now than it was like a year ago,thats just overpowerd,taking cap from your enemy and give it to yourself,thats like a module that steals shield/armor from your enemy and gives it to you. Nos should drain cap,put not give it to you. I dont like "you can only fit one nos per ship" ideas,such solutions just limit the possible fittings. (one reason i never liked the EW changes,cos it limits ships like the scorp or the BB to pure ECM ships) ____ ____ My english is bad.
Melicien Tetro Gallente FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 12:24:00 - [179] I think nanos and inerts are fine how they are. I'm glad speed tanking is finally becoming a viable option, and I know alot of matar are happy about it. Nano ships are usually pretty lacking in tank, so if they actually take fire, they're dead. I say, QQ more. Whenever something beats zomg gunnery skillz and huge tanks, everyone cries nerf. Nanos and inerts will be FOTM, people will get sick of losing expensive ships over accidentally getting within web range, or something. And I'm going to say that I pioneered the nano myrmidon on the test servers. ;p I tried to fight a shark with a pistol underwater once, and I'll be damned if he didn't laugh at me and eat me. Sharks need a ******* nerf. True story.
flyerken Gallente Darklite inc	Posted - 2007.01.24 13:10:00 - [180] The problem with nanoships can be solved very easy in one of several ways: 1: Make webbers so that they reduce speed instantly (no more inertia). This will be effective and will not break any other setup. 2: Put a stacking penalty on NOS. This should have been done a long time ago. This will not break the nano setups but will reduce its effectiveness. 3: make inertia stacking. This will end the nanosetups but will also kill a lot of other setups ingame. 4: Give ships a maximum speed they can never break. something like basespeed x 10. 5: remove the mass factor of inertia stabilisers and increase the inertia bonus. This will be the likely solution the dev's will chose.

sb404 Caldari Tarnak inc.	Posted - 2007.01.24 14:02:00 - [181] I'm going to try my hand at thinking outside the box here. It might sound rediculous at first, but anyone that cares to try it and let me know just how dumb it was is more than welcome. So here it comes... Anyone thought about popping drones infront of the nanobs as it is webbed and running off inertia to the gate? Wouldn't it hit the wreck and be thrown out of allignment? What about dropping cans infront of it? Wouldn't it have a similar "concord billboard effect"? There you have it, now back to the same old boring thread, once you've wipped the tears from your eyes and cleaned up the coffee from your screen. ------------------------------------------------- I never wrote this -Eris
Spaced Skunk Buffed Rumpuss Zit Dids	Posted - 2007.01.24 14:02:00 - [182] The dominix and typhoon setup for speed are very much cap dependant, and I say balance nosferatu before you nerf nano/inertia modules. Why should CCP nerf 'a setup'? If maybe CCP thought about the fittings on the Dominix (hard to fit blaster setup) and the fittings on the Typhoon (damned rediculous, too hard to fit, needs more powergrid and CPU), there would be more setups flying about yes?
Axia Firehead Amarr Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.01.24 14:58:00 - [183] then, all nanoBS user, as they keep telling us that web is the solution will be agree that web need to be instant ? then, once we could web one, the inertia wont allow him to go the gate or out of range without problem little grunt
Zanarkand Gallente Enterprise Estonia Cult of War	Posted - 2007.01.24 15:03:00 - [184] Typhoon DPS is NOT irrelevant. 5 Heavies + 4 siege + 3 Heavy nosf(or possibly 4) is NOT easy to tank. I hope they don't nerf Nanophoons before I can fly one >_>
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 15:32:00 - [185] Originally by: Zanarkand Edited by: Zanarkand on 24/01/2007 15:05:17 Typhoon DPS is NOT irrelevant. 5 Heavies + 4 siege + 3 Heavy nosf(or possibly 4) is NOT easy to tank. Missiles do (nearly) 0 dmg, guns don't track, heavy/medium t2 drones are outrunned by nanophoons. Weee... warrior IIs might actually do some awesome dmg vs a nanoBS. Speed is it's tank, don't bother saying thing like "it will die when it gets fired at.." That means you most likely killed a 1.5km/s nanoBS and won EVE at that day... I hope they don't nerf Nanophoons before I can fly one >_> from where people created that myth that turrets can't track a nanoBS? Their signature is the size of a moon!!! Turrets can track them almost as well as if they were moving with MWD off!! Put a nanophoon to fight an AC tempest and dare to TRY and you will see who pwons the other! If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.01.24 15:45:00 - [186] Originally by: Rachel Vend ...it's not that hard to kill them when you get some webs on him. That is like saying it is not that hard to date a Playmate when you are Hugh Hefner. Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 15:56:00 - [187] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Zanarkand Edited by: Zanarkand on 24/01/2007 15:05:17 Typhoon DPS is NOT irrelevant. 5 Heavies + 4 siege + 3 Heavy nosf(or possibly 4) is NOT easy to tank. Missiles do (nearly) 0 dmg, guns don't track, heavy/medium t2 drones are outrunned by nanophoons. Weee... warrior IIs might actually do some awesome dmg vs a nanoBS. Speed is it's tank, don't bother saying thing like "it will die when it gets fired at.." That means you most likely killed a 1.5km/s nanoBS and won EVE at that day... I hope they don't nerf Nanophoons before I can fly one >_> from where people created that myth that turrets can't track a nanoBS? Their signature is the size of a moon!!! Turrets can track them almost as well as if they were moving with MWD off!! Put a nanophoon to fight an AC tempest and dare to TRY and you will see who pwons the other! The Nanophoon does... And it it doesnt, it turns tail and leaves. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 16:39:00 - [188] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Zanarkand Edited by: Zanarkand on 24/01/2007 15:05:17 Typhoon DPS is NOT irrelevant. 5 Heavies + 4 siege + 3 Heavy nosf(or possibly 4) is NOT easy to tank. Missiles do (nearly) 0 dmg, guns don't track, heavy/medium t2 drones are outrunned by nanophoons. Weee... warrior IIs might actually do some awesome dmg vs a nanoBS. Speed is it's tank, don't bother saying thing like "it will die when it gets fired at.." That means you most likely killed a 1.5km/s nanoBS and won EVE at that day... I hope they don't nerf Nanophoons before I can fly one >_> from where people created that myth that turrets can't track a nanoBS? Their signature is the size of a moon!!! Turrets can track them almost as well as if they were moving with MWD off!! Put a nanophoon to fight an AC tempest and dare to TRY and you will see who pwons the other! The Nanophoon does... And it it doesnt, it turns tail and leaves. so you didnt even tried right? Casuse if you hadd you would discover that the nanophoon have absolutely no chance of killing a AC tempest (fit wih rougly same ammount of isk). The autopest can EASILY track the nanophoon!! and the pathetic ank" of a nanophoon will not resist many seconds against a ACPest This comes form the same people that say that missiles are the best thing to use agian nanoships.. complete nonsense!! missiles do zero damage to them. Turrets are far far better choice since the HUGE signature means that the speend is meaningless!! An ACpest can even track a nanocane extremely well!! If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 17:17:00 - [189] Originally by: Kagura Nikon so you didnt even tried right? Casuse if you hadd you would discover that the nanophoon have absolutely no chance of killing a AC tempest (fit wih rougly same ammount of isk). The autopest can EASILY track the nanophoon!! and the pathetic ank" of a nanophoon will not resist many seconds against a ACPest This comes form the same people that say that missiles are the best thing to use agian nanoships.. complete nonsense!! missiles do zero damage to them. Turrets are far far better choice since the HUGE signature means that the speend is meaningless!! An ACpest can even track a nanocane extremely well!! Yup a similaly skilled and valuable tempest will drive off a similarly skilled and valuable nano-phoon. I am not disagreeing with that. The difference is when that tempest comes accross a bigger and badder ship, say a full faction vindicator with officer guns and faction antimatter, the Nano-phoon just runs the other way, while the tempest explodes in a firey ball of steel and ductape. P.S. while a tempest can easily track the Nano-phoon, you need an armageddon or other pulse laser user to actualy make a real big dent. A tempest will be at about half or less damage due to falloff[60% or so with barrage]. [and falloff rigs dont fit on it, that is reserved for the Maelstrom]The tempest will still do plenty of damage, yes, probably enough to drive the offending ship away. But that just drives the ship away, it doesnt kill it. So we setup a risk/benefit matrix 1= win, 0 = tie, -1= ship exploding Best Middle Worst \| Total Nano 1 \| 0 \| 0 \| 1 \| Normal 1 \| 0 \| -1 \| 0 Clearly the nanoship is superior, the worse case scenario is "i run away", the benefit matrix gives it a clear advantage over a normal ship. It wins, or it leaves. This is why the answer to the question of "who wins in a fight between an AC pest and a nanophoon?" is "The nanophoon does, and if it doesnt, the nanophoon leaves." If we setup the matrix to view a battle between the two it gets even worse for the AC pest. Because in the best case scenario against the nano-ship, it still doesnt destroy the nano-ship. Best Middle Worst \| Total Nano 1 \| 0 \| 0 \| 1 \| Normal 0 \| 0 \| -1 \| -1 Clearly there is a balance issue here. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Kuentai Beagle Corp	Posted - 2007.01.24 17:47:00 - [190] One of the big strengths is that a nanoship is great at about 17km and thus thats where most of them orbit as getting closer will start cutting speed. 3 t2 damps on a non dampening bonus ship and an average nano bs isn't going to lock beyond 14km. This spares hacs and recons which deserve to be able to nano due to prices as they have such a long natural lock range. The fix is already here... Stop being so lazy and think of these things people. --------------- "The good man has few enemies, but the ruthless... None."

Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 18:12:00 - [191] Originally by: Kuentai One of the big strengths is that a nanoship is great at about 17km and thus thats where most of them orbit as getting closer will start cutting speed. 3 t2 damps on a non dampening bonus ship and an average nano bs isn't going to lock beyond 14km. This spares hacs and recons which deserve to be able to nano due to prices as they have such a long natural lock range. The fix is already here... Stop being so lazy and think of these things people. this has already been addressed, please read the thread. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Hockston Axe Amarr	Posted - 2007.01.24 18:23:00 - [192] Amongst all the whines and cries about how they can't get kills, don't forget that these are also used a lot for extreme looting/salvaging. 3 salvage tackles (or any armor rigs) already gut your speed even with inertals/nanos, don't make my salvager a useless turtle because of the mass whineage about mass.
sb404 Caldari Tarnak inc.	Posted - 2007.01.24 18:50:00 - [193] Originally by: Hockston Axe Amongst all the whines and cries about how they can't get kills, don't forget that these are also used a lot for extreme looting/salvaging. 3 salvage tackles (or any armor rigs) already gut your speed even with inertals/nanos, don't make my salvager a useless turtle because of the mass whineage about mass. Uhmmm... define extreme salvaging and "salvage tackles" please, I don't understand what you mean. ------------------------------------------------- I never wrote this -Eris
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 19:08:00 - [194] Originally by: sb404 Originally by: Hockston Axe Amongst all the whines and cries about how they can't get kills, don't forget that these are also used a lot for extreme looting/salvaging. 3 salvage tackles (or any armor rigs) already gut your speed even with inertals/nanos, don't make my salvager a useless turtle because of the mass whineage about mass. Uhmmm... define extreme salvaging and "salvage tackles" please, I don't understand what you mean. salvage tackles are salvage boosting rigs. "extreme salvaging" probably means "salvaging a lot" ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Tomsudy Minmatar BloodThirsters Corp	Posted - 2007.01.24 19:47:00 - [195] nnnnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo wth you guys wanna nerf some of the most fun ships ingames. Most fun since dual mwd and you lot wanna god dam nerf it ffs. Some of us love our new nano ships. Go work a way around em ffs but stop god dam moaning on the ******* forums till they get nerfed. The game is finally getting away from the basic 1v1 sit as close as possible and tank each other to death. The speed is more fun requires skill, please dont nerf my babys :( ________________________________________ THTA
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.24 19:53:00 - [196] Sad to see people want to have iwin buttons with like no training required, making all the specialized roleships useless.. I guess inties and vagas should just selfdestruct, right? Jamming & Logoffski
sb404 Caldari Tarnak inc.	Posted - 2007.01.24 20:04:00 - [197] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: sb404 Originally by: Hockston Axe Amongst all the whines and cries about how they can't get kills, don't forget that these are also used a lot for extreme looting/salvaging. 3 salvage tackles (or any armor rigs) already gut your speed even with inertals/nanos, don't make my salvager a useless turtle because of the mass whineage about mass. Uhmmm... define extreme salvaging and "salvage tackles" please, I don't understand what you mean. salvage tackles are salvage boosting rigs. "extreme salvaging" probably means "salvaging a lot" I wanted to know what kind of extreme salvaging would require a nanobs... but didn't know about the rigs though. ------------------------------------------------- I never wrote this -Eris
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 20:06:00 - [198] Edited by: Goumindong on 24/01/2007 20:03:01 Originally by: sb404 I wanted to know what kind of extreme salvaging would require a nanobs... but didn't know about the rigs though. No, he is just worried about a nerf having a side effect of killing his ability to salvage really well. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer EVE Animal Control	Posted - 2007.01.24 20:18:00 - [199] Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 24/01/2007 20:15:49 Web him and he's down. Webber is now standard fit for BS's to tackle other bs's. No biggie. In addition, the mos tpowerful BS's (megathrons, abbadon, rohk's and hypers) cant use their guns in this crazy fast setup. Only drone ships and missle ships, which have always been 2nd tier in pvp to pure dedicated turret-gank setups. I feel they give flexibility and variety to the fits of BSs. They stay. ---------------------------------------- Friends Forever
Opai McTwist Amarr The Sell Swords	Posted - 2007.01.24 20:49:00 - [200] Yay. I formally pat the people who love their nano-whatevers on the back. Congratulations on finding something that allows you to disengage from a fight. There seems to be some heavy disconnect between the two camps on this argument. NoNerf camp: Seems to be saying that people whining for a nerf are just people that A)don't want to think creatively B)can't fly a hugin or a rapier C)don't fit webbers D)don't want to spend billions of isk on a counter E)just want to ruin a Nano-pilot's fun F)want easy ganks in bubble camps G)want to blob everyone to death. Nerf Camp: Seem to be saying that NoNerf peeps A)want an iwin-solopwnmobile B)want a get-out-of-fight-free card C)forget about inertia and that webbers don't insta-work D)just want their WCS back E)just want to be able to gank and run with no danger Additionally, it seems that some Nerf-ers post rational arguments, and some non-nerf-ers post a lot of straw-man arguments. Now that's just the impression I get from reading replies. Especially the "don't nerf it cuz its fun" argument. The best arguments I've read so far are all on the side of doing something about the Nanoship fad. I understand that people are happy that they've found a speed "tank". While it "fits" in the game becuase of how modules and stats work, I don't believe for a second that it works as intended. I have no problem with battleships going fast. I do have problems with battleships that go fast in circles, or can turn like interceptors. I don't have a problem with people trying to use speed as a "tank" I do have issues with the fact that an alert Nano pilot need never be tackled. Someone correct me if I am wrong but it appears as if the most compelling arguments (in my opinion) from the Non-Nerf camp are: A) It is thinking outside the box, don't discourage that B) People only want it nerfed because its new and effective C) It costs a ton of isk, and people should get what they pay for The most compelling arguments (again, in my opinion) from the Nerf camp are: A) It removes the role that interceptors and vagabonds currently occupy B) It can engage or disengage at will. No other ship enjoys that priviledge, especially now that WCS have been nerfed C) Sure a nano is paper-thin, and if caught will pop, but the trouble is catching one in the first place, so the lack of hitpoints argument falls short of convincing. I think the best suggestions so far in this debate have centered on reducing the agility bonus that battleships currently enjoy, without reducing the speed factor; and for re-working nosferatus. Please someone point out that I am wrong someplace, but from what I have been reading, the concept of a Battleship flying like an interceptor is just wrong and needs to be addressed.

Elmicker Unscoped Myriad Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 20:49:00 - [201] Edited by: Elmicker on 24/01/2007 20:48:42 Let us reiterate. Webs do not work. Their inertia slowboats them to about 300km if they stop accelarating once the web hits, and they only have to drift for 100km or so until they can whack their mwd on for another spin (that's assuming you've got a huginn doing the webbing, and assuming the huginn survived the nos/drone fest sent its way) Warp scrambling does not work. They simply turn around and run. Sensor dampening holds them off, but only until they get up close and start locking you. And, as any lachesis pilot knows, speedy drone ships are your doom when relying on sensor damps. Camping them in the system does not work, because the average 6km/s nanobs will run a large bubble in mere seconds, that's even if they decide to run the large bubble (Assuming he's stuck about for 8 minutes to anchor the damned thing). They usually turn on a sixpence and are away in less than a second. Or decide to head 250km up and bounce a sniper and kill him, solo. Getting them to run is not a good thing. Because they will just be back in 2 hours, when your lachesis/huginn/ACPest team have gone elsewhere and are doing other things. The worst bit, is not their speed. I don't care if a BS is doing 6km/s if he's going to shoot straight past me, but when he can just perform a u-turn and come screaming back. Having BSs that can do that kind of speed and still manage to turn like that is the worst bit. Its like stab-fitted vagabonds all over again, but with heavy nos, drones and torps. And no, it doesnt cost billions of isk. Anyone living in the south for any amount of time can fit a 3-4km/s nanoship with top end mods for ~150-200m, due to the rat drops (local hull ods, nanos and istabs, domi kit) being ideal.
ElweSingollo The Vanyar Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2007.01.24 21:22:00 - [202] Edited by: ElweSingollo on 24/01/2007 21:23:03 Originally by: Sadist Edited by: Sadist on 24/01/2007 11:04:56 Originally by: voogru Originally by: Sadist Originally by: Tomb A battleship is NOT and SHOULD NOT BE a SOLO-pwnmobile. (with the exception of Instab whoring on the typhoon or dominix) Originally by: voogru Using combat logger, I did 16,646 points of damage, over 6 minutes 39 seconds, that comes out to a WHOOPING 41.71 DPS! 41.71 DPS != SOLO-pwnmobile Aside from snipstating dps after resists and without drones (you know they dont show drone damage in the log, right?), you also forget the 4 heavy nos that the battleship has on your opponent, eradicating any possibility of a tank, even with injector. If you have to use 3rd party programs to calculate your DPS, then, well, you're obviously incompetent to make any judgements about balance. How about you give us the real dps? Or ask for help in calculating it. Err well as I was the target..... http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Lancer/Voogru_Damage.jpg Which btw voogru asked me to post so people could see the damage I took... Voogru didn't use drones agaisnt me (not sure how much of a drone bay the mach has) but I would imagine any drones he did have would be less than the http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Lancer/Ehxo_Damage.jpg that was pounding on me damage wise so lets see it still would have taken 6-7 mins to kill me.
Brotekk Even-Flow	Posted - 2007.01.24 21:46:00 - [203] I don't know about you guys. But if it kills me, I will petition and whine. /end sarcasm Although i don't like fighting them myself, Arbitrators have a hard time taking out a battleship moving that fast. I'm not complaining, I think it adds something. And the minmatar elite babies can quickly kill their point. Don't like it? Counter it. If you cant counter it, then shut up. "Vitoc, Is it in you?" -Gheytorade chemicals
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 22:01:00 - [204] Edited by: Goumindong on 24/01/2007 21:59:26 Originally by: ElweSingollo Err well as I was the target..... http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Lancer/Voogru_Damage.jpg Which btw voogru asked me to post so people could see the damage I took... Voogru didn't use drones agaisnt me (not sure how much of a drone bay the mach has) but I would imagine any drones he did have would be less than the Curse that was pounding on me damage wise so lets see it still would have taken 6-7 mins to kill me. both a phoon and domi can fit a full 5 heavy drones. Heavy drones twice as much damage exactly, as medium drones. The Curse can fit 5 medium drones only, and has a single damage bonus to them. So a Typhoon will do 33% more damage with its drones than a curse does. A Dominix will do twice as much damage as a curse does with its drones. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Firane Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.01.24 22:07:00 - [205] As has been stated before: Nanostabs are not the problem. Webifiers are the problem. Increase range, slightly decrease effectivness. Introduce Light and Medium webifying drones. ---
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.01.24 22:36:00 - [206] Originally by: Firane As has been stated before: Nanostabs are not the problem. Webifiers are the problem. Increase range, slightly decrease effectivness. Introduce Light and Medium webifying drones. LOL. You have no clue do you? Imagine a Taranis with two light web drones and some rails. What inty would be able to kill it? You can slow an inty down while staying outside the enemy inty web range and pound the crap out of it. Same principle goes with cruisers. You don't need to be that fast, just faster than your webbed target. Inertial stabs and nanos need to be stacking nerfed, just like everything else, and both of them need to be combined in the stacking nerf. I.e. 2x nanos and 1x inertial stab has the same stacking penalty as 3x nanos. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.24 22:45:00 - [207] Nanobattleships are the best thing to happen to PVP in years. Why? People can't **** about, undocking and redocking and undocking nearly as much. They mess up, and they end up 60km off station, and that's a Good Thing. Having a competent nano-BS pilot in gang can double the amount of fights you get on any random roaming op.
ElweSingollo The Vanyar Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2007.01.24 23:04:00 - [208] Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 24/01/2007 21:59:26 Originally by: ElweSingollo Err well as I was the target..... http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Lancer/Voogru_Damage.jpg Which btw voogru asked me to post so people could see the damage I took... Voogru didn't use drones agaisnt me (not sure how much of a drone bay the mach has) but I would imagine any drones he did have would be less than the Curse that was pounding on me damage wise so lets see it still would have taken 6-7 mins to kill me. both a phoon and domi can fit a full 5 heavy drones. Heavy drones twice as much damage exactly, as medium drones. The Curse can fit 5 medium drones only, and has a single damage bonus to them. So a Typhoon will do 33% more damage with its drones than a curse does. A Dominix will do twice as much damage as a curse does with its drones. Okay Domi clearly better than the phoon in the drone damage stakes Phoon v Curse drone damage wise Curse should do 75% of the damage the phoon does unless I misunderstand things because it gets an in built 50% bonus to drone damage when you fly it. Basically I don't understand your 33% from damage wise? Also a curse can fit 7 medium drones but loaunch only 5 I think you will find was what you wanted to say.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.24 23:15:00 - [209] Originally by: Kusotarre People can't **** about, undocking and redocking and undocking nearly as much. They mess up, and they end up 60km off station, and that's a Good Thing. Having a competent nano-BS pilot in gang can double the amount of fights you get on any random roaming op. Agree so much.... but yet, making roleships useless is a very vert bad side effect. Flying nanoship is lots of fun, I do it all the time, but it's a bit imba. And I still think nos is the primary reason for it.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 23:22:00 - [210] Originally by: ElweSingollo Okay Domi clearly better than the phoon in the drone damage stakes Phoon v Curse drone damage wise Curse should do 75% of the damage the phoon does unless I misunderstand things because it gets an in built 50% bonus to drone damage when you fly it. Basically I don't understand your 33% is coming from damage wise? Also a curse can fit 7 medium drones but launch only 5 I think you will find was what you wanted to say. In regards to the Dominix yes drone damage points will do a heck of a lot more but you loose any dps form siege or cruise launchers in the highs that the Phoon or Mach would have. 1.33/1 = 1/.75 Curses drones do 75% of the damage of a typhoons drones, or 25% less damage, same thing. Typhoons drones do 33% more damage than a curses drones, or 133% as much damage, same thing. The quetion was "how much damage would a typhoon do compared to a cuse" and the answer is "33% more" becuase Elwe said "but I would imagine any drones he did have would be less than the Curse" when it would in fact be 33% more than that. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.24 23:42:00 - [211] With the drones only, that is. On top of this come 4 torp launchers...
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.24 23:46:00 - [212] Originally by: Aramendel With the drones only, that is. On top of this come 4 torp launchers... Yes, that was implied. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Constantinee Caldari Omerta Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.24 23:49:00 - [213] Originally by: hotgirl933 its a fun ship its balanced not many can fly em you are insanley wrong... blame karr! he made the nanophoon vid :P. all jokes aside it is a pain to kill these buggers even with missiles. I find it histerical that someone with full snakes and the right fitting can outrun ceptors and vagabonds with snakes in a nano ship. personally i think there should just be a boost to reacking or missile speed or soemthing to ive these guys less a chance. i mean a frig cant even track it soemtimes cause the speed. Omerta Syndicate
Deva Blackfire Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.01.25 00:01:00 - [214] Originally by: Kusotarre Nanobattleships are the best thing to happen to PVP in years. Why? People can't **** about, undocking and redocking and undocking nearly as much. They mess up, and they end up 60km off station, and that's a Good Thing. Having a competent nano-BS pilot in gang can double the amount of fights you get on any random roaming op. Fights or maybe you meant cheap ganks, coz enemy has no chance to kill you?
ElweSingollo The Vanyar Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2007.01.25 00:06:00 - [215] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: ElweSingollo Okay Domi clearly better than the phoon in the drone damage stakes Phoon v Curse drone damage wise Curse should do 75% of the damage the phoon does unless I misunderstand things because it gets an in built 50% bonus to drone damage when you fly it. Basically I don't understand your 33% is coming from damage wise? Also a curse can fit 7 medium drones but launch only 5 I think you will find was what you wanted to say. In regards to the Dominix yes drone damage points will do a heck of a lot more but you loose any dps form siege or cruise launchers in the highs that the Phoon or Mach would have. 1.33/1 = 1/.75 Curses drones do 75% of the damage of a typhoons drones, or 25% less damage, same thing. Typhoons drones do 33% more damage than a curses drones, or 133% as much damage, same thing. The quetion was "how much damage would a typhoon do compared to a cuse" and the answer is "33% more" becuase Elwe said "but I would imagine any drones he did have would be less than the Curse" when it would in fact be 33% more than that. Originally by: Aramendel With the drones only, that is. On top of this come 4 torp launchers... fair enough never been great at percentages and didn't quite understand your first post. To expand the reason I mention the curse at all is that Voogru didn't use drones on me so taht wasn't factored in to Sadist's reply however for most of the engagement I had the curse on me as well hence me mentioning it and the damage it drones did. Obviously would have died quicker maybe 4 mins instead of 6 or 7
Yuki Li Caldari Omerta Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.25 00:18:00 - [216] Why nerf it? Why nerf Dual MWD battleships in 2004? Because battleships aren't supposed to do that, because most the ships in the game have no way of fighting it in a 1vs1 scenario, and because battleships simply are not supposed to be solopwneverything ships. Website / Recruiting
Maxine Blade	Posted - 2007.01.25 00:22:00 - [217] New Module: Large Tractor Beam Able to stop a ship to 0 m/s instantly. Don't Nerf the Nanoships, but give us a module to counter it.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.25 00:55:00 - [218] Originally by: Maxine Blade New Module: Large Tractor Beam Able to stop a ship to 0 m/s instantly. Don't Nerf the Nanoships, but give us a module to counter it. How do we do that without trouncing interceptors? ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 01:06:00 - [219] Edited by: Kusotarre on 25/01/2007 01:02:58 Originally by: Deva Blackfire Originally by: Kusotarre Nanobattleships are the best thing to happen to PVP in years. Why? People can't ** about, undocking and redocking and undocking nearly as much. They mess up, and they end up 60km off station, and that's a Good Thing. Having a competent nano-BS pilot in gang can double the amount of fights you get on any random roaming op. Fights or maybe you meant cheap ganks, coz enemy has no chance to kill you? Both, actually. Cheap ganks can be mocked for what the are - fights where someone will lose horribly, without the agressing side really trying, but they do accomplish something when someone you're trying to gank is playing undocking games. It allows you kill the safety-system-abusing ***, and get on with your op. And, we've gotten loads of actual fights from having bumps available. That video I posted in the video forums, only happened the way it did because we got to bump a guy 60km off the gate. If we didn't bump, we wouldn't have been able to take advantage of the straggler, he would have just jumped out and regrouped with the rest of his gang, letting their larger size get into a more strategic, and hence unwinnable-for-us position. In this case and others, bumping got us a serious and fun fight. As someone else said, nanos aren't the problem, really. Nos are. There should be a module to protect a certain amount of cap, and some nerf for large nos versus smaller targets. As it is now, nano-BS are hard to kill without huginns due to a nano-BS's nos disabling any ceptors in web range, and killing them quickly. Get rid of the lame, but keep the bump.
Naskaya Elegance Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.01.25 05:23:00 - [220] Edited by: Naskaya on 25/01/2007 05:22:53 I agree with the fact that Nosferatus are the problem. Many games have to deal with overpowered Vampire powers/spell/effect, as it weaken your foe and strengthen yourself for the same cost. Some of them deal with the issue by cutting the energy you get in half (you remove 400, you get 200), or no energy in return at all. The first one could be realistic in Eve, as the loss of energy would simulate the loss transfer in space between the ships. You could even get energy in accordance with the distance between ships. (100% back at 0km, 50% at optimal and 0% at optimal + falloff) But this wouldn't be enough for fixing this problem, as you could still empty almost instantly an inty capacitor with 4~6 Heavy Nos. Why not add a signature parameter to nos effect ? Smaller signature, less energy you get, as the Energy vampire weapon has problems in tracking a small sized target. In the end, you would still empty the capacitor of such ships, but it would take more time, giving an inty the option to effectively tackle Nano-Battleships.

Rockbox Amarr Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.01.25 06:18:00 - [221] Originally by: Thor Xian Originally by: Siltan As to nanophoons etc, anyone tried using webbing drones? Last I checked, my webber drones didn't go 5 km/s or more. You realize how much money it takes to get a nano phoon going that fast.... Rockbox > Resistence is futile...Rockbox > Penetration is imminent!
mematar The Raven Warriors	Posted - 2007.01.25 07:14:00 - [222] Originally by: Rockbox Originally by: Thor Xian Originally by: Siltan As to nanophoons etc, anyone tried using webbing drones? Last I checked, my webber drones didn't go 5 km/s or more. You realize how much money it takes to get a nano phoon going that fast.... I doubt he does I doubt many of these lil' whiners dont know how much you need to spend on it to get it go at those speeds (4-5km/s+) And yes, you can try to use webber drones, they WILL work on the nanophoons that are not like mine :) on those that only go 3-4km/s.
Altai Saker Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.01.25 09:02:00 - [223] Just because something is expensive doesn't mean it should be invincible. Anyways, getting a nano bs that fast is not as expensive as you think. http://www.omniscient-order.com/
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 10:02:00 - [224] Just re estating something that i think is being lost in discussion: yes nano BS need a nerf. But a nerf that do not affect any other ships!! Cruisers and BC still should be able to focus on some speed advantage (bc at a smaaller degree). So the nef should be one that do not hamper a guy that simply wants to put 2 Nanofiber on his rupture, or Hurricane. Or someone that want to put 1 istab and 2 nano on his fleet issue stabber 9like mine, or do someone really thinks this ship doe snot deserve to reach high speeds? ) All sulutions must contemplate the real issue that is: The nuimber of low slots rules out wich ship will be the fastest one, not its base mass neither its base speed. That Must be cahnged. I re type my proposal for the n-th time. Make Nanofiber speed bonus be percentage wise. And then maybe making the agility boost be stack nerfed (but then i would suggest increasign the net value a bit, so the guy that used only 2 of them still have same effect) If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.25 10:56:00 - [225] Originally by: Naskaya I agree with the fact that Nosferatus are the problem. Many games have to deal with overpowered Vampire powers/spell/effect, as it weaken your foe and strengthen yourself for the same cost. But this wouldn't be enough for fixing this problem, as you could still empty almost instantly an inty capacitor with 4~6 Heavy Nos. Why not add a signature parameter to nos effect ? I'm against an anti-Nos module, as well as i'm against all modules which are a must. These restrict fitting diversity. The problem goes deeper than noses. It's down to general sustainability. The setups most ppl fly are not designed to sustain cap indefinately, even when they are just running guns+tank. Most EW ships cant sustain cap while running modules. When you add additional stress from a nos, the system simply cannot handle it, and cap goes to 0. Now this could be solved by simply tanking passive, using no cap guns and perhaps fitting injectors. Or using a nos to get cap from someone else, thus running your systems. Do you see? The fundamental problem lies in the fact that most ppl consider active setups that use monstous amounts of cap as the best possible strategy, and this leads to NOS being the best possible solution against those setups. While it is largely usless against low cap use setups. This is the real problem. Most setups are not sustainable by them selves, and due to that, fitting NOS has become almost mandatory. Why not NOS resistance modules? Most ppl didn't fit ECCM modules while they were effective, now that ECM is nerfed to oblivion, there is no reason to fit them anyways, cause it ECM is ineffective outside very special circumstances. Well, the most effective NOS counters, injectors are already in game, but some ppl just refuse to use them. Their loss... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Exiled One Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.25 11:11:00 - [226] At least 200mil to get the phoon going 6km/s. 2,3bil to get the speed to 9km/s. It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.01.25 11:22:00 - [227] Originally by: mematar Originally by: Rockbox Originally by: Thor Xian Originally by: Siltan As to nanophoons etc, anyone tried using webbing drones? Last I checked, my webber drones didn't go 5 km/s or more. You realize how much money it takes to get a nano phoon going that fast.... I doubt he does I doubt many of these lil' whiners dont know how much you need to spend on it to get it go at those speeds (4-5km/s+) And yes, you can try to use webber drones, they WILL work on the nanophoons that are not like mine :) on those that only go 3-4km/s. I know exactly how much ISK it takes. I fight with/against people whos setups run upwards of 500m to a bil on a daily basis, and some are really expensive, once you take into account implants (6+ bil easily). It's no holds barred PVP. Maelstroms with Gist X XL shield boosters anyone? Saying that it's ok for a ship to be overpowered just because it's expensive is crap. I know plenty of guys for whom 300m in the ship and a few bil in implants that you don't lose very often (if ever) isn't that big a deal. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Lakotnik	Posted - 2007.01.25 11:46:00 - [228] Ok, for example, I am flying an amarr battleship. Or any other amarr ship cept recon. Now please tell me one setup, isk to fit is not a problem (willing to pay even as much as a person did for the nanoship). One setup that i would be able to KILL a nanobs if it engages me. Like i said, isk is not a problem, must is to kill, location is not a problem (station, belt, gate, whatever). Solo of course, not with a blob. Not even with a friend in a rapier for example. 1v1 PVP, plain and simple, and i would like to kill. Of course, setup has to be anything but nano - full rack of nos is ok. Full rack of nos with mwd is ok. Full rack of nos, mwd and nanos/i-stabs is NOT ok. ps. setup most likely wont be tested as i dont have that amount of ISKs. This is just an example saying that with ships worth the same there is just simply impossible to get a nanocrap down. Till they do something dumb or get lag. So, my point of view is: nanoships are totally lame. Perhaps they need some time to kill a target, but they will, or they ll run. As lame as stabs, even more problematic here is that ships have some combat advantage compared to stabs. That fact doesnt make gatecamps less lame tho and i agree using nanoships to some extent. However, now this reached epidemic proportions. Almost everyone with some ISK and no brain flies that. I consider something uber when its so widely used that there is nothing else that could be maybe as good as this. No counter-stuff at all. Old lasers, gankageddons, shieldtanking apoc... How to catch a nanoship now? Weird suggestion nobody sane would use. Nobody sane would camp one gate for days though, so that wont be a problem. First, you need a standard gatecamp on one side. Fastlock BS, web ships, large bubble, ceptors and a couple of dictors that will be used on next stage. So, dictors stay on the gate, waiting for a ship to jump in. As a nanoship jumps in they jump to the other side and bubble gate. A couple of webships (any ship that can web that far - so ceptors with domi webs will work as well for example) and battleships join on that side as well. A ship starts putting up a bubble. So, nanoship is caught on the gate, on both sides there are enemies with web and bubble (on one side with dictors only atm). BSs start killing a nanoship. A bit of damage on the one side of the gate, a bit more on the other side etc, till the ship is killed. Or till the pilot loses patience while doing this jumping for hours. Suggestions - only 1 i-stab per ship? Ceptors arent using more, that wont hurt vagas much but it will be quite painful for nanobs. Relative bonuses and stacking on nanos and overdrives? Less inertia bonus on nanos? (half perhaps). I would not include any other module (cept maybe mobile web - same as warp disruptor, just webbing instead). Web works ok already. Anti-nos module that will just prevent from being nossed or that would decrease effect will be as pointless as eccm probably. A module that would make nos ship regret using it would be much cooler. For example with module activated you still lose cap, just only half. However your cap explodes in ship and kills the same amount of cap that was ment to be drained. Result - you lose half of cap, ship doesnt get cap and loses full amount that would be drained without module. Do not make penalties too harsh or give dedicated nos ships (blood ships, amarr recons) some resistance/immunity to that module (2nd half of the effect - losing cap - so they just drain half the amount) Meh why am i trying, nobody will read, too long. Smile, tomorrow will be worse.
Laboratus Gallente BGG	Posted - 2007.01.25 12:02:00 - [229] Originally by: Lakotnik Ok, for example, I am flying an amarr battleship. Or any other amarr ship cept recon. +stuff Ok, amarrian ship. Ok, all battleships with T2 pulse lasers will at least drive him off. Baalghorn with 4 NOS 4 T2 Pulse will outnos and out dps any nanophoon. If you deploy a large bubble and sit a bit between where he want's to go with a web and a scrambler, you should have ample time to blast him to bits. Takes skill, but is still doable. And as a general setup it sill isn't too bad. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Helmut 314 Amarr J.H.E.N.R Pure.	Posted - 2007.01.25 12:06:00 - [230] An upwards adjustment of the mass of the Dominix and Typhoon would solve a lot of the issues people have with the nano setups. ________________________________ Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson

Exiled One Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.25 12:07:00 - [231] Originally by: Lakotnik Ok, for example, I am flying an amarr battleship. Or any other amarr ship cept recon. Now please tell me one setup, isk to fit is not a problem (willing to pay even as much as a person did for the nanoship). One setup that i would be able to KILL a nanobs if it engages me. Like i said, isk is not a problem, must is to kill, location is not a problem (station, belt, gate, whatever). Solo of course, not with a blob. Not even with a friend in a rapier for example. 1v1 PVP, plain and simple, and i would like to kill. Of course, setup has to be anything but nano - full rack of nos is ok. Full rack of nos with mwd is ok. Full rack of nos, mwd and nanos/i-stabs is NOT ok. ps. setup most likely wont be tested as i dont have that amount of ISKs. This is just an example saying that with ships worth the same there is just simply impossible to get a nanocrap down. Till they do something dumb or get lag. So, my point of view is: nanoships are totally lame. Perhaps they need some time to kill a target, but they will, or they ll run. As lame as stabs, even more problematic here is that ships have some combat advantage compared to stabs. That fact doesnt make gatecamps less lame tho and i agree using nanoships to some extent. However, now this reached epidemic proportions. Almost everyone with some ISK and no brain flies that. I consider something uber when its so widely used that there is nothing else that could be maybe as good as this. No counter-stuff at all. Old lasers, gankageddons, shieldtanking apoc... How to catch a nanoship now? Weird suggestion nobody sane would use. Nobody sane would camp one gate for days though, so that wont be a problem. First, you need a standard gatecamp on one side. Fastlock BS, web ships, large bubble, ceptors and a couple of dictors that will be used on next stage. So, dictors stay on the gate, waiting for a ship to jump in. As a nanoship jumps in they jump to the other side and bubble gate. A couple of webships (any ship that can web that far - so ceptors with domi webs will work as well for example) and battleships join on that side as well. A ship starts putting up a bubble. So, nanoship is caught on the gate, on both sides there are enemies with web and bubble (on one side with dictors only atm). BSs start killing a nanoship. A bit of damage on the one side of the gate, a bit more on the other side etc, till the ship is killed. Or till the pilot loses patience while doing this jumping for hours. Suggestions - only 1 i-stab per ship? Ceptors arent using more, that wont hurt vagas much but it will be quite painful for nanobs. Relative bonuses and stacking on nanos and overdrives? Less inertia bonus on nanos? (half perhaps). I would not include any other module (cept maybe mobile web - same as warp disruptor, just webbing instead). Web works ok already. Anti-nos module that will just prevent from being nossed or that would decrease effect will be as pointless as eccm probably. A module that would make nos ship regret using it would be much cooler. For example with module activated you still lose cap, just only half. However your cap explodes in ship and kills the same amount of cap that was ment to be drained. Result - you lose half of cap, ship doesnt get cap and loses full amount that would be drained without module. Do not make penalties too harsh or give dedicated nos ships (blood ships, amarr recons) some resistance/immunity to that module (2nd half of the effect - losing cap - so they just drain half the amount) Meh why am i trying, nobody will read, too long. Officer web. It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Deva Blackfire Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.01.25 12:20:00 - [232] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 25/01/2007 12:17:49 Oh so now we balance game based on OFFICER modules? Heh... Also officer webs are 75% iirc - any decent nano ship should fly over 1km/s in them anyways. EDIT: Now i wonder - why we needed WCS nerf in 1st place... We had uber officer scramblers - everyone should have used em.
sb404 Caldari Tarnak inc.	Posted - 2007.01.25 12:21:00 - [233] Edited by: sb404 on 25/01/2007 12:18:11 Originally by: Laboratus The problem goes deeper than noses. It's down to general sustainability. The setups most ppl fly are not designed to sustain cap indefinately, even when they are just running guns+tank. Most EW ships cant sustain cap while running modules. When you add additional stress from a nos, the system simply cannot handle it, and cap goes to 0. Now this could be solved by simply tanking passive, using no cap guns and perhaps fitting injectors. Or using a nos to get cap from someone else, thus running your systems. I see, so if I "passive" fit my interceptor I will be able to stop nanobs? That's the whole point of the discussion. Yes NOS are part of the issue, but the real issue is not being able to stop a ship no matter the fitting. The only ships that can dream to get the nanobs in range to scramble it, imo, are interceptor class and vagabond. Please explain how I can fit them to sustain 2,3 Heavy NOS long enough to scramble the nanobs so that it counts for something. ------------------------------------------------- I never wrote this -Eris
Exiled One Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.25 13:00:00 - [234] Edited by: Exiled One on 25/01/2007 12:57:14 Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 25/01/2007 12:17:49 Oh so now we balance game based on OFFICER modules? Heh... Also officer webs are 75% iirc - any decent nano ship should fly over 1km/s in them anyways. EDIT: Now i wonder - why we needed WCS nerf in 1st place... We had uber officer scramblers - everyone should have used em. by Lakotnik Ok, for example, I am flying an amarr battleship. Or any other amarr ship cept recon. Now please tell me one setup, isk to fit is not a problem (willing to pay even as much as a person did for the nanoship). One setup that i would be able to KILL a nanobs if it engages me. Like i said, isk is not a problem, must is to kill A pulse geddon will easily hit and kill a bs orbiting @ 2-3km/s. Unless you have **** skills thou. It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.25 13:12:00 - [235] There is a significant difference between causing a nanoship to flee and killing it.
Helmut 314 Amarr J.H.E.N.R Pure.	Posted - 2007.01.25 13:15:00 - [236] Do tell, how many salvos from your pulses will hit the nanoship before its out of range ? The falloff on pulses is crap so if youre lucky, have your mids full of sensorboosters and a stupid nanoship pilot, maybe three volleys. Hardly enough to remove the shields of a BS even. The whole point with a nanoship is its speedtank, the inability for others to hit it with drones, turrets or missiles. If you happen upon a group of BS a good pilot like Ryysa for instance will be long gone before you can get the first couple shots in. ________________________________ Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson
Exiled One Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.25 13:24:00 - [237] I'll just continue ganking you in my stabbaphoons!!Ö and leave this thread be. It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Kaoyama Ameko	Posted - 2007.01.25 13:27:00 - [238] It would be pretty ridiculous if CCP completely removed the appeal of nanobs (which are, thankfully, a really different take on the usual BS "shoot it until it dies" tactic). I agree that it's ALSO ridiculous that they would allow a fitting with no counter whatsoever. Just for the sake of getting myself flamed (since you people can't agree on ANYTHING), I'll just put in my 2 cents with my own personal opinion that probably no one will pay attention to: NanoBSs are fast and agile, but they have no real tank to speak of... hence making them about as tough as a half-decent BC tank-wise. This means that smaller ships (which are ALSO more agile) have a damn good chance of taking them down with their damage outputs. Granted... 4-9km/s is a bit ridiculous, but slowing NanoBSs to a point where smaller ships can catch up with them, but battleships are still mostly helpless against them would bring a LOT to EVE. Mainly, it would make fleets a lot more varied, since the actual need for small-ship gank-squads to take out other specialized ships would be there. Having a fleet composed of a little more than Battleships, HACs, and intys would be nice. This bring us to the problem of NOS, which I'm sure you're all familiar about. Now you have a bunch of frigs and fast cruisers zooming to a Battleship with 4 heavy NOS fitted, and a good number of nice drones to boot, but the frigates and cruisers are your only hope of getting rid of this pest. Well, I guess they'll just have to send 5 frigates and take advantage of the weakness NanoBSs have... they can ONLY fit 4 Heavy NOS :)
Jamius	Posted - 2007.01.25 13:40:00 - [239] Hmm - interesting sounding ship this nanophoon. Really expensive to setup you say - sounds fair that it's fairly special then (depends how expensive, know nothing about how it's setup). I do however get the feeling that not actually everyone is flying them as some said. Maybe what, a tiny percentage of 1% of PvP players or something? I certainly ain't seen one. I personally do not give a rats ar$e if someone goes 5km/sec in a BS and I can't kill them as they sure as h3ll can't kill me either - so run away Mr fast and I'll go fight someone that actually wants a fight, or just gank some poor player who ain't got a nanophoon. I've never killed a vagabond as they always escape from me - in turn I've never been killed by a vaga so until the number of people using them gets out of hand (which it never did) I've no problem with the ship apart from I want to fly one myself for certain scenario's - but I've never gotten around to it. My fault, not the ships or people using them. I get the distinct feeling this is being blown out of all proportion and I've never understood why people complain about ships they can't kill that can't kill them either due to a compromised setup on said ship(assuming all else is equal). People cry far too much in this game about people that get away.
Kaoyama Ameko	Posted - 2007.01.25 13:48:00 - [240] Originally by: Jamius I get the distinct feeling this is being blown out of all proportion and I've never understood why people complain about ships they can't kill that can't kill them either due to a compromised setup on said ship(assuming all else is equal). People cry far too much in this game about people that get away. Actually, I think you're right. 4 Cruise missile launchers can't possibly be enough to outdamage a decent BS's tank, so why the hell does anyone care that someone is flying a ship that can't actually HURT them? It's like *****ing that flies are impossible to swat. House flies are house flies, they're harmless, and they just fly around provoking you. I guess complaining about Nanophoons is kinda like spending your next week hunting down a fly in your house just because it annoys you a bit... or actually posting in an obvious troll thread. On the other hand, I'm completely sure that many, many people on this forum fall for trollbait like drooling morons. This does not apply to all you non-drooling morons.

Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 14:00:00 - [241] My god people you must purge from your minds the concept that all fights shoudl end in death! They should NOT!!!! That is why there is a scrambler modules, because runnign away is part of the game! Face it!! Any ship that is 10ms faster than your ship will be able to escape you.. if they don't do it they are plain stupid.... Escaping form the combat is PVP as well. In fact is the inteligent and tactical part of PVP. Leave to fight another day. Someone that cannot recognize the first and most important principle of combat should not even be discussing PVP balance! If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
GankYou	Posted - 2007.01.25 14:00:00 - [242]
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 14:06:00 - [243] Originally by: Helmut 314 Do tell, how many salvos from your pulses will hit the nanoship before its out of range ? The falloff on pulses is crap so if youre lucky, have your mids full of sensorboosters and a stupid nanoship pilot, maybe three volleys. Hardly enough to remove the shields of a BS even. The whole point with a nanoship is its speedtank, the inability for others to hit it with drones, turrets or missiles. If you happen upon a group of BS a good pilot like Ryysa for instance will be long gone before you can get the first couple shots in. MWD bases speed tanks will not make you hard to hit for turrets!! Stop spreading that Lie! The faction and DEDspace MWD people are using raise the signature up to 700%! Wanna escape him? ECM him and run away (ya know minmatar have low sensor strenght) An ammar ship that he can defeat. APoc with 4 heavy nos and 4 LArge smart bombs (can neutralize completely his ddrones and missiles). CAn even use only 2 smart and 2 beams He WILL get out of cap before you (The MWD drinks cap faster than your guns and you have more base cap). If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Exiled One Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.25 14:14:00 - [244] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Helmut 314 Do tell, how many salvos from your pulses will hit the nanoship before its out of range ? The falloff on pulses is crap so if youre lucky, have your mids full of sensorboosters and a stupid nanoship pilot, maybe three volleys. Hardly enough to remove the shields of a BS even. The whole point with a nanoship is its speedtank, the inability for others to hit it with drones, turrets or missiles. If you happen upon a group of BS a good pilot like Ryysa for instance will be long gone before you can get the first couple shots in. MWD bases speed tanks will not make you hard to hit for turrets!! Stop spreading that Lie! The faction and DEDspace MWD people are using raise the signature up to 700%! Wanna escape him? ECM him and run away (ya know minmatar have low sensor strenght) An ammar ship that he can defeat. APoc with 4 heavy nos and 4 LArge smart bombs (can neutralize completely his ddrones and missiles). CAn even use only 2 smart and 2 beams He WILL get out of cap before you (The MWD drinks cap faster than your guns and you have more base cap). That is indeed correct, an apoc with 4 heavy nos will survive any nanobs gank. Might be the ultimate antistabbaphoon machine as well if you invest some good isk into the setup. It's great being Amarr, aint it?
esquimo leviticus Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.01.25 14:38:00 - [245] Edited by: esquimo leviticus on 25/01/2007 14:35:39 I love this thread, the fact that so many folks are so massivly against nano BS setups demonstrates that the game has become exciting, surly this is something to overcome rarther than ranting about taking out CCP's nerfbat. I'm not a great fan of the nano BS but hey it's not the end of the world, there's ways to adapt for both side. If your up against a nanodomi away from a gate, take out it's drones, this can be done v effectivly with a BS with damps and smartbombs fitted, just make sure you have no mates closeby, lol. The nanodomi's option is to run away like the coward with a few less drones. I admit it's not an ideal situation, but fun non the less and will at least maybe force a nanoDomi to stop hunting in a loop. Get with spirit of the game and if you cant take out the nano BS using the blob method, adapt to overcome the problem. If you cant beat them join them, or at least force a stalemate, if you cant beat them, then it seems that thems are the breaks. The fact that a nanoBS can thwart thier uber fleet by running away is a good thing, surly folks can see the funny side of that fact, hell some FC's need to have thier ego taken down a step or five, esp by a lone BS that decides it doesn't want to get shotdown by a blobfest.
Jamius	Posted - 2007.01.25 15:00:00 - [246] Originally by: Kaoyama Ameko Edited by: Kaoyama Ameko on 25/01/2007 13:44:23 Actually, I think you're right. 4 Cruise missile launchers can't possibly be enough to outdamage a decent BS's tank, so why the hell does anyone care that someone is flying a ship that can't actually HURT them? lol - 4 cruise would barely scratch a decent BC or cruiser tank for that matter. I meant to add that someone suggested NOS is the problem. Please leave NOS alone, seriously, please, don't do it. Won't go on, off topic but please Lord no. (PS I fly all clash ships up to BS so I'm not a big ship w***e)
Copine Callmeknau The Splinter Syndicate SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 15:27:00 - [247] Originally by: Montaire Im not quite certian you can get as high as he says you can. But let me try 3 Local Hull Conversion Inertial Stab 3 Local Hull Conversion Nanofiber 3 Speed Rigs for MWD Boost 100 mn Gisti MWD Full set of Snake's Skill Hardwiring Thats about 4200 m/s if my numbers are right. The % boost from the MWD and the I-Stabs interact in a way I dont fully understand. Someone call teh po-lice, a ship that you spend half a bil on in fittings and a bil or two in implants is hard to kill Next you'll be saying a dual centus rep vindicater with corpum EANM and a slave set is a tough cookie to *** Try to engage them off the gate? They're usually hitting ratters or people at station anyway, how about you hit them with a huginn there so that their momentum doesn't carry them to jump range of a gate. If you can't scramble a defence squad fast enough that's your problem, I know we can. ----- Originally by:** wrong on so many levels you could only be more wrong if you where tuxford.
SmokeMeAKipper Kipper Corp	Posted - 2007.01.25 15:35:00 - [248] Edited by: SmokeMeAKipper on 25/01/2007 15:31:56 people have the same issue with nano BS that they have with the standard missile crow and the vagabond They can hit the sweet spot between web and scram range. Lots of ships can do this if you set them up to. yes it is sometimes painful to watch your ship die and not be able to do much about it, but in many situations this scenario can be avoided before hand - or you can get away (dont get caught ratting with hostiles in local, or run for the gate/station/roids) it reminds me of another situation where you die and there is nothing you can do about it - it is called ECM and it is still in the game. there is another situation where you often die and cant do much about it - its called blobbing. nerf multiple ships attacking 1 ship I could go on. Do NOT nerf p.s. t2 fitted phoons dont go much over 3km - 3.5km you need faction items to go better (same speed applies to vaga standard setup) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast - - - - - - - - - - - -
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.25 15:41:00 - [249] "MWD bases speed tanks will not make you hard to hit for turrets!! Stop spreading that Lie! The faction and DEDspace MWD people are using raise the signature up to 700%!" Stop screaming, it does make you harder to hit (because like pointed out few times already the boost to speed is due to combination of skills, modules and optionally right and hardwiring... considerably larger than increase of the signature) It may not be enough to make it completely impossible to hit with short range turrets (autocannons, pulses), but it helps. Life itself verifies it for you -- if that extra speed made no difference on getting hit, the nano-ships with pilots that have half a brain would be orbitting targets with their MWD off. After all, their speed it already high enough to outrun anything that doesn't sport MWD itself, and they could save tons of cap they use to keep that MWD running. If that extra speed in orbit is no benefit then why do they use it? Are they all just braindead morons? o.O
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.01.25 15:48:00 - [250] Originally by: esquimo leviticus surly this is something to overcome rarther than ranting about taking out CCP's nerfbat. I'm not a great fan of the nano BS but hey it's not the end of the world, there's ways to adapt for both side. I guess this thread has gotten so long that people are not reading before they are posting. Nano BS in general is not the problem. The problem is a certain class of nano BS for which there is no effective counter other then flying one yourself. I don't really want these ships nerfed into obsolescence. I think it is important to have a ship for hit and run raids. It makes the game more interesting and I would like to fly one myself eventually. However, as it stands these ships don't really have an effective counter. How about an advanced skill that improves a mod's effect on inertia? Advanced Mass Manipulation or something like that. It wouldn't change the strength of a webber, just how fast it acts. Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell

Kaoyama Ameko	Posted - 2007.01.25 15:55:00 - [251] Originally by: MrTripps Originally by: esquimo leviticus surly this is something to overcome rarther than ranting about taking out CCP's nerfbat. I'm not a great fan of the nano BS but hey it's not the end of the world, there's ways to adapt for both side. I guess this thread has gotten so long that people are not reading before they are posting. Nano BS in general is not the problem. The problem is a certain class of nano BS for which there is no effective counter other then flying one yourself. I don't really want these ships nerfed into obsolescence. I think it is important to have a ship for hit and run raids. It makes the game more interesting and I would like to fly one myself eventually. However, as it stands these ships don't really have an effective counter. How about an advanced skill that improves a mod's effect on inertia? Advanced Mass Manipulation or something like that. It wouldn't change the strength of a webber, just how fast it acts. QFT, keep the NanoBS class alive, and keep it appealing, just make it so that there's some way to stop it.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 16:37:00 - [252] Originally by: j0sephine "MWD bases speed tanks will not make you hard to hit for turrets!! Stop spreading that Lie! The faction and DEDspace MWD people are using raise the signature up to 700%!" Stop screaming, it does make you harder to hit (because like pointed out few times already the boost to speed is due to combination of skills, modules and optionally right and hardwiring... considerably larger than increase of the signature) It may not be enough to make it completely impossible to hit with short range turrets (autocannons, pulses), but it helps. Life itself verifies it for you -- if that extra speed made no difference on getting hit, the nano-ships with pilots that have half a brain would be orbitting targets with their MWD off. After all, their speed it already high enough to outrun anything that doesn't sport MWD itself, and they could save tons of cap they use to keep that MWD running. If that extra speed in orbit is no benefit then why do they use it? Are they all just braindead morons? o.O that are all (or almost all(exclude the AB max speed skill and the istab)) before the MWD boost. So the relation of speed/signature is the same bar a max of 25%+15% difference form that skill. That is Hardly anything significant when the target is orbiting at around 20km. Speed rigs also increase signature. And they keep speed up cause its the easier way to avoid be caught by surprise by an MWD burst from enemy and also deny missile damage. At the end.. if you are at a gate, just go to gate and jump.. if you are in a belt just go deepr and he will get momentarly stuck in a roid and you can warp. If you are caught in an SS, ok then you have a real problem of bad luck. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.25 16:43:00 - [253] Edited by: Aramendel on 25/01/2007 16:41:53 Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Someone call teh po-lice, a ship that you spend half a bil on in fittings and a bil or two in implants is hard to kill Exept I get that speed with a t2 MWD, 3 LH nanos, 2 LH instabs and 3 vent rigs and 30 mil in implants, about 200 mil total in fitting and implants together. His calculations are wrong. Originally by: Kagura Nikon Speed rigs also increase signature. Wrong.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 16:47:00 - [254] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 25/01/2007 16:41:53 Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Someone call teh po-lice, a ship that you spend half a bil on in fittings and a bil or two in implants is hard to kill Exept I get that speed with a t2 MWD, 3 LH nanos, 2 LH instabs and 3 vent rigs and 30 mil in implants, about 200 mil total in fitting and implants together. His calculations are wrong. Originally by: Kagura Nikon Speed rigs also increase signature. Wrong. you are right.. I somehow confused their drawback with the shield one.. Maybe they should increase signature to keep on par with the other speed stuff. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.25 16:53:00 - [255] Edited by: j0sephine on 25/01/2007 16:50:49 "that are all (or almost all(exclude the AB max speed skill and the istab)) before the MWD boost. So the relation of speed/signature is the same bar a max of 25%+15% difference form that skill. That is Hardly anything significant when the target is orbiting at around 20km." And if you don't consider reduction of incoming damage by 1/3rd to 1/4th a considerable difference then i simply don't know what to say. Note, this is equivalent of maxed out resistance bonus of Caldari ships for example. Or an extra invul field, or a faction energized nano. Or knocking out one-two of the damage mods from your opponent. Perhaps people are idiots when they waste slots on fitting these mods. After all, it doesn't apparently make any significant difference.
Alaisa Rift	Posted - 2007.01.25 17:09:00 - [256] Edited by: Alaisa Rift on 25/01/2007 17:09:23 don't forget the ship, drones... and any other mods that might be needed, if all of that is T2 ( - ship) then yeh it does add up to half a billion, if I use half a billion on a ship I expect it to have a little pwnage... use the same setup or use a webification weapon or nos and a smartbomb to kill drones and some missiles. or use ECM's ... yes they may be nerfed, but making them lose target lock could be usefull, or otherwise use sensor dampners, have some good ones and he will have to orbit closer making his speed drop.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.25 18:13:00 - [257] Edited by: Aramendel on 25/01/2007 18:13:40 Originally by: Alaisa Rift don't forget the ship, drones... and any other mods that might be needed, if all of that is T2 ( - ship) then yeh it does add up to half a billion Not really. For a typhoon for example you have 25 mil ship (after insurance), 40 mil for 4 heavy dim and 4 t2 siege, 15 mil for a t2 WD, 10 mil together for a t2 sensor booster, reactor contron and cap injector, 10 mil for a BCU2. 6 berserkers2 and 5 warrior2 6 mil. Gives us a total of 106 mil, 306 mil total with the rest. This is not really more than you have to pay for any other t2 fitted BS with rigs (and less what you have to pay for some t2 fitted HACs without rigs). Pricewise nanoships are nothing special.
Raven DeBlade Caldari Bladerunners Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.01.25 18:51:00 - [258] Edited by: Raven DeBlade on 25/01/2007 18:50:55 They are overpowere, no battleship should be able to reach speeds over 11km/sec period, they should not be ingame. Fix will hopefully come soon(TM). Either add proper countermeasures, like skills for webs (Range and speed) but a total "nerf" is not good either, speed shoul be ingame BUT at a penalty, it is rediculous to see all these hyperfast ships zip along and be able to do what they do without any significant risk. P.S T2 Webbers should be adressed also! D.S "To hunt pirates you need time and patience, because even monkeys fall from the trees"
Kaoyama Ameko	Posted - 2007.01.25 18:56:00 - [259] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 25/01/2007 18:13:40 Originally by: Alaisa Rift don't forget the ship, drones... and any other mods that might be needed, if all of that is T2 ( - ship) then yeh it does add up to half a billion Not really. For a typhoon for example you have 25 mil ship (after insurance), 40 mil for 4 heavy dim and 4 t2 siege, 15 mil for a t2 WD, 10 mil together for a t2 sensor booster, reactor contron and cap injector, 10 mil for a BCU2. 6 berserkers2 and 5 warrior2 6 mil. Gives us a total of 106 mil, 306 mil total with the rest. This is not really more than you have to pay for any other t2 fitted BS with rigs (and less what you have to pay for some t2 fitted HACs without rigs). Pricewise nanoships are nothing special. Please tell me where to get a Phoon for 10mil, since I'd love to get one that cheap. Last I checked, market price was at around 80mil. Seriously, though, cheap phoons would be nice.
sb404 Caldari Tarnak inc.	Posted - 2007.01.25 19:00:00 - [260] Originally by: Kaoyama Ameko Originally by: Aramendel Not really. For a typhoon for example you have 25 mil ship (after insurance), 40 mil for 4 heavy dim and 4 t2 siege, 15 mil for a t2 WD, 10 mil together for a t2 sensor booster, reactor contron and cap injector, 10 mil for a BCU2. 6 berserkers2 and 5 warrior2 6 mil. Gives us a total of 106 mil, 306 mil total with the rest. Please tell me where to get a Phoon for 10mil, since I'd love to get one that cheap. Last I checked, market price was at around 80mil. Seriously, though, cheap phoons would be nice. Well, I believe the bold part should answer that, where did you get the 10mil though, that's still a mystery... ------------------------------------------------- I never wrote this -Eris

M00dy Stain of Mind	Posted - 2007.01.25 19:09:00 - [261] I fly a Nano Phoon sometimes and it goes about 3km/s. I don't have any implants or rigs and some of my nanos are plain ol' T1. But OMG is it fun to fly! Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed awesomeness of 24000 Gigs - Devil Mercenaries For Hire!
Alexandre Martin Gallente Agony Unleashed	Posted - 2007.01.25 19:30:00 - [262] Why not tether the effective range of webifiers to the ship being targeted. For example a webbifier could "lock" a frig at 20KM as it does at the moment, but because a battleship is larger it can establish lock at a greater distance (obviously modified up for various ships bonii and down for other ships roles, like the covops frigate which is supposed to be stealthy or a recon cruiser). Just a thought.
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 19:54:00 - [263] Originally by: j0sephine And if you don't consider reduction of incoming damage by 1/3rd to 1/4th a considerable difference then i simply don't know what to say. Note, this is equivalent of maxed out resistance bonus of Caldari ships for example. Or an extra invul field, or a faction energized nano. Or knocking out one-two of the damage mods from your opponent. Perhaps people are idiots when they waste slots on fitting these mods. After all, it doesn't apparently make any significant difference. It is significant, for sure, but consider the midslots on a standard nanophoon: MWD, Injector, Disruptor, XL SB. One can hardly even call that a tank. I still contend this is yet another problem with nosferatus, and no way to either defend your cap from them, or deprive the enemy of cap from them aside from breaking the lock. The nosferatu problem does all the following in favour of the nano-BS: - makes it impossible to tackle with frigate/destroyer/cruiser sized hulls, - allows it to sustain MWD without using injectors, -- that in turn allows it to speed tank missiles forever versus, say, raven, -- this also allows it to disable amarr and gallente gun systems, or tank, or both, -- this leaves only short range minmatar as a consistent threat, and, really, how common are they? The nano-BS is the new vagabond. When a nano-BS is roaming your space, just like when a nano/stab-abond roams your space, your best chance of killing it involves a huginn/rapier and hopefully a lachesis to augment the damage dealer. Just like nanostababonds, it's hard to get a single ship to kill it, although making it disengage isn't ever too much of a problem. The nano-BS is harder to kill than the vagabond, but only because of large nos.
Hellspawn01 Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.25 20:21:00 - [264] Dont nerf clever players. Ship lovers click here
Shiraz Merlot Octavian Vanguard RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.25 20:40:00 - [265] There is a kill on the rzr killboard where someone has commented "The counter to nanophoons ... two nanophoons!". I'm sure you can guess what it looks like.
Kaoyama Ameko	Posted - 2007.01.25 20:54:00 - [266] Originally by: Kusotarre Originally by: j0sephine And if you don't consider reduction of incoming damage by 1/3rd to 1/4th a considerable difference then i simply don't know what to say. Note, this is equivalent of maxed out resistance bonus of Caldari ships for example. Or an extra invul field, or a faction energized nano. Or knocking out one-two of the damage mods from your opponent. Perhaps people are idiots when they waste slots on fitting these mods. After all, it doesn't apparently make any significant difference. It is significant, for sure, but consider the midslots on a standard nanophoon: MWD, Injector, Disruptor, XL SB. One can hardly even call that a tank. I still contend this is yet another problem with nosferatus, and no way to either defend your cap from them, or deprive the enemy of cap from them aside from breaking the lock. The nosferatu problem does all the following in favour of the nano-BS: - makes it impossible to tackle with frigate/destroyer/cruiser sized hulls, - allows it to sustain MWD without using injectors, -- that in turn allows it to speed tank missiles forever versus, say, raven, -- this also allows it to disable amarr and gallente gun systems, or tank, or both, -- this leaves only short range minmatar as a consistent threat, and, really, how common are they? The nano-BS is the new vagabond. When a nano-BS is roaming your space, just like when a nano/stab-abond roams your space, your best chance of killing it involves a huginn/rapier and hopefully a lachesis to augment the damage dealer. Just like nanostababonds, it's hard to get a single ship to kill it, although making it disengage isn't ever too much of a problem. The nano-BS is harder to kill than the vagabond, but only because of large nos. waves the "Balance NOS" flag, knowing full well that it's just gonna go on ignored... as always
Drek Grapper	Posted - 2007.01.25 21:37:00 - [267] Edited by: Drek Grapper on 25/01/2007 21:36:08 I think Naskaya is on the right track here... Originally by: Naskaya Edited by: Naskaya on 25/01/2007 05:41:13 I agree with the fact that Nosferatus are the problem. Many games have to deal with overpowered Vampire powers/spell/effect, as it weaken your foe and strengthen yourself for the same cost. Some of them deal with the issue by cutting the energy you get in half (you remove 400, you get 200), or no energy in return at all. The first one could be realistic in Eve, as the loss of energy would simulate the loss transfer in space between the ships. You could even get energy in accordance with the distance between ships. (100% back at 0km, 50% at optimal and 0% at optimal + falloff) But this wouldn't be enough for fixing this problem, as you could still empty almost instantly an inty capacitor with 4~6 Heavy Nos. Why not add a signature parameter to nos effect ? Smaller signature, less energy you get, as the Energy vampire weapon has problems in tracking a small sized target. In the end, you would still empty the capacitor of such ships, but it would take more time, giving an inty the option to effectively tackle Nano-Battleships. I'm against an anti-Nos module, as well as i'm against all modules which are a must. These restrict fitting diversity. Quote: Why not add a signature parameter to nos effect ? Smaller signature, less energy you get, as the Energy vampire weapon has problems in tracking a small sized target. In the end, you would still empty the capacitor of such ships, but it would take more time, giving an inty the option to effectively tackle Nano-Battleships. What about something like this- Large NOS > BS = 100% effective transfer ............> BC = 75% effective transfer ............> Cruiser = 50% effective transfer ............> Frig/Dest = 25% effective transfer ............> Inty = 15% effective transfer Sorry bout the dodgy spacing...it just would'nt line up. :) And stack nerf NOS on transfer effectiveness perhaps. Obvoisly it would apply to all ships so hence- Med NOS> Cruiser = 100%, Med NOS> Frigate = 75% etc etc. Needs more thought but i'm just throwing it out there...
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.25 22:33:00 - [268] Originally by: Kusotarre Originally by: j0sephine And if you don't consider reduction of incoming damage by 1/3rd to 1/4th a considerable difference then i simply don't know what to say. Note, this is equivalent of maxed out resistance bonus of Caldari ships for example. Or an extra invul field, or a faction energized nano. Or knocking out one-two of the damage mods from your opponent. Perhaps people are idiots when they waste slots on fitting these mods. After all, it doesn't apparently make any significant difference. It is significant, for sure, but consider the midslots on a standard nanophoon: MWD, Injector, Disruptor, XL SB. One can hardly even call that a tank. I still contend this is yet another problem with nosferatus, and no way to either defend your cap from them, or deprive the enemy of cap from them aside from breaking the lock. The nosferatu problem does all the following in favour of the nano-BS: - makes it impossible to tackle with frigate/destroyer/cruiser sized hulls, - allows it to sustain MWD without using injectors, -- that in turn allows it to speed tank missiles forever versus, say, raven, -- this also allows it to disable amarr and gallente gun systems, or tank, or both, -- this leaves only short range minmatar as a consistent threat, and, really, how common are they? The nano-BS is the new vagabond. When a nano-BS is roaming your space, just like when a nano/stab-abond roams your space, your best chance of killing it involves a huginn/rapier and hopefully a lachesis to augment the damage dealer. Just like nanostababonds, it's hard to get a single ship to kill it, although making it disengage isn't ever too much of a problem. The nano-BS is harder to kill than the vagabond, but only because of large nos. Aye, except a vagabond has a very hard time killing a competent BS 1v1 solo. And the ship was made for hit and run ops (it says so in the description) while a nanoBS can wtfpwn most battleships 1v1 and everyone and their mother can fly one without specialization training. I'm all for nerfing nos, nanos/istabs are fine. N.F.F. Recruitment
Rachel Vend Gallente Zend Insurance	Posted - 2007.01.25 22:37:00 - [269] Originally by: Raven DeBlade speed shoul be ingame BUT at a penalty, it is rediculous to see all these hyperfast ships zip along and be able to do what they do without any significant risk. There are several penalties already: 1. Their damage is total crap. 2. If they get webbed, they are on the express train to the clone bay. 3. The better (faster) setups are just as expensive as the faction/officer tank setups, and just as hard to kill.
Kataclismo	Posted - 2007.01.25 22:49:00 - [270] Pull up th BS mass, nerf inertial + nano (mass reduction)

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

Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.26 16:57:00 - [301] Originally by: Valea Silpha So c'mon... what is a viable offensive tactic against a nanobs ... i fly a huginn and i I don't like spamming but I do want to make my point clear, check here for a good solution to what you just described as to be the problem. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863 The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Sae Marr Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.26 17:04:00 - [302] I'm a minmatar pilot. I had flown the nanophoon when they weren't as common as they are now. With that out of the way, I agree with the original poster, although maybe not to that extent, that the nano/instab setups, especially bs ones, need to be brought down a notch. The previously universally flown and hated Nos+EW whorage has turned into whoring Nos and speed. Now, I'm not saying speed setups should not be viable, but they should not be as powerful and as ridiculously easy to fly as they are right now. Also, ships should probably randomly appear farther from the gate on jump-in than they do now. End rant. -
Sawirek	Posted - 2007.01.26 17:06:00 - [303] Okay i seen what a fleet of nanoships can do lately, i don't want to whine that it is too overpowered and do something to nerf it, well could a little, but i would advise to put something (no i don't know, but i am not payed for it) that can counter it. Okay take a huggin, that is how you counter one nanoBS, and now someone tell me how to counter a fleet of nanoBS ? With another nanoBS fleet would be the answer, but it is a kinda fuzzy coz with the way this is going we all gonna fly just nano ships in matter of year.
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.26 17:26:00 - [304] Originally by: Sawirek Okay i seen what a fleet of nanoships can do lately, i don't want to whine that it is too overpowered and do something to nerf it, well could a little, but i would advise to put something (no i don't know, but i am not payed for it) that can counter it. Okay take a huggin, that is how you counter one nanoBS, and now someone tell me how to counter a fleet of nanoBS ? With another nanoBS fleet would be the answer, but it is a kinda fuzzy coz with the way this is going we all gonna fly just nano ships in matter of year. people, please read: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863 This is a very nice way to disable Nano ships from becoming invincible because of they're speed, its a new form of EW, please check it out and comment on it people. this is my last plug of this for now. I'll stop spamming this now. -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Khavi Vetali Team Americas Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:44:00 - [305] Originally by: Wizzkidy 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. Yes, yes they are. However, the agility bonus on them doesn't appear to be stacking nerfed.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:06:00 - [306] Originally by: Solar Blade Its a tactic that only got known untill recently when someone took a typhoon and invented a new defence for battleship, speed defence. No, it is a tactic that has been known for a long time, however when inertia(l) stabalizers were changed to include a mass reduction with them it made the tactic much much much stronger and easier to achieve. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:10:00 - [307] Actually, rigs gave it a bigger boost than the changed instabs But, yes, it is an old tactic, almost as old as eve itself. Ultra speed setups surfaced and vanished again with module changes & balancing.
rinkanu	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:14:00 - [308] personaly i cant see how people can actually say that the nano / inertia stabs isnt a problem... once u cant kill a ship in a 1 on 1 battle even when fully prepared for the enemies fitting there is a problem. (considering both players have same sp , funds ,... u get my point) simple as that
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:31:00 - [309] Originally by: Aramendel Actually, rigs gave it a bigger boost than the changed instabs But, yes, it is an old tactic, almost as old as eve itself. Ultra speed setups surfaced and vanished again with module changes & balancing. Yea, but remove either one and the problem mainly goes away. The i-stabs are enablers just as much as the rigs are. Originally by: MrDisposable Nano setups do very very poor dmg.... and they are not cap stable. without NOS they cannot work. 5 heavy drones + 4 bonused torps is not "very very poor damage" 5 bonused heavy drones is not "very very poor damage" Its not super fantastic, but its not bad. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
GankYou	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:42:00 - [310] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Aramendel Actually, rigs gave it a bigger boost than the changed instabs But, yes, it is an old tactic, almost as old as eve itself. Ultra speed setups surfaced and vanished again with module changes & balancing. Yea, but remove either one and the problem mainly goes away. The i-stabs are enablers just as much as the rigs are. Originally by: MrDisposable Nano setups do very very poor dmg.... and they are not cap stable. without NOS they cannot work. 5 heavy drones + 4 bonused torps is not "very very poor damage" 5 bonused heavy drones is not "very very poor damage" Its not super fantastic, but its not bad. For clueless monkeys: give me a stabphoon setup with sieges that will go 6km/s without snakes.

MrDisposable	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:50:00 - [311] Sorry, I did overstate it.... but thier damage is not un-tankable... far from it. Its the NOS thats untankable.
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:59:00 - [312] nos can be "tanked". cap injectors anyone? and the trick is NOT to inject more than youre drained, but rather injecting exactly the amount you use, JUST BEFORE you use it. so the opponent sucks on your empty cap.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.26 20:02:00 - [313] Originally by: GankYou Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Aramendel Actually, rigs gave it a bigger boost than the changed instabs But, yes, it is an old tactic, almost as old as eve itself. Ultra speed setups surfaced and vanished again with module changes & balancing. Yea, but remove either one and the problem mainly goes away. The i-stabs are enablers just as much as the rigs are. Originally by: MrDisposable Nano setups do very very poor dmg.... and they are not cap stable. without NOS they cannot work. 5 heavy drones + 4 bonused torps is not "very very poor damage" 5 bonused heavy drones is not "very very poor damage" Its not super fantastic, but its not bad. For clueless monkeys: give me a stabphoon setup with sieges that will go 6km/s without snakes. Best you will hit with non-faction gear is 4km/s Oh noes, only 4km/s! Its still too fast. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
MrDisposable	Posted - 2007.01.26 20:13:00 - [314] Originally by: Taipan Gedscho nos can be "tanked". cap injectors anyone? and the trick is NOT to inject more than youre drained, but rather injecting exactly the amount you use, JUST BEFORE you use it. so the opponent sucks on your empty cap. Cap injectors have a lifespan.. Nos does not.
Sonjared	Posted - 2007.01.26 20:30:00 - [315] Reasonable solution that addresses most if not all issues presented: MAKE IT SO that the bigger the ship and the faster the big ship goes, the slower it can turn. So you CAN make a BS to from 300 to 10000 (with rigs,implants and so on) - but it would also take a long long time to accelerate AND stop. And it wouldn't be able to orbit at 10000 speed at less than 100 KM away etc.
Black Night	Posted - 2007.01.26 20:47:00 - [316] I think the problem has been over blown. The only problem with the ship is its ability to turn on a dime (and that will be fixed). Nevertheless, I believe the nanobs are need for gate campers. Why have 5 or more ppl gang up one ship, and that ship not have a way to escape. Therefore, the real problem is gate campers, someone found a way to get away from gate campers, and they do not like it. find a way for ppl to escape gate campers, and then slow down the nanobs.
Sonjared	Posted - 2007.01.26 21:02:00 - [317] Edited by: Sonjared on 26/01/2007 21:01:01 Originally by: Nicocat I have found the answer to nano ships: Medium T2 autocannons hurt like a *****. Medium drones can catch up. Might need T2 minmatar ones, though. Noone uses lasers, so I haven't tested them ;) So there you have it. When fighting a ship with no tank, medium guns work fine. a) the nano ship would drain Amarr of cap as nanos like NOS = no lasers b) Only Warrior II can catch up and will be smartbombed so c) Turrets have hard time tracking because you're going 3-10 km/s and using a tracking disruptor. d) torps won't hit and cruises make little damage Heavy missiles and heavy assault javelins are pretty much the only thing that work. Anything shorther range like blasters and so on are quite useless as nano ship can easily adjust orbit to the heavy nos limit.
Uhu	Posted - 2007.01.26 21:10:00 - [318] There are several things that need fixing. 1. Introduce structural overload - hull damage on fast manevuers/collisions. Make agility an adjustable parameter (like overpowering the manevuer engines as a special action), resulting in different ammounts of structural damage. We will be able to turn BS real quick, but not more than 2-3 times before it falls apart. And we will be able to suicide ram things :) 2. battlesip agility. The things aree too fast to turn, even without instabs. Introduce max safe turning/accelerating speed dependant on sig radius (to avoid structural overload) 3. Delete nosferatu from the game. Or make them EM damage type weapons, affected by resists and sig radius to calculate the stolen cap ammount.
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.26 21:38:00 - [319] Everyone is talking about nerfing NOS, or nerfing stabs and nano's but I found a perfect solution to nano-battleships. besides people are all saying that battleships shouldn't go so fast but if you adapt them the right way, why shouldn't they, if you lighten them up and change it offcourse it will be able to move faster, the only thing having any influance in space is mass, the lesser mass the faster things go, and by decreasing the ships mass it will be able to change direction quicker.. but enough about that. I found a way to counter this by nullifying the mass adition, thereby making nanoships far less invincible. check this link for more info. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863&page=1 -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Reto The Last Resort	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:04:00 - [320] Edited by: Reto on 26/01/2007 22:02:42 [crosspost] i agree to a certain point with the op. since: bs are hard-hitting powerhouses which are the foundation of a gang or a fleet. they are deffo not solopwn mobiles and should never be. but: the "speed over tank" option however is something which must be preserved. ppl should be able to fly their ships fast to avoid dmg if they wish to. especially the smaller ship classes like cruisers and frigates should be able to hit high speeds (interceptors in general and cruisers like the vagabond or the deimos should be highspeed boats). big ships however shouldnt without sacrificing A LOT of their actual capabilities (no large nos, heavy arms, heavy tank). a bs on its own should NOT be able to take out other bs without risking at least getting hit and maybe destoryed aswell. nanos currently have to less drawbacks for bigger ships. if a bs can attack my battleship without me being able showing resistance there is something wrong with the basic game design ccp wants to implement to make ppl work as a team. there is no heavy nerf of a module neccesary here. simply decrease the effect of inertia stabs proportional to the mass of the ship. i reconned that istabs have less effect the bigger the ship is. i reach a great speed with 2 TI stabs on my ares but the effect isnt that good if i use em on my thorax for example. this should be further increased or make i-stabs like afterburners dependant on shipsize. inertia stabilizers should need powergrid to compensate the momentum of a ship. the bigger the mass the more pg u need. for example: frig sized i-stabs -> let em as they are 1 pg med sized i-stabs -> small pg use...like 20 pg bs sized i-stabs -> 100-200 pg use...enuff to gimp nos+torp+mwd+ipwnuall setups however it is highly recomended that such a change should include thinking about oversized i-stab fitting and further details. bs sized i-stab on a cruiser shouldnt lead to a maller going 100000m/s... this is what came to mind after i read all of the previous nano-fad threads. im striclty against the uber-nerf of i-stabs or piracy but im for the precise and reasonable modification of ships according to their role within combat. [/crosspost] Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".

Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:14:00 - [321] Edited by: Taipan Gedscho on 26/01/2007 22:11:22 Originally by: MrDisposable Originally by: Taipan Gedscho nos can be "tanked". cap injectors anyone? and the trick is NOT to inject more than youre drained, but rather injecting exactly the amount you use, JUST BEFORE you use it. so the opponent sucks on your empty cap. Cap injectors have a lifespan.. Nos does not. invalid argument. example: projectile guns have a lifespan. a repper doesnt. so? stop whining, just because you dislike nos. and, no, i dont use a nano or nos ship. i just dont like brainless nerfing
MrDisposable	Posted - 2007.01.26 23:01:00 - [322] Originally by: Taipan Gedscho Edited by: Taipan Gedscho on 26/01/2007 22:11:22 Originally by: MrDisposable Originally by: Taipan Gedscho nos can be "tanked". cap injectors anyone? and the trick is NOT to inject more than youre drained, but rather injecting exactly the amount you use, JUST BEFORE you use it. so the opponent sucks on your empty cap. Cap injectors have a lifespan.. Nos does not. invalid argument. example: projectile guns have a lifespan. a repper doesnt. so? stop whining, just because you dislike nos. and, no, i dont use a nano or nos ship. i just dont like brainless nerfing Ok then how about this.... how long can you run a repper on cap boosters vs how long can you fire your guns assuming either cargo is 100% filled with either? Exactly... you could fire for ages, you can boost for like 2-3 minutes. Also if you know your opponent is using a booster why even waste the ammo until you are sure his cap is completely dead?
xVx Scarecrow Minmatar	Posted - 2007.01.26 23:29:00 - [323] Okay i dont know if any1 has suggested this cuz am not readin thro 10 pagies but how about a stacking nerf for nanos and i-stabs e.g the stacking nerf of dmg mods so it wouldnt be as bad for smaller ships cuz thay only fir 1 or 2 where as the bs fits more. [URL=http://img478.imageshack.us/my.php?image=siggy6.jpg][/URL]
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.26 23:41:00 - [324] Originally by: Goumindong Yea, but remove either one and the problem mainly goes away. The i-stabs are enablers just as much as the rigs are. Well...no. Using 3 nanos + 3 instabs instead of 6 nanos gives my nanophoon a 7% higher MWD speed. Using 3 vent rigs gives it a 47% higher MWD speed. As far as responsible boosts go the one of instabs is rather small. You could remove it entirely and not change much.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.26 23:44:00 - [325] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Goumindong Yea, but remove either one and the problem mainly goes away. The i-stabs are enablers just as much as the rigs are. Well...no. Using 3 nanos + 3 instabs instead of 6 nanos gives my nanophoon a 7% higher MWD speed. Using 3 vent rigs gives it a 47% higher MWD speed. As far as responsible boosts go the one of instabs is rather small. You could remove it entirely and not change much. I suppose you are right then. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.26 23:48:00 - [326] Edited by: Tovarishch on 26/01/2007 23:48:13 Originally by: Solar Blade Stop Whining and Adapt to your advisaries. The same could be said to you... and everyone else who makes this stupid comment. How about YOU stop whining and adapt to life without a battleship that is as fast and agile as an interceptor. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.27 00:01:00 - [327] Edited by: Aramendel on 27/01/2007 00:02:36 Originally by: Goumindong I suppose you are right then, but with just the MWD ive noticed significant differences in the speed increases when moving from nanos to i-stabs in a proper configuration. Not on battleships. On frigs (and even cruisers) instabs have a FAR greater effect because the speed boost from nanos is relatively small compared to their base speed. For example, on a claw fitting 2 nanos + 2 instabs instead 4 nanos gives me a 19% speed boost. 2 vent rigs still give me a greater boost, though.
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.27 01:28:00 - [328] "Well...no. Using 3 nanos + 3 instabs instead of 6 nanos gives my nanophoon a 7% higher MWD speed. Using 3 vent rigs gives it a 47% higher MWD speed." This isn't very fair comparison -- on one hand you have "replace 3x +speed module with 3x -mass module" and on the other hand you have "3x +speed module vs nothing". Try something more analoguous... how much speed do you get out of "3x nano + 3x i-stab" ship when compared to just "3x nano" ship?
Gragnor Ordos Humanitas	Posted - 2007.01.27 01:29:00 - [329] Originally by: Sadist Originally by: Tomb A battleship is NOT and SHOULD NOT BE a SOLO-pwnmobile. (with the exception of Instab whoring on the typhoon or dominix) Fair enough. Take this to its logical end. We will all sit 10km apart f1-f8 and log when we get to structure. He with the best tank wins. BORING. Now add in the flavour of a pack of nano ships- dancing in and out- first mistake is their last. The basic issue is that speed tanking is viable. I have spent $300m to try it out. I have ratted in it and was shocked to find it works. When ratting you orbit at 20-25km - f1-f8 and watch as you win. Cap management is everything. It is not for the feint of heart as your first mistake results in tears as your ship dies. So now we have a new tanking systenm - one that cannot be stopped easily. If you want to - spend $300m. Nanophoons escape gate camps - yet the one I saw over the last week was in structure by the time he got away. That's the balance - speed is his tank. He cannot be slow or he dies. Do not nerf this new tanking system. Otherwise the game stagnates. Move with it. Drop your tanks and get nanoed up. Spend the isk to compete - don't whinge about it. And by the way - a nanophoon in a small gang is an awesome tackler - but for damage - forget about it. I know I can be very easily tanked. All I can do is hold, drain and run. Without friends - I am dead - against a two on one - I cannot fight. That means a nanophoon is not a solo pwn mobile. One on one - it has enormous advantages but for anything else - its gonna die fast if it gets called primary and cannot get 50km away in ten seconds.
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.27 01:44:00 - [330] Edited by: j0sephine on 27/01/2007 01:41:51 "Fair enough. Take this to its logical end. We will all sit 10km apart f1-f8 and log when we get to structure. He with the best tank wins. BORING. Now add in the flavour of a pack of nano ships- dancing in and out- first mistake is their last." This isn't "taking things to logical end", but rather exaggeration and simplification in attempt to prove one should be allowed to squeeze square peg in round hole. The ships dancing in and out and meeting the end when they make mistake have been in the game from the beginning. They're frigates and to some extent cruisers, along with their tech.2 variants. At the same time you have ships which are more about plain duking it out -- with heavier armour, more of punch and able to fight at short, medium and long distances. But consequently deprived of high speed and maneuverability of these lighter dancers. You don't need to "all sit 10km apart f1-f8 and log when we get to structure" and you don't need a nano battleship to already have this different sort of playstyle. The thing is, some people don't actually like the "first mistake is the last" part of that alternate gamestyle no matter how much they try to use it in defense of being able to use heavily armoured ship with speeds and agility of vessels... that are granted fraction of battleship hitpoints for a reason. And so they try to buy themselves the extra protection without caring how it affects the game on the whole.

Venix An Eye For An Eye Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.01.27 01:46:00 - [331] Signed to nerf nano bs-bcs. I think the vaga is fine and intys are fine. But a BS and BC outrunning an inty is just sad.
JaxxFunk Minmatar Macabre Votum	Posted - 2007.01.27 02:35:00 - [332] Maybe give the nano's/instabs a slight stacking penalty, but seriously peeps, you can't just moan for every new tactic/setup that pwns to be nerfed.
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.27 02:54:00 - [333] Claim: NanoBS are faster than ceptors. This is wrong. A crow with 2 istabs and a T2 MWD will outpace a NanoBS with a T2 MWD. A crow with 2 istabs and a gistii MWD will outpace a nanoBS with gist MWD. If you want to compare a BS using full rack of LH nanos and istabs, gist MWD and LG or HG snakes versus a non-snake, non-gist, non-istabbed interceptor, you're delusional. Claim: NanoBS has good damage. Wrong. The highest damage NanoBS is typhoon with 4 seige and 5 heavies. There is no bonus to drones here, and no room to fit BCSs. Also, NanoBS cannot fit 4 seige, MWD and 4 NOS and XL SB without fitting RCUs, lowering speed considerably. The dominix, OTOH, has only 5 drones with a damage bonus, and no missile slots. Again, pretty bad damage. Any decent short range BS will outdamage these ships by a wide margin. Claim: NanoBS are better tacklers than ceptors. Wrong. Ceptors are not only faster, they have superior lock time, and that makes a big difference. If you want to make the argument that NanoBS can fit a sensorbooster, then either A) Typhoon loses it's shieldbooster, or B) Domi loses web/hardener/ECCM/something-else-useful. Again, to reiterate. The problem with nanoBS is the inability to effectively tackle, and that is mostly due to the power of Nos versus small targets. NanoBS are slippery, hard to catch, frustrating to fight, have poor damage, can't tank, can control when they do and do not fight. It's a tier 2 vagabond.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.27 03:08:00 - [334] 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
Neuromandis	Posted - 2007.01.27 03:08:00 - [335] Well, I gotta ask... Do we really want 500% mwd's on BS's?? Why not make 1mn as they are, 10mn 400% and 100mn's 300%? Battleships don't need that kind of speed boosting, I think... Even blasterboats should be fine...
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.27 04:00:00 - [336] Originally by: Black Night I think the problem has been over blown. The only problem with the ship is its ability to turn on a dime (and that will be fixed). Nevertheless, I believe the nanobs are need for gate campers. Why have 5 or more ppl gang up one ship, and that ship not have a way to escape. Therefore, the real problem is gate campers, someone found a way to get away from gate campers, and they do not like it. find a way for ppl to escape gate campers, and then slow down the nanobs. thing is, all you need to get back to the gate is an MWD. nanos sure help, but unless theres an instalocking huginn a typical blasterthron will be able to make it back to the gate in most cases. nanos just change the 'most' to 'all' nanobs need to be nerfed, somehow. At current, they lean far too much towards the "i dont fight if i dont want to but if i do i can" attitute, and to be fair, thats also known as consensual pvp. is that really what we want?... people not fighting unless they know they can win and ifthings go bad they can run? pretty boring, tbh
Exiled One Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.27 04:54:00 - [337] Originally by: Neuromandis Well, I gotta ask... Do we really want 500% mwd's on BS's?? Why not make 1mn as they are, 10mn 400% and 100mn's 300%? Battleships don't need that kind of speed boosting, I think... Even blasterboats should be fine... DIE It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.27 05:56:00 - [338] Originally by: mallina nanobs need to be nerfed, somehow. At current, they lean far too much towards the "i dont fight if i dont want to but if i do i can" attitute, and to be fair, thats also known as consensual pvp. is that really what we want?... people not fighting unless they know they can win and ifthings go bad they can run? pretty boring, tbh The ability (or, to be precise, the high probability) of being able to decide to engage or not does not make the PVP a matter of choice for both sides. If you want to kill a nanoBS, you can try. Bring a huginn, bring recon launchers, hell, bring your own nanoBS, and, if they ever fix nosferatus, bring a ceptor. By your definition of what consentual PVP is, vagabonds, nanocurses, nanoBS, all ceptors, and countless other ships must be included in this category.
booh	Posted - 2007.01.27 09:17:00 - [339] I don't think nanos/istabs are the problem. Atleast now theres some fun ships to fly and in a different way than the usual stuff. And it's not like you don't have anything to counter. Huginns are now actually useful, we always whined they sux. There are other things that are wrong. Like NOS/vampires. They should be target ship size sensitive. Something like "tracking". So they don't work fully on frigs or fast things. Then intyes can also tackle those nber-nano BS. The combination of missiles, drones and NOS is the lethal stuff, not the speed - cause it's all speed independent. And there you have two ways of stopping them. Another thing that needs fixing is Tech2 web, something like 90% and 12km. Another good thing for huginns/rapiers and against nano ships. And the nanos add more variety to your gangs. Now you suddenly need some webbers also to counter it. And this can only be a good thing.
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.27 09:39:00 - [340] Originally by: booh I don't think nanos/istabs are the problem. Atleast now theres some fun ships to fly and in a different way than the usual stuff. And it's not like you don't have anything to counter. Huginns are now actually useful, we always whined they sux. There are other things that are wrong. Like NOS/vampires. They should be target ship size sensitive. Something like "tracking". So they don't work fully on frigs or fast things. Then intyes can also tackle those nber-nano BS. The combination of missiles, drones and NOS is the lethal stuff, not the speed - cause it's all speed independent. And there you have two ways of stopping them. Another thing that needs fixing is Tech2 web, something like 90% and 12km. Another good thing for huginns/rapiers and against nano ships. And the nanos add more variety to your gangs. Now you suddenly need some webbers also to counter it. And this can only be a good thing. I do agree nos needs some nerf to it, as long as its not completely useless against fast ships. make its cycles or nos value's decrease as the tracking takes down, don't make it as sensitive as turrets but more something in between, so it still nosses frigates but not completely drains them in 2 seconds flat. also check out the link in my sig, I found a way to balance the issue :D -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.27 10:19:00 - [341] Originally by: j0sephine This isn't very fair comparison -- on one hand you have "replace 3x +speed module with 3x -mass module" and on the other hand you have "3x +speed module vs nothing". Try something more analoguous... how much speed do you get out of "3x nano + 3x i-stab" ship when compared to just "3x nano" ship? Of cource it isn't a fair comparison - but that isn't the point at all. Rigs have the advantage of using previously "unused" slots, but this does not chance anything with the result. A nanoship pre-kali was no running with only 3 nanos - you have to compare what it is using before and what after. And there the main part of the boost comes from rigs. This is rather important, considering we hear quite regulary "nerf instabs" here, but those are not really the problem. Actually nerfing them would hurt frigates more than battleships.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.27 11:14:00 - [342] Edited by: Ryysa on 27/01/2007 11:14:25 Nanoships are really not overpowered. N.F.F. Recruitment
JVol	Posted - 2007.01.27 12:44:00 - [343] "Battleships aren't supposed to go as fast as an inty " "nano Bs are un-killable in solo PvP " "it's an unfair advantage and should be nerfed " "They can run away whenever they want " "doing 4500k m/s in a nano bs is ridiculous " Am I am getting the gyst of the slackers who want this type of ship nerfed out of existence so THEY don't have to actually THINK of ways to counter this VERY specific ship? If you go out in 0.0 with lets just say, a really good generic raven set up( insert ANY other really good solo PvP setup here BTW ), and you encounter a nano phoon, chances are, if you don't run away in time, your gonna die. SO WHAT?!! Had you known you would ONLY be facing THAT ship, you COULD fit for it... damps, ecm, both VERY effective at countering it. You may not kill him, but he wont kill you either. Eve isn't about the dev's making it so you can easily force every enemy you see into fighting YOUR fight... If you go into 0.0 with any one fitting someone will be able to kill you. These setups are only good vs ships with no counter measures to defend themselves from its strengths. Not much unlike the same "generic" ships getting caught by an mwd'ing scorp nos'ing and jamming, you cant get way, you cant do ANY damage, you weren't set up for THAT ship, you die. I'm sure the skilled pilots on this forum could name dozens of ships/setups that if you don't specifically set YOUR ship up to counter are going to kill you EVERYTIME and not take any damage from you. Doesn't mean they should be nerfed all to heck. These ships CAN be tackled by a small gang as well. try fitting up a duel webby nano phoon to tackle the "offending" nano ship.. Just because they cant be tackled by a darn inty doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to fly in game.. Fit one up, fly it, you'll find that its NOT an "IWIN" button.
Exiled One Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.01.27 14:01:00 - [344] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 27/01/2007 11:21:01 Originally by: j0sephine This isn't very fair comparison -- on one hand you have "replace 3x +speed module with 3x -mass module" and on the other hand you have "3x +speed module vs nothing". Try something more analoguous... how much speed do you get out of "3x nano + 3x i-stab" ship when compared to just "3x nano" ship? Of cource it isn't a fair comparison - but that isn't the point at all. Rigs have the advantage of using previously "unused" slots, but this does not change anything with the result. A nanoship pre-kali was no running with only 3 nanos - you have to compare what it is using before and what after. And there the main part of the boost comes from rigs. This is rather important, considering we hear quite regulary "nerf instabs" here, but those are not really the problem. Actually nerfing them would hurt frigates more than battleships. Originally by: Kusotarre Wrong. The highest damage NanoBS is typhoon with 4 seige and 5 heavies. There is no bonus to drones here, and no room to fit BCSs. Also, NanoBS cannot fit 4 seige, MWD and 4 NOS and XL SB without fitting RCUs, lowering speed considerably. The dominix, OTOH, has only 5 drones with a damage bonus, and no missile slots. Again, pretty bad damage. A nanophoon with 3 nanos 2 instabs goes 4500 m/s with a t2 MWD, 3 vent rigs and 30 mil in implants. This is just plenty and leaves room for a BCU and RCU. And, no, 400 dps is not "bad dps", especially when you combine it with 4 heavy nos. 400 dps on a target which has no harderners and reps/boosters running is more than 1000 dps from a blasterthron on a target which does. And even without this it is a good deal more than a vaga or a captor can do. Minus 700m/s from that velocity and you get orbit speed. Any decent bs pilot will hit a bs with +1500m sig radius orbiting at ~3,5km/sec. It's great being Amarr, aint it?
Soros 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.27 14:31:00 - [345] nano domi isn't the problem ther slow in comparison to any frigate.. A typhoon on the other hand is a problem, but you are comparing a nanophoon with gistii mwd and local intertia / nano to a t2 mwd ceptor.. Also remember nanophoons take 20seconds to lock a frig plenty of time for you to web them down, i strongly disagree with any '' nurf nano '' if someone wants to invest that sort of isk into a ship thats fine, it has its weaknesses you just have to find them !!
Kaar Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.01.27 15:04:00 - [346] Its funny, the last 3 nano ships ive coming into contact with (2 phoon 1 domi) have all died. Why? Because i use the tools provided to stop them. The domi died because i got him webbed with my huggin. The two phoons died because the 3 web drones from my raven webbed him.... STOP THE DAMN WHINING AND USE THE TOOLS AVAILABLE. --- ---
PriceCheckMax	Posted - 2007.01.27 16:10:00 - [347] Edited by: PriceCheckMax on 27/01/2007 16:10:00 Originally by: Kaar Its funny, the last 3 nano ships ive coming into contact with (2 phoon 1 domi) have all died. Why? Because i use the tools provided to stop them. The domi died because i got him webbed with my huggin. The two phoons died because the 3 web drones from my raven webbed him.... STOP THE DAMN WHINING AND USE THE TOOLS AVAILABLE. Says someone who flies nanophoons all the time... Afraid they might nerf your solopwnmobile? and you were the first one to make the setup semi-famous(?)
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.27 16:12:00 - [348] Originally by: JVol Am I am getting the gyst of the slackers who want this type of ship nerfed out of existence so THEY don't have to actually THINK of ways to counter this VERY specific ship? check here for a something i thought up to counter this very specific ship setup :) http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863 -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Amy Wang	Posted - 2007.01.27 17:03:00 - [349] Edited by: Amy Wang on 27/01/2007 17:01:28 Problem is, you can think as hard as you want, you cant counter snake implanted faction fitted nano-BS unless their pilot makes a mistake. You can prevent part of their damage somehow with EW but you wont kill one of those things unless the pilot makes a mistake. Tell me your idea of catching one and I will tell you why it wont work. btw check out my easy and balanced fix: *Introduce a hardcap* for speed increase based on a ships base speed.** You cant pass this hardcap whatever you fit into your ship or clone it simply wont go any faster. Hardcaps are pretty commonly used in many mmorpgs to prevent game breaking stats. e.g. base speed x 30 (or 25 or 35 whatever you see fit, maybe even different for different ship classes and races, base speed means speed from item database without any bonuses from skills etc) with factor 30 we get new Phoon max speed: 4500m/s new Domi max speed: 3600m/s Still fast for a BS but not invulnerability mode anymore. No more game breaking speeds and if you use expensive equipment you still get an edge because you can fit more damage mods or even a tank while flying with top speed.
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.27 17:04:00 - [350] "Of cource it isn't a fair comparison - but that isn't the point at all." Well, must say i don't see much point in using a biased comparison, in this case... as it just provides skewed view on the issue. "Rigs have the advantage of using previously "unused" slots, but this does not change anything with the result. A nanoship pre-kali was no running with only 3 nanos - you have to compare what it is using before and what after. And there the main part of the boost comes from rigs." Rigs are basically 2-3 extra slots on the ship. In this sense they aren't exactly "more" overpowered than existing slots -- a slot is a slot is a slot. And while yes, a ship with 14 slots is quite naturally expected to be more powerful than the same ship given 11 slots... it doesn't mean extra slots given to the ship should be specifically nerfed to the point where their presence doesn't matter whatsoever. The problem isn't specifically part of the fitting (nanos, i-stabs) or the other (rigs) but them combined and stacked into the final result... since each of them have separately very comparable effect on the ship at hand. Although yes, it could be argued that if suggested 'solution' to problem is giving nano's and i-stabs percentage-based speed boost and fixed value based mass changes, then the same approach should be taken towards the rigs. "This is rather important, considering we hear quite regulary "nerf instabs" here, but those are not really the problem. Actually nerfing them would hurt frigates more than battleships." They are (along with the nanos) significant part of the problem. And how exactly nerfing them would hurt frigates more? Currently frigates get less boost out of these modules than the battleships do. Proposed changes aim to reverse that, if anything o.(

Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.27 17:36:00 - [351] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 27/01/2007 17:35:59 Originally by: Amy Wang Edited by: Amy Wang on 27/01/2007 17:01:28 Problem is, you can think as hard as you want, you cant counter snake implanted faction fitted nano-BS unless their pilot makes a mistake. You can prevent part of their damage somehow with EW but you wont kill one of those things unless the pilot makes a mistake. Tell me your idea of catching one and I will tell you why it wont work. btw check out my easy and balanced fix: *Introduce a hardcap* for speed increase based on a ships base speed.** You cant pass this hardcap whatever you fit into your ship or clone it simply wont go any faster. Its space... unless your flying near lightspeed there is no max speed. besides introducing hardcaps would kinda go against a lot of things this game is good for, why won't people allow for a bit of new tactics, as long as they are counterable they should be fine... I find this idea quite good honestly. its the sandbox thats called eve, if you want a super fast interceptor should there be hardcap to it. even if its unreachable its not a good solution since it obliverates the nano tactic, instaid a counter could be used like RGG's (see my signature) which would work just as well, but still leave the nano tactic viable. if people want to fly at high speeds than thats they're choice, it would be the same if I would spend a huge amount of money on a tank or super rare ECM's. you want to cap those off to then... kinda go's into the same direction if you think about it. I don't like it being attacked by a nano-ship and being unable to counter it, but I don't want to see the tactic become useless either. -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Shandling Minmatar Disband Phoenix Supremacy	Posted - 2007.01.27 17:39:00 - [352] I think a NOS fix will deal with it. Add tracking to NOS. Don't let NOS drain if target has less cap left than a full drain. If that was fixed, the nanophoon would still be good but not as 'godly' as it can be now.
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.27 17:40:00 - [353] Originally by: Shandling I think a NOS fix will deal with it. Add tracking to NOS. Don't let NOS drain if target has less cap left than a full drain. If that was fixed, the nanophoon would still be good but not as 'godly' as it can be now. I agree with adding tracking to nos, but it won't fix the problem mate... -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Kaar Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.01.27 17:56:00 - [354] Originally by: PriceCheckMax Edited by: PriceCheckMax on 27/01/2007 16:10:00 Originally by: Kaar Its funny, the last 3 nano ships ive coming into contact with (2 phoon 1 domi) have all died. Why? Because i use the tools provided to stop them. The domi died because i got him webbed with my huggin. The two phoons died because the 3 web drones from my raven webbed him.... STOP THE DAMN WHINING AND USE THE TOOLS AVAILABLE. Says someone who flies nanophoons all the time... Afraid they might nerf your solopwnmobile? and you were the first one to make the setup semi-famous(?) You dont know a damn thing that I fly these days. --- ---
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.27 18:16:00 - [355] Can we get carrier and dread size MWD please? -------- snip You are not allowed to be outbreak alt atm. Your friendly [GM]/[DEV]/[ISD] team. snip
Cyberus	Posted - 2007.01.27 18:21:00 - [356] Edited by: Cyberus on 27/01/2007 18:20:17 Edited by: Cyberus on 27/01/2007 18:19:43 There is actualy very simple solution without nerfing any modules. let they give the bonuses as they are but what you need is the nerf ships. Yes you hear me rigth nerf ships .... all of them. all araces and all types of ships. dont mess with mods. What you actualy need is the speed limit at the given ships types. I have 2 difrent solutions but both with same result. here it comes. 1) set the maximum speed what can be flow at given ship type: a)battleships - 800m/s ( minmatar can have the racial bonus of 20% on all they ships so it will become 1000m/s) B)cruisers/hac's - max speed of 1000m/s (minmatar +20%) c) frigats/af - max speed 1500 ( +20% minmatar racial) d) Interceptors will be ofcource not limited at all because of the role in game. 2) There is other simple solution. all AB/MWD modules only incrace/give bonus to the basic ship speed without counting skills in.( example: phone with t2 mdw and maxed aceleration control skill will fly max at 1012 m/s,[ cause of racial bonus] scorpion only 776 m/s . The skills like navigation will only effect the ships when ab/mwd modules not active. Same is for inetria stabs and nano's. So simply say only the bonus to the basic speeds of space ships.
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.27 18:49:00 - [357] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 27/01/2007 18:49:48 Originally by: Cyberus Edited by: Cyberus on 27/01/2007 18:20:17 Edited by: Cyberus on 27/01/2007 18:19:43 There is actualy very simple solution without nerfing any modules. let they give the bonuses as they are but what you need is the nerf ships. Yes you hear me rigth nerf ships .... all of them. all araces and all types of ships. dont mess with mods. What you actualy need is the speed limit at the given ships types. I have 2 difrent solutions but both with same result. here it comes. 1) set the maximum speed what can be flow at given ship type: a)battleships - 800m/s ( minmatar can have the racial bonus of 20% on all they ships so it will become 1000m/s) B)cruisers/hac's - max speed of 1000m/s (minmatar +20%) c) frigats/af - max speed 1500 ( +20% minmatar racial) d) Interceptors will be ofcource not limited at all because of the role in game. 2) There is other simple solution. all AB/MWD modules only incrace/give bonus to the basic ship speed without counting skills in.( example: phone with t2 mdw and maxed aceleration control skill will fly max at 1012 m/s,[ cause of racial bonus] scorpion only 776 m/s . The skills like navigation will only effect the ships when ab/mwd modules not active. Same is for inetria stabs and nano's. So simply say only the bonus to the basic speeds of space ships. what you are proposing is nerfing a viable tactic, there is NO maximum speed in space unless you come near lightspeed (and with the warpdrive even that speed can be exceded. it could go against the sandbox freedome EVE has imagine it like this, If I fit a super powerfull tank ... should then suddenly my max rep amount be cap'd off... or if I fit a powerfull ECM ship with all modules geared to ECM... should that be cap'd off ext ext ext... and it would contradict eve's own theory and the laws of physics even more so. (not that eve has perfect physics but still...) there is another way to keep speed usefull as a tank but not invincible by introducing a counter: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863 -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Cyberus	Posted - 2007.01.27 19:11:00 - [358] Quote: what you are proposing is nerfing a viable tactic, there is NO maximum speed in space unless you come near lightspeed (and with the warpdrive even that speed can be exceded. I belave that you forget 1 thing. They are already limited. even with skills and full load of nano's inertias they cant go faster then the module bonus give. You speaking about phisics in game.... Well if there was real phisics like in space then actualy they will accelerate contineusly so long the module trust. So dont say that i probpose to nerf them at all. Only what i said is to discrace already limited speeds anyway. Only for balancing. I have also read treat of yours about solution with new module and i can tell you 1 thing . The problem will still saty so long that ships use nosfieratu. Once you cap dead you are dead and they still go with they impressive speed of interceptor.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.27 20:12:00 - [359] Originally by: Ryysa Edited by: Ryysa on 27/01/2007 11:14:25 Nanoships are really not overpowered. Wow you are on top of a lot of those mails. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.27 21:32:00 - [360] Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 27/01/2007 21:31:26 Edited by: Hyperforce99 on 27/01/2007 21:30:13 Originally by: Cyberus Quote: what you are proposing is nerfing a viable tactic, there is NO maximum speed in space unless you come near lightspeed (and with the warpdrive even that speed can be exceded. I belave that you forget 1 thing. They are already limited. even with skills and full load of nano's inertias they cant go faster then the module bonus give. You speaking about phisics in game.... Well if there was real phisics like in space then actualy they will accelerate contineusly so long the module trust. So dont say that i probpose to nerf them at all. Only what i said is to discrace already limited speeds anyway. Only for balancing. I have also read treat of yours about solution with new module and i can tell you 1 thing . The problem will still saty so long that ships use nosfieratu. Once you cap dead you are dead and they still go with they impressive speed of interceptor. true, but max speed and ultimate max speed are 2 different things. see I do understand that eve has a max speed, but with modules this can be increased. However making it impossible to, even with more / better modules (ext.) increase your max speed, just isn't right. it creates a roof in the max speed, and that kinda go's against the eve sandbox feeling, if I want to have a super powerfull tank, I can put on every most expensive module, implant, rig and bonus to make it near invincible. does that mean that there should be a cap on armor repaireres or shield booster to? how would you feel if your interceptor would be the only ship that can go past 5000m/s making them the only thing that can be used to catch other ships. even when you use a T1 which is completeley fitted for this... maybe not as effective as an interceptor but still... it might be able to do it. and about the NOS tactic, think about the following. Nano ships are so strong because you can not damage them while they have all the time in the world to NOS you dry and then kill you with ease. if it fails they run, and possibly try again. With the RGG,they can still nos you dry, but if you can hit them... damage them, you can kill them before they can nos you dry, then you have a chance. Cap booster would be able to help you here as well, as they longate the battle, turning the advantage to your side. giving you more time to kill it before your out of cap. If the enemy ship doesn't want to be inside your RGG range then he will have to go OUTSIDE nos range. see what I mean. and last, if they aren't fast enough, and you do manage to webbify them, then they probably arn't fast enough to escape your webbers range before they are brought to a crawl. The increased mass might make them take longer to slow down, but with less speed they also need a shorter braking range. -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863

JVol	Posted - 2007.01.27 22:01:00 - [361] Nano ships are NOT INVINCIBLE!! I built one and tested it last vs a corp8's malstrom.. it kicked my butt.. why? He had t2 800's with an opt at about 2-3km, but the falloff is 18-19km.. It pounded me with just ONE tracking computer< ripped thru my sheilds and armor in seconds, and I was orbiting at 19km at almost 3k m/s with 4 nos and 4 t2 cruise, one mwd rig and 2 20% speed rigs.. STOP your whining about these darn ships being "invincible".. They are no more difficult to counter than snipers or ECM.. The people that "sortta" play this game, are going to RUIN it!!
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.27 22:08:00 - [362] Originally by: JVol Nano ships are NOT INVINCIBLE!! I built one and tested it last vs a corp8's malstrom.. it kicked my butt.. why? He had t2 800's with an opt at about 2-3km, but the falloff is 18-19km.. It pounded me with just ONE tracking computer< ripped thru my sheilds and armor in seconds, and I was orbiting at 19km at almost 3k m/s with 4 nos and 4 t2 cruise, one mwd rig and 2 20% speed rigs.. STOP your whining about these darn ships being "invincible".. They are no more difficult to counter than snipers or ECM.. The people that "sortta" play this game, are going to RUIN it!! 3km is slow. And as soon as fight doesn't start to go your way... vroooom.... 200km away. -------- snip You are not allowed to be outbreak alt atm. Your friendly [GM]/[DEV]/[ISD] team. snip
Naviset	Posted - 2007.01.27 23:04:00 - [363] Uhhh, explain to me how webber drones caught up to a decent Nanophoon? Tell me how you kept one in range long enough for the webbers to slow him down? Did you REALLY engage a nanobs, or are you just trying to sound like you have experience with them? A slight modification to nos would help, also, perhaps an additional effect of webs that modifies a ships inertia. Originally by: Kaar Originally by: PriceCheckMax Edited by: PriceCheckMax on 27/01/2007 16:10:00 Originally by: Kaar Its funny, the last 3 nano ships ive coming into contact with (2 phoon 1 domi) have all died. Why? Because i use the tools provided to stop them. The domi died because i got him webbed with my huggin. The two phoons died because the 3 web drones from my raven webbed him.... STOP THE DAMN WHINING AND USE THE TOOLS AVAILABLE. Says someone who flies nanophoons all the time... Afraid they might nerf your solopwnmobile? and you were the first one to make the setup semi-famous(?) You dont know a damn thing that I fly these days.
Cyberus	Posted - 2007.01.28 00:15:00 - [364] Originally by: JVol Nano ships are NOT INVINCIBLE!! I built one and tested it last vs a corp8's malstrom.. it kicked my butt.. why? He had t2 800's with an opt at about 2-3km, but the falloff is 18-19km.. It pounded me with just ONE tracking computer< ripped thru my sheilds and armor in seconds, and I was orbiting at 19km at almost 3k m/s with 4 nos and 4 t2 cruise, one mwd rig and 2 20% speed rigs.. STOP your whining about these darn ships being "invincible".. They are no more difficult to counter than snipers or ECM.. The people that "sortta" play this game, are going to RUIN it!! what you write hier is just silly simple 1vs1 damage ship test. in real pvp you did warped or outrun him long time before he got in ya armour. I did figth those ships personaly and yes they are weak on tank but they strong point is nano's + inertia stabs + nosfies. they sucked me dry so i has no cap left to scrambleand web them. They was also not able kill my ship and once i was with missels in they armour they just run. But this is not the point. THe point of this whole disscussion that that ships goin to fast. Yes they are too fast m8 for the size of the ship. So you can kill them thats rigth, if you can stop them and thats what we all discuss about. I have seen many septors dieing while goin after those ships and damage dealers was simply no able to do anything cause they run out of they range. So in my opinion its completely unrealistic thats so big ships fly so fast. Yes i know that its a game but if i would like to see things goind so fat i just did buy damn formule1 game and play with. CCP did screw up again and they know that. Its just matter of time before this ccp gonna get back to the "normal"
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.28 00:46:00 - [365] Basically, speed tanking is a fairly cool idea. Problem is when you're speed tanking ships of approximately the same size class (and larger). Then, everything breaks down. I've no problems with the idea of 'ceptors, frigates, cruisers, 'speed tanking' a battleship. It's a trade off, where they can't hurt the BS a great deal, but ... well, evade a lot of firepower in return. A 3km+ battleship on the other hand, especially if it's 'pimped up' with snakes and faction gear, is basically pretty much immune to ships of the same size. Or ships smaller. Or ships larger. I'm sorry, 'bring a huginn' or 'bring webber drones' are fallacious arguments - if you fit specifically to counter a particular tactic, then yes, you _should_ win. Against that tactic. Interceptors are annoying, fast and hard to hit. That's a reasonable tradeoff for not being all that tough, nor doing a huge amount of damage. High speed BS/BCs have the advantages, but without the drawbacks. This is a problem.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.28 05:58:00 - [366] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Ryysa Edited by: Ryysa on 27/01/2007 11:14:25 Nanoships are really not overpowered. Wow you are on top of a lot of those mails. Not sure if you are sarcastic or not, I was being sarcastic. But currently, what some decent pvpers with some snake implants can do in a roaming gang with nanoships is ridiculous... And I know there are a LOT of people abusing it atm. See - a lot of people don't just whine on forums, they have some fun with it until it gets nerfed, then find something else. It always goes that way. There have been a million reasons a million solutions to everything. This topic has been discussed to death. It's CCP's call to do or not to do something about this nanofad. Everyone knows the standpoints etc. N.F.F. Recruitment
Levin Cavil Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.01.28 07:30:00 - [367] 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. ---------- Eve is balanced: Caldari have to train Rails Minmatar have to train Missiles Gallente have to train Drones Amarr have to train Caldari
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.28 07:40:00 - [368] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Ryysa Edited by: Ryysa on 27/01/2007 11:14:25 Nanoships are really not overpowered. Wow you are on top of a lot of those mails. Not sure if you are sarcastic or not, I was being sarcastic. But currently, what some decent pvpers with some snake implants can do in a roaming gang with nanoships is ridiculous... And I know there are a LOT of people abusing it atm. See - a lot of people don't just whine on forums, they have some fun with it until it gets nerfed, then find something else. It always goes that way. There have been a million reasons a million solutions to everything. This topic has been discussed to death. It's CCP's call to do or not to do something about this nanofad. Everyone knows the standpoints etc. No, it wasnt[and I was aware that you were being sarcastic]. When I accessed the board there were 15 kills on it in 3 systems, you were on top of 13 of them. I quoted you for the "see, evidence" part. In order to get on the top of a kill mail over a machariel you need to be engaging first and doing good damage. So what the boards mails told me was that you were chosing engagements and tacking and the support would come in later to close the deal. But you were still dealing significant enough damage[unlike an interceptor, or probably even a vagabond] to stay at the top of the mails. I.E. you could have essentialy been soloing for most of the kills. Frankly, i dont think an interceptor would have been able to do the job you did. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.28 07:54:00 - [369] Edited by: Ryysa on 28/01/2007 07:53:10 Originally by: Goumindong No, it wasnt[and I was aware that you were being sarcastic]. When I accessed the board there were 15 kills on it in 3 systems, you were on top of 13 of them. I quoted you for the "see, evidence" part. In order to get on the top of a kill mail over a machariel you need to be engaging first and doing good damage. So what the boards mails told me was that you were chosing engagements and tacking and the support would come in later to close the deal. But you were still dealing significant enough damage[unlike an interceptor, or probably even a vagabond] to stay at the top of the mails. I.E. you could have essentialy been soloing for most of the kills. Frankly, i dont think an interceptor would have been able to do the job you did. Actually a lot of those fights we were outblobbed 3:1. We just ganked some stuff and left. Oh and mate, that machariel was nano machariel with 4 launchers/4 nos and 12km/s... The reason I did more damage was because machariel doesn't have rof bonus But yes, I meant the link as proof that this needs to get nerfed. It's stupid atm, I only fly nanostuff now, it's just so darned effective, it's a sin not to use it when you are able to. Soon every decent pvp squad will fly that... and since nanoships can't really kill nanoships that good unless one side of nanoships gets blobbed too hard.. well.. it's going to be very silly to say the least. And you are right, inty could never do this, but speed fitted vagabond could... Then again it requires specialization training etc. And it has tracking, can't just click orbit mwd, nos, torps, orbit at 24km and wtfpwn everything afk. I prefer my vagabonds gank fitted though :) N.F.F. Recruitment
Soros 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 09:41:00 - [370] Nanos are not the problem. Nos is the problem... !

Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.01.28 11:27:00 - [371] Call me ***** Role player but nanoships are violence against logic in many directions. If copurse someone wants speed tanking sure thing but speed tanking with 100000 ton monster did you loose yor mind ? What is then purpose of smaller class ships ? Their main adventage speed and agility is gone with nano**s. Someone should realize that BB is not only class in this game, but these extreme setups makes other classes almost obsolte. But maybe nanosips can be usefull to increase value of cruisers, for example increase tracking of med turrets and make heavy missiles more capable to hit these fast moving large vessels (increase overal speed and explosion speed, maybe introduce new missile type). This could make from curiser viable counter to nanoships and important part of fleets. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.28 11:53:00 - [372] Originally by: Soros Nanos are not the problem. Nos is the problem... ! QFT N.F.F. Recruitment
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 13:37:00 - [373] 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.
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 14:45:00 - [374] 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. *********************************************** -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 14:49:00 - [375] 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.
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 14:54:00 - [376] 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." *********************************************** -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:06:00 - [377] 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.
Amerame Section XIII	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:16:00 - [378] Maybe just making 20km webs as common as 20km scramblers would be enough.
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:22:00 - [379] 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. ********************************************* -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
Sykosys Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:23:00 - [380] Here is my viewpoint, Its not the nano's but the actual inertia stabs that are the problem. And these setups are DEFINITLY unbalanced. Why?? Because something is unbalanced when the only counter is the same thing. That is very unbalanced.

welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:24:00 - [381] 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.
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:24:00 - [382] Originally by: Amerame Maybe just making 20km webs as common as 20km scramblers would be enough. That would be a death sentence to any interceptor pilot. *********************************************** -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:29:00 - [383] 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.
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:30:00 - [384] Originally by: Sykosys Here is my viewpoint, Its not the nano's but the actual inertia stabs that are the problem. And these setups are DEFINITLY unbalanced. Why?? Because something is unbalanced when the only counter is the same thing. That is very unbalanced. So the fact that Faction ships with officer gear are vertually unchalanged by anything but the equivalent or larger numbers is different. Time and time agian Nanopilots have said that they no that counters exist because we have all run into them. Obviously we dont go around advertising the fact that we have died all over the forums but can you really blame us? P.S. When people say Nano they are refering to both in this thread because the combination of the agility and added speed are the complaint of many. Some have specified the inertia that lest the BS slide out of the Web range is the problem but my answer to them is MOVE YOUR SHIP and make it fast to catch things. *********************************************** -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:33:00 - [385] 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. *********************************************** -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:40:00 - [386] 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.
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:45:00 - [387] Originally by: welsh wizard 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. Thank you for proving my point and the fact that agian you say that you are being objective and I am not just reinforces what I was saying. Im sorry that this has apparently gotten off topic but I agian restate the fact that I think that Nano/Instab ships have there purpose and should remain. *********************************************** -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
Jack Rackhem Minmatar	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:45:00 - [388] nanoships: nice aspects: fast (duh) can escape quite a few situations reasonable (but by no means uber) firepower bad aspects: very expensive to do right practically no tank, or not a very good tank...this is a HUGE weakness, especially with revelations. there really isn't much need to nerf them...they are very expensive (say ~400mil to set up) and they can't win all fights. In fact, against certain ships and setups, about all they can do is force a stalemate or leave. what they are really good for is the solo pirate preying on smaller ships. a properly set up raven would eat one 1v1 if the nanoship decided to hang out and slug it out. all the nanoship does is allow you to get away if need be vs similar sized targets. to kill one, it's very simple...stop it. now i know a lot of people are saying "but you CAN'T stop it!" and that is simply not true. ok, it can escape a bubble camp...about time something could (and i don't want to hear the *****ing about that as i am also an interdictor pilot). as was mentioned before...it may be able to escape, but a proper bubble camp will still prevent it from violating the cordon that you have set up. if it isn't a proper camp, then sure it can escape and move on...but that's your fault for not setting up the camp right. think of a nanoship as a gheto tech 2 ship. a single hac is going to ruin the day of pretty much anything battleship or smaller (depending on setups of course) in a 1v1 fight. are people calling on a nerf to HACs? They cost about the same as a HAC to set up right...it ain't a poor man's setup. do what you would do against a threat like a HAC...have multiple people or fly one yourself. yes warp to 0 makes them slipery...but if you can land a few webs on it...it's toasty like. how do you get close enough with a ship that can take it's dmg and tackle it? i leave that to the readers to figure out (i.e. i'm not going to play the game for you...just think outside the box)...but rest assured it can be done. a few months back 5 n00b pilots (none with more than 6mil SPs, at least 2 were around 3mil SPs) all flying tech 1 ships...only 2 of which were battleships...took on a vagabond and a nano-phoon. we managed to kill the phoon and the vagabond ran, while only loosing a caracal in the process. the phoon pilot wasn't a n00b...it's was a matter of tactics. before you ask, yes this was in 0.0. if this is going to be a "nerf cauz my uber l33t t1 frigate can't killz it!" thread...then i'm just going to laugh . in short, use your head...you can beat a nanoship if you use your head. -Jack Rackhem PS yes, i know my last name is spelled wrong... If you fought like a man, you wouldn't have to die like a dog!
Sykosys Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:50:00 - [389] Nano ships turn around on a dime and fly away from anything they don't wish to engage. BS's should not be able to do this. A BS should not be able to turn like an inty and flee from anything. This is wrong, why doesn't anyone see this.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.28 15:57:00 - [390] Originally by: Aurora Mahair Some have specified the inertia that lest the BS slide out of the Web range is the problem but my answer to them is MOVE YOUR SHIP and make it fast to catch things. In short, counter nanoships with nanoships. Great..not. Basically, this will end up the same way as it did with ECM - everyone and their jumpclone using them because they are the best counter against themselves and anything else is more or less in a disadvantage. Not that there were not countersetups, but why using them when you can have the strength of a setup and the counter instead having just the counter? Well, we have seen how the ECM thing worked out.

Jack Rackhem Minmatar	Posted - 2007.01.28 16:02:00 - [391] Originally by: Sykosys Nano ships turn around on a dime and fly away from anything they don't wish to engage. BS's should not be able to do this. A BS should not be able to turn like an inty and flee from anything. This is wrong, why doesn't anyone see this. pretty much anything can run from a fight (except for bubble camps) if you set it up right and are paying attention. hell, those people that say the can outrun an inty have no idea how to set up ships. pvp isn't all about locking and firing your guns...there is a lot more to it ********************* If you fought like a man, you wouldn't have to die like a dog!
Aurora Mahair Minmatar Keepers of the Holy Bagel	Posted - 2007.01.28 16:05:00 - [392] Originally by: Aramendel In short, counter nanoships with nanoships. Great..not. Basically, this will end up the same way as it did with ECM - everyone and their jumpclone using them because they are the best counter against themselves and anything else is more or less in a disadvantage. Not that there were not countersetups, but why using them when you can have the strength of a setup and the counter instead having just the counter? Well, we have seen how the ECM thing worked out. This is another example of what im talking about. You are applying this logic to this situation but what about to a Damp/web setup. where you are Rendered unable to defend your self accept by tanking it until friends can show up (Same thing that happens with Nano ships.) *********************************************** -Aurora Mahair "Think for yourself, question authority..." Third Eye, Tool
Sykosys Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.28 16:12:00 - [393] Originally by: Jack Rackhem Originally by: Sykosys Nano ships turn around on a dime and fly away from anything they don't wish to engage. BS's should not be able to do this. A BS should not be able to turn like an inty and flee from anything. This is wrong, why doesn't anyone see this. pretty much anything can run from a fight (except for bubble camps) if you set it up right and are paying attention. hell, those people that say the can outrun an inty have no idea how to set up ships. pvp isn't all about locking and firing your guns...there is a lot more to it no no no The problem isn't actually being able to run away. Its the ease in doing so. BS's are fairly huge and should require a bit of time to turn around. Not just turn and instantly into 3k speed
JVol	Posted - 2007.01.28 16:38:00 - [394] Well said... Now can WE PLEASE get a dev to comment on this?? Its more than obvious that this is of great concern to many pilots in EVE atm.. Originally by: Jack Rackhem nanoships: nice aspects: fast (duh) can escape quite a few situations reasonable (but by no means uber) firepower bad aspects: very expensive to do right practically no tank, or not a very good tank...this is a HUGE weakness, especially with revelations. there really isn't much need to nerf them...they are very expensive (say ~400mil to set up) and they can't win all fights. In fact, against certain ships and setups, about all they can do is force a stalemate or leave. what they are really good for is the solo pirate preying on smaller ships. a properly set up raven would eat one 1v1 if the nanoship decided to hang out and slug it out. all the nanoship does is allow you to get away if need be vs similar sized targets. to kill one, it's very simple...stop it. now i know a lot of people are saying "but you CAN'T stop it!" and that is simply not true. ok, it can escape a bubble camp...about time something could (and i don't want to hear the *****ing about that as i am also an interdictor pilot). as was mentioned before...it may be able to escape, but a proper bubble camp will still prevent it from violating the cordon that you have set up. if it isn't a proper camp, then sure it can escape and move on...but that's your fault for not setting up the camp right. think of a nanoship as a gheto tech 2 ship. a single hac is going to ruin the day of pretty much anything battleship or smaller (depending on setups of course) in a 1v1 fight. are people calling on a nerf to HACs? They cost about the same as a HAC to set up right...it ain't a poor man's setup. do what you would do against a threat like a HAC...have multiple people or fly one yourself. yes warp to 0 makes them slipery...but if you can land a few webs on it...it's toasty like. how do you get close enough with a ship that can take it's dmg and tackle it? i leave that to the readers to figure out (i.e. i'm not going to play the game for you...just think outside the box)...but rest assured it can be done. a few months back 5 n00b pilots (none with more than 6mil SPs, at least 2 were around 3mil SPs) all flying tech 1 ships...only 2 of which were battleships...took on a vagabond and a nano-phoon. we managed to kill the phoon and the vagabond ran, while only loosing a caracal in the process. the phoon pilot wasn't a n00b...it's was a matter of tactics. before you ask, yes this was in 0.0. if this is going to be a "nerf cauz my uber l33t t1 frigate can't killz it!" thread...then i'm just going to laugh . in short, use your head...you can beat a nanoship if you use your head. -Jack Rackhem PS yes, i know my last name is spelled wrong...
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2007.01.28 17:08:00 - [395] im really ****ed by this whining about so called "nanoships", so i haven't read the whole X pages about the subject, and therefore dont know if its already been mentioned... but what if i put... say... 3 or 4 drone navcomps on my dominix and launched a wave of webber drones... wouldnt this slow a nanoship long enough so it can get tackled by an inty?
Father Weebles Repo Industries	Posted - 2007.01.28 18:00:00 - [396] Originally by: Taipan Gedscho im really ****ed by this whining about so called "nanoships", so i haven't read the whole X pages about the subject, and therefore dont know if its already been mentioned... but what if i put... say... 3 or 4 drone navcomps on my dominix and launched a wave of webber drones... wouldnt this slow a nanoship long enough so it can get tackled by an inty? webber drones only travel at +-1500 m/s while most nano-ships easily go past 2500 "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."
Zelakil	Posted - 2007.01.28 18:50:00 - [397] CCP please do not nerf this. I dont' fly one but I can still see that this is one of those things that makes the game dynamic and interesting. People that complain about things like this should be playing WoW, not a game like Eve in which strategy is #1. If you ab****ely MUST do something, please come up with a way to beat them (if thats really impossible as some claim) rather than do away with them. There is no logical reasson that a mod such as a mass reduing stab should have a stack penalty...we want the game to be as realistic as possible while maintaining playability. I have noticed its usually the people that get popped that complain. Well, peeps, train your skills so you can fly one to then go after it one on one.
Taipan Gedscho Taipan Industries	Posted - 2007.01.28 19:11:00 - [398] Originally by: Father Weebles Originally by: Taipan Gedscho im really ****ed by this whining about so called "nanoships", so i haven't read the whole X pages about the subject, and therefore dont know if its already been mentioned... but what if i put... say... 3 or 4 drone navcomps on my dominix and launched a wave of webber drones... wouldnt this slow a nanoship long enough so it can get tackled by an inty? webber drones only travel at +-1500 m/s while most nano-ships easily go past 2500 did you actually read my post? my ogres with ONE navcomp go 1500+ im sure webbers with 3+ navcomps go ALOT faster. reading ftw
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.28 20:56:00 - [399] Originally by: Aurora Mahair This is another example of what im talking about. You are applying this logic to this situation but what about to a Damp/web setup. where you are Rendered unable to defend your self accept by tanking it until friends can show up (Same thing that happens with Nano ships.) Bad bad analogy. Which ships can mount such a setup? Gallente and minni recons. Those ships do not have nos at all and perhaps half the base dps of nanoBS. If those would do only 200-300 dps and had not 4 heavy nos fitted I doubt anyone would complain about them. Also, those setups are far more vulnerable against higher numbers. They can almost completely disable another ship (but are rather vulnerable to medium & heavy drones), but one single ship, no matter which kind (within limits, a t1 fitted frigate shouldn't be a problem), will either force them to retreat or die. A 08/15 BC or an AF is just fine there. You have to use a far more specialized counter against a nanobs.
Liberator Girl	Posted - 2007.01.28 21:06:00 - [400] Why not just double the speed of every ship and get inertia/nano stacking penality ? This would cause that each nano would have less meaning cause the base speed would be bigger + there wouldnt be any sense of gettin more than 3 cause of the stacking penality. Lowslot ships wouldn't be so much overpowered. Case closed

Dragy Caldari Royal Hiigaran Navy	Posted - 2007.01.28 21:08:00 - [401] It was me
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.01.28 21:25:00 - [402] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Aurora Mahair This is another example of what im talking about. You are applying this logic to this situation but what about to a Damp/web setup. where you are Rendered unable to defend your self accept by tanking it until friends can show up (Same thing that happens with Nano ships.) Bad bad analogy. Which ships can mount such a setup? Gallente and minni recons. Those ships do not have nos at all and perhaps half the base dps of nanoBS. If those would do only 200-300 dps and had not 4 heavy nos fitted I doubt anyone would complain about them. Also, those setups are far more vulnerable against higher numbers. They can almost completely disable another ship (but are rather vulnerable to medium & heavy drones), but one single ship, no matter which kind (within limits, a t1 fitted frigate shouldn't be a problem), will either force them to retreat or die. A 08/15 BC or an AF is just fine there. You have to use a far more specialized counter against a nanobs. Having just read this entire post I would like to thank Aramendel, j0sephine and Goumindong. What a great contribution these characters give to Eve -no matter what the discussion topic they seem to be able to look at the problem from a non-biased angle. For that thank you. Ko
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.01.28 21:38:00 - [403] Maybe if mobile WARP distruptors realy do their job for example ditrupt Microwarp drives there wont be such problem :)) Now seriously Nanoships are now almos everywhere its clear sign of their powerfullnes. There is no simple counter as against ECM or sniper setups. So its realy ony solution to everyone fly nanoships or matar recon ? Thats realy crappy game witch 3 flyeable ships... BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
gordon cain Minmatar x13	Posted - 2007.01.28 23:01:00 - [404] Originally by: Jack Rackhem nanoships: nice aspects: fast (duh) can escape quite a few situations reasonable (but by no means uber) firepower bad aspects: very expensive to do right practically no tank, or not a very good tank...this is a HUGE weakness, especially with revelations. there really isn't much need to nerf them...they are very expensive (say ~400mil to set up) and they can't win all fights. In fact, against certain ships and setups, about all they can do is force a stalemate or leave. what they are really good for is the solo pirate preying on smaller ships. a properly set up raven would eat one 1v1 if the nanoship decided to hang out and slug it out. all the nanoship does is allow you to get away if need be vs similar sized targets. to kill one, it's very simple...stop it. now i know a lot of people are saying "but you CAN'T stop it!" and that is simply not true. ok, it can escape a bubble camp...about time something could (and i don't want to hear the *****ing about that as i am also an interdictor pilot). as was mentioned before...it may be able to escape, but a proper bubble camp will still prevent it from violating the cordon that you have set up. if it isn't a proper camp, then sure it can escape and move on...but that's your fault for not setting up the camp right. think of a nanoship as a gheto tech 2 ship. a single hac is going to ruin the day of pretty much anything battleship or smaller (depending on setups of course) in a 1v1 fight. are people calling on a nerf to HACs? They cost about the same as a HAC to set up right...it ain't a poor man's setup. do what you would do against a threat like a HAC...have multiple people or fly one yourself. yes warp to 0 makes them slipery...but if you can land a few webs on it...it's toasty like. how do you get close enough with a ship that can take it's dmg and tackle it? i leave that to the readers to figure out (i.e. i'm not going to play the game for you...just think outside the box)...but rest assured it can be done. a few months back 5 n00b pilots (none with more than 6mil SPs, at least 2 were around 3mil SPs) all flying tech 1 ships...only 2 of which were battleships...took on a vagabond and a nano-phoon. we managed to kill the phoon and the vagabond ran, while only loosing a caracal in the process. the phoon pilot wasn't a n00b...it's was a matter of tactics. before you ask, yes this was in 0.0. if this is going to be a "nerf cauz my uber l33t t1 frigate can't killz it!" thread...then i'm just going to laugh . in short, use your head...you can beat a nanoship if you use your head. -Jack Rackhem PS yes, i know my last name is spelled wrong... A decent Typhoon Nano pilot would eat that raven alive. The missiles wont even come near to scratch it. Gordon Cain
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 01:00:00 - [405] Edited by: mallina on 29/01/2007 01:00:11 When a battleship has the agility and mobility of an interceptor and the firepower to down the average battleship within a relatively reasonable timespan, whilst neutralizing the threat of smaller ships that attempt to lock it down then something is very wrong, no matter how much it costs or how 'different' it may indeed be. case in point: Gang of Nanophoons versus Gang of standard Battleships, Battlecruisers, Recons and Interceptors You can be damn certain that the nanophoons will have the advantage here. They're free to engage whenever they want and although there might be an element of risk with taking the gang head-on (especially in the prescence of a huginn/rapier, although no doubt they would be called primary and dispatched quickly) theres nothing the other gang can do to make you fight if you dont want to, or even leave their space. Due to NOS, it is impossible for interceptors to obtain a tackle without practically suiciding itself by getting in range of the nanophoons and far away from the reach of its own gang. The ONLY POSSIBLE WAY (bar human error) to kill a nanophoon is to get a web on it. Lets look at the options here: 1- Get within 10km. Not gonna happen, as such ships operate well outside that range 2- use a tackler. Very risky, nanobs can lock them long before they get in range, nos them dry, take them out and chances are the webbed bs will escape long before support jumps to the inty. 3- use webber drones. helpful, but ineffective. the drones are unable to catch up to the nanobs unless it makes a serious mistake. Thing is, it'l probably still be going faster than you despite that, plus the drones can be destroyed. 4- use a Huginn or Rapier the most effective method, but requires one or more minmatar specialized pilots to obtain. Even then, it will never stop the nanobs from getting out of gatecamps and if the gang of nanoships knows that its there they sure as hell wont blindly fly into range of it. that, and recons arnt too tough anyway, so unless you're remote repping your huginn/rapier to death it'l be called primary and dispatched before its of any real use, in most cases. in short, the only effective counter to nanobs is to Bait it and have a cloaked Rapier or two to web it. To stop it simply warping off if its more than 24k away you could also use an Arazu to scram it and keep it dampened. The problem with THAT is that you'd be using at least 3 ships, 2 of which require specced pilots, in order to have a good chance of catching one nanophoon. is that really how it should be?
Flesh Eater	Posted - 2007.01.29 01:27:00 - [406] In order to get the speeds and usefulness you guys are talking about, the required fitting is so ridiculously expensive that it is not even nearly worth all this fuss.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.29 01:31:00 - [407] Originally by: Flesh Eater In order to get the speeds and usefulness you guys are talking about, the required fitting is so ridiculously expensive that it is not even nearly worth all this fuss. no, they are not that expensive. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.01.29 02:07:00 - [408] Finally Minnie ships are recognized for their strengths and everybody wants a nerf. ~CoLe Blackblood
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.01.29 02:21:00 - [409] 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. You speak the truth. ~CoLe Blackblood
JVol	Posted - 2007.01.29 03:08:00 - [410] Has dev responded to this topic YET???

mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 03:41:00 - [411] Originally by: CoLe Blackblood The nanoship adds spice to Eve. The phoon was considered the most useless POS battleship of all the races - now it is feared. But then again the NeutDomi is a ridiculous solopwnmobile, is that next on the list? Oh wait it has Nos so it must be. The nanoship jumping into a bubblecamp has a chance. Why is this a problem? Is the boring ass bubble-camp supposed to be the iWin of Eve? NOSECMDomi was overpowered. NOS/NEUTDomi, whilst still a powerful ship, is not. also, comparing a nanophoon to a 20 person gatecamp isnt too healthy. why should a combat-setup battleship be able to slip past such numbers with such ease when standard ones cant?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.29 04:10:00 - [412] Originally by: mallina Originally by: CoLe Blackblood The nanoship adds spice to Eve. The phoon was considered the most useless POS battleship of all the races - now it is feared. But then again the NeutDomi is a ridiculous solopwnmobile, is that next on the list? Oh wait it has Nos so it must be. The nanoship jumping into a bubblecamp has a chance. Why is this a problem? Is the boring ass bubble-camp supposed to be the iWin of Eve? NOSECMDomi was overpowered. NOS/NEUTDomi, whilst still a powerful ship, is not. also, comparing a nanophoon to a 20 person gatecamp isnt too healthy. why should a combat-setup battleship be able to slip past such numbers with such ease when standard ones cant? because they are flying the nano-setups? ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.01.29 04:53:00 - [413] Originally by: mallina also, comparing a nanophoon to a 20 person gatecamp isnt too healthy. why should a combat-setup battleship be able to slip past such numbers with such ease when standard ones cant? A nanoship is far from invulnerable in a gatecamp. But it does stand a chance at slipping through, and why shouldn't it? Just because you've got a 20 ship camp doesn't mean you win. Just because the incoming jumper is in a nanoship doesn't mean he will win either. The odds are even in an otherwise skewed matchup and that leads us back to the openness of Eve. 20 nanoships jumping in on 20 snipers would be interesting to see. ~CoLe Blackblood
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.01.29 06:21:00 - [414] Originally by: CoLe Blackblood Originally by: mallina also, comparing a nanophoon to a 20 person gatecamp isnt too healthy. why should a combat-setup battleship be able to slip past such numbers with such ease when standard ones cant? A nanoship is far from invulnerable in a gatecamp. But it does stand a chance at slipping through, and why shouldn't it? Just because you've got a 20 ship camp doesn't mean you win. Just because the incoming jumper is in a nanoship doesn't mean he will win either. The odds are even in an otherwise skewed matchup and that leads us back to the openness of Eve. 20 nanoships jumping in on 20 snipers would be interesting to see. why would it be interesting? the nano ships would be on the snipers in zero time -and most snipers don't fit a web and usually run a very small tank. I would put my isk on the nano ships winning every time.
Havok Pierce Gallente	Posted - 2007.01.29 07:36:00 - [415] Edited by: Havok Pierce on 29/01/2007 07:33:28 Originally by: Sara Devi why would it be interesting? the nano ships would be on the snipers in zero time -and most snipers don't fit a web and usually run a very small tank. I would put my isk on the nano ships winning every time. I guess it's time to rethink our gate{w,g}ank tactics and setups.
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.01.29 08:22:00 - [416] Originally by: Havok Pierce Edited by: Havok Pierce on 29/01/2007 07:33:28 Originally by: Sara Devi why would it be interesting? the nano ships would be on the snipers in zero time -and most snipers don't fit a web and usually run a very small tank. I would put my isk on the nano ships winning every time. I guess it's time to rethink our gate{w,g}ank tactics and setups. yes, which is the point that the non biased players have been making. ie. everyone that can will run nano.
Hera Persephone	Posted - 2007.01.29 08:46:00 - [417] Nanos/Inertia stabs are not overpowered. Just learn how to kill them. They actually pop easy due to the lack of tank (Speed is their tank.) Just grab a little fast ship and web them. They will pop easy. If you don't have a little fast ship, mess up their orbit, go the opposite way they are when they reach their max orbit range. you will run right thru web range, web them then see the perty blue light.
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.29 09:23:00 - [418] Originally by: Hera Persephone Nanos/Inertia stabs are not overpowered. Just learn how to kill them. They actually pop easy due to the lack of tank (Speed is their tank.) Just grab a little fast ship and web them. They will pop easy. If you don't have a little fast ship, mess up their orbit, go the opposite way they are when they reach their max orbit range. you will run right thru web range, web them then see the perty blue light. OMFG 14 pages of discussion and you can't even be bothered to read THE FIRST PAGE? This has been discussed SO MANY TIMES - a WEB will NOT help you in the situation!! These BS with I-Stabs will have too much inersia for you to web them enough, and they do not pop easy because they still have the amount of armour of a BS!! READ the damn thread ffs
Hera Persephone	Posted - 2007.01.29 09:30:00 - [419] If you put a web on them this is how it will go. "La dee da, look im outrunning all of these missiles la dee da. Oh ****! I'm webbed!" BAM BAM BAM!! "All those missiles i was outrunning a second ago just hit me and killed me!"
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.01.29 09:32:00 - [420] Originally by: Hera Persephone If you put a web on them this is how it will go. "La dee da, look im outrunning all of these missiles la dee da. Oh ****! I'm webbed!" BAM BAM BAM!! "All those missiles i was outrunning a second ago just hit me and killed me!" You wont get close enough to do so, it does NOT work. unless the pilot is stupid (which dont happen very often)

Hera Persephone	Posted - 2007.01.29 09:43:00 - [421] Originally by: Wizzkidy Originally by: Hera Persephone If you put a web on them this is how it will go. "La dee da, look im outrunning all of these missiles la dee da. Oh ****! I'm webbed!" BAM BAM BAM!! "All those missiles i was outrunning a second ago just hit me and killed me!" You wont get close enough to do so, it does NOT work. unless the pilot is stupid (which dont happen very often) It is just as easy as webbing an Intercepter
jarni Amarr The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.01.29 10:05:00 - [422] There¦s something seriusly wrong when a bs can outrun a cruise missle. Something to think about
Hera Persephone	Posted - 2007.01.29 10:10:00 - [423] Cruise missiles sux in pvp to begin with anyways.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 10:12:00 - [424] Something came to my mind. WEhat about removing the agility bonus on the istab leavinbg only the mass bonus? That would hamper the agility of the nanoBS so they would have issues to turn on a dime. For example the nanophoon would have 30% less agility bonus. Still not perfect... but not bad. What is the better part? This do not affect smaller ships so heavily since they already have quite good agility. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Hera Persephone	Posted - 2007.01.29 10:15:00 - [425] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Something came to my mind. WEhat about removing the agility bonus on the istab leavinbg only the mass bonus? That would hamper the agility of the nanoBS so they would have issues to turn on a dime. For example the nanophoon would have 30% less agility bonus. Still not perfect... but not bad. What is the better part? This do not affect smaller ships so heavily since they already have quite good agility. good idea.
Lem2J Black Sea Industries	Posted - 2007.01.29 10:34:00 - [426] Nano domis are out of comparsion with the other ships tbh.
Ka'lorn Font'a Amarr Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.01.29 11:05:00 - [427] You know there is something wrong with stabs when you run into a 8-10 strong fleet in Empire, and over half of them are using i-stab/nano setups. No, there isn't anything you can do against several nano'd ships, bring a Rapier? They'll instapop it Such is life
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 13:22:00 - [428] Originally by: Ka'lorn Font'a You know there is something wrong with stabs when you run into a 8-10 strong fleet in Empire, and over half of them are using i-stab/nano setups. No, there isn't anything you can do against several nano'd ships, bring a Rapier? They'll instapop it Such is life yes yes.. evveryone already got that point. We can stop discussing that! We need to discuss possible balances that do not over nerf nano cruisers and nanobattlecruisers . And if possible something that keeps nanoBS p[ossible but more more limited (like reducing their agility so they cant orbit at that speed) If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Imaos	Posted - 2007.01.29 13:49:00 - [429] I think the problem is giving fixed speedboost for nanos and percentual mass decrease for the istabs. This way the modules favor big ships and not vice versa. My solution: +20m/s -> 10% more speed -15%mass (stacking nerfed) -> fixed max reduction not stacking nerfed I would base the mass reduction on a frig with the maximum low slot count so it doesnt go negative mass. Maybe even introduce new istabs for larger ships with harder fitting reqs. This way it favors small fast ships over larger slowmobiles.
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 13:57:00 - [430] sighs Can we please not get more and more fun features of EVE get nerfed because so many people whined until their fingers bled? [OMG! SMASH!]

Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 14:32:00 - [431] Originally by: Imaos I think the problem is giving fixed speedboost for nanos and percentual mass decrease for the istabs. This way the modules favor big ships and not vice versa. My solution: +20m/s -> 10% more speed -15%mass (stacking nerfed) -> fixed max reduction not stacking nerfed I would base the mass reduction on a frig with the maximum low slot count so it doesnt go negative mass. Maybe even introduce new istabs for larger ships with harder fitting reqs. This way it favors small fast ships over larger slowmobiles. basically the same thing that i proposed at start of this thread. But it seem no one gave adamm about it. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
OBI WAN Dark Knights of Deneb Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.01.29 15:35:00 - [432] Maybe the problem with these ships isn't the ability of them to escape, but rather the fact they can easily kill ships, both smaller and larger, with their combination of NOS and tracking-less DPS? A nanophoon running from me or my gang isn't the largest threat in the world, but the fact they can engage at will and easily WIN is! I honestly think a reduction in the range of Heavy Nosferatu, to say ~14-15km, combined with an increase in webifier range, would solve many problems that we have in EVE right now. For example, the ability to webify a nanoBS outside it's NOS range allows for it to be tackled without the tackler dying a horrible death. Also, increased web range will help Amarr reach that oh so hard to grasp, alluring mid-range that their pulse lasers were intended for. Just a thought... __________________________________________ Originally by: n sx Death to you and your sugar coated empire.
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 16:00:00 - [433] Originally by: Tobias Sjodin sighs Can we please not get more and more fun features of EVE get nerfed because so many people whined until their fingers bled? im sure it's fun for the people flying them what about the people who arn't flying them and dont want to fly them? why should everything else suffer because some winbuttonjunkies need their fix? its got to the point where people are regulary fielding gangs of nanophoons/domis. when you have 10-20 working together, the only way to compete is to do exactly the same. there is no practical counter
Spaced Skunk Buffed Rumpuss Zit Dids	Posted - 2007.01.29 16:43:00 - [434] Originally by: mallina Originally by: Tobias Sjodin sighs Can we please not get more and more fun features of EVE get nerfed because so many people whined until their fingers bled? im sure it's fun for the people flying them what about the people who arn't flying them and dont want to fly them? why should everything else suffer because some winbuttonjunkies need their fix? its got to the point where people are regulary fielding gangs of nanophoons/domis. when you have 10-20 working together, the only way to compete is to do exactly the same. there is no practical counter This is a very good point, and generally is about game balance. I do think the nano-BS are fun, but, changed my mind about them. They are an imbalance. However, balance out nos, give the typhoon and dominix some extra grid/CPU so they can actually have some ranged setups, and maybe all will be well. I still want nano-BS to remain in-game though, just give em some tweaking so them are still a used setup, but arent such the iwin buttons they are now.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.29 16:52:00 - [435] 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
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 17:32:00 - [436] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 29/01/2007 16:53:14 It's the nos that makes them almost impossible to tackle alone. ... 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 QFT although nos is only part of the problem, it would be enough of a change to make people reconsider their setups if they still want to maintain their cap. i like it.
Imaos	Posted - 2007.01.29 18:35:00 - [437] Originally by: Kagura Nikon basically the same thing that i proposed at start of this thread. But it seem no one gave adamm about it. Yep. Seems to be too easy that way. I posted that in a lot of threads on that topic, but it always drowned in the flames.
Aleksie Perchov	Posted - 2007.01.29 20:16:00 - [438] why is this topic still going? Its been a giant circle for the past like 7 pages. Some moron goes "LoLz just web them" and the entire process starts over again. Let it die, wait for the Devs to do something, or nothing.
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.29 20:59:00 - [439] Originally by: mallina Originally by: Tobias Sjodin sighs Can we please not get more and more fun features of EVE get nerfed because so many people whined until their fingers bled? im sure it's fun for the people flying them what about the people who arn't flying them and dont want to fly them? why should everything else suffer because some winbuttonjunkies need their fix? its got to the point where people are regulary fielding gangs of nanophoons/domis. when you have 10-20 working together, the only way to compete is to do exactly the same. there is no practical counter I'm not flying them. Your point is moot with me. [OMG! SMASH!]
Naqisaki	Posted - 2007.01.29 21:04:00 - [440] This is why I use faction webs+damps on my Rapier :) Stop crying :P

Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.01.29 22:57:00 - [441] Originally by: Naqisaki This is why I use faction webs+damps on my Rapier :) Stop crying :P sure you do.
Luscious Linda	Posted - 2007.01.30 01:43:00 - [442] Just Web them they go boom
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.01.30 02:51:00 - [443] Originally by: Luscious Linda Just Web them they go boom no they don't. they go zoooom as they coast out of web range.
eXtas Kemono.	Posted - 2007.01.30 03:16:00 - [444] Originally by: Sara Devi Originally by: Luscious Linda Just Web them they go boom no they don't. they go zoooom as they coast out of web range. no they slow down pretty fast, with the inertas they have low mass... but u need beter then a 75% webber
kublai TunDraGon	Posted - 2007.01.30 03:42:00 - [445] 24 days I will have minmatar cruiser V. Matar recon time <3 I pity the fool in a nano battleship as TunDraGon strips his oh so juicy faction mods ;) It adds diversion to be honest, I think it should be a little more SP intensive if anything, as it's a very powerfull weapon that is VERY simple to get. But remove it? nah, just make it an effort to be able to do it.
Terell	Posted - 2007.01.30 04:32:00 - [446] since i saw a nano-phoon at 9k m/s and coming back to the gate before a huggin with 2 sb II cant even target him something must be wrong at eve
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.01.30 05:42:00 - [447] well they should really introduce some sort of tracking for nos. if you're going 5k your heavy nos shouldn't be able to extract any cap.
eXtas Kemono.	Posted - 2007.01.30 05:58:00 - [448] get over that u cant catch them going back to the gate! who wants to die in a bublecamp without having a chance? I havent used a ship that isnt able to mwd back to the gate for over a year, and u dont need inertas for that.. just a mwd, skills and snakes and youre ship will get back to the gate, even webbed.
Imechal Ravpeim International Multi-Player Consortium Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.01.30 06:23:00 - [449] The only idea I liked out of this thread was making webs slow down ships faster. It'd make sense gameplay wise too because they distort the space around them, not actually effecting the ship's speed itself. I don't think instant slowdown would be a good thing... but maybe four times faster would balance everything. I like nano ships. I think if someone spends 3 bill to fit a ship purely for speed then it should go pretty damn fast. You have no reason to whine that your 15 mill ceptor or 70 mill recon ship can't catch it.
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.01.30 06:37:00 - [450] Originally by: Imechal Ravpeim The only idea I liked out of this thread was making webs slow down ships faster. It'd make sense gameplay wise too because they distort the space around them, not actually effecting the ship's speed itself. I don't think instant slowdown would be a good thing... but maybe four times faster would balance everything. I like nano ships. I think if someone spends 3 bill to fit a ship purely for speed then it should go pretty damn fast. You have no reason to whine that your 15 mill ceptor or 70 mill recon ship can't catch it. So then by that reasoning my 4 billion isk navy apoc should be able to tank, what, 20 battleships? I mean if I'm spending that much on a tank it should be able to tank a lot.

eXtas Kemono.	Posted - 2007.01.30 07:18:00 - [451] I think webbs are just fine, heavy nos is overpowered tho.. u fly our ceptor into 25km of a bs = dead, u fly youre cruiser within 25km of a bs = dead... kinda sucks :(
Hyperforce99 Gallente Strike Force I Omega Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.30 09:03:00 - [452] the modules themselves are not the problem, NOS not included, I also think that needs to have a tracking penalty (so it can still suck from frigs but nearly not as hard)... if you nerf nano's I-stabs or NOS either way your also gonna damage to other peoples ship setups than to the nano setups alone. I mission in a dominix, which needs heavy nos to keep its dual tank running. my deimos uses 2 I-stabs. thats why nerfing exsisting modules is pretty much out of the question, besides the NANO-BATTLESHIP tactic is a valid tactic, its possible without exploiting the game. therefore it is plain and simple POSSIBLE to do. its however so hard to counter that it becomes unbalanced. thats why instaid of nerfing anything I found a way to counter it. without destroying the nano-BS tactic http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863 theory: Utilizing similiar systems as the webifier the Remote Graviton Generator uses energy streams to fill up unused space inside a space vessle with gravity wells on a moleculiar scale. Ships with a decreased mass percentage will therefore become heavier and have they're mass increased. however, because only the space inside a vessle can be used this module can not increase a ships mass indefinatly. Using more than 2 of these modules therefor will have near to no effect on the target vessle. ----- Max Mass - Current Mass = (amount to increase) * Mass increase percentage = Mass increase. The max mass will be 110% (up to 125% for advanced/rare modules) the mass increase percentage is 50% so if the target has only '50' mass instaid of 100% original then it will have a mass increase of 30% up to '80' mass (with a max mass increase of 110% of the original. ----- I made a thread here that explains how if you increase the mass of a ship back to its original up to a max increase of 110% or a bit more depending on the module) you then should be able to track the target. since I-stabs decrease mass, which in turn makes the ship faster in orbit, MWD faster and warp faster. If you can counter and undo the mass decrease, you allready slow it down enough to be able to track it, and without a tank, nano-ships can be taken out fairly easy once your guns can connect. or if the ship doesn't want its mass increased, then it can go and fly outside the Remote Graviton Generators range which makes it unable to NOS you and makes your guns able to track the ship better. Either way it counters all forms of the tactic without nerfing anything. its not effective to use against anything else than mass reduced (originally slow... as in BS and BC) ships. using this on a frigates or destroyers won't have near to no effect. cause they allready are fast and decreased mass won't have that much effect on them, if theres no decreased mass, the RGG doesn't have a lot of effect on the target ship. hence its no use to use them on small ships. please comment on that thread if you like the idea. -=-=-=-=-=-=-= SIGNATURE =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The perfect solution against Nano-Battleships without nerfing anything :D http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465863
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.30 09:31:00 - [453] Originally by: Imechal Ravpeim The only idea I liked out of this thread was making webs slow down ships faster. It'd make sense gameplay wise too because they distort the space around them, not actually effecting the ship's speed itself. I don't think instant slowdown would be a good thing... but maybe four times faster would balance everything. I like nano ships. I think if someone spends 3 bill to fit a ship purely for speed then it should go pretty damn fast. You have no reason to whine that your 15 mill ceptor or 70 mill recon ship can't catch it. No this is the worst of all ideas since it completely destroy all speed setups not only nanoBS. It destroy vagabonds, stabbers, slashers, all ceptors, frigates... F#@! Minmatar as you can see. This si the worst of all propositions by far, because it does not focus on the real issue and tries to kill a mosquito with a 1400mm Howitzer! If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Durethia Momentum. Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.30 09:33:00 - [454] Edited by: Durethia on 30/01/2007 09:38:24 others have made better suggestions and points...
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.30 10:53:00 - [455] Easy peasy. Let's make that 'max velocity' stat on an AB/MWD actually mean something. If you've got mass <= the boost of the AM/MWD, then you get that. If your mass is higher, well, guess you're out of luck.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.30 11:16:00 - [456] Thats basically how MWDs work right now... MWDs give a smaller boost to ships with a mass > MWD thrust and a bigger boost to ships with mass < MWD thrust. So it very much means something right now.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.30 11:27:00 - [457] Originally by: James Lyrus Easy peasy. Let's make that 'max velocity' stat on an AB/MWD actually mean something. If you've got mass <= the boost of the AM/MWD, then you get that. If your mass is higher, well, guess you're out of luck. well, that wouldn't slow anything down.. people use mwd/ab speed rigs, you know... My max speed boost on phoon is like 1250% or something on a core x-type mwd... N.F.F. Recruitment
Liberator Girl	Posted - 2007.01.30 14:19:00 - [458] Originally by: mallina Originally by: Tobias Sjodin sighs Can we please not get more and more fun features of EVE get nerfed because so many people whined until their fingers bled? im sure it's fun for the people flying them what about the people who arn't flying them and dont want to fly them? why should everything else suffer because some winbuttonjunkies need their fix? its got to the point where people are regulary fielding gangs of nanophoons/domis. when you have 10-20 working together, the only way to compete is to do exactly the same. there is no practical counter No bs should go faster than a ceptor.
Bruno Bonner Gallente Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.01.30 14:22:00 - [459] You know, with lateral thinking, the only thing i came up with was tweaking a bit the Stasis Webifier modules. You have Warp Scramblers and Warp Disruptors. One works at 7.5km the other at 20km. Can we just make 2 types of Webbers? 1 that works at 7.5km and has 75% reduction in speed and another that works at 20km and has something along 35%? adjusting of course energy per cycle and CPU/Powergrid requirements. This of course can open a whole new problem with interceptors fitting this long range webbers, but to me there was always a very strange combination of modules when you have a long range and short range warp jammers and just 1 stasis webber. regards Bruno ------ aka BinderAJ
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.30 14:28:00 - [460] 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.

Thomas Maleficus Caldari Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.30 15:27:00 - [461] These ships are not invincible, you can kill them with a three man team. It has been done, you just need the right bait. Pirates stole my signature.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.30 16:35:00 - [462] Originally by: welsh wizard 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. not true! You are unhappoy with that! I dont care with that, in fact I think that is very good. Only thing bad is they are superior to all lower size nanoships. And this should not be! The day there is zero chance to get out of a fight if you are not winning, is the day i quit eve. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.01.30 16:40:00 - [463] "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.
SFShootme The Carebear Stare	Posted - 2007.01.30 18:21:00 - [464] Quote: - makes it impossible to tackle with frigate/destroyer/cruiser sized hulls, - allows it to sustain MWD without using injectors, -- that in turn allows it to speed tank missiles forever versus, say, raven, -- this also allows it to disable amarr and gallente gun systems, or tank, or both, -- this leaves only short range minmatar as a consistent threat, and, really, how common are they? solution 1: Nos back And i'm not sure how u guys see a phoon going 11km/s.... But the fastest i've seen whas at 7km/s and that whas with riggs, nano's, implants etc. And fastest inty i have seen whas 19km/s.... (with gang bonus). Which should be sufficient to tackle a nanophoon. If it nosses back use ur small cap injector or something. Tho shall give Life, for Life.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.01.30 18:52:00 - [465] Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 30/01/2007 18:52:50 Good lord, how many more dolts are going to reply "Just web them".... Nano-Battleship momentum -> "Lol @ ur Web nooblet!!111" ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Omega Bloodstone Battlestars Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.30 20:02:00 - [466] Edited by: Omega Bloodstone on 30/01/2007 20:00:44 Edited by: Omega Bloodstone on 30/01/2007 19:59:58 Webs are irrelevent in terms of the fact that the ship loses speed over time so they make all bolts back to the gate. Bumping one of these things would require a large ship on it's own and this is an out there chance of success, and as far as the use of Huginn/Rapiers are we saying that everyone in eve must train these two ships just to defend against nano phoons and Domi's, that in it's own tell you that they need nerfage, I mean, only one ship allows one of these to be beat and hell..I'm Minnie and can surely set up a nano phoon and throw in some snakes and a speed rig, nanos and inertials..not very genius. No brains behind it at all, it is unfair at the moment. Do nano and inertials have the ol' more than one starts lowering the affective bonus deal? At the point you know that at best chance you need one ship type to defeat something it needs the nerf bat, and I hate nerf bats soo...clearly nano setups are cheesy and an I-WIN button. The ones that can fly them like myself that complain against nerfage simply don't want to lose BS's, thats their problem. bet you also see these folks flying them to. I flew one once, quit after realizing that there is no competition while your in one, unless of course you come across another.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.01.30 21:49:00 - [467] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: welsh wizard 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. not true! You are unhappoy with that! I dont care with that, in fact I think that is very good. Only thing bad is they are superior to all lower size nanoships. And this should not be! The day there is zero chance to get out of a fight if you are not winning, is the day i quit eve. What about the day where there is a zero chance you can make anyone stick around to duke it out? ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Guillame Herschel Gallente Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires	Posted - 2007.01.31 00:11:00 - [468] Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 31/01/2007 00:07:42 Originally by: Omega Bloodstone Webs are irrelevent in terms of the fact that the ship loses speed over time so they make all bolts back to the gate. ... and as far as the use of Huginn/Rapiers are we saying that everyone in eve must train these two ships just to defend against nano phoons and Domi's. I don't know man, looks like the opposite position can be supported with the same argument. Should everyone train for Nanophoon and Nanodomi to defend against Huginn/Rapier? Hmmm... -- Guile can always trump hardware --
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.01.31 00:33:00 - [469] Originally by: Guillame Herschel Edited by: Guillame Herschel on 31/01/2007 00:07:42 Originally by: Omega Bloodstone Webs are irrelevent in terms of the fact that the ship loses speed over time so they make all bolts back to the gate. ... and as far as the use of Huginn/Rapiers are we saying that everyone in eve must train these two ships just to defend against nano phoons and Domi's. I don't know man, looks like the opposite position can be supported with the same argument. Should everyone train for Nanophoon and Nanodomi to defend against Huginn/Rapier? Hmmm... Not really, but nice try...and since the Huginn/Rapier is the only ship that can counter a nanoBS why would you try and counter the recon ship with a nanoBS. Seems like flawed logic to me.
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.31 01:15:00 - [470] Originally by: Goumindong What about the day where there is a zero chance you can make anyone stick around to duke it out? it's closer than you realise. first hp boosts, then WTZ, then combat viability of impossible-to-catch nano setups... the day when its possible to escape every bad situation is the day pvp in EVE is no longer fun. previously, if you got attacked and were in a slow ship (battleship) you generally had 2 options to save yourself. Kill them first, or deagress and dock/jump. both were possible, although in some cases difficult to achieve. a Nanophoon can disengage whenever the hell it feels like from any ship bar minmatar recons, which are paper thin anyway. Not even Interceptors can do that so well.

Antipathy	Posted - 2007.01.31 01:23:00 - [471] I saw a dominix going at something like 8km/s the other day! Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
Kataclismo	Posted - 2007.01.31 01:54:00 - [472] IT IS A F***ING BS!!! WASNT SUPOSED TO REACH 10KM/S!!! In a BS, if you get GANKED theres no other way except to accept your painfull and quick death... you will get poped and poded. But in 1x1, if i dont have time to lock+web my enemy before he can reach 250KM, theres no fun in this PVP.. ¼¼
Jonathan Peterbilt Caldari Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2007.01.31 06:18:00 - [473] Originally by: Thomas Maleficus These ships are not invincible, you can kill them with a three man team. It has been done, you just need the right bait. Exactly. If you need 3 man team to kill one ship then thats a good reason to nerf it.
Jonathan Peterbilt Caldari Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2007.01.31 06:27:00 - [474] 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. So you are saying that people use nano stabbed BSs to avoid gate camps? Not really, they use them to PVP and run when they see they are about to die. But its fine... you shouldnt have the problem then when they nerf them like WCSs. Add some lock time and take away lock range and you can have them the way they are now. I have no problem with that.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.31 10:15:00 - [475] The issue is. A faster ship should be able to escape in a lot of situations. The problem is Battleships can fit too many nanos and istabs andd have huge inertia, so they can escape easier than a cruiser. The opossite should be true. A Battleship with speed advantage should be able to escape another single BBby slowly gaingin groiund towards > 20km and then after quite some time have ground to escape. That would leave him still tackable by cruisers etc... But if you think a Megathron will anyday be able to force a smart tempest pilot to stay in fight... you are dreaming. The tempest even with 25 ms advantage will eventually get out of the 20km range and warp . If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.01.31 11:53:00 - [476] Edited by: LUKEC on 31/01/2007 11:50:49 Originally by: Thomas Maleficus These ships are not invincible, you can kill them with a three man team. It has been done, you just need the right bait. Does that mean that something is ballanced if you need fleet to kill it? Ofc. it's balanced if only I can fly it, but there is not really many such ships around. The whole nano mania just made game 4tl again. It was better when stiletto was enough to hold most things down. Now you need gang to counter 1 setup and alot of luck to kill it. -------- .....
Haruko Red Xenobytes Stain Empire	Posted - 2007.01.31 12:57:00 - [477] Havent read this huge thread, but here is my idea about balancing things: Make a stacking penalty for agility. Battleships still will be able to reach a good speed, but it will take much longer to get to the maximum speed and they will not warp out before most smaller ships will get lock on them. Cruisers will be faster to accelerate, and frigates will be the fastests. It is very logical and close to real-life physyics in my opinion. _____________________________________________ "I dont smoke." (C) William Blake Originally by: Torfi Frans, Technical Producer EVE is huge, complex, dark and sinister. It's what we love about the game.
Iconoclastix	Posted - 2007.01.31 14:30:00 - [478] Edited by: Iconoclastix on 31/01/2007 14:33:19 Edited by: Iconoclastix on 31/01/2007 14:32:15 ROFLMAO!!! So justice is served!!! I'm new to EVE. I haven't played more then a month, yet I'd like to share a fresh, view point from a beginers perspective, that I hope the devs will appreciate. Please don't nerf the "Nano-phoon" for the following reason. While reading elsewhere on this site about how to solo-mine effectively, I learned that the Dominix, (Gallente), and the Apocalypse, (Amarr), are the two prefered battleships for low sec/0.0 sec mining. However, being Minmatar, I decided to stick with our own ships and make them work for me as well as I could. So, I have been taining to be able to use the first battleship that I can afford, the Typhoon. Yep, that's right for MINING! I mention this is a chat channel the other day and was soundly told how foolish it was to use a Typhoon for mining. I found this thread because it was mentioned in channel that "Nano-phoon"s were the current FOTM and since it was the first time I'd heard anyone say ANYTHING positive about Minmatar ships, I was of course, intrigued. Can you imagine my supprise when I read all these "might makes right" people whining about a ship that was able to disengage from a combat if it chose to??? "It's not fair!", but, "We can't kill you if you don't want to be killed!" HAHAHAHAHA!!! In my opinion, thats just too damn bad! The irony and sheer audacity of some of you PVP folks is astounding! It's only been a month, yet so far, the only PVP I've seen is when someone in a big ship, smashes someone in a little ship. That's it. Over, and over, and over again. A big ship smashes a little ship. I don't know why you bother. You've gotta be incredablly stupid to think that if you MUG someone using superior skills, firepower, and armor, you are the better person because you won. And the ONLY time I've seen people start fights is when they think that the other person has no chance. Well, now something new has come along and upset the apple cart, so now, ya gotta deal with it, the same way that you tell us newbs to deal with being smashed when we venture into low sec/0.0 space, LOL! Don't get me wrong - I love the thrill and excitment of matching wits with other players in a PYP enviroment. But lets keep it real, eh? If I chose to mine my own business and live a life of peaceful co-existence, mining, exploring, inventing, etc., sooner or later some macho-head PVP person with no desire other then ruining my day, will come along and try to blow me out of the sky, shattering my peaceful dream into glittering shards of space dust. Will you warn me, or challenge me to a fair fight on some pretext or another? No. Will you climb out of your T2 battleship or T2 battlecruiser and fly a T1 mining ship to meet me on equal terms or a level playing field? No. Will you look at my description and say, "Oh, look, less then a month playing, he hasn't been in EVE long enough to make this an interesting fight."? No. What will actually happen is that you'll attempt to glorify preying on someone who means you no harm, (someone you've chosen SPECIFICLY because of the preceived assessment that the potential victim, is too weak to be able to fight back effectively), and you will ONLY fight from a position of strength. True glory in wining a fight, is when the odds are AGAINST you, picking a fight when you know you are going to win is called BULLYING. I've seen other people complain that they were simply traveling from point "A" to point "B", when they were ganked at a gate camp, or smashed in a Rookie ship for no reason, and the thug who killed them said "Aww, stop your whining!", or "You deserved to die because you're weak". As tempting as it is to throw those words back, I suggest you grab some glory and take a lesson from us newbs - adapt, and learn from your losses. Good Luck.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.31 14:45:00 - [479] Originally by: Iconoclastix Please don't nerf the "Nano-phoon" for the following reason. While reading elsewhere on this site about how to solo-mine effectively, I learned that the Dominix, (Gallente), and the Apocalypse, (Amarr), are the two prefered battleships for low sec/0.0 sec mining. However, being Minmatar, I decided to stick with our own ships and make them work for me as well as I could. So, I have been taining to be able to use the first battleship that I can afford, the Typhoon. Yep, that's right for MINING! I mention this is a chat channel the other day and was soundly told how foolish it was to use a Typhoon for mining. I found this thread because it was mentioned in channel that "Nano-phoon"s were the current FOTM and since it was the first time I'd heard anyone say ANYTHING positive about Minmatar ships, I was of course, intrigued. Can you imagine my supprise when I read all these "might makes right" people whining about a ship that was able to disengage from a combat if it chose to??? "It's not fair!", but, "We can't kill you if you don't want to be killed!" HAHAHAHAHA!!! In my opinion, thats just too damn bad! The irony and sheer audacity of some of you PVP folks is astounding! It's only been a month, yet so far, the only PVP I've seen is when someone in a big ship, smashes someone in a little ship. That's it. Over, and over, and over again. A big ship smashes a little ship. I don't know why you bother. You've gotta be incredablly stupid to think that if you MUG someone using superior skills, firepower, and armor, you are the better person because you won. And the ONLY time I've seen people start fights is when they think that the other person has no chance. Well, now something new has come along and upset the apple cart, so now, ya gotta deal with it, the same way that you tell us newbs to deal with being smashed when we venture into low sec/0.0 space, LOL! Don't get me wrong - I love the thrill and excitment of matching wits with other players in a PYP enviroment. But lets keep it real, eh? If I chose to mine my own business and live a life of peaceful co-existence, mining, exploring, inventing, etc., sooner or later some macho-head PVP person with no desire other then ruining my day, will come along and try to blow me out of the sky, shattering my peaceful dream into glittering shards of space dust. Will you warn me, or challenge me to a fair fight on some pretext or another? No. Will you climb out of your T2 battleship or T2 battlecruiser and fly a T1 mining ship to meet me on equal terms or a level playing field? No. Will you look at my description and say, "Oh, look, less then a month playing, he hasn't been in EVE long enough to make this an interesting fight."? No. What will actually happen is that you'll attempt to glorify preying on someone who means you no harm, (someone you've chosen SPECIFICLY because of the preceived assessment that the potential victim, is too weak to be able to fight back effectively), and you will ONLY fight from a position of strength. True glory in wining a fight, is when the odds are AGAINST you, picking a fight when you know you are going to win is called BULLYING. There is a flaw with your logic. Imagine if you will, someone follows you around in 0.0, in a nano ship, whilst you're peacefully mining. Any time you bring out something that has a chance against it, he runs. Otherwise, he takes potshots at your haulers and barges, all day long. So please, off that hobby horse, that "OMG PVPERS ARE EVIL"
ninjaholic Burn the Jolly Roger	Posted - 2007.01.31 14:54:00 - [480] SERIOUSLY, someone outsmarts you and you go crying to CCP. While it might be rediculous that a BS is travelling at over 4.5km/s, clearly someone was SMART enough to figure it out, why aren't YOU smart enough to find a way around it? And no, I haven't the skills for it either, but at least I'm not screeching the word NERF every time someone humbles me with brains for a change. If you people have issues with being outsmarted, I suggest you click here and join the other 10 million peter-pan-syndrome kids in MMORPG's. The SMART ones will already be able to guess where THAT link goes. I say LET them have their fun because they deserve it for a while. If you nerf more modules and ship-setups then what you're REALLY nerfing is CREATIVITY, something that I LOVE about this game, far more than overstackied BS's. I'd tell you what the REAL BS is, but that'd be flaming. USE your brain, and find a way around it, instead of mumbling the word nerf through that silver spoon in your mouth, while stamping your feet to Mommy (CCP). One word for you people. INGENUITY. That's even a nice link to explain it to anyone who doesn't know what it is. Seriously guys ----- BURN THE JOLLY ROGER (IGB site with articles etc)

Iconoclastix	Posted - 2007.01.31 15:28:00 - [481] Edited by: Iconoclastix on 31/01/2007 15:33:47 Edited by: Iconoclastix on 31/01/2007 15:30:30 My apoligies Captain, perhaps I did get carried away and not express myself clearly. The point of my post is this: I like the idea of being able to fly a ship that allows me the potential option of disengaging from some thug who wants to pick a fight. If a fool wants to give me the power to lead them around all day taking pot shots at me, so be it, other then laugh at their stupidity, there's not a lot I can do about it. However, rather then point out a flaw in my logic, instead you reinforced the desire for the existance of a ship capable of escaping from such a griefer. Now I ask, who would want to dedicate a whole day to trying to make me miserable? Uhmm... Lets see, a miner would rather be mining, a trader would be too busy making more money, there's no way an explorer would have the time, there's no motivation for an inventor, I know that there are other activities/occupations in EVE, however, please forgive my inexperience, the only type of person I can think of that would be willing to spend a day taking pot shots at me is an "evil PVP'er", ! BTW, I don't really think that PVP'ers are evil!
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.31 15:57:00 - [482] You can fit 5 warp core stabs, 2 overdrives and a MWD on your typhoon and mine all day with it. No need for a nanosetup there. (Not that mining in a phoon is the smartest thing to do)
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.01.31 16:34:00 - [483] Originally by: ninjaholic SERIOUSLY, someone outsmarts you and you go crying to CCP. While it might be rediculous that a BS is travelling at over 4.5km/s, clearly someone was SMART enough to figure it out, why aren't YOU smart enough to find a way around it? So far I've come up with: 1) Do the same thing, better. 2) Bring a lot of people. 3) bring a huginn. Would you accept that the first 2 are signs that a tactic or fit is overpowered? OK, lets leave aside the annoyance of _one_ ship path that's a viable countermeasure - A web doesn't work quite as well as you think it does. As soon as your huginn shows up, the nanobs can be in warp a matter of seconds later, or already having enough velocity to coast out of web/lachesis scrambler range. Which means bringing more numbers, which leads us back to 2).
Cupdeez Vengeance of the Fallen Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.31 18:29:00 - [484] I think the nano Domi is fun... Not un-stoppable but very hard to stop. They are expensive to run. Run through 18 800 cap injectors in about 10 mins.. They are only fun to fly in small gangs kinda pointless in fleetbattles. Perfect ship for someone that likes to run 90% of the time. I don't care if they get nerfed but I got money that says CCP will nerf them somehow. Signature filesize exceeds max limit of 24000 bytes. Mail us if you have questions -Eldo Davip
Hydrian Alante The Scope	Posted - 2007.01.31 18:32:00 - [485] Simple: nerf Nos! Nos is overpowered for deacdes now. If ccp nerf Nos then the Nanobattleships will disappear. Without Nos they could just nano as long the 800 Booster charges last. And that would be long. So nerf Nos in kind of tracking, signature and lower the drain/sec. Make it more like a gun with skills and specialisation. Otherwise, I have great fun while pirating in my nanophoon. I fought something like 10men geang killed some ships and then got away. It was pure fun to play with them. They always tried to get into a better position, sent a lone inty (which went boom ofc)
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.31 19:06:00 - [486] Edited by: Ryysa on 31/01/2007 19:08:38 Going to post one more time... There is a very strong argument about "counters". The following counters apply to mostly anything ingame: 1. BBB (Bring Bigger Blob). 2. Do the same thing better. Currently, in addition to the former, there are the following counters to nanoBS: 1. Webbing. 2. Fast Tracking Turrets. Now, at least there are some counters. I can't find any counters to NOS. Small ships get wtfpwned by big NOS, there's no module to reduce nossing amount, there's no way to do anything, except nos back more. This, in my book, is an IWIN module. With NO drawbacks and NO counters. Guess how many IWIN modules the nanobs fit atm? 4... And the only cruiser sized vessel which can be effectively nanoed up is the curse. Oh, woopsie, it has a RANGE and an AMOUNT bonus to the IWIN module. Vagabonds can't speedtank while attacking something, if you want to bring this as an argument against the curse. They also can't disable the opponent's tank completely. Now, if you NOS a nanobs back with 4 nos or deny him the opportunity to NOS his target, he needs, depending on his skills/mwd, to use a cap charge about every 20-30 seconds. Even with a medium secure container, you won't be carrying much more than 25 charges. That means, you can run your MWD for 10-15 minutes before you run out cap. Due to current HP buffs, to kill a decently tanked ship of the same class, it takes you 3-4 minutes. If it has an injector, it takes a LOT longer. Now, if there was a counter to NOS, except fitting more of it (NanoBS has 4...), nanoBS would have to make trips to stations quite often to refill cap charges... Making them almost pointless for any really serious roaming ganking. They would also lose their huge IWIN button against EVERYTHING smaller size. Think about it... Trackless weapons/drones are in the game for a very long time now... Nanos are ingame for a very long time... What forced the nanobs is the fact that it takes forever to kill something that is not out of cap. Revelations is all about cap. Nanobs are effective at killing cap. Speedtanking is a viable alternative, I think it should stay ingame. Speedtanking has always had a very high cost on cap. A battleship shouldn't be able to speedtank forever with 4 nos. Face it, the CORE problem is not that you can't kill nanobs, it's the fact that they can keep speedtanking forever while killing their targets, WHILE being uncatchable. Take a vagabond for example, solo, it's a minor nuisance. It might gank your haulers or your ceptors/frigs, but it can't kill anything bigger on it's own. To deal damage, it has to stop speedtanking. Forever speedtanking should only be available to interceptors as they are built from the ground up for speedtank, and they have very low HP. Think about it... are istabs/nanos/mwd's really the problem? Or is it the fact that you can keep it all running forever? If you had to go to station to refill after 15 minutes of action every time, and that everyone could tank your pathetic damage, because you couldn't make everyone's cap instashutoff, would you still fly a nanoship? I know i wouldn't. So as I said before, leave speedtanking to the ships SPECIALIZED in it. I want to use my vagabond again, I want to use my interceptors again... I am sick of my flying trashcan, yet I keep flying it, because no other ship can outperform it for guerilla warfare right now. Sad... N.F.F. Recruitment
Omega Bloodstone Battlestars Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.31 19:09:00 - [487] Originally by: Hydrian Alante Simple: nerf Nos! Nos is overpowered for deacdes now. If ccp nerf Nos then the Nanobattleships will disappear. Without Nos they could just nano as long the 800 Booster charges last. And that would be long. So nerf Nos in kind of tracking, signature and lower the drain/sec. Make it more like a gun with skills and specialisation. Otherwise, I have great fun while pirating in my nanophoon. I fought something like 10men geang killed some ships and then got away. It was pure fun to play with them. They always tried to get into a better position, sent a lone inty (which went boom ofc) LOL, dude fought a 10 man gang, killed some and survived??? Yea sure, lets not nerf nano BS'sI can fly one like I said earlier, w/ snakes, nanos, inertials, and speed rigs if I want, but I damn sure know that I have an advantage, so I dont...it's not fun in god mode, I prove nothing in those victories, just that one guy figured out the setup and 1000 folks copied it and it's no different than up,down,up,down,left,right,left, right,A,B,A,B, start(the true gamers know what this code accomplished back in the day
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.01.31 19:50:00 - [488] Originally by: Iconoclastix Edited by: Iconoclastix on 31/01/2007 15:38:52 ROFLMAO!!! So justice is served!!! (Snip) Seriously mate, read the entire thread and come back when you have an understanding of what the exact problem is... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.01.31 20:07:00 - [489] if ccp wants to leave nano and istabs same, then they need to give different class webs that can be fit cruiser and or bs sized that have far greater range and are designed for the mass/intertia of that class ship then i wouldnt mind because i would have proper counter
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.01.31 20:40:00 - [490] Originally by: Rawthorm Fact of the matter is this new trend can not be allowed. Fine, but the cure should NOT be worse than the disease in many ways, as stacking MWD's was (should just of made MWD's ADD 500% speed, not multiply by x5, ffs...). //Maya

Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.01.31 21:19:00 - [491] nanophoon worked perfectly fine before istabs ffs... istabs aren't the problem... N.F.F. Recruitment
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.01.31 22:51:00 - [492] Edited by: Aramendel on 31/01/2007 22:56:27 Originally by: Guillame Herschel You mean mass. Mass controls how fast you accelerate, agility controls how fast you can turn. The problem is that not all ships use the same speed booster. Small ships use 1MN MWD, BS use 100MN MWD. But they both use the same mass reduction mods, which reduce mass by the same percentage. So obviously the BS with the bigger mass will get a bigger quantity of mass reduced by the i-stab. But it's MWD remains the same, and is now somewhat overpowered for the lower mass of a BS with i-stab. Mass is already stacking penalized. Inertia isn't. And -inertia allows you to accelerate faster. This is very easy to test. A sigil with 5 t1 nanos takes me 24 secs to get from 0 to 100% speed. A sigil without them takes 45 secs. The nanosigil accelerates to 100% in 0.53 the time the normal sigil takes. 5 t1 nanos give an inertia of 0.875^5 -> 0.51 of original. Also, the mass reduction has to battleships an identical effect as it has to inties. For example, a crusader has 1.05 kt mass. A 1mn MWD adds 0.5 kt mass and has full effeciency with 1.5 kt ship weight. With 1.55 kt the 1mn MWD has 96.8% effeciency. Now add an LH instab to it and it reduces the mass by 15%. The MWD has now 113.9% effeciency. Now, take a domi. 105 kt mass. 50 kt mass addition from the MWD. Full effeciency at 150 kt. It's 100% identical as with the crusader, exept that all numbers are higher by the factor of 100. But since we divide tham through each other we get the same effeciency numbers as the crusader gets before and after an instab. In short: BSs and inties get exactly the same boost from instabs. Where BSs get a bigger boost are nanos. 24 m/s is a 20% speed boost for a domi. It's a 5.2% speed boost for a crusader. This means an inty gets a bigger boost from replacing a nano with an instab than a BS gets. A nanophoon with 3 nanos, 3 instabs is only 8% faster than a nanophhon with 5 nanos. A claw with 2 nanos, 2 instabs is (IIRC) 28% faster than a calw with 4 nanos. So effeciently for a before after scenario with replacing nanofibers prekali with instabs postkali inties got a bigger boost. Basically, as far as the total boost for nanoBS goes instabs have a rather small influence. Nerfing them would actually hurt frigs more than battleships. The BIG influence comes from the rigs. 3 t1 vent rigs make my nanophoon on sisi 47% faster. Replacing 3 nanos with 3 instabs results only in a 8% speed boost.
Pico DeGallo	Posted - 2007.01.31 23:23:00 - [493] The general design of the game's mechanics encourage people, especially in PvP, to fit to some extreme (extreme speed, extreme damage, extreme tanking, etc.). That people find fitting at some extreme typically works better than fitting at any of the many more "balanced" configurations I think is a real flaw in the game. Solo and in small groups, you pick the fights where the extreme you've chosen gives a clear advantage over the extreme (or PvE setup) you opponent has chosen and you win. Or, you leave (or lose) when the roles are reversed. Of course, a popular way of making sure you don't find yourself on the short end of the stick by bringing a knife to a gun fight is to bring lots of knives. Blob with your buds and many knives can kill a few guns. Personally, I'd like to see the extremes of ship configurations not be so extreme. E.g., speed should be about controlling the range at which the combat occurs; not about going so fast even the best guns and missiles can only tickle you.
Jennifer Meek Gallente Planck Bubble Generation Technologies	Posted - 2007.02.01 02:33:00 - [494] Heres the solution to Nano ships: Nanofiber II's On sale! Get yours today! (Message me ingame) ---
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.01 09:57:00 - [495] Originally by: Ryysa Edited by: Ryysa on 31/01/2007 19:08:38 Going to post one more time... There is a very strong argument about "counters". The following counters apply to mostly anything ingame: 1. BBB (Bring Bigger Blob). 2. Do the same thing better. Currently, in addition to the former, there are the following counters to nanoBS: 1. Webbing. 2. Fast Tracking Turrets. Now, at least there are some counters. I can't find any counters to NOS. Small ships get wtfpwned by big NOS, there's no module to reduce nossing amount, there's no way to do anything, except nos back more. This, in my book, is an IWIN module. With NO drawbacks and NO counters. Guess how many IWIN modules the nanobs fit atm? 4... And the only cruiser sized vessel which can be effectively nanoed up is the curse. Oh, woopsie, it has a RANGE and an AMOUNT bonus to the IWIN module. Vagabonds can't speedtank while attacking something, if you want to bring this as an argument against the curse. They also can't disable the opponent's tank completely. Now, if you NOS a nanobs back with 4 nos or deny him the opportunity to NOS his target, he needs, depending on his skills/mwd, to use a cap charge about every 20-30 seconds. Even with a medium secure container, you won't be carrying much more than 25 charges. That means, you can run your MWD for 10-15 minutes before you run out cap. Due to current HP buffs, to kill a decently tanked ship of the same class, it takes you 3-4 minutes. If it has an injector, it takes a LOT longer. Now, if there was a counter to NOS, except fitting more of it (NanoBS has 4...), nanoBS would have to make trips to stations quite often to refill cap charges... Making them almost pointless for any really serious roaming ganking. They would also lose their huge IWIN button against EVERYTHING smaller size. Think about it... Trackless weapons/drones are in the game for a very long time now... Nanos are ingame for a very long time... What forced the nanobs is the fact that it takes forever to kill something that is not out of cap. Revelations is all about cap. Nanobs are effective at killing cap. Speedtanking is a viable alternative, I think it should stay ingame. Speedtanking has always had a very high cost on cap. A battleship shouldn't be able to speedtank forever with 4 nos. Face it, the CORE problem is not that you can't kill nanobs, it's the fact that they can keep speedtanking forever while killing their targets, WHILE being uncatchable. Take a vagabond for example, solo, it's a minor nuisance. It might gank your haulers or your ceptors/frigs, but it can't kill anything bigger on it's own. To deal damage, it has to stop speedtanking. Forever speedtanking should only be available to interceptors as they are built from the ground up for speedtank, and they have very low HP. Think about it... are istabs/nanos/mwd's really the problem? Or is it the fact that you can keep it all running forever? If you had to go to station to refill after 15 minutes of action every time, and that everyone could tank your pathetic damage, because you couldn't make everyone's cap instashutoff, would you still fly a nanoship? I know i wouldn't. So as I said before, leave speedtanking to the ships SPECIALIZED in it. I want to use my vagabond again, I want to use my interceptors again... I am sick of my flying trashcan, yet I keep flying it, because no other ship can outperform it for guerilla warfare right now. Sad... By the hardes that is tp say that.. i agree with Ryysa. That is a good summary. But I shoudl add. BS have other advanatges on nanosetup over inties and cruisers. The nano speed boost is percentually bigger and they have far more low slots. So Even with a Nos nerf i think we should have agility stack nerfed AND nano speed boost changed to a percentage value. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Boo Koo	Posted - 2007.02.01 11:07:00 - [496] leave them as they are now, but change warp disruption bubbles. give us the option to pick warp bubble or web bubble when we deploy them. tech 1 bubble would have 60% speed loss tech 2 bubble would have 80% speed loss
mmm thatsthreems	Posted - 2007.02.01 11:12:00 - [497] Here's my idea: Instead of the sig radius penalty on the i-stabs, (negated by the extreme speed in any case), have a sensor strengh penalty. So yes, you can still fly your BS at a zillion miles per sec, but an ECM or two would nullify all your firepower and pretty much force you to withdraw, with an expensive ship that can do zero dps. It also gives a nice metagame incentive for people to include ECM in their ships/gangs. I think it's nice because it doesn't add any extra gameplay mechanics, is sortof fluffy, and it won't really break the role of i-stabs in smaller ships. As for the NOS/Neut... I'd say that its sin is the fact that it only gets better as it gets bigger. I wouldn't expect a heavy NOS to be able to suck frigate-class ships dry - it should be as effective as other BS-class weapons on frigs, meaning: not much. Right now frigates have lost their place in the rock-paper-scissors - and NOS is to blame.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.01 11:48:00 - [498] Edited by: Ryysa on 01/02/2007 11:44:47 Originally by: Boo Koo leave them as they are now, but change warp disruption bubbles. give us the option to pick warp bubble or web bubble when we deploy them. tech 1 bubble would have 60% speed loss tech 2 bubble would have 80% speed loss How about we just delete interceptors from the game? And how about, if you jump into a gatecamp, you just load in cloning station, your loot gets autosold and divided by the participants of the gatecamp, without firing a shot. Since a gatecamp should be an unpassable iwin button, should it not? N.F.F. Recruitment
Iconoclastix	Posted - 2007.02.01 13:31:00 - [499] Quote: Seriously mate, read the entire thread and come back when you have an understanding of what the exact problem is... Don't be flippant, as a newcomer, of course I read the entire thread before daring to venture an opinion - it would be foolish to do otherwise. Allow me to quote Ivan Kirilenkov, of ISD... Quote: I'd also like to point out that stickying this thread is a way of dealing with the large amount of threads on this topic, and not an endorsement from CRC that it is an issue. The Devs makes the call on that, we don't. I read that, along with 16 pages of gut-wrenching posts, mostly advocating a nerf, of one kind or another. From the plain banel, to some very immpressive number crunching analysis of the situation. There are a lot of people favoring more "resonable" alternative nerfs. It seems that a large number of people would like to see the "Nano-phoon/bs" or the modules that allow the creation of such, weaken by the devs in the alleged interest of game balance. This makes me laugh! I laugh because it's sheer hypocracy! I've yet to meet the PvP'er who truly desires "balance". Gate camping isn't about balance. It's a group of thugs waiting to mug the first weakling that walks into their trap. Roving pirate gangs aren't about balance, they're a bunch of rabid dogs looking for the next hapless victim to pounce upon. I suppose that there are sporting tournements where groups of pilots compeat against each other, or duels or something of that nature, however, I haven't seen, read or heard much about it. One the other hand, I have seem lots, and lots, of chest-beating, sabre-rattling PvP'ers and PvP Corps with names like "Johnny Bringer-of-death-and-pwnage-to-the-entire-know-universe-and-all-that-is-light-and-good" member of "Super Corp of Unrelenting Meanness [SCUM]", with bios that brag about how they eat Carebears for breakfast. I feel that you forfeit the right to champion "balance" the moment you pop your first shuttle, whack your first rookie ship, participate in your first gate camp, swooped into your first belt looking for miners to kill, or blew up your first hauler. My point is that you long timers are the ones that the fresh new players like myself are supposed to draw inspiration from. Set an example of how to caport oneself when faced with a challenge. Whining to CCP like a first day newbie on a trail account about how "that ship just isn't fair" is very poor form indeed. You'll be better served working on effective counter stratagies, or ways in which you can deal with the latest "new super weapon". It's not the first time you'll meet a better ship, and it won't be the last time. Think about it, those Carebears that you look down your noses on go out in ships that have NO CHANCE whatsoever, all day, and everyday. They'll never have the combat skills that you have because they train other things. So unless I missed somewhere in the rules a part saying that you have the right to be able to destroy any ship in the game, I suggest that you stop lying to yourself about "game balance and fair-play", get over it and learn to deal. Devs, as far as I'm concerned, this is such a non-issue. I usually fly a Scythe or a Hoarder. Now you say there's a new ship out there that can kill me and there's nothing I can do about it? Big deal. It'll just have to get in line with all the OTHER ships that try to do the same to me every day.
Felinuszzz Caldari TunDraGon	Posted - 2007.02.01 13:46:00 - [500] All I'll say: I saw a Smartbomb Megathron go 9000 m/s last night. He popped/podded our Interceptor before the Interceptor could lock him, and then he MWD'ed 400km from our gang. NINE THOUSAND METRES PER SECOND. GOD-MODE. That's all I've got to say. ---------

mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.01 14:04:00 - [501] Originally by: Iconoclastix Don't be flippant, as a newcomer, of course I read the entire thread before daring to venture an opinion - it would be foolish to do otherwise. ... I feel that you forfeit the right to champion "balance" the moment you pop your first shuttle, whack your first rookie ship, participate in your first gate camp, swooped into your first belt looking for miners to kill, or blew up your first hauler. ... Devs, as far as I'm concerned, this is such a non-issue. I usually fly a Scythe or a Hoarder. Now you say there's a new ship out there that can kill me and there's nothing I can do about it? Big deal. It'll just have to get in line with all the OTHER ships that try to do the same to me every day. Judging from the the attitute of your post i get the feeling you've probably yet to venture out of hi-sec, so im afraid your idea of pvp may be somewhat different from what it actually is. the fact is, nobody fights fair. this isn't WoW. if you fly out into 0.0 in a mining barge and get upset when any noob with a warp scram and guns pops you guess what? it's your fault. PvP in EVE is not consensual. if some meanies are camping you in well you have two options: setup to get past them or bring some friends to kill them. theres nothing unbalanced about that aspect of the game, and not all PvP is about killing carebears. What IS unbalanced is when you have gangs of 20 battleships travelling through 0.0 which move, turn and align as fast as interceptors, are many more times difficult to catch and will rip any equalsized gang to pieces, minimal losses even IF they setup to counter. Ofc this might not affect you in the slightest right now but if some point you want to have a go at PvP yourself, only to be killed by a ship which you cant hit, you cant web, you cant tank and you cant run away from - i think you'd feel differently.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.01 14:26:00 - [502] Originally by: Iconoclastix I've yet to meet the PvP'er who truly desires "balance". Gate camping isn't about balance. You seem to confuse "balance" with "fairness".
Griseus Amarr Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.01 14:29:00 - [503] All saying that NOS is a problem with nanophoon. It's not exeactly right. Typhoon can fly 4 minutes on MWD without NOS, 9 minutes on Cap Booster, and infinite on NOS. So that's not a major problem. Few small ships with dampeners can kill typhoon. Even if nos drying frig, it can restore cap to run 1 webber. and thats only to 1 frig... ------------------------- Hunter
Piscis Gallente Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2007.02.01 15:04:00 - [504] What I find hard to understand is why people don't stop and think where this is all going before moaning on for hours on end -what happens in a world where you have no extremes, it all migrates to the mean and then what? This moany "its not fair, I want it my way" mentality is exactly what brings you constant fly on the wall BS on TV and allows an entire nation to be transfixed by a fat ignorant mare called Jade -cmon people there has to be extremes or it Isn't interesting, you simply cant demand fairness without considering that one man's meat is another poisen or am I alone here? EVE is littered with examples of extremes and whilst I admit it Isnt easy to kill a nano fitted ship, It Isnt impossible either and hardly exclusive so whats the problem -get over it, play the game and stop encouraging the downgrading of what makes the game interesting!!! As a few people have said -many things in the game are far from even so do you want CCP to waste time and money messing with old things or inventing new ones -move on adapt and deal with it, If Its all so very messed up why do you all play the game huh??? Just my 10 euros worth! :) PISCIS
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.01 16:06:00 - [505] Originally by: Felinuszzz All I'll say: I saw a Smartbomb Megathron go 9000 m/s last night. He popped/podded our Interceptor before the Interceptor could lock him, and then he MWD'ed 400km from our gang. NINE THOUSAND METRES PER SECOND. GOD-MODE. That's all I've got to say. Grats, you got owned by Heikki. To attain a such speed the ship has: Gist X-Type MWD, some other fancy faction stuff. The Clone has: 1x HG Snake set.... 2-3 bil ? Shaqil's 8% speed implant. Zor's custom hyper-link - 5% mwd/ab speed Rogue CY-2 - 5% speed Rogue MY-2 - 5% Mwd/ab speed. Basically, the only thing that could make it any faster possibly is a claymore with skirmish warfare thingie. Your average bombathron does not go 9km/s :P N.F.F. Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.01 16:27:00 - [506] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Felinuszzz All I'll say: I saw a Smartbomb Megathron go 9000 m/s last night. He popped/podded our Interceptor before the Interceptor could lock him, and then he MWD'ed 400km from our gang. NINE THOUSAND METRES PER SECOND. GOD-MODE. That's all I've got to say. Grats, you got owned by Heikki. To attain a such speed the ship has: Gist X-Type MWD, some other fancy faction stuff. The Clone has: 1x HG Snake set.... 2-3 bil ? Shaqil's 8% speed implant. Zor's custom hyper-link - 5% mwd/ab speed Rogue CY-2 - 5% speed Rogue MY-2 - 5% Mwd/ab speed. Basically, the only thing that could make it any faster possibly is a claymore with skirmish warfare thingie. Your average bombathron does not go 9km/s :P maybe remove all that and put on a machariel :P If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Zalt O	Posted - 2007.02.01 18:16:00 - [507] while sitting around playing with my corp, joking around, we decided to try and nano a carrier but the carrier pilot wouldnt go for it so... no game there, but I came up with a new concept that would "fix" to an extent nano-ships. The concept would be Sheering. Ships when they have exceeded a speed will begin to "sheer" apart taking n^x dps where n is the number of seconds where you have exceeded that maximium speed ability of your ship. And x is a calculated number based off your ship mass, maximium speed, and class. As everyone knows, if your going to go really fast in space, the faster you go, the more damage smaller objects will do when you impact them. This takes this into account. Of 'corse ships like interceptors and other T2 ships will be much more resilliant to sheering damage then a typhoon or dominix as they are more compact and employ better technology. parts of this I havent been able to come up with yet are where should the damage be applied? (ie. directly to the hull? should resistances apply? ect...) is the damage enough so that it will bring nanoships more into in pvp with other ships?
Swiftiger	Posted - 2007.02.01 18:23:00 - [508] Edited by: Swiftiger on 01/02/2007 18:30:52 I have an idea for somebody to try against a NanoBS... I believe the main problem is that before you web they, they fire up the MWD and their 'intertia' takes them past any slow webbers. The 'fast' speed tacklers aren't a match because they get NOS'd to death in seconds or jsut destroyed in seconds. My Idea is to use the Huginn: -Equip with a MWD (Y-T8 got me 1.7km/s, go faster if you want, maybe some of the faster NanoBS 'coast' at 2km/s?) -Equip with a 30km Warp Disrupt -Equip with a Web -Equip with three (3) Sensor Disrupters (going three Phased Muon's will drop even a Sensor Boosted NanoPhoon [140km lock range] below 30k lock range) -Equip Sensor Boosters (well low slots, ive used up all the meds) yourself for quicker lock The 'idea' is to web the NanoBS and have enough speed to keep up with their 'inital' speed from before you webbed them; While you drop their LOCK range below 30km and you stay at 30km. They should continue to slow down as you continue to: -block warp -block movement -he shouldn't be able to lock on you while you do it This won't stop a NanoBS from jumping into a blockade and fleeing back to the gate to jump again, but it should stop them from 'owning' the field... What you guys think? Anybody moved to try it?
TZeer BURN EDEN Terra Incognita.	Posted - 2007.02.01 20:43:00 - [509] Nano ships are bad m`kay.... But seriously... What does CCP think of this? I havent seen a reply from them yet.
Gaogan Gallente Solar Storm X-PACT	Posted - 2007.02.01 22:11:00 - [510] The problem with nanobs is not that it is some new extreme fitting that nobody has figured out how to combat yet. The problem is that this is an extreme fitting for which there is only one counter: the same extreme fitting. The only thing that can catch a nanobs is another nanobs. With other extreme setups, there is always some other extreme setup that is its antithesis. Rock, paper, scissors. When the only way to beat rock is with a larger rock, the game is broken.

Disteeler	Posted - 2007.02.01 22:30:00 - [511] Seen one today approaching me. I counted around 100km in 10 secs. I've escaped dunno how yet. I asked him how fast he was: 10284 m/s (match my maths). MoLeH > 2007.02.01 21:00:01 Notify Speed changed to 10284 m/s
Xurx Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.02 00:40:00 - [512] So how long do we have to wait before this overpowered setups are nerfed ? This is getting ridiculous....
Karrimdra FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.02 02:06:00 - [513] Edited by: Karrimdra on 02/02/2007 02:07:58 k, too lazy to read through the whole post to see whether somene has already posted this.. so dont flame me for it... Anyone remember "OMG OMG NERF DUAL MWD!?!?!?!!?!". It happened, with CCP saying "Battleships were never intended to go that fast", or words to that effect. What we have now, is this effect back in game, however if you notice, a good phoon setup will go at 7.5km-8km/s (I personally have seen the 7.5km/s). My crow, using gistii MWD and istab/nano pulls off 6.5km/s. Tell me how exactly people expect this as balanced? Yes, being able to pull off 2-4km/s is alright, but thats catchable. I'm not complaining about this, i havnt been ganked(please note that slothe:P) by one yet myself and dont intend to be. I'm sure there are ways to stop them, though its bloody hard, since even a hugin struggles to web something with that much mass (still, even with the istabs) doing 7km/s, its inertia still pushes it miles away, it wont slow down "ZOMG ITS WEBBED DIE". And actually, you would need a lachesis alongside any hugin in order to scram it before its webbed, or you face the "web>turn>zoomwarp!". EDIT: just to point this out, i'm neither pro or con to this build. i cant use it, i will try my hardest to kill it. I just wanted ot point out the first bit of my thread to everyone else hat had maybe forgotten, wasnt playing. etc From nothing to something in just one corp!
Andur'il Midnight Enterprises	Posted - 2007.02.02 02:50:00 - [514] Forgive my ignorance, I've never encountered a NanoBS so can't speak from experience, but what happens when they come into contact with a deployed object such as a jetcan? Do they bounce off like everything else, or do they just have too much inertia? Originally by: CherniyVolk Die with respect earned than live to be a joke across the galaxy.
eXtas Kemono.	Posted - 2007.02.02 03:12:00 - [515] I dont know how u fitt youre huginns but mine dont have any problem catching a nano-bs :) unless he got faction nos that is, and even then u cant noss a huginn so it cant webb because webbs use so litle cap... and if u webb a ship before they press warp they dont insta warp.. they dont really align at all if they were mwd'ing :P but the nos is totaly overpowered!
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.02.02 03:44:00 - [516] Originally by: eXtas I dont know how u fitt youre huginns but mine dont have any problem catching a nano-bs :) unless he got faction nos that is, and even then u cant noss a huginn so it cant webb because webbs use so litle cap... and if u webb a ship before they press warp they dont insta warp.. they dont really align at all if they were mwd'ing :P but the nos is totaly overpowered! so you don't have an issue catching one unless it has faction nos? could you please explain how catching one is easier when they don't use faction nos -apart from the slight advantage in nos range. extas no offense dude, but everyone knows your favorite ship ingame atm is the nanophoon...
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.02 06:14:00 - [517] i still say make 1mn 10mn 100mn webs... there you go they solve your problem to the whole mwd thing... each of those sized webs have the range and power to counter the web properly... and i dont know how to make the 100mn work vs 10mn or 1mn not sure if its fair that they should stop a ship dead in its tracks but some how there should be a signature size related to them as how effective the "net" of the web so to speak... i think the fit is fine it just needs proper counters to it... then lets see how many people will fly paper thin setups when you can fit a proper module or 2 to counter it just for that... but you would have to pay the cap and the fitting req
Sara Devi	Posted - 2007.02.02 06:29:00 - [518] Originally by: sr blackout i still say make 1mn 10mn 100mn webs... there you go they solve your problem to the whole mwd thing... each of those sized webs have the range and power to counter the web properly... and i dont know how to make the 100mn work vs 10mn or 1mn not sure if its fair that they should stop a ship dead in its tracks but some how there should be a signature size related to them as how effective the "net" of the web so to speak... i think the fit is fine it just needs proper counters to it... then lets see how many people will fly paper thin setups when you can fit a proper module or 2 to counter it just for that... but you would have to pay the cap and the fitting req and where does that leave a blasterboat when it tries to approach another ship with a bs sized webber. more then likely dead at 20. the solution is to fix the problem not duck tape it with another counter mod.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.02.02 07:39:00 - [519] Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 02/02/2007 07:36:28 Originally by: Iconoclastix Quote: Seriously mate, read the entire thread and come back when you have an understanding of what the exact problem is... Don't be flippant, as a newcomer, of course I read the entire thread before daring to venture an opinion - it would be foolish to do otherwise. Allow me to quote Ivan Kirilenkov, of ISD... Quote: I'd also like to point out that stickying this thread is a way of dealing with the large amount of threads on this topic, and not an endorsement from CRC that it is an issue. The Devs makes the call on that, we don't. I read that, along with 16 pages of gut-wrenching posts, mostly advocating a nerf, of one kind or another. From the plain banel, to some very immpressive number crunching analysis of the situation. There are a lot of people favoring more "resonable" alternative nerfs. It seems that a large number of people would like to see the "Nano-phoon/bs" or the modules that allow the creation of such, weaken by the devs in the alleged interest of game balance. This makes me laugh! I laugh because it's sheer hypocracy! I've yet to meet the PvP'er who truly desires "balance". Gate camping isn't about balance. It's a group of thugs waiting to mug the first weakling that walks into their trap. Roving pirate gangs aren't about balance, they're a bunch of rabid dogs looking for the next hapless victim to pounce upon. I suppose that there are sporting tournements where groups of pilots compeat against each other, or duels or something of that nature, however, I haven't seen, read or heard much about it. One the other hand, I have seem lots, and lots, of chest-beating, sabre-rattling PvP'ers and PvP Corps with names like "Johnny Bringer-of-death-and-pwnage-to-the-entire-know-universe-and-all-that-is-light-and-good" member of "Super Corp of Unrelenting Meanness [SCUM]", with bios that brag about how they eat Carebears for breakfast. I feel that you forfeit the right to champion "balance" the moment you pop your first shuttle, whack your first rookie ship, participate in your first gate camp, swooped into your first belt looking for miners to kill, or blew up your first hauler. My point is that you long timers are the ones that the fresh new players like myself are supposed to draw inspiration from. Set an example of how to caport oneself when faced with a challenge. Whining to CCP like a first day newbie on a trail account about how "that ship just isn't fair" is very poor form indeed. You'll be better served working on effective counter stratagies, or ways in which you can deal with the latest "new super weapon". It's not the first time you'll meet a better ship, and it won't be the last time. Think about it, those Carebears that you look down your noses on go out in ships that have NO CHANCE whatsoever, all day, and everyday. They'll never have the combat skills that you have because they train other things. So unless I missed somewhere in the rules a part saying that you have the right to be able to destroy any ship in the game, I suggest that you stop lying to yourself about "game balance and fair-play", get over it and learn to deal. Devs, as far as I'm concerned, this is such a non-issue. I usually fly a Scythe or a Hoarder. Now you say there's a new ship out there that can kill me and there's nothing I can do about it? Big deal. It'll just have to get in line with all the OTHER ships that try to do the same to me every day. It's nothing to do with 'carebears' vs 'PvP'ers for crying out loud... Nano Battleships are imbalanced for a whole plethora of reasons as highlighted already, yet you don't seem to have noticed that and instead, structured your argument along the lines of 'ebil old timers ganking noob carebears'... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.02 08:52:00 - [520] Iconoclastix, you have a very narrow understanding of the game or the problem...god, I really hope your not that challenged in real life.

Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.02 09:19:00 - [521] What about new module: Fast Turret Servos - active lowslot module - greatly increase tracking speed - greatly increase turret signature resolution Medium turrets with this moudule can track orbiting nanoBS with its huge signature but it wont increase threat to small fast agile ships. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.02 10:25:00 - [522] I'm everything you described about PVP'rs, ( except I love the occasional " fair duel " ) but for the most part your right on the money... I kill anything I can be it shuttle to mining barge to carrier. 99% of "pvp" isn't about fair play, its about overwhelming the weaker opponent, killing him and taking his "things". the devs don't need to nerf this ship, players need to learn to adapt. Originally by: Iconoclastix Quote: Seriously mate, read the entire thread and come back when you have an understanding of what the exact problem is... Don't be flippant, as a newcomer, of course I read the entire thread before daring to venture an opinion - it would be foolish to do otherwise. Allow me to quote Ivan Kirilenkov, of ISD... Quote: I'd also like to point out that stickying this thread is a way of dealing with the large amount of threads on this topic, and not an endorsement from CRC that it is an issue. The Devs makes the call on that, we don't. I read that, along with 16 pages of gut-wrenching posts, mostly advocating a nerf, of one kind or another. From the plain banel, to some very immpressive number crunching analysis of the situation. There are a lot of people favoring more "resonable" alternative nerfs. It seems that a large number of people would like to see the "Nano-phoon/bs" or the modules that allow the creation of such, weaken by the devs in the alleged interest of game balance. This makes me laugh! I laugh because it's sheer hypocracy! I've yet to meet the PvP'er who truly desires "balance". Gate camping isn't about balance. It's a group of thugs waiting to mug the first weakling that walks into their trap. Roving pirate gangs aren't about balance, they're a bunch of rabid dogs looking for the next hapless victim to pounce upon. I suppose that there are sporting tournements where groups of pilots compeat against each other, or duels or something of that nature, however, I haven't seen, read or heard much about it. One the other hand, I have seem lots, and lots, of chest-beating, sabre-rattling PvP'ers and PvP Corps with names like "Johnny Bringer-of-death-and-pwnage-to-the-entire-know-universe-and-all-that-is-light-and-good" member of "Super Corp of Unrelenting Meanness [SCUM]", with bios that brag about how they eat Carebears for breakfast. I feel that you forfeit the right to champion "balance" the moment you pop your first shuttle, whack your first rookie ship, participate in your first gate camp, swooped into your first belt looking for miners to kill, or blew up your first hauler. My point is that you long timers are the ones that the fresh new players like myself are supposed to draw inspiration from. Set an example of how to caport oneself when faced with a challenge. Whining to CCP like a first day newbie on a trail account about how "that ship just isn't fair" is very poor form indeed. You'll be better served working on effective counter stratagies, or ways in which you can deal with the latest "new super weapon". It's not the first time you'll meet a better ship, and it won't be the last time. Think about it, those Carebears that you look down your noses on go out in ships that have NO CHANCE whatsoever, all day, and everyday. They'll never have the combat skills that you have because they train other things. So unless I missed somewhere in the rules a part saying that you have the right to be able to destroy any ship in the game, I suggest that you stop lying to yourself about "game balance and fair-play", get over it and learn to deal. Devs, as far as I'm concerned, this is such a non-issue. I usually fly a Scythe or a Hoarder. Now you say there's a new ship out there that can kill me and there's nothing I can do about it? Big deal. It'll just have to get in line with all the OTHER ships that try to do the same to me every day.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.02 10:32:00 - [523] So should i throw away months of training and start another race becose my dont have any ship capable to be battleceptor ? BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
xHomicide	Posted - 2007.02.02 11:43:00 - [524] What sucks is when your gang of 4 nano-bs costing about 1.2billion PLUS implants has to turn home because someone undocks in a rapier. --------- The only major issue I have with nano-bs is their ability to nullify ceptors with nos. A well fit ceptor can easily catch up to a nano-bs and web them. EXCEPT they instantly get nossed, lose tackle, and lose a very expensive ceptor. So basically the uber-ceptors that are going fast enough to catch them rather stay away. Basically, nos needs a sig penalty. It needs to work just like missile sig calculation. The nano-bs would still be entertaining to fly but it would certainly be more fragile if it could not instantly disable ceptors that could web it.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.02 11:45:00 - [525] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/02/2007 11:43:51 As a sidenote, nanosetups got an indirect small boost with 1.3. T2 nanofibers are inventable now. ATM they cost still about half as much as domi nanos, but it's quite likely that their price will fall a good bit in the coming weeks. Originally by: xHomicide What sucks is when your gang of 4 nano-bs costing about 1.2billion PLUS implants has to turn home because someone undocks in a rapier. Which will survive about 20 seconds vs 20 heavy drones and 16 torp launchers. Unless it is supported by a sizeable blob it won't do much.
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.02 11:53:00 - [526] ANY BS can nos an inty into losing scram, NOT just nanos. "If" NOS got reworked like missiles did, it would need to be able to be trained up with proper skills to far surpass its current state, i.e. - longer range, ROF, sig bonus, more drain ect.. thats the only way it would work. Like the did with drones and missiles.. BUT>>>>> NANO phoon/DOMIs shouldn't be nerfed cause guys are too lazy to adapt to the new tactics Originally by: xHomicide What sucks is when your gang of 4 nano-bs costing about 1.2billion PLUS implants has to turn home because someone undocks in a rapier. --------- The only major issue I have with nano-bs is their ability to nullify ceptors with nos. A well fit ceptor can easily catch up to a nano-bs and web them. EXCEPT they instantly get nossed, lose tackle, and lose a very expensive ceptor. So basically the uber-ceptors that are going fast enough to catch them rather stay away. Basically, nos needs a sig penalty. It needs to work just like missile sig calculation. The nano-bs would still be entertaining to fly but it would certainly be more fragile if it could not instantly disable ceptors that could web it.
xHomicide	Posted - 2007.02.02 11:58:00 - [527] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 02/02/2007 11:43:51 As a sidenote, nanosetups got an indirect small boost with 1.3. T2 nanofibers are inventable now. ATM they cost still about half as much as domi nanos, but it's quite likely that their price will fall a good bit in the coming weeks. Originally by: xHomicide What sucks is when your gang of 4 nano-bs costing about 1.2billion PLUS implants has to turn home because someone undocks in a rapier. Which will survive about 20 seconds vs 20 heavy drones and 16 torp launchers. Unless it is supported by a sizeable blob it won't do much. [/quote Because heavy drones catch rapiers...wtf? no. Neither do torps. Rapier can easily speed tank torp, they can easily speed tank cruise. Not to mention the fact that it could uncloak next to you at any moment and web you, which puts your expensive ship in front of the firing squad to die instantly. There are very few counters in all of eve as hard as the rapier counter to nano-bs.
xHomicide	Posted - 2007.02.02 11:59:00 - [528] Originally by: JVol ANY BS can nos an inty into losing scram, NOT just nanos. "If" NOS got reworked like missiles did, it would need to be able to be trained up with proper skills to far surpass its current state, i.e. - longer range, ROF, sig bonus, more drain ect.. thats the only way it would work. Like the did with drones and missiles.. BUT>>>>> NANO phoon/DOMIs shouldn't be nerfed cause guys are too lazy to adapt to the new tactics Originally by: xHomicide What sucks is when your gang of 4 nano-bs costing about 1.2billion PLUS implants has to turn home because someone undocks in a rapier. --------- The only major issue I have with nano-bs is their ability to nullify ceptors with nos. A well fit ceptor can easily catch up to a nano-bs and web them. EXCEPT they instantly get nossed, lose tackle, and lose a very expensive ceptor. So basically the uber-ceptors that are going fast enough to catch them rather stay away. Basically, nos needs a sig penalty. It needs to work just like missile sig calculation. The nano-bs would still be entertaining to fly but it would certainly be more fragile if it could not instantly disable ceptors that could web it. I see no issues with removing the ability of BS to instantly nos off ceptors as they can now. In fact I believe that is also an issue that would be SOLVED by this change. And NO, there is no reason why skills would be needed to surpass nos as we know it.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.02 12:15:00 - [529] Originally by: xHomicide Because heavy drones catch rapiers...wtf? no. Neither do torps. Rapier can easily speed tank torp, they can easily speed tank cruise. Not to mention the fact that it could uncloak next to you at any moment and web you, which puts your expensive ship in front of the firing squad to die instantly. There are very few counters in all of eve as hard as the rapier counter to nano-bs. As said, it needs a blob to do anything. It can speedtank you, but only for a limited time - if it uncloaks "next to you" it will be in nos range and can speedtank for 1 MWD cycle... if it stays outside 30k (or are you telling me your "1.2billion" ships do not have a faction nos?) it won't be able to scramble you.
Piscis Gallente Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2007.02.02 12:20:00 - [530] Just out of Interest, since when did the world of EVE need balance -where does it all go If everytime a majority want something they get it rite or wrong? Think people the world (majority of people) would rather do a lot of things like not work, or never have to be nice to anyone -what then if they get their wish???? Extremes are good, each race can fit these modules and make super fast ships that are very very expensive and can easily be countered by more fast ships!!! I mean surely someone in a Astarte chasing mining ships with a 10th of the skill points or a guy who got a carrier via ebay ISK isnt technically fair? Am I alone here or do we just like to moan? PISCIS

Trind2222 Amarr Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.02 13:26:00 - [531] I know how balance Naono ship whit out nerfing the speed make a rage nerf when fitting nano : -20% Targeting Range and make the penalty stack and players can still have fast nano ships.
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.02 13:33:00 - [532] Originally by: Piscis Just out of Interest, since when did the world of EVE need balance -where does it all go If everytime a majority want something they get it rite or wrong? Think people the world (majority of people) would rather do a lot of things like not work, or never have to be nice to anyone -what then if they get their wish???? Extremes are good, each race can fit these modules and make super fast ships that are very very expensive and can easily be countered by more fast ships!!! I mean surely someone in a Astarte chasing mining ships with a 10th of the skill points or a guy who got a carrier via ebay ISK isnt technically fair? Am I alone here or do we just like to moan? PISCIS hmmm, let me guess you're a nanoBS pilot. It certainly isn't hard to spot you guys. I mean none of your posts contain any logic at all.
Crellion Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.02.02 15:24:00 - [533] 1. Its funny how people come crying here to force others to explain to them how to counter Nanoships to avoid nerfage. You ll get nothing from me. Yes its uber when you see one eject pls. 2. Nanobs is not as good in many combat situations as a normal BS. (a) 2 ceptors / Rapier / stabber + say 2 BCs kill it. Try to kill a Gank Mega with that and you ll get splattered all over the grid. (b) They become useless when numbers grow. If your team had 1-3 people NanoBSs are usefull. If there is 20 of you they are probably useless. If you want to attack a mixed gang they are the worst BS to have often. 3. They are however good at one thing. Behind enemy line disruption of little 0.0 blobacarebears. 2000 people alliances who think they can bubble the chokepoint with 100 people and have the other 1900 mine with lows filled with cargo expanders or rat with ravens sporting torps 1 salvager 1 tractor beam and 3 Heavy drones. Well boohoo very much... If you know what you are doing you can kill a nanoship with a huge combination of 2 man teams in most of which a Rapier doesnt figure. But then you do have to know how to pvp... survival of the fittest and all that. 4. Soemeone posted how he trained billions of skills to train for a race that has no nano BS. It takes 10-12 days to train Domi lvl4 or Phoon lvl4 (I know it does cause I did it recently). If you dont have any missle skills or any drone skills or any navigation skills that not a problem with your race but a problem with your training program... 5. Ceptors can fit a small nos. Keeps your web and scram running long enough. You are not webbed so he needs 1 min+ to kill you. There is only 1 points I sympathise with: Heavy missles and their precision variant should in my opinion so some reasonable damage to BS sized objects going at 3-5 km/s. Target navigation prediction needs a tweak. In every other respect... keep on whining and ejecting. See you in space. PS (I wont post replies to replies you can say nanoBS can outank and outank a Hyperion and I wont reply so it must be true o/) Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim.
Omega Bloodstone Battlestars Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.02 16:07:00 - [534] Okay, thread has gone on and on...And has proven only one thing imo. Half of eve likes them and half do not. I would think that this thread has given plenty enough opinions for CCP to make a conclusion as to what they are or are not going to do. Now for the consumer/pilots in Eve, two choices if CCP keeps the nanoBS's and allows them. 1)if you hate them, start posting as many counters as you can on forums to educate the player base, cordinate with corp members, fit one of these bad boys up and figure out it's weaknesses. The fitting is no mystery, just expensive :P, has more to do with your head(implants)then so much the ship other than making it as light as possible in low slots and tossing on rigs. 2)make isk, get snakes, set one up yourself, and start tearing folks a part. It takes isk, not an incredible amount of sp's to make an affective version, though sp's help with everything duh and make a much more affective version. If CCP nerf them well thats quite conclusive, no more arguing over them.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.02 16:19:00 - [535] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/02/2007 16:16:07 Originally by: Crellion (a) 2 ceptors / Rapier / stabber + say 2 BCs kill it. Try to kill a Gank Mega with that and you ll get splattered all over the grid. Rapier double webs mega and double damps his targeting range to around 18k. Pretty much identical effect as vs a nanophoon/domi, exept that you can do it at a gate, too, without the mega being able to escape.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.02 16:26:00 - [536] Originally by: Karrimdra Edited by: Karrimdra on 02/02/2007 02:07:58 k, too lazy to read through the whole post to see whether somene has already posted this.. so dont flame me for it... Anyone remember "OMG OMG NERF DUAL MWD!?!?!?!!?!". It happened, with CCP saying "Battleships were never intended to go that fast", or words to that effect. What we have now, is this effect back in game, however if you notice, a good phoon setup will go at 7.5km-8km/s (I personally have seen the 7.5km/s). Ok, my typhoon with Core X-Type MWD, 2 istabs and 3 nanos, and me having a FULL LG SNAKE SET, CY-2, MY-1 goes 7km/s. If i used my last 2 lows for nanos and not dmg mods i'd go probably 8k/s. Quote: My crow, using gistii MWD and istab/nano pulls off 6.5km/s. Tell me how exactly people expect this as balanced? 6.5km/s WITHOUT 700 mil of isk implants in your head you idiot. Take a LG snakeset , you will get 9km/s+ out of your crow. Quote: Yes, being able to pull off 2-4km/s is alright, but thats catchable. I'm not complaining about this, i havnt been ganked(please note that slothe:P) by one yet myself and dont intend to be. I'm sure there are ways to stop them, though its bloody hard, since even a hugin struggles to web something with that much mass (still, even with the istabs) doing 7km/s, its inertia still pushes it miles away, it wont slow down "ZOMG ITS WEBBED DIE". And actually, you would need a lachesis alongside any hugin in order to scram it before its webbed, or you face the "web>turn>zoomwarp!". If you web an mwding battleship it will take ages to align and warp, maybe you should play the GAME and not the FORUM WARS and get a friggin clue. Originally by: Sara Devi Originally by: eXtas I dont know how u fitt youre huginns but mine dont have any problem catching a nano-bs :) unless he got faction nos that is, and even then u cant noss a huginn so it cant webb because webbs use so litle cap... and if u webb a ship before they press warp they dont insta warp.. they dont really align at all if they were mwd'ing :P but the nos is totaly overpowered! so you don't have an issue catching one unless it has faction nos? could you please explain how catching one is easier when they don't use faction nos -apart from the slight advantage in nos range. extas no offense dude, but everyone knows your favorite ship ingame atm is the nanophoon... You seriously need a cup of stfu. eXtas flies huginn a very big lot, in fact, check any killboard, you will see that he has flown huginn for a very long time now. I'd advise you to shut up and learn from him. His huginn pulls about 5km/s. Just because people are complete morons and don't fit MWD on huginn, doesn't mean that huginn is useless. Also, the reason he mentioned faction nos, is because if you fit 28km disruptor on huginn, then you can easily web them and mwd around them outside nosrange where they can't do **** to you. You can actually solo kill them VERY easily with huginn. Hint, little setup tips for you to PWN nanoships without faction nos.: 3x dual 180mm II, 3x heavy launcher II mwd, 2x lse II, 2x 90% web, 28km disruptor 2x istab, pdu II 2x mwd/ab speed rigs. Go try it, and stfu about eXtas being biased because he flies nanophoon. I fly nanophoon too, I still think it needs a nerf, just people crying because they got owned in the face on forum (like crellion said) are really sad. N.F.F. Recruitment
Piscis Gallente Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2007.02.02 16:47:00 - [537] Edited by: Piscis on 02/02/2007 16:44:03 Originally by: Koloch Originally by: Piscis Just out of Interest, since when did the world of EVE need balance -where does it all go If everytime a majority want something they get it rite or wrong? Think people the world (majority of people) would rather do a lot of things like not work, or never have to be nice to anyone -what then if they get their wish???? Extremes are good, each race can fit these modules and make super fast ships that are very very expensive and can easily be countered by more fast ships!!! I mean surely someone in a Astarte chasing mining ships with a 10th of the skill points or a guy who got a carrier via ebay ISK isnt technically fair? Am I alone here or do we just like to moan? PISCIS hmmm, let me guess you're a nanoBS pilot. It certainly isn't hard to spot you guys. I mean none of your posts contain any logic at all. I'm not a nano Pilot at all, and If you cant see the logic its probbaly best you keep quite as opposed to removing all reasonable doubt as to your depths of ignorance -I was simply saying you cant remove something just because you or I dont like it -we need extremes and its not exactly uber invincible or cheap! Take a look at the Raven It dominated for years and a complete nube could do Uber damage -do you want that gone as well -then what next?? I hate nano ships FYI but I respect that people can fly them and should you choose a good setup then you are risking a huge amount of ISK on a ship with no tank which can be beaten -Vaga's die all the time for instance -does that have to go 2? Its good that matters are divided, all opinion is of interest IMO and Its just a shame some are quite so Ignorant as to believe every opinion has ONLY self interest behind it -good debate otherwise! PISCIS
The GR8One	Posted - 2007.02.02 17:33:00 - [538] Guys, I apologize in advance for the writing style...I am eating. OK my alliance, as have many others, has faced several of the "Super Uber Speed I Can Not Kill You Flying Cigars"...aka Nano-Phoons. Solo, they are very hard to kill as we have all found out. In groups, they are easier to manage as they do not have the DPS to be a huge factor in a 8 vs. 8 (those kinds of numbers) engagement. The story is that a dude in a typical Nano-Phoon comes in and proceeds to do his thing (Nos, Scram etc) to one of my pilots in his Raven. Raven guy yells out..OMG I am scrammed. We then proceed to put support on him (Shield Transfer and Shield Drones)...he is fine because Phoon guy doesn't have the DPS to beat the Raven. Next, our guy in a single Blackbird with not more than 3 million SP comes in and ECMs Phoon Guy...he is now a non-factor. As our BB guy gets in...the rest of Phoon Guy's buddies come in to help him (typical tactic of course...send the Phoon in first then the rest come in). Good timing on our part because once they warped in we already had the Phoon as a non-factor (other than a big ass flying cigar). They had a couple Ravens and some variuos T2 Frigs (I think 2 AFs and 1 Interceptor). I then call the nearest Raven primary. We get about 3 points of Warp Scram, 1 Web and about 12 heavy Nos on him...plus the damage of 4 Drakes and a Kestrel (of Doom) as well as various Drones. Raven goes down in like a minute. Rest of guys warp away. We win. Morale of the story is that the Phoon is counterable by good tactics...though that thing still needs to be hit by the nerf-stick....its pretty ridiculous to see that huge pile of metal zooming around faster than I can get my Crow. Oh and BTW...one of my friends Petitioned a loss against a Nano-Phoon citing it as an exploit. His response from GMs were that there is NO BALANCE ISSUE with the ship and that it is NOT AN EXPLOIT
Shadowraven213 Caldari Madison Industrial Co. Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.02 17:49:00 - [539] i remember when a raven with 6x seige and a mwd used to be able to overtake its own torps and land about 10 on the target at once rendering the tank/repair capability of the target absolutely redundant and this was changed to where missiles are now faster than the ship, oh wait that isnt true anymore im eagerly awaiting the reintroduction of the kestral with cruise, only this time i want it to fly at 6k a second haveing a lot of sp in missile does not count when fighting any nanoship with a raven so i say make missiles instant hit weapons and get rid of the tracking on guns to balance it, or ccp could just tell us when they are going to fix pvp so we could actually play and enjoy the game i would much rather fight a person with a faction bs than a cheap nanosetup because i know that the faction guy worked for his ship and i wouldnt mind looseing to him 1v1 at all i dont want to be forced to fly the aforementioned setup in pvp but the days are ticking to where i wont be able to compete anymore without one
TheEndofTheWorld	Posted - 2007.02.02 17:56:00 - [540] Originally by: The GR8One Oh and BTW...one of my friends Petitioned a loss against a Nano-Phoon citing it as an exploit. His response from GMs were that there is NO BALANCE ISSUE with the ship and that it is NOT AN EXPLOIT Oh, you are so uber and can easily beat Nanoships? And still need to nerf them? AND THAT IS LIKE the lamest petition abuse ever =/ Stop that

bulabuba Gallente Klima Galactic	Posted - 2007.02.02 17:58:00 - [541] I don't know if this has already been said, cause I didn't read all 18 pages, but I think that the arguments about people learning how to counter them miss the point. Yes, it might be possible to counter these setups, but it shouldn't be necessary to counter what seems a fairly obvious oversight by the developers and a broken game mechanic. Battleships are supposed to be huge, heavy, relatively slow, high powered behemoths. I'm sure that the devs never intended for them to be able to go faster than frigs and interceptors, regardless of fit. The way that the game is supposed to be balanced (as I understand it) is that you have ships with lots of firepower (that tend to be slow) and you ahve ships with lots of speed (which tend not to have a lot of firepower). Due to tracking speed and such, the little, fast ship is supposed to have a chance against the much harder hitting but slower ship. When you have a ship that both hits hard and flies faster than the fastest little ships, it breaks this balancing equation. Yes, you might be able to figure out a way to counter it, but if that way requires a whole gang to counter one ship, I'm sorry, but that's not balanced. In just about every game, creative players are able to come up with things that give them an advantage in the game that the devs never forsaw or intended. These things temporarily imbalance the game until the devs realize their oversight and correct it. The basic oversight here, I think, is that they didn't take into aco**** the number of low slots that some relatively light battleships have when they assigned stats to nanos and intertial stabs. Some smart players realized that oversight, and took advantage. Now the devs need to correct the oversight, and restore the intended balance to the game. It happens in every game. I'm sure this isn't the first or last time it will happen in Eve. ----------------------------------------------- Are GoonSwarm ever going to be allowed to build up in any way in 0.0 space again? No. -DB Preacher[BoB]
Malachi Nefzen Caldari Insane Decision	Posted - 2007.02.02 18:10:00 - [542] just make it so you can't run mwd/nosf at the same time
Djerin Obsidian Exploration Services The Pentagram	Posted - 2007.02.02 18:17:00 - [543] Imho those nano-istab-battleships are imbalanced. When i was a newb i was told EVE is not favouring old characters. But when those setups showed up the telling turned out to be wrong. For a normal player without 3 fitted faction/officer-webbifiers these ships are like unkillable. There is no reasonable ship setup that can win over i-stabbed nano-bs in a 1vs1 situation. Yet you cannot even escape an attack since you're getting bumped while aligning. And even worse: they can bump you from stations/gates so that you cannot dock/jump either. I think there's a huge lack of balance here. And don't tell anyone to just get one of these monsters too. I don't want the game to have an i-win-button. It's just lame, because it's like iddqd reserved to old players with the iskies and the skillpoints.
Jasai Kameron Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.02 18:19:00 - [544] Has anyone ever killed a nano-battleship, one v one, with a non-nano-setup. If yes, how did you do it? I've seen lots of people saying it's real easy to counter a nano-bs, but not so many people saying they can kill one. And those that say they can kill one are usually talking about having overwhelming numbers. The fact that a nano-ships momentum will normally get it out of danger even when webbed and the fact that it can kill tacklers extremely quickly means there isn't enough danger of losing the ship, to balance the awesome abilities its speed tank and nosf give it. 'course, I'm biased. I really want the guns I invested so much sp in to actually hit opponents. Nih.
Omega Bloodstone Battlestars Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.02 18:40:00 - [545] Edited by: Omega Bloodstone on 02/02/2007 18:39:20 Edited by: Omega Bloodstone on 02/02/2007 18:38:51 LinkageFound this in another thread. Enough said. 18,000m/s nough said
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.02 18:47:00 - [546] Edited by: Aki Yamato on 02/02/2007 18:44:57 Originally by: Crellion 1. Its funny how people come crying here to force others to explain to them how to counter Nanoships to avoid nerfage. You ll get nothing from me. Yes its uber when you see one eject pls. There is only 1 points I sympathise with: Heavy missles and their precision variant should in my opinion so some reasonable damage to BS sized objects going at 3-5 km/s. Target navigation prediction needs a tweak. In every other respect... keep on whining and ejecting. ...... See you in space. PS (I wont post replies to replies you can say nanoBS can outank and outank a Hyperion and I wont reply so it must be true o/) So your message to word is drop yor currect race and weapon spec and train Domi or Typhoon becose these 2 ships makes rest XY ship in eve obsolte (even hard to gain CS HAC...) ? Dont fly in smaller then 3 man gang ? Every smart nano pilot will avoid contact with gangs witch might be dangerous and focus on other targets becose there are plenty of pilots witch cant or wont play speed setups. BTW i see at least one great imballance with nanoships. Their speed is unlimited they can fly as fast as their setup allows them. In other side range based ships are capped at 250km and they catn do anything about it. And its obvious that fire range increase is logical counter to close range ships with faster aproach. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Christopher Multsanti Viziam	Posted - 2007.02.02 21:01:00 - [547] I refuse to read 18 pages, REFUSE I TELL YOU!!!! But this is not just a nano/inertia issue, think about rigs and implants also. kthxbye. It's great being Amarr that flys Minmintar aint it?
Petrified Forshadowed Stars	Posted - 2007.02.02 22:21:00 - [548] Personally, I think people should adapt to different tactics. But from a physics point of view if a heavy duty ship what has a very light internal structure is traveling quickly, then slapping it with a web or two should cause it significant internal damage while traveling over optimal speeds. Maybe creating an optimal safe speed rule in relation to a ships travel would be wise. For light ships such as Inties that speed would be very high since they have little mass. For larger ships such as Battleships, that speed would be much lower given their greater mass. For every Nano added - better for the greater percentage the structure is sacrified for the sake of faster speeds, the top safe speed is lowered. A ship will most likely be ok to travel at max speed with all low slots fitted with nanos but once they hit the MWD they are put at significant risk should their ship suddenly slow down due to webbing. The faster a ship is traveling over the top safe speed the greater damage to their structure and then armor. So if you are going to fast, you might pop if they web you hard. Just an idea. - - - Just another Old Man Online.
The GR8One	Posted - 2007.02.02 22:32:00 - [549] Originally by: TheEndofTheWorld Originally by: The GR8One Oh and BTW...one of my friends Petitioned a loss against a Nano-Phoon citing it as an exploit. His response from GMs were that there is NO BALANCE ISSUE with the ship and that it is NOT AN EXPLOIT Oh, you are so uber and can easily beat Nanoships? And still need to nerf them? AND THAT IS LIKE the lamest petition abuse ever =/ Stop that Whoa there Forum Warrior...calm down! I'm not saying anything about uberness because I don't have it. I am just saying that good tactics can beat the ship. They still need to be nerfed to a degree because of what has already been covered in the last 18 odd pages. Yeesh.
Futher Bezluden Minmatar Red Dwarf Mining Corps 5th Column	Posted - 2007.02.03 00:40:00 - [550] yes, swing thy mighty nerfbat and perfectly strike thee terrible iStab/ODJ/Nano BS. No reason for ceptor class BS pushing 4000m/s +. I will admit a certain swelling of the ePeen when I run about in my 4800m/s machariel, but these are freaking battleships not interceptors. CCP, thanks for watching all of this on the test server, then putting it into the game. How much ***** was smoked before signing off on this? THUKKER -Be Paranoid

Severeina	Posted - 2007.02.03 01:35:00 - [551] In my opinion the NOS / i-stab / nano-combo completely ruins the fun of PVP. I myself am a blaster pilot.. I like to get in close and dish it out, often in a Thorax. Nowadays, whenever I engage a target I get nossed over and over again, nano-ship or not. I want to go down gunz blazing... not fizzle out into a capless nothingness. Is this what PVP has become unless you fit an equal or greater amount of NOS/nanos?
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.03 02:31:00 - [552] Originally by: Severeina In my opinion the NOS / i-stab / nano-combo completely ruins the fun of PVP. I myself am a blaster pilot.. I like to get in close and dish it out, often in a Thorax. Nowadays, whenever I engage a target I get nossed over and over again, nano-ship or not. I want to go down gunz blazing... not fizzle out into a capless nothingness. Is this what PVP has become unless you fit an equal or greater amount of NOS/nanos? The problem is nos, not nanos... If there was some kind of nerf on nos, the nanobs wouldn't have cap to run their stuff forever and couldn't make targets cap die, and their damage isn't that hard to tank when you have your cap... Simple. N.F.F. Recruitment
Iconoclastix	Posted - 2007.02.03 02:34:00 - [553] Quote: It's nothing to do with 'carebears' vs 'PvP'ers for crying out loud... Nano Battleships are imbalanced for a whole plethora of reasons as highlighted already, yet you don't seem to have noticed that and instead, structured your argument along the lines of 'ebil old timers ganking noob carebears'... My argument has little to do with carebears vs PvP'ers. My arguement is "So what if they're imbalanced, carebears deal with imbalanced matchups all the time without whining for a nerf, some of you, who are supposed to be the bad asses of the game, apparently lack the strength of character of a carebear". Issuses, (or non-issues), aside, a fundamental truth of the matter is this: The nanobs can come roaring into your life, ruin your day, and there's little to nothing that many of you can do about it. Now just what you planning to do with your day? You were planning to find someone who couldn't do anything to keep you from roaring into their life and then ruin their day. If you fail to see the irony of this I submit that the challenge doesn't lie with me. In my previous posts, I tried to point out that cries for a non-existant and when the truth is told, a non-desirable, attempt at "balance" and/or "fair play" is the genesis of the humor I find in this situation. Even though I go poking around in 0.4 - 0.0 space, on trade runs, or hoping to find a 'roid field where the inherent risk is worth the potential reward, I actually spend most of my time mining in 0.4/0.3 space. This means that I am well aware of the potential dangers, and I accept them without complaint. Never-the-less, my vantagepoint is that of a potential mugging victim. It doen't matter to me if you use a knife, (non-nanobs), or if you use a gun, (nanobs), at the end of the day, dead is dead. Now, to hear the knife thugs, (non-nanobs), whine and demamd that something be done because they were able to freely terrorize until the gun thugs, (nanobs), came along with an "unbeatable" advantage is frankly, hilarious. If you spend your days bullying the weak and defenseless, and a bigger bully comes along and bullies you, I'm gonna laugh at you. When you run home crying to "Momma CCP" that another bully, bigger then you, kicked your butt, I'm gonna laugh that much harder. You will, of course, have a different perspective of the situation, one that I may even share were I in your pod, but for now, thats how it looks from where I sit. If it hadn't been for all the player bios and the Corp descriptions that I've read that glorify ganking non-combative people, I would not have bothered with my first post. I applaud the people who reconize that neither life, nor EVE are "fair". And when faced with a challange, are capable of rising to meet it. As for those who feel that a perspective outside of the way in which they would have the debate framed is cause for personal attacks, perhaps you'll remember me the next time you are used and abused by your politicians.
Sally Caldari R.u.S.H. Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.03 03:15:00 - [554] If you want to catch tricked out BS with 2b setup - use a tricked out inty with same very expencive setup. Its not hard to understand, eh? -- Stories: #1 --
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.03 03:17:00 - [555] Again... You've hit the nail on the head. To hear the majority of the complaints of "balance" come from peoples who's PVP background consists of 20 man bubbled up gate camps or 8-1 odds blobs, which have NO semblance of "balance" whatsoever! To hear them ACTUALLY whine about not being able to "force" them to engage or to "force" them to stay put until they die is funny *t. EVE isn't about "balance", its about players MAKING it Unbalanced in their favor to kill your opponents. Nanobs are as unbalanced as a sniper is to a blaster boat that's too far away or to an ECM ship that has you jammed n scrammed and you didn't bring FOF's... like it or not, if PVP didn't have its imbalances, every fight would be a stalemate.. ADAPT AND OVERCOME.. or die quietly please Originally by:** Iconoclastix Edited by: Iconoclastix on 03/02/2007 02:46:38 Edited by: Iconoclastix on 03/02/2007 02:42:57 Quote: It's nothing to do with 'carebears' vs 'PvP'ers for crying out loud... Nano Battleships are imbalanced for a whole plethora of reasons as highlighted already, yet you don't seem to have noticed that and instead, structured your argument along the lines of 'ebil old timers ganking noob carebears'... My argument has little to do with carebears vs PvP'ers. My arguement is "So what if they're imbalanced, carebears deal with imbalanced matchups all the time without whining for a nerf, some of you, who are supposed to be the bad-asses of the game, apparently lack the strength of character of a carebear". Issuses, (or non-issues), aside, a fundamental truth of the matter is this: The nanobs can come roaring into your life, ruin your day, and there's little to nothing that many of you can do about it. Now just what were you planning to do with your day? You were planning to find someone who couldn't do anything to keep you from roaring into their life and then ruin their day. If you fail to see the irony of this I submit that the challenge doesn't lie with me. Trust me, if it hadn't been for all the player bios and the Corp descriptions that I've read that glorify ganking non-combative people, I would not have bothered with my original post in the first place. In my previous posts, I tried to point out that cries for a non-existant and when the truth is told, a non-desirable, attempt at "balance" and/or "fair play" is the genesis of the humor I find in this situation. Even though I go poking around in 0.4 - 0.0 space, on trade runs, or hoping to find a 'roid field where the inherent risk is worth the potential reward, I actually spend most of my time mining in 0.4/0.3 space. This means that I am well aware of the potential dangers, and I accept them without complaint. Never-the-less, my vantagepoint is that of a potential mugging victim. It doen't matter to me if you use a knife, (non-nanobs), or if you use a gun, (nanobs), at the end of the day, dead is dead. Now, to hear the knife thugs, (non-nanobs), whine and demamd that something be done because they were able to freely terrorize until the gun thugs, (nanobs), came along with an "unbeatable" advantage is frankly, hilarious. If you spend your days bullying the weak and defenseless, and a bigger bully comes along and bullies you, I'm gonna laugh at you. When you run home crying to "Momma CCP" that another bully, bigger then you, kicked your butt, I'm gonna laugh that much harder. You will, of course, have a different perspective of the situation, one that I may even share were I in your pod, but for now, thats how it looks from where I sit. I applaud the people who reconize that neither life, nor EVE are "fair". And when faced with a challange, are capable of rising to meet it. As for those who feel that a perspective outside of the way in which they would have the debate framed, is cause for personal attacks, perhaps you'll remember me the next time you are used and abused by your politicians.
Angelic Resolution Arcanum Defence Forces	Posted - 2007.02.03 03:57:00 - [556] Here's a little fact. I just fought a nanophoon that went 4.8k's. This nanophoon managed to pop a raven and a megathron without losing his shields completely. My t2 cruise missiles did all on 0.1 dmg on him when he was going full speed. The only reason he got to within 3/4's of shields was because he turned wrong. Care to tell me how this is balanced. Anyone? oh that's right.. It's not. Put it any way you want the tactic used although sound, is so far unbalanced it isn't funny. We had a gang of 13 ships after this one nanophoon and all of us could deal damage to a normal ship. But these nanoships, you'd be lucky if you even hit them with a small rail let alone a decent hit with missiles.
Crellion Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.02.03 05:34:00 - [557] Originally by: Angelic Resolution Here's a little fact. I just fought a nanophoon that went 4.8k's. This nanophoon managed to pop a raven and a megathron without losing his shields completely. My t2 cruise missiles did all on 0.1 dmg on him when he was going full speed. The only reason he got to within 3/4's of shields was because he turned wrong. Care to tell me how this is balanced. Anyone? oh that's right.. It's not. Put it any way you want the tactic used although sound, is so far unbalanced it isn't funny. We had a gang of 13 ships after this one nanophoon and all of us could deal damage to a normal ship. But these nanoships, you'd be lucky if you even hit them with a small rail let alone a decent hit with missiles. This post has changed my views. I see the light. Nanophoons must be nerfed. NPC#s suffer torture inhuman and degrading behaviour daily. What is the government doing? When will they tell us the truth? Elvis is alive and performs at Jita 4-4 on Fridays Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim.
Gauss Belloid Prison Break Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.03 07:55:00 - [558] Nanoships are lame - except when I fly them of course!
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.02.03 08:32:00 - [559] Originally by: Iconoclastix Edited by: Iconoclastix on 03/02/2007 02:46:38 Edited by: Iconoclastix on 03/02/2007 02:42:57 Quote: It's nothing to do with 'carebears' vs 'PvP'ers for crying out loud... Nano Battleships are imbalanced for a whole plethora of reasons as highlighted already, yet you don't seem to have noticed that and instead, structured your argument along the lines of 'ebil old timers ganking noob carebears'... In my previous posts, I tried to point out that cries for a non-existant and when the truth is told, a non-desirable, attempt at "balance" and/or "fair play" is the genesis of the humor I find in this situation. It's quite simple why the current situation needs looking at. These setups render an entire line of ships û those that are small, fast and hard to hit, obsolete, by being fast, hard to hit with Battleship-sized hitpoints, while packing Battleship-sized weapons. It really is that simple - Battleships should not be zipping around with the manoeuvrability of small, fast hard to hit ships. Note I said manoeuvrability, high speed in itself isn't really a problem, if a Battleship was capable of going 9km/sec but in a virtual straight line there would be no problems, it's the agility that goes with these setups that is plain wrong... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Chavu	Posted - 2007.02.03 08:36:00 - [560] Originally by: Ryysa Edited by: Ryysa on 31/01/2007 19:08:38 Going to post one more time... There is a very strong argument about "counters". The following counters apply to mostly anything ingame: 1. BBB (Bring Bigger Blob). 2. Do the same thing better. Currently, in addition to the former, there are the following counters to nanoBS: 1. Webbing. 2. Fast Tracking Turrets. Now, at least there are some counters. I can't find any counters to NOS. Small ships get wtfpwned by big NOS, there's no module to reduce nossing amount, there's no way to do anything, except nos back more. This, in my book, is an IWIN module. With NO drawbacks and NO counters. Guess how many IWIN modules the nanobs fit atm? 4... And the only cruiser sized vessel which can be effectively nanoed up is the curse. Oh, woopsie, it has a RANGE and an AMOUNT bonus to the IWIN module. Vagabonds can't speedtank while attacking something, if you want to bring this as an argument against the curse. They also can't disable the opponent's tank completely. Now, if you NOS a nanobs back with 4 nos or deny him the opportunity to NOS his target, he needs, depending on his skills/mwd, to use a cap charge about every 20-30 seconds. Even with a medium secure container, you won't be carrying much more than 25 charges. That means, you can run your MWD for 10-15 minutes before you run out cap. Due to current HP buffs, to kill a decently tanked ship of the same class, it takes you 3-4 minutes. If it has an injector, it takes a LOT longer. Now, if there was a counter to NOS, except fitting more of it (NanoBS has 4...), nanoBS would have to make trips to stations quite often to refill cap charges... Making them almost pointless for any really serious roaming ganking. They would also lose their huge IWIN button against EVERYTHING smaller size. Think about it... Trackless weapons/drones are in the game for a very long time now... Nanos are ingame for a very long time... What forced the nanobs is the fact that it takes forever to kill something that is not out of cap. Revelations is all about cap. Nanobs are effective at killing cap. Speedtanking is a viable alternative, I think it should stay ingame. Speedtanking has always had a very high cost on cap. A battleship shouldn't be able to speedtank forever with 4 nos. Face it, the CORE problem is not that you can't kill nanobs, it's the fact that they can keep speedtanking forever while killing their targets, WHILE being uncatchable. Take a vagabond for example, solo, it's a minor nuisance. It might gank your haulers or your ceptors/frigs, but it can't kill anything bigger on it's own. To deal damage, it has to stop speedtanking. Forever speedtanking should only be available to interceptors as they are built from the ground up for speedtank, and they have very low HP. Think about it... are istabs/nanos/mwd's really the problem? Or is it the fact that you can keep it all running forever? If you had to go to station to refill after 15 minutes of action every time, and that everyone could tank your pathetic damage, because you couldn't make everyone's cap instashutoff, would you still fly a nanoship? I know i wouldn't. So as I said before, leave speedtanking to the ships SPECIALIZED in it. I want to use my vagabond again, I want to use my interceptors again... I am sick of my flying trashcan, yet I keep flying it, because no other ship can outperform it for guerilla warfare right now. Sad... I'm quoting this as I think it is an excellent post and Ryysa is a very good pilot who I have respect for (his vagabond is very scary) The problem really is Heavy NOS vs a smaller ship. with 4x Heavy NOS you can drain a cruiser and below in two cycles of the NOS. A BC takes 3-4 cycles. After that you are dead. There is absolutely zero reason for any BS to be going that fast and that agile.

18 Rabbit	Posted - 2007.02.03 09:07:00 - [561] Edited by: 18 Rabbit on 03/02/2007 09:04:28 Nos should be subject to turret, tracking and stacking issues. That way, missile people may be relatively immune to nos (dps-wise anyway), but they also won't be relatively skillful at them either. Unless they make the effort to train, in which case, good for them. Yes, the projectile people still get an edge up, but they aren't particular over-powered at present anyway, since they do still have tracking, range, etc to consider with their weapons. Nos are bad by themselves at present, but the conjunction of Nos, nano, and missiles that don't track and don't miss is a problem.
Helmut 314 Amarr J.H.E.N.R Pure.	Posted - 2007.02.03 09:33:00 - [562] The combination of nanos, faction gear and various faction implants is giving results that CCP in all likelyhood never expected. I personally like flying around fast but when you get into a BS and manage to set it up to zoom around faster than an interceptor without resorting to faction implants for billions of isk and so on I think everyone realizes that something is broken. Of course, you can apply faction gear and faction implants to an interceptor and go even faster. The difference is of course that one lucky hit on that interceptor when youre turning and boom, bye bye faction gear. Imagine that this wasnt a speed issue, but a damage one. By fitting some faction modules and plugging in some implants you could increase the damage mod on your battleship guns from 10x to 45x and make them track like frigate guns with a ROF of 2 seconds. Tempests instapopping tanked battleships, Megathrons killing them in two volleys and so on. What would you be saying then ? The funny thing is that there will be a nerf to these silly speeds, CCP realizes that its unbalanced, and there will be much crying when they apply that nerf not to NOS, but to the real issue, the unintended synergy between ships and certain modules and implants. ________________________________ Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.03 10:45:00 - [563] Let me help you... 1. tracking comps 2. damps 3. jammers 4. NOS 5. neuts 6. webbers 7. small ecm drones Had your raven/mega had any of these or combination of these things they would still be alive.. They weren't set up to counter the threat, they died because of it. I'm not even going to get into tactics that could also have helped turn the tide, both solo and gang. If you had a gang of 13 ships and you COULDN'T kill one nano bs, you need to seroiusly think about mining... ADAPT and OVERCOME... or die quietly Originally by: Angelic Resolution Here's a little fact. I just fought a nanophoon that went 4.8k's. This nanophoon managed to pop a raven and a megathron without losing his shields completely. My t2 cruise missiles did all on 0.1 dmg on him when he was going full speed. The only reason he got to within 3/4's of shields was because he turned wrong. Care to tell me how this is balanced. Anyone? oh that's right.. It's not. Put it any way you want the tactic used although sound, is so far unbalanced it isn't funny. We had a gang of 13 ships after this one nanophoon and all of us could deal damage to a normal ship. But these nanoships, you'd be lucky if you even hit them with a small rail let alone a decent hit with missiles.
Captain Crimson Domini Umbrus	Posted - 2007.02.03 10:49:00 - [564] Originally by: Iconoclastix Edited by: Iconoclastix on 03/02/2007 02:46:38 Edited by: Iconoclastix on 03/02/2007 02:42:57 Quote: Cynical trash Don't point out the obvious, we aren't as stupid as you think. 'What do you mean, where's the treasure? It's in this chest: ****ography and biscuits! Yarrr!'
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.03 11:34:00 - [565] Edited by: Aki Yamato on 03/02/2007 11:30:31 Originally by: JVol Let me help you... 1. tracking comps 2. damps 3. jammers 4. NOS 5. neuts 6. webbers 7. small ecm drones Had your raven/mega had any of these or combination of these things they would still be alive.. They weren't set up to counter the threat, they died because of it. I'm not even going to get into tactics that could also have helped turn the tide, both solo and gang. If you had a gang of 13 ships and you COULDN'T kill one nano bs, you need to seroiusly think about mining... ADAPT and OVERCOME... or die quietly Its poor arguing (like jammers on non ECM ship is realy funny idea) to defend your flying in easy mode ? Yea that is exactly what nano BS is "easy mode". This setups have one giant advetage, adventage to fight only if they want to, if they face certain victory. If they find tough target the can warp put in 2s and keep looking for another easy kill. Other setups dont have this superior option. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.03 11:46:00 - [566] Originally by: JVol Again... You've hit the nail on the head. To hear the majority of the complaints of "balance" come from peoples who's PVP background consists of 20 man bubbled up gate camps or 8-1 odds blobs, which have NO semblance of "balance" whatsoever! To repeat myself fairness != balance. The balance people are talking about is not about "balanced (= fair) fights" but about ship & module balance. Basically, no ship/module combo should be so effeccient compared to other combos that it makes no real sense to fly anything else. Nanosetups because exactly this - they get more and more popular simply because they represent the most effecient ship currently isk/effect and sp invested/effect wise. "ADAPT AND OVERCOME" commentw are rather dumb here, because the only way to do this is a) fly nanosetups yourself or b) use specialized blobs for taking them out. And they hurt PvEs much more than PvPers. A normal BS disrupting your mining ops & transport lines is relatively easy to catch. A nanobs can wreck havoc for weeks without you being able to stop it.
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.03 12:28:00 - [567] Originally by: Aki Yamato Edited by: Aki Yamato on 03/02/2007 11:30:31 Originally by: JVol Let me help you... 1. tracking comps 2. damps 3. jammers 4. NOS 5. neuts 6. webbers 7. small ecm drones Had your raven/mega had any of these or combination of these things they would still be alive.. They weren't set up to counter the threat, they died because of it. I'm not even going to get into tactics that could also have helped turn the tide, both solo and gang. If you had a gang of 13 ships and you COULDN'T kill one nano bs, you need to seroiusly think about mining... ADAPT and OVERCOME... or die quietly Its poor arguing (like jammers on non ECM ship is realy funny idea) to defend your flying in easy mode ? Yea that is exactly what nano BS is "easy mode". This setups have one giant advetage, adventage to fight only if they want to, if they face certain victory. If they find tough target the can warp put in 2s and keep looking for another easy kill. Other setups dont have this superior option. UUmmm, actually a mimitar racial jammer would work REAL nice, on a nano PHOON, dontcha think? Not to mention I had more than JUST jammers in the list... Quote: If they find tough target the can warp put in 2s and keep looking for another easy kill. Other setups dont have this superior option. I can think of more than one setup that lets you leave when you want to,can't you? Quote: And they hurt PvEs much more than PvPers. A normal BS disrupting your mining ops & transport lines is relatively easy to catch. A nanobs can wreck havoc for weeks without you being able to stop it. This is why people are whining about nanos, they are used to the "easy" bs's to counter.. If your mining op or transport fleet's ecsort wing isnt setup to counter a nano, what OTHER ships isn't it setup to deal with? Jammers, snipers, dampers???
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.03 13:21:00 - [568] Edited by: Aramendel on 03/02/2007 13:22:54 Quote: Had your raven/mega had any of these or combination of these things they would still be alive.. They weren't set up to counter the threat, they died because of it. I'm not even going to get into tactics that could also have helped turn the tide, both solo and gang. If you had a gang of 13 ships and you COULDN'T kill one nano bs, you need to seroiusly think about mining... They would still be alive - but so would be the nanophoon. They can be forced to retreat, but unless they make a pilot error cannot be killed. That is their main strength, what kills a normal setup just forces them to bail out. A normal setup encounters an enemy which has more EW/nos/numbers than it it dies. A nanosetup flees. And can try again. And again. And again. Originally by: JVol I can think of more than one setup that lets you leave when you want to,can't you? Exept these other setups tend not to have 4 heavy drones, 4 heavy nos and 4 torps (or drone boni). Other setups have weaker dps and/or no nospower. Nanophoons/domis keep the cake and eat it. Quote: This is why people are whining about nanos, they are used to the "easy" bs's to counter.. If your mining op or transport fleet's ecsort wing isnt setup to counter a nano, what OTHER ships isn't it setup to deal with? Jammers, snipers, dampers??? As you said yourself the other setupos are easy to counter compared to nanoBSs. Aka they are stronger than other setups. Aka unbalanced. Snipers cannot keep your targets from warping out and are completely helpless if they jump into a gatecamp which has at least equal numbers. Damperner setups are quite strong vs a single ship, but vs multiples (read: 2+) they are killed fast. Killed. Not forced to retreat. ECM ships cannot do much alone, they have the worst dps of all setups. And when you pin them down are also dead meat. Nanophoons/domis are far more slippery there.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.03 17:19:00 - [569] Edited by: Ryysa on 03/02/2007 17:17:17 As Aramendel pointed out... nanobs have uber investment/return ratio if you are a skilled pilot. To fly nanobs you need like 2 weeks to train the bs skill etc. To counter nanobs you need pimped huginn which takes like 2 months to train for. That's the problem, i don't mind stuff going fast, in fact i LOVE fast fights at high speed, i think it brings some skill into the current "tank shoot die" equation. But the combination of "LOL U ARE CRUISER I NOS U U DIE HAHA KK GG" and trackless weapons etc makes this whole stuff imba. I mean, if you want to have a fairly powerful fast hit/andrun ship train vagabond or ceptor, and work together with other people. You shouldn't be able to win eve in a nanobs with minimal skillpoint investment. If you want to choose your fights you should have some penalties... Inties have low hp etc, vagabond has tracking/cap issues, it's fairly balanced. NanoBS is like... iwin cap, iwin nos and iwin speed... But hey, i'll keep using my nanophoon and ganking stuff with it, until it gets nerfed. I think CCP is aware of the issue and are working on a solution, as i said before, this topic has been discussed to death. Removing interceptors and vagabond from the game is not the point I think, they should always fill a niche role with high specialization cost/penalties associated. You shouldn't be able to solo win an mmorpg imo... but hey, that's just my opinion. EDITS: posting drunk ftl etc. N.F.F. Recruitment
Sanguinnus	Posted - 2007.02.03 17:20:00 - [570] Quote: I'm not a nano Pilot at all, and If you cant see the logic its probbaly best you keep quite as opposed to removing all reasonable doubt as to your depths of ignorance -I was simply saying you cant remove something just because you or I dont like it -we need extremes and its not exactly uber invincible or cheap! Take a look at the Raven It dominated for years and a complete nube could do Uber damage -do you want that gone as well -then what next?? I hate nano ships FYI but I respect that people can fly them and should you choose a good setup then you are risking a huge amount of ISK on a ship with no tank which can be beaten -Vaga's die all the time for instance -does that have to go 2? Its good that matters are divided, all opinion is of interest IMO and Its just a shame some are quite so Ignorant as to believe every opinion has ONLY self interest behind it -good debate otherwise! PISCIS QFT

Capt Rob Minmatar Black Omega Security Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.03 18:06:00 - [571] Originally by: Sanguinnus Quote: I'm not a nano Pilot at all, and If you cant see the logic its probbaly best you keep quite as opposed to removing all reasonable doubt as to your depths of ignorance -I was simply saying you cant remove something just because you or I dont like it -we need extremes and its not exactly uber invincible or cheap! Take a look at the Raven It dominated for years and a complete nube could do Uber damage -do you want that gone as well -then what next?? I hate nano ships FYI but I respect that people can fly them and should you choose a good setup then you are risking a huge amount of ISK on a ship with no tank which can be beaten -Vaga's die all the time for instance -does that have to go 2? Its good that matters are divided, all opinion is of interest IMO and Its just a shame some are quite so Ignorant as to believe every opinion has ONLY self interest behind it -good debate otherwise! PISCIS QFT So QFT
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.03 19:18:00 - [572] Quote: UUmmm, actually a mimitar racial jammer would work REAL nice, on a nano PHOON, dontcha think? Not to mention I had more than JUST jammers in the list... I can think of more than one setup that lets you leave when you want to,can't you? Racial Jammer givs you 25% chace at best You call it very nice ? LOL Yea many more setups allows to leave when you want but they dont have firepower and durability of nanobs. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Capt Rob Minmatar Black Omega Security Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.03 21:29:00 - [573] Originally by: Aki Yamato Quote: UUmmm, actually a mimitar racial jammer would work REAL nice, on a nano PHOON, dontcha think? Not to mention I had more than JUST jammers in the list... I can think of more than one setup that lets you leave when you want to,can't you? Racial Jammer givs you 25% chace at best You call it very nice ? LOL Yea many more setups allows to leave when you want but they dont have firepower and durability of nanobs. or maby there are a good number of fits and your just imcompetent?
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.03 21:41:00 - [574] Edited by: Koloch on 03/02/2007 21:38:44 Originally by: Sanguinnus I'm not a nano Pilot at all, and If you cant see the logic its probbaly best you keep quite as opposed to removing all reasonable doubt as to your depths of ignorance -I was simply saying you cant remove something just because you or I dont like it -we need extremes and its not exactly uber invincible or cheap! Take a look at the Raven It dominated for years and a complete nube could do Uber damage -do you want that gone as well -then what next?? I hate nano ships FYI but I respect that people can fly them and should you choose a good setup then you are risking a huge amount of ISK on a ship with no tank which can be beaten -Vaga's die all the time for instance -does that have to go 2? Its good that matters are divided, all opinion is of interest IMO and Its just a shame some are quite so Ignorant as to believe every opinion has ONLY self interest behind it -good debate otherwise! PISCIS This debate is about battleships going 5k+ and being able to leave the engagement when ever they want, it isn't about the Vaga or the Raven. Making over exagerated statements makes you look like you are desperate to defend the nanoBS - that how it looks and that's how I call it. Extreme setups that are easy to train for aren't good for the game. This is why CCP fixed missle training and the Raven. ..and to respond to all of these isk investment replies. There are a lot of people with very expensive implants and ship setups outside of nanoBS pilots...the vast majority of them don't fly them in pvp because they AREN'T an "I-WIN" setup nor will they allow them to leave the engagement when things get hairy. nanoBS pilots on the other hand CAN! This is why we are seeing so many people flying around in 4+ billion isk ships -because there is very little risk in loosing it
Darth Matt	Posted - 2007.02.03 22:14:00 - [575] i enjoy the tactical need to come up with a way to defeat new ships, i have discussed with fellow corpmates, and some say nerf, I say lets out smart them in a cheaper way, and then pop them... my solutions will be kept to myself..your a feisty group, and the flames would be neverending..
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.04 01:43:00 - [576] Originally by: Aki Yamato Quote: UUmmm, actually a mimitar racial jammer would work REAL nice, on a nano PHOON, dontcha think? Not to mention I had more than JUST jammers in the list... I can think of more than one setup that lets you leave when you want to,can't you? Racial Jammer givs you 25% chace at best You call it very nice ? LOL Yea many more setups allows to leave when you want but they dont have firepower and durability of nanobs. I get alot better % than that with my skills, but for YOU, isnt a 25% chance of living better than YOUR current 0% since you seem unable or unwilling to counter these ships?? lol You have obviously never exploited the weakness' in this ship, or you would know they have almost NO duribility outside its speed. Fly one and you'll see. I didn't build one untill I had lost 2 ships to 2 different noobs, but instead of whining about it, I got in one and learned how to beat them.
Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.04 02:53:00 - [577] nano-bs are broken the basci ccp rule .... to build balanced ships. nerfing the nos, i think its a solution, but there¦s a problem, if u nerf the nos, how are u going to defend your lonely bs from a ceptor. A bs need a long range and heavy nosf to drain a ceptor¦s cap at least to be able runaway. CCP, please nerf the nano-bs, they are unbalanced ships. I can fly a phoon, and have all the necesary skill and isk to get a nice nano-phoon, but ill never fly it ive taken a decision, if i find a nano-bs, ill just warp to a safe and i will never try to fight vs them, its a way to get them bored, if they dont find targets they will noticed no one wants to fight vs unbalanced ships.
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.04 04:56:00 - [578] Originally by: Terell *nano-bs are broken the basci ccp rule .... to build balanced ships*. CCP, please nerf the nano-bs, they are unbalanced ships. I can fly a phoon, and have all the necesary skill and isk to get a nice nano-phoon, but ill never fly it ive taken a decision, if i find a nano-bs, ill just warp to a safe and i will never try to fight vs them, its a way to get them bored, if they dont find targets they will noticed no one wants to fight vs unbalanced ships. WTF??!! WHERE, JUST WHERE is THAT rule? Did anyone else see this "RULE"? I think this line of thinking is going to ruin EVE..
Fenderson The Priory Shroud Of Darkness	Posted - 2007.02.04 04:59:00 - [579] the most important thing to consider here is that nanoBS are stealing the role of an enire class of ships. There is currently no reason to fly an interceptor or tackling cruiser when you can just fly a nanoBS and have most of the advantages of an inty without any of the weaknesses. got new corp, need new sig. mail me ingame.
Sanguinnus	Posted - 2007.02.04 10:51:00 - [580] Hmmm, theres a slight difference, do i want to spend 15-20 mil to make my inty got a 6/7 km/s or a few billion to make my bs got at 7km/s, that's intys well nullified. :/ nice comparison.

Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.04 11:21:00 - [581] Originally by: JVol Originally by: Aki Yamato Quote: UUmmm, actually a mimitar racial jammer would work REAL nice, on a nano PHOON, dontcha think? Not to mention I had more than JUST jammers in the list... I can think of more than one setup that lets you leave when you want to,can't you? Racial Jammer givs you 25% chace at best You call it very nice ? LOL Yea many more setups allows to leave when you want but they dont have firepower and durability of nanobs. I get alot better % than that with my skills, but for YOU, isnt a 25% chance of living better than YOUR current 0% since you seem unable or unwilling to counter these ships?? lol You have obviously never exploited the weakness' in this ship, or you would know they have almost NO duribility outside its speed. Fly one and you'll see. I didn't build one untill I had lost 2 ships to 2 different noobs, but instead of whining about it, I got in one and learned how to beat them. Yea so ennlight me how do you get more jammer strengh then 4.5 ? (T2 racial jemer 3.6 +25% by signal disperdion) Maybe i have overlooked some powerfull skill or maybe you overloked nerfstick with hits ECM in kali... Im able efectly couner these ship up tu certain speed with my ships but you are right im unwilling to switch to another race or class of ships. Their only weaknes is human factor... maybe you need to learn about nanobs main adventages and use them properly. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.04 11:54:00 - [582] Quote: Yea so ennlight me how do you get more jammer strengh then 4.5 ? (T2 racial jemer 3.6 +25% by signal disperdion) Maybe i have overlooked some powerfull skill or maybe you overloked nerfstick with hits ECM in kali... Im able efectly couner these ship up tu certain speed with my ships but you are right im unwilling to switch to another race or class of ships. Their only weaknes is human factor... maybe you need to learn about nanobs main adventages and use them properly. No WONDER you get killed SO easy,, Do you REALLy NEED me to TELL you how to get your racial jammer up past 25% ? GEEeeZ. Also go ahead and REread the post you keep refering to, I gave SEVEN different ways to counter these ships, ecm was only ONE of the ways and switching races wasn't one of them. Go play WOW
Spooky Woman	Posted - 2007.02.04 12:13:00 - [583] Originally by: JVol ... I gave SEVEN different ways to counter these ships... Go play WOW Uuuh... be nice... All you pro-nanobs people can talk all you want about counters. The problem is that the counters only work if the nanobs chooses to engage. If it wants to, it just slips away. Not very effective for a counter is it?
nakKEDK	Posted - 2007.02.04 12:25:00 - [584] im gonna try my brand new nano-thorax....
Crellion Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.02.04 12:33:00 - [585] The heart of the matter is that the same person who would poon you in a normal BS anyway does it in a nanoBS... and the one who would make a mistake and lose his BS will make same mistake and lose his nanoBS... but this thread at least gives an alternative shaft for people to vent their anguish... so it is a good thing in a way... Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.04 13:18:00 - [586] Edited by: Aki Yamato on 04/02/2007 13:15:13 Originally by: JVol Quote: Yea so ennlight me how do you get more jammer strengh then 4.5 ? (T2 racial jemer 3.6 +25% by signal disperdion) Maybe i have overlooked some powerfull skill or maybe you overloked nerfstick with hits ECM in kali... Im able efectly couner these ship up tu certain speed with my ships but you are right im unwilling to switch to another race or class of ships. Their only weaknes is human factor... maybe you need to learn about nanobs main adventages and use them properly. No WONDER you get killed SO easy,, Do you REALLy NEED me to TELL you how to get your racial jammer up past 25% ? GEEeeZ. Also go ahead and REread the post you keep refering to, I gave SEVEN different ways to counter these ships, ecm was only ONE of the ways and switching races wasn't one of them. Go play WOW Yor pesumption about i have been kill by nano BS is wrong actualy I have 0 loss to nanobs. Yea I need to know how to increase racial jammer strengh grom 3.6 to at least 9 to get 50% chance to jamm (typhoon has senzor 18 )withou mounting it to blackird scorpion or rook. 1. Tracking comps - their celling is somwhere around 5k/ms orbiting speed 2. Dampeners - at least 2 to cut locking range enought 3. Jammers - simply dont work on non ECM ships 4. NOS - pure nos ship works but low efective against different spectrum of targets 5. Neuts - same as nos 6. Webbers - works only at few ships... 7. Light ECM drones - dont have personal experience but i presume it wil be similar to clasic ECM. So imo your suggestions are un effective or usable only in particular situations, with however every SMART nano pilot will avoid (as fleet of hugins and neut apocs). All its reminds me early stage of war of atlanic, when wolfacks of german U-boats plundered allied convoys, diving to depths if something goes wrong. Until Liberator long range bomber and new anti sub weapons and enigma decrypting hit the scene. Your suggostions are same despair as tactics for convoys in early stage. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.04 13:27:00 - [587] Quote: All you pro-nanobs people can talk all you want about counters. The problem is that the counters only work if the nanobs chooses to engage. If it wants to, it just slips away. Not very effective for a counter is it? OMFG!! WHY do you people feel it's a problem if a ship that CHOSES not to engage, can get away? Its not a " right " or somthing for everyone to bow down and fight YOUR way, when , where and how YOU want.. The counters work, tactics work, and nanoBS pilots will still make errors. SO ya know, COUNTERS aren't intended to MAKE someone fight, they are intended to defend yourself WHEN you ARE fighting. Your entire statement made you sound like a bubble/gate camper whos used to killing every ship that jumps thru your camp with 20 of your friends
Spooky Woman	Posted - 2007.02.04 13:38:00 - [588] Originally by: JVol Your entire statement made you sound like a bubble/gate camper whos used to killing every ship that jumps thru your camp with 20 of your friends Perhaps... But your statement makes you sound like you want a way to go any system, killing and maiming without running the risk of being caught. As you said yourself, the only way to catch a nanobs, is if the pilot makes an error. So as long as he doesn't make any errors, he's invulnerable?.... Hmmmmm...
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.04 14:07:00 - [589] Originally by: Spooky Woman Originally by: JVol Your entire statement made you sound like a bubble/gate camper whos used to killing every ship that jumps thru your camp with 20 of your friends As you said yourself, the only way to catch a nanobs, is if the pilot makes an error. So as long as he doesn't make any errors, he's invulnerable?.... Hmmmmm... When did I say THAT? NEVER did I say the "only" way to catch a nanoBS is for him to make a mistake.. do some REreading dude.. Quote: Perhaps... But your statement makes you sound like you want a way to go any system, killing and maiming without running the risk of being caught. There's a couple problems with this statement. First, if I wanted to do that, I'd use a recon. Second, there's ALWAYS a risk of being causght, no matter what your in. To set the record straight im NOT a nanoBS pilot, I only set one up AFTER "i" was killed be a couple of them, AND I was killed after my 3rd day in one! lol.. I made a noob mistake and the guy who killed made none. poof nano bs dead. I'm taking the position in this tread that I am because I see a few very big flaws with some of the logic that the folks who want them nerfed out of eve have. Frankly I am not willing to fork out the isk needed to properly use this ship to its fullest capabilitys, and with all off the shekf stuff its good, but not the ship it is with in=mplants and faction gear.. But then again, what ship isnt killer with the right faction gear and implants..?? Anyways, there have been some really insightfull posts on this topic, and some REALLy lame ones as well..
Angelic Resolution Arcanum Defence Forces	Posted - 2007.02.04 14:33:00 - [590] JVol, go back and read the part where I wrote my T2 cruise missiles hitting for 0.1 damage. Then read it again. Let it sink in. Our fastest inty went 5400/s. Then got insta locked down, nos'd and popped. Nano pilots are smart enough to stay inside of 150km's of any small fleet near them, know why? Cause at 150km's you'll get jumped on by the rest. Now I have only fought 2 nanobs's, one was the above. The other was a rather cheap skilled unknowlegable pilot that I got to half armor before a blue jumped into system and he decided to run. It's fair is it JVol? A raven vs a blasterthron. Even battle. A geddon vs a rokh. Even Battle. A Nanodomi and a nanophoon vs geddon, rokh, blasterthron, raven. Uneven battle. Know how I know? Cause the lasers, blasters and drones don't track. And the T2 torp raven hits for 10dmg. It's really balanced. Jammers, yeah sure they work lovely. Tracking disruptors... Sensor Damp's.. why didn't I think of that..? Cause they're useless. You have a nanoBS feel like he's getting the damp or anything similar, it's run away and he comes back when their isn't a gang. Fine sure no problems. Or the other problem occurs were you have a bullseye painted on your hull. Yay! Remeber that old trick of launching 4 torps and having the mwd on so they all hit at once? Ever seen a cruiser go down that way cause I sure as hell have. It's so friggen pointless it aint funny. Nano's need to be altered. Not they should be, they NEED to be. Jvol, I want to see you try and take on a nano first solo and then with a group of people. I aint talking theoreticall I am talking in practise, a nanophoon comes to your home 0.0 system and kills a few people. I want to see YOU (Yes YOU) try and catch him in an inty. Then I want to see you and a small gang try and catch him. After that I want you to come back here and tell me how it is you managed to catch them. Oh wait.. You can't. Fit dual webs they say. Yes great idea, he warps away. Fit dual webs and a scrambler you moron. How do you catch him in time? Fit dual webs, scrambler, mwd and kill him you idiot. Watch him own the **** out of you with T2 heavies and Nos. Fit up a nanoBS yourself and kill him - That's the only one I don't have a come back for except these: 1) it's hypocritical 2) it's pointless as I wouldn't be lame enough to use it on anyone else 3) The likelyhood of actually killing the other nanobs would be 0 as they would be smart and run away If you come up with a counter that works Jvol, by all means: post it. Until then try to realise that a nanoBS will always win in a 1 vs 1 in anything. Even a 1 vs 2 and 3 and 4 and 5. Try it some time :)

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.04 14:39:00 - [591] Originally by: JVol When did I say THAT? NEVER did I say the "only" way to catch a nanoBS is for him to make a mistake.. do some REreading dude.. The little problem is that there are far more ways to for a nan-nano setup with similar dps and nospower as a nanoBS has to get killed without him making any error than a nanoBS faces. What kills a non-nano setup usually forces a nanosetup to flee. As j0sephine said once very accurately, vs each other the worst possible outcome for a nanosetup is the best possible outcome for a non-nanosetup. The nanosetup kills or flees. The non-nanosetup is getting killed or forces the nanosetup to flee. You mentioned recons. The force recons have with their cloak a similar survival rate as nanoBS, yes. But there is also a little difference: they dps is a LOT lower. And they have with the exeption of the pilgrim no nos. And the pilgrim in itself is an exeption of the recons - it has no range bonus and needs to get within 12k range to use his nos (or 19k if it uses the best faction, which is still within warp disruptor range). Which means once it engages a target with a WD it cannot flee until it leeches its whole cap or kills it. All you need is a bait and a BC or similar in the next system and you have a dead pilgrim because past 12k it is only a moderately better tanked arbitrator. If local fills up a nanoBS can disengage at any time. The other recons can disable a ship without it being able to stop them from fleeing, but have, as said, no nos, little dps and a very poor tank. 5 heavy on them is a major problem. If nanoBS would do 200 dps, would have no nos and only 2k armor and shield I doubt people would complain about them.
Angelic Resolution Arcanum Defence Forces	Posted - 2007.02.04 15:42:00 - [592] If nanoBS would do 200 dps, would have no nos and only 2k armor and shield I doubt people would complain about them. Course they would as a fleet of them going 5k's would still be unbalanced and a pain in the arse to kill. Am all for a slug fest but not if your slug can't even track.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.04 15:56:00 - [593] Well, you do not see fleets of recons moving around all the time, do you? Of cource there are recon gangs, but they are no very common occurance. They simply cannot do much damage against a bigger gang before they get killed or driven off.
Nyssa Osbourne Minmatar Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.02.04 15:58:00 - [594] Edited by: Nyssa Osbourne on 04/02/2007 15:56:06 There are a lot of valid (and not-so-valid) arguments here, but I'd like to point out that EVE is about -choice-. People are able to choose whether or not to PVP. They can choose what ship to fly and how to set it up. Part of the appeal of EVE is the flexibility it affords you. In my two years or so on EVE I have seen many arguments over various specific ships or setups and many have seen some serious consideration from CCP. I would like to point out that people using nano ships are using a very effective form of skirmish warfare. They choose their hunting grounds and their targets according to what they are able to handle. Admittedly, interceptors, interdictors and the (also controversial) vagabond are meant to be able to do this but experience tells us that the nano-BS is the singally most effective ship at skirmish warfare. There -are- counters to Nano-BS, but most require pairs or larger groups to realistically tackle a single opponent (As in to actually catch and destroy rather than force to flee). In fleet actions the nano-ships can't stand up to the rigours of such battles and as such are only really seen in roving gangs. The question here is why are you complaining? Nano-ships are an effective form of warfare, yes, but you need to get inventive in response, or suggest realistic alternatives. If the NOS is the issue, then perhaps increase the cycle duration rather than reduce the amount transferred. If it is the nanofibres, then it might be an idea to convert the fixed speed and agility bonus to a percentage. That way they benifit the intended ships more and the larger ships less. A stacking penalty on I-Stabs and Nanos sounds a good idea, and would bring those modules in line with others. If this is the route taken though, then what's to say we shouldn't have stacking penalties on -all- modules that give bonuses of any sort? That is if we -have- to change anything. Personally I don't think it's the ships or modules that are broken per-se, I believe that it's the lack of creativity of the players. I don't fly a Nano-ship myself. I'm a frigate pilot first and foremost and I have come up against Nano-BS before and lost. In war one side cannot complain that another has an unfair advantage because they can't think of a realistic counter. Here's a challenge to all of you: There are hundreds of modules in EVE. Try some new and unexpected combinations. You may surprise yourself with how effective they are, and more importantly, surprise your enemy. So what if they run? At least you've seen off a threat and lived to tell of it. Running is something that most people don't get to do, and from the sounds of it, if a large portion of PVPers had their way, once you engage there should be no way of backing out. To the people with that particular attitude: Perhaps you shouldn't be campaigning to NERF modules, but instead to have it you can't warp when locked. Perhaps that would be a fairer solution in your eyes. ------
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.02.04 16:05:00 - [595] Edited by: Nyxus on 04/02/2007 16:02:14 My corp is currently engaging in a series of engagements while attacking a hostile outpost. Want to know the the number 1 tackler for the fleet? A typhoon. 10 km/s + scrams + nos +sensor boosters is faster, better, and more dps than any ceptor with MUCH better survivability. Aramendel said that a NanoBS is like having your cake and eating it too. That's not entirely correct. NanoBS is like having your cake and eating it, taking your friends cake and eating his, and if the guy down the street doesn't run into his house to hide you can get his cake as well. It's a "1 ships pwns all" battleship that shouldnt exist. Nyxus PS - I think it's Outbreak that has a crow that does 26km/s. That's prolly a bit broken as well. The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships. - Golan Trevize
Kaeten Hybrid Syndicate Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.04 16:09:00 - [596] tbh the bonuses that nano gives to battleships are too much, if I'm correct it's 15% PER what the ships agility is at and speed so that it stacks. make it 15% of original! Pwnage PvP Recruitment
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.04 16:11:00 - [597] Very nicely put.... Originally by: Nyssa Osbourne Edited by: Nyssa Osbourne on 04/02/2007 15:56:06 There are a lot of valid (and not-so-valid) arguments here, but I'd like to point out that EVE is about -choice-. People are able to choose whether or not to PVP. They can choose what ship to fly and how to set it up. Part of the appeal of EVE is the flexibility it affords you. In my two years or so on EVE I have seen many arguments over various specific ships or setups and many have seen some serious consideration from CCP. I would like to point out that people using nano ships are using a very effective form of skirmish warfare. They choose their hunting grounds and their targets according to what they are able to handle. Admittedly, interceptors, interdictors and the (also controversial) vagabond are meant to be able to do this but experience tells us that the nano-BS is the singally most effective ship at skirmish warfare. There -are- counters to Nano-BS, but most require pairs or larger groups to realistically tackle a single opponent (As in to actually catch and destroy rather than force to flee). In fleet actions the nano-ships can't stand up to the rigours of such battles and as such are only really seen in roving gangs. The question here is why are you complaining? Nano-ships are an effective form of warfare, yes, but you need to get inventive in response, or suggest realistic alternatives. If the NOS is the issue, then perhaps increase the cycle duration rather than reduce the amount transferred. If it is the nanofibres, then it might be an idea to convert the fixed speed and agility bonus to a percentage. That way they benifit the intended ships more and the larger ships less. A stacking penalty on I-Stabs and Nanos sounds a good idea, and would bring those modules in line with others. If this is the route taken though, then what's to say we shouldn't have stacking penalties on -all- modules that give bonuses of any sort? That is if we -have- to change anything. Personally I don't think it's the ships or modules that are broken per-se, I believe that it's the lack of creativity of the players. I don't fly a Nano-ship myself. I'm a frigate pilot first and foremost and I have come up against Nano-BS before and lost. In war one side cannot complain that another has an unfair advantage because they can't think of a realistic counter. Here's a challenge to all of you: There are hundreds of modules in EVE. Try some new and unexpected combinations. You may surprise yourself with how effective they are, and more importantly, surprise your enemy. So what if they run? At least you've seen off a threat and lived to tell of it. Running is something that most people don't get to do, and from the sounds of it, if a large portion of PVPers had their way, once you engage there should be no way of backing out. To the people with that particular attitude: Perhaps you shouldn't be campaigning to NERF modules, but instead to have it you can't warp when locked. Perhaps that would be a fairer solution in your eyes.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.04 16:15:00 - [598] Originally by: Nyssa Osbourne The question here is why are you complaining? Because nanoships right now effeciently remove choice. Choice only exists if all alternatives are about equal in effeciency. If one is far more effecient than anything else being able to choose between this and alternatives is not an option for choice, but for stupididy. Nanoships make inites and vagas basically redundant and devalue heavily any ships using shortrange turrets. Before kali and the resulting boosts from rigs & instabs nanoBS were just fine. They could use their speed to kill ships not prepared for them but were still slow enough that they were catchable by normally setup inties and some cruisers. An option, but not so good that you would laugh at someone who wanted to use a regular tank on his phoon. Now however you need intys specifically setup for speed to catch them and their additional speed usually results in them being too far away from the rest of your gang to do anything when they finally slow down. In short, the effeciency of nanosetups increased significantly without their counters getting more effecient, too.
Nyssa Osbourne Minmatar Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.02.04 16:25:00 - [599] Amarendel: You say the efficiency is that much greater. Yes, it is superior to a lot of setups, and I admit that it has forced a certain amount of redundancy on things like the vagabond etc, but what is it that you think is broken? Not aimed at you specifically, but I see a lot of people saying 'Nerf this or that' or saying that something doesn't work, but where are the alternatives? If you want CCP to do something, come up with ideas for them to explore, if not then carry on trying to find counters or get out of PVP. The choice is still there. It is more limited, but the choice is always there. ~Nyssa ------
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.04 16:39:00 - [600] Edited by: Aramendel on 04/02/2007 16:39:03 As said. You have a typhoon. You have equal skills for a nanosetup or a tank setup. If you are indecisive which fit to you you have choice because both has for you about the same amount of advantages and disadvantages. If you tell your corp "hey, I just killed a phoon and he was not nanoed up!" and as result get laughter and "what a noob" comments there is no choice because the only viaable option are nanos. If you call that "still a choice" you would have this also if nanosetups would be nerfed to the ground and would be only useful vs ships running 1400mms arties without tracking comps and no drone skills. It would be an very bad choice to fit, but still one... Then this particular defination of "choice" is no argument for or against nanos because it will always be there no matter what you do. For "what I think is broken" see the last sentence of my last post. Nanophoons were a pretty viable setup pre-kali. People used them, and they were effecient, but they were not dominating. Kali gave their main aspect - speed - a very significant boost (about 60% more from (mainly) rigs and (in a smaller part) instabs). Counters against them stayed the same. If you take a balanced setup, boost it significantly and leave counters against it the same, what do you get?

Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.04 17:24:00 - [601] Originally by: Aramendel If you take a balanced setup, boost it significantly and leave counters against it the same, what do you get? QFT. And don't forget that Kali made NOS more important for breaking tanks, so that boosted it too... N.F.F. Recruitment
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.04 18:07:00 - [602] Originally by: Nyssa Osbourne Edited by: Nyssa Osbourne on 04/02/2007 15:56:06 There are a lot of valid (and not-so-valid) arguments here, but I'd like to point out that EVE is about -choice-. People are able to choose whether or not to PVP... you sure? if i wanted consentual PvP i would go and play WoW
Norm Voight	Posted - 2007.02.04 20:54:00 - [603] Originally by: Nyxus Edited by: Nyxus on 04/02/2007 16:02:14 Aramendel said that a NanoBS is like having your cake and eating it too. That's not entirely correct. NanoBS is like having your cake and eating it, taking your friends cake and eating his, and if the guy down the street doesn't run into his house to hide you can get his cake as well.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.04 21:04:00 - [604] Originally by: Ryysa And don't forget that Kali made NOS more important for breaking tanks, so that boosted it too... Well, yes and no. The hitpoint boost means it takes longer to kill stuff. However, cap also get a "hitpoint" boost - so while it takes longer to kill stuff it also takes longer to leech it dry. Both normal weapons and nos got "nerfed" in this aspect. Longer fights made the capmanagement trickier, but this more a nerf for ships which have to divide their cap between weapons and tank, aka lasers and hybrids, than a boost for nos. It benefits from their nerf, of cource, but so do drones, missiles and projectiles. Rigs, however, are another thing. 3 * rep rigs make you rep 52% faster - and with a 52% better capeffeciency. Vs a ship with those ships without nos got "nerfed" and those with nos got "buffed". However, vs a ship with 3 cap capacity rigs the opposite is the case.
Sun Win Mutually Assured Distraction	Posted - 2007.02.04 22:14:00 - [605] Edited by: Sun Win on 04/02/2007 22:13:43 Just wanted to poke my head in here and thank all of the people who are saying that nanoships are totally invincible. Every time someone posts something like that, some poor pilot who doesn't really know how to fly nanos our their ____ and then engages me and my friends and then we take their ship away from them and sell the mods. Edit: I agree with Ryysa. If there is an issue with nano ships, it's with the 4x NOS. Well the 4x NOS combined with the speed tank. It's a great piece of synergy for pilots who know how to fly them (though even they can make mistakes). For those of you having trouble fighting them, know that there are ways to fly to make them make wrong turns, or to get them close enough to your friends that the web can hold. It's not easy but it is possible. New to Eve? Learn to Fly - join channel: "Eve University" or read here
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.04 22:38:00 - [606] Oh to may smart guys telling us its easy to catch and kill nanobs so lets make little contest: 50M ISK to first men who post non speed setup witch will be a perfect hunter killer to nanobs singlehanded. + 50M ISK if it will be caldari ship Price of setup does not matter it can be any faction fit. If course you have to prove your setup works. Nanobs speed is set for at least 6500m/s Im sure its realy easy money becose there is so many combinations of modules so there is surly many solutions. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
gordon cain Minmatar x13 Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.04 23:01:00 - [607] Edited by: gordon cain on 04/02/2007 22:58:36 I would go Carrier style here. High: 5 Faction Neuts Mid: 2 Faction Webs 1 Faction Disruptor 3 Sensor Boosters Low: Tank + signal ampl Cargo: Luck + Beer to celebrate kill OR: A damn good Rapier / Hugin Pilot with damps to keep his range down. Gordon Cain
Farscape Hw Black Omega Security Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.04 23:58:00 - [608] to all you noobs who cant afford nano bs's fit for uber speed... go screw yourselves. i paid 2bill for my implants, and spend 200m for the mwd, 120m for the nanos, 20mill for the istabs, 80mill for the disruptor it takes to keep your point, 100m for the battleship, 120m for the rigs, it takes a load of isk to go that fast... stop complaining when someone with a setup worth that much wtfpwns you. huggin or rapier is the anti-nano bs, so you have your counter, its not indestructable. if your going to nerf it at all make heavy webbing drones faster. your already paper thin with all those nanos fitted. so quit your *****ing my sig got nerfed by serethathetawhatever
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.05 00:09:00 - [609] Originally by: Farscape Hw to all you noobs who cant afford nano bs's fit for uber speed... go screw yourselves. i paid 2bill for my implants, and spend 200m for the mwd, 120m for the nanos, 20mill for the istabs, 80mill for the disruptor it takes to keep your point, 100m for the battleship, 120m for the rigs, it takes a load of isk to go that fast... stop complaining when someone with a setup worth that much wtfpwns you. huggin or rapier is the anti-nano bs, so you have your counter, its not indestructable. if your going to nerf it at all make heavy webbing drones faster. your already paper thin with all those nanos fitted. so quit your *****ing I got news for you. Nobody f'n cares what you paid for your nanoBS! The amount of isk you or anybody else has invested ingame doesn't dictate how ccp should balance the game -get it through your head.
Farscape Hw Black Omega Security Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.05 00:37:00 - [610] Originally by: Koloch Originally by: Farscape Hw to all you noobs who cant afford nano bs's fit for uber speed... go screw yourselves. i paid 2bill for my implants, and spend 200m for the mwd, 120m for the nanos, 20mill for the istabs, 80mill for the disruptor it takes to keep your point, 100m for the battleship, 120m for the rigs, it takes a load of isk to go that fast... stop complaining when someone with a setup worth that much wtfpwns you. huggin or rapier is the anti-nano bs, so you have your counter, its not indestructable. if your going to nerf it at all make heavy webbing drones faster. your already paper thin with all those nanos fitted. so quit your *****ing I got news for you. Nobody f'n cares what you paid for your nanoBS! The amount of isk you or anybody else has invested ingame doesn't dictate how ccp should balance the game -get it through your head. I got news for you. it does f'n matter how much one of these setups costs that determines how the game is ballanced. my sig got nerfed by serethathetawhatever

Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.05 00:55:00 - [611] Originally by: Farscape Hw Originally by: Koloch Originally by: Farscape Hw to all you noobs who cant afford nano bs's fit for uber speed... go screw yourselves. i paid 2bill for my implants, and spend 200m for the mwd, 120m for the nanos, 20mill for the istabs, 80mill for the disruptor it takes to keep your point, 100m for the battleship, 120m for the rigs, it takes a load of isk to go that fast... stop complaining when someone with a setup worth that much wtfpwns you. huggin or rapier is the anti-nano bs, so you have your counter, its not indestructable. if your going to nerf it at all make heavy webbing drones faster. your already paper thin with all those nanos fitted. so quit your *****ing I got news for you. Nobody f'n cares what you paid for your nanoBS! The amount of isk you or anybody else has invested ingame doesn't dictate how ccp should balance the game -get it through your head. I got news for you. it does f'n matter how much one of these setups costs that determines how the game is ballanced. I disagree. You shouldn't be able to buy an "i-win" ship -and why are you allowed to have an "i-win" ship because you invest billions when other types of pvp ships that invest that much don't get the same advantage?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.05 02:00:00 - [612] Edited by: Aramendel on 05/02/2007 01:57:24 Originally by: Farscape Hw I got news for you. it does f'n matter how much one of these setups costs that determines how the game is ballanced. So a HAC should for example always kill a battleship because it costs more?
Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.05 02:46:00 - [613] during my 3 years playing eve, its the first time im thinking to get out eve online. since i saw a nano-bs insta warping out or running away at 8k and nosfing every takler, its not a balanced play game. Im not interested on what they have paid for his implants and stuff, since im at eve, ive learned one basic rule, any ship can kill any other ship. since im going to need at least 3 or 4 players to hunt one nano-bs (how many ships am i going to need to hunt a gang formed for only stupid 5 nano-bs.... 20 players only to have a chance to hunt them ?, it has no sense), ive taken one decision, and i would advice everyone to do the same: im not going to fight vs any nano-bs until ccp nerfs it. i still remember how doble-mwd, cruise misile on a kestrel, 5-wcs on a raven, and some other stuff have been nerfed caused it not a balanced ship fiting. Im sure its only a question of time, that ccp will nerfed it.
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.05 03:36:00 - [614] How anyone things that a bs can warp and align and go faster then its smaller classà needs to get his head checkedà how is it even balanced in gameà when a bs can out do what a cruiser can and even a captor nowà that is just plan ridiculous. This brings me to the times when BS were the be all shipsà they had fixed it and gave use to the cruiser and frig sizeà now this again destroys that balance completely and no its not nos as the problem.. the fact that it looks like a BS it shoots like a BS, it has the HP of a BSà but wait it acts better then a ceptorà you find it a problem? I do not care about any implants or gang modulesà the fact that none gang/faction implant bs can do the same just not as ridiculously as those with the 1B+ fittings. Seriously how can people defend that these fits are reasonable? What is your reasonable justification? The isk? No hmm last time I checked a BS should act like a BS and not like a ceptor regardless how much isk you through at ità maybe next we should see a cruiser act like a carrier? Seeing even cruiser sized ships warp as fast as a shuttle or faster then captors reallyà just makes me want to sayà maybe I should hit the cancel button cause thatÆs just stupid The agility needs to be completely rewords, I donÆt care about speedà but a BS should not act better then a ceptorà the whole eve physics there should be reworked, istabs and nanos should not allow a BS to act like a ceptor period! The speed and the improved agility should be thereà but the speed should come at a heavy price to agility on a ship that size, when reaching past its normal nano/istab speed there should be some hefty penalties to agility as that ship should not be able to turn, just like you wouldnÆt think that a semi truck could maneuver like a sports car, sure you could get it to go very fast but not be able to handle like a very light sports car.
Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.05 03:46:00 - [615] Originally by: sr blackout How anyone things that a bs can warp and align and go faster then its smaller classà needs to get his head checkedà how is it even balanced in gameà when a bs can out do what a cruiser can and even a captor nowà that is just plan ridiculous. This brings me to the times when BS were the be all shipsà they had fixed it and gave use to the cruiser and frig sizeà now this again destroys that balance completely and no its not nos as the problem.. the fact that it looks like a BS it shoots like a BS, it has the HP of a BSà but wait it acts better then a ceptorà you find it a problem? I do not care about any implants or gang modulesà the fact that none gang/faction implant bs can do the same just not as ridiculously as those with the 1B+ fittings. Seriously how can people defend that these fits are reasonable? What is your reasonable justification? The isk? No hmm last time I checked a BS should act like a BS and not like a ceptor regardless how much isk you through at ità maybe next we should see a cruiser act like a carrier? Seeing even cruiser sized ships warp as fast as a shuttle or faster then captors reallyà just makes me want to sayà maybe I should hit the cancel button cause thatÆs just stupid The agility needs to be completely rewords, I donÆt care about speedà but a BS should not act better then a ceptorà the whole eve physics there should be reworked, istabs and nanos should not allow a BS to act like a ceptor period! The speed and the improved agility should be thereà but the speed should come at a heavy price to agility on a ship that size, when reaching past its normal nano/istab speed there should be some hefty penalties to agility as that ship should not be able to turn, just like you wouldnÆt think that a semi truck could maneuver like a sports car, sure you could get it to go very fast but not be able to handle like a very light sports car. /signed
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.02.05 04:00:00 - [616] The NanoBS kicks ass. ~CoLe Blackblood
Serzath Labteck Corporation LTD. Novus Ordos Seclorum	Posted - 2007.02.05 08:05:00 - [617] Some questions: what is the role of a battleship? i think the answer is, tanking and do damage to stationary installations and other equaly or bigger ships (bs's dreads, carriers etc). what is the role of smaller sized ships? i think the answer is, protecting the larger ships vs hostiles What is the role of an interceptor i think the answer is, as the name sugests....intercepting other ships. If above answers are correct...then we now have a ship with a module setup that doesn't fit in his role....
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.05 09:43:00 - [618] Originally by: Serzath Some questions: what is the role of a battleship? i think the answer is, tanking and do damage to stationary installations and other equaly or bigger ships (bs's dreads, carriers etc). what is the role of smaller sized ships? i think the answer is, protecting the larger ships vs hostiles What is the role of an interceptor i think the answer is, as the name sugests....intercepting other ships. If above answers are correct...then we now have a ship with a module setup that doesn't fit in his role.... OK, here it is finally. THIS is the narrow minded thinking that is fueling all of the "nerf it" if it doesn't fit into their cookie cutter molds. The above questions, are ridiculous, as are the "wrong answers" to them...The dev's wouldn't give us so may options if the ships HAD to fill the roles of conventional thinking and nothing more.
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.05 10:08:00 - [619] Originally by: JVol Originally by: Serzath Some questions: what is the role of a battleship? i think the answer is, tanking and do damage to stationary installations and other equaly or bigger ships (bs's dreads, carriers etc). what is the role of smaller sized ships? i think the answer is, protecting the larger ships vs hostiles What is the role of an interceptor i think the answer is, as the name sugests....intercepting other ships. If above answers are correct...then we now have a ship with a module setup that doesn't fit in his role.... OK, here it is finally. THIS is the narrow minded thinking that is fueling all of the "nerf it" if it doesn't fit into their cookie cutter molds. The above questions, are ridiculous, as are the "wrong answers" to them...The dev's wouldn't give us so may options if the ships HAD to fill the roles of conventional thinking and nothing more. I wouldn't call it cookie cutter, but yes each ship class has a general area they were designed to fill. The devs give us the mods so that we can be creative with our setups, but like many times in the past they have made a mistake and missed a mod that overpowers certain ship types -ie dual mwd.
Spooky Woman	Posted - 2007.02.05 10:09:00 - [620] Originally by: JVol Originally by: Serzath Some questions: what is the role of a battleship? i think the answer is, tanking and do damage to stationary installations and other equaly or bigger ships (bs's dreads, carriers etc). what is the role of smaller sized ships? i think the answer is, protecting the larger ships vs hostiles What is the role of an interceptor i think the answer is, as the name sugests....intercepting other ships. If above answers are correct...then we now have a ship with a module setup that doesn't fit in his role.... OK, here it is finally. THIS is the narrow minded thinking that is fueling all of the "nerf it" if it doesn't fit into their cookie cutter molds. The above questions, are ridiculous, as are the "wrong answers" to them...The dev's wouldn't give us so may options if the ships HAD to fill the roles of conventional thinking and nothing more. OMG... JVol... Relax... :) Serzath is just stating what he thinks EVE should be like. EVE is as much your game as it is Serzaths, mine, or anybodys. Don't come tell us that our opions are "wrong". Everybody has the right to have an opion on a topic. If you don't agree fine. But don't come telling us the our opions are "wrong", or that we are "narrow minded".

Trigos Trilobi	Posted - 2007.02.05 10:15:00 - [621] Originally by: Farscape Hw to all you noobs who cant afford nano bs's fit for uber speed... go screw yourselves. i paid 2bill for my implants, and spend 200m for the mwd, 120m for the nanos, 20mill for the istabs, 80mill for the disruptor it takes to keep your point, 100m for the battleship, 120m for the rigs, it takes a load of isk to go that fast... stop complaining when someone with a setup worth that much wtfpwns you. huggin or rapier is the anti-nano bs, so you have your counter, its not indestructable. so quit your *****ing Actually after reading this thread it seems pretty much the opposite. We've had quite a bunch of people claiming that nanobs either wins, or flees if the things turn sour. We've also had people claim that nanobs is one of the few ship types available that can somewhat reliably avoid gate camps, and others state that this is how it should be, gatecamps need their 'counter' too. Without delving too much into these claims, and exactly how accurate and realistic they are, it seems to me that if there's any truth in these, it pretty much screws the 'high price justification' for the existence of nano-bs'. The price for the ship is irrelevant if you don't consider the 'maintenance cost', ie, how often you need to replace it since it got blown up. Sure the one time cost is high, but the survivability might more than make up for it, possibly making the nanobs in fact one of the cheapest/most cost-efficient shiptypes to fly in the long run. -tt
Master OlavPancrazio Einherjar Rising	Posted - 2007.02.05 11:07:00 - [622] Originally by: JVol Originally by: Serzath Some questions: what is the role of a battleship? i think the answer is, tanking and do damage to stationary installations and other equaly or bigger ships (bs's dreads, carriers etc). what is the role of smaller sized ships? i think the answer is, protecting the larger ships vs hostiles What is the role of an interceptor i think the answer is, as the name sugests....intercepting other ships. If above answers are correct...then we now have a ship with a module setup that doesn't fit in his role.... OK, here it is finally. THIS is the narrow minded thinking that is fueling all of the "nerf it" if it doesn't fit into their cookie cutter molds. The above questions, are ridiculous, as are the "wrong answers" to them...The dev's wouldn't give us so may options if the ships HAD to fill the roles of conventional thinking and nothing more. Mabye. Or could it possibly be.... it's unbalanced? NO WAY! Peopele posting in conjuction something is too overpowered, no way they could be right.... Because it's in the game now means it's perfect. Perfect logic their jvol. I'd just like to say I raped your t2 cruise raven in a nano bs. Seems abit stupid no?
MOCC3	Posted - 2007.02.05 11:19:00 - [623] Edited by: MOCC3 on 05/02/2007 11:22:25 Originally by: Xendie adapt or die. after 3 years ive found a really fun ship to fly and ppl start whining about it of course. train to use a huginn or rapier. This is the best post iv seen on this whine fest. 1 Huginn on scanner and no nanoship will fly anywhere near you. Also Nanoships have poor scan res. If u put a damp on them a inty can lock them down long enuf to web/slow down. Nanoship is not a I win button. But it is nice for minnie to have a setup that pwn most ships. Solo not in gang combat. Also the Nanophoon goes so fast/so popular for these reasons--> 1) Lowest Mass of all BS 2)highest top speed of all BS 3)7 Lows 4) the 4/4 set up 4 missile 4 nos plus drones DPS. Once again to stop a nanoship... Of what ever kind u need a Huginn or a rapier. If u role play Ammar your screwed hire some minnie merch for a few weeks. I was not flaming just trying to give good input O yeah Before Kali I seen Vids of Nanophoons going 5500ms.no rigs just full head of snake implants. I think people are mad now that with rigs, you can go that fast cheaper.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.05 11:41:00 - [624] Originally by: MOCC3 Once again to stop a nanoship... Of what ever kind u need a Huginn or a rapier. Exept you do not need a curse or pilgrim to stop a normally tanked ship (even if it has a 5 bil officer tank). Reading comprehenshion 4tw! People do not complain that it is impossible to stop one. But that the amount of viaable counters is to low comapred with what other setups have. Quote: O yeah Before Kali I seen Vids of Nanophoons going 5500ms.no rigs just full head of snake implants. I think people are mad now that with rigs, you can go that fast cheaper. They are mad because those phoons are now going 9 km/s. Nanophoons pre-kali were just fine. People were using them regulary, so they were by far not underpowered. So, if they were balanced pre-kali how can they be balanced now with a 60% speed boost while their counters did not get similar boosts?

Ivan Kirilenkov Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2007.02.05 11:42:00 - [625] Right. The discussion has raged for 20 pages - and while I realize that it is a lot for people to read up on, I would still suggest that you do some skimming before posting. Suggestions like "Use a Hugin/Rapier with faction webbers" or "Just use Webbing drones" have all been suggested and discussed, and I suggest that you read those posts before posting it again. It's allready been posted several times, and it just insults those who have actually been discussing this topic for 20 pages. Also, at times the discussion has degraded into personal attacks. I've been quite lenient this far, but consider yourselves warned, I am going to start to dish out warnings if this trend continues. Flaming just to have the thread locked is not going to be taken lightly. forum rules \| [email protected] \| Our Website

xHomicide	Posted - 2007.02.05 11:48:00 - [626] Edited by: xHomicide on 05/02/2007 11:52:42 If nos worked just like missile explosion radius all would be well. Basically, this would make the value of a ceptor concrete in its ability to tackle. The fact that any BS can detackle themselves with a single nos diminishes the ceptor's value. This problem is magnified by nano-bs. FINALLY a bs that a good fast ceptor pilot is needed to tackle... oh wait, nos. The worst solution would be making the nano-BS slow. Having a varient in combat styles and dynamics makes every battle new and entertaining. The correct line of action is to add in the ability for more main stream ships (not just the rapier) to offer some abilitly in countering.
Master OlavPancrazio Einherjar Rising	Posted - 2007.02.05 11:55:00 - [627] Originally by: xHomicide If nos worked just like missile explosion radius all would be well. Basically, this would make the value of a ceptor concrete in its ability to tackle. The fact that any BS can detackle themselves with a single nos diminishes the ceptor's value. This problem is magnified by nano-bs. FINALLY a bs that a good fast ceptor pilot is needed to tackle... oh wait, nos. A inty would have to turn on mwd to catch a nano bs, thus making nos more effective.
xHomicide	Posted - 2007.02.05 12:00:00 - [628] Originally by: Master OlavPancrazio Originally by: xHomicide If nos worked just like missile explosion radius all would be well. Basically, this would make the value of a ceptor concrete in its ability to tackle. The fact that any BS can detackle themselves with a single nos diminishes the ceptor's value. This problem is magnified by nano-bs. FINALLY a bs that a good fast ceptor pilot is needed to tackle... oh wait, nos. A inty would have to turn on mwd to catch a nano bs, thus making nos more effective. Except an MWDing ceptor still has much lower sig than a BS. Other options would is the ability of nos to be based on the ships max cap. Regardless of how it is done, the important thing is that it is less affective against smaller ships. There are several ways this could be implemented.
Master OlavPancrazio Einherjar Rising	Posted - 2007.02.05 12:33:00 - [629] How about just reduce heavy nos range to about 15k or even 12k like medium nos. That would allow a inty to orbit a bs at 15k and not worry about being nossed.
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.05 13:26:00 - [630] Master OlavPancrazio Einherjar Rising Ma bye. Or could it possibly be.... it's unbalanced? Mabye. Or could it possibly be.... it's unbalanced? NO WAY! Peopele posting in conjuction something is too overpowered, no way they could be right.... Because it's in the game now means it's perfect. Perfect logic their jvol. I'd just like to say I raped your t2 cruise raven in a nano bs. Seems abit stupid no? The statement you just made was your logic, not mine Dude.. your funny, ATTEMPTING to flame me personally by pretending to take the opposite side of the argument I happen to be on, your a nano pilot who has lost 2 nano ships !!(that you've posited, there could be more) http://ehj.griefwatch.net/?p=kills&victim=Master%20OlavPancrazio&type=Typhoon Take a look what he lost them to, rofl. And to show just how overpowered his NANO of doom is look at these solo kills. http://ehj.griefwatch.net/?p=kills&date=2007-02-05&mode=solo Your OWN kill board speaks against your pathetic attempt to "switch sides" on this argument just to slam me. If you really think this is such an overpowered ship, why do you only have 4 solo kills in it? So it was when you were killing the 2 velators a capsule and a noob in a myrmidon solo (I'm not making any of this up, its right in his kill board) that you stepped back and went "WHOA, this is one bad solo KILLLING machine?" I think NOT. And as you would like to mislead folks here to prove a point even YOU don't believe in, by saying you killed my raven solo in your nano, WRONG! http://ehj.griefwatch.net/?p=details&kill=5189# Hers the kill mail where his 3 other friends and he DID pop me, a domi ( which my 3 man gang and I popped before 2 of us died )a a crow and a caracal with his nano.. Not the solo pownage he wants to lead you to believe. What's my point with all of this?? Its that these ships ARE very effective *WHEN*.. 1. in the right hands of a skilled pilot 2. when setup with some very expensive mods and implants 3. when attacking VERY specific enemy's 4. that they have MANY counters to either chase them off or catch and kill them 5. they are not an "I win" button 6. and that some of the folks who want to see them gone have, well... LESS than "what's in the best interest of EVE" and far more of a "What's easiest for me at the moment" kind of attitude towards this setup. I'm sorry If I have come off kinda aggro about this in past posts, but I really don't feel this is "SO GOOD" it HAS to be nerfed. I've flown one, I've killed them and been killed in them....I think if you haven't done these things yet, you most likely aren't qualified to swing the nerf bat at it .

Master OlavPancrazio Einherjar Rising	Posted - 2007.02.05 14:16:00 - [631] I've had a lot more than 4 solo kills in a nanophoon. And when I lost them they were due to various mistakes I made, not because the enemy had some counter that worked well. For example, one time I lost it because I hit a gate and did a dead stop. The other time I lost it because I decided to go for a kill instead of warp out knowing that would probably get me killed. Either way, I figure I could of gotten out of both situations.
Trind2222 Amarr Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.05 15:59:00 - [632] Think if all had noano BS is in eve nobody can kill each other unless they don't make a run for it nobody whoud have kill mails no longer yes on a good a hugin can stopp a nano bs but my point is the game whoud be boring becose all is flying the nano BS in the end all will quit eve becose there noting to do in eve it have become nano bs game and where is fun in that that why cpp need to look at this before to manny will fly nano BS. If nano BS don't make the game boring for you you will thing that in time when all is flying 1 and think of all good batles you coud get but becose all ucing nano BS there noting like a good batle.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.05 17:01:00 - [633] I thing im going to remake STAR WARS, Insted of TIE fighters X-Wings will fight with nano-Imperial Star destoyers. So rebels needs Han Solos Millenium Falcon to catch them. And final scene will be how Death Star is orbiting at hight speed (becose death star has so many lowslots) Millenium Falcon and from brige of DS will Dart Vader laught: I PWN You !! becose my DS cost me 6 bilions ! Everybody have to love this movie, and who is not is narrow minded thinking. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Master OlavPancrazio Einherjar Rising	Posted - 2007.02.05 18:10:00 - [634] Originally by: Aki Yamato I thing im going to remake STAR WARS, Insted of TIE fighters X-Wings will fight with nano-Imperial Star destoyers. So rebels needs Han Solos Millenium Falcon to catch them. And final scene will be how Death Star is orbiting at hight speed (becose death star has so many lowslots) Millenium Falcon and from brige of DS will Dart Vader laught: I PWN You !! becose my DS cost me 6 bilions ! Everybody have to love this movie, and who is not is narrow minded thinking. Heh, DS going 9k m/s lawlor
Kruel Blunt Force Syndicate	Posted - 2007.02.05 18:47:00 - [635] Originally by: Aki Yamato I thing im going to remake STAR WARS, Insted of TIE fighters X-Wings will fight with nano-Imperial Star destoyers. So rebels needs Han Solos Millenium Falcon to catch them. And final scene will be how Death Star is orbiting at hight speed (becose death star has so many lowslots) Millenium Falcon and from brige of DS will Dart Vader laught: I PWN You !! becose my DS cost me 6 bilions ! Everybody have to love this movie, and who is not is narrow minded thinking. Nice analogy.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.05 18:53:00 - [636] This is the same argument as the "nerf warp stab" argument you used to read about all the time. And it's no more intelligent then that one was. There is no limit to the number of ships that can lock and warp jam you, so why should there be a limit to the ships defense/counter? Everyone in this game PvPs in one way or another. That may be the guy trying to run his goods through your gate camp to sell them. Now, random pirate corp/organization is not limited to the number of ships that can be stacked on a gate...why not nerf that? Set a maximum number of ships that can lock a single target? how about that for "fair"? I've never been killed in a 1 vs 1. Then lowest number of ships on any of my killmails is 3 and the average is 6-10 with as many as 17 on one. If you are yelling about nerfing something, nerf both sides. It seams that anything that makes the game challenging for campers is bad....... Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Akkoreana	Posted - 2007.02.05 20:35:00 - [637] Perhaps they should penalize nano-fibres the same way they penalize most fittings. Each additional module past one is less and less effective.
Akkoreana	Posted - 2007.02.05 20:35:00 - [638] Perhaps they should penalize nano-fibres the same way they penalize most fittings. Each additional module past one is less and less effective.
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.05 22:31:00 - [639] I was in a gang playing cat and mouse with a nano-phoon for several hours yesterday. We knew he was coming so we set out a Raven as bait. The NP launches drones and starts with the usual high speed orbit and nos routine. The Raven counters with smart bombs. This pops the drones, but the Raven is almost down. I warp in with a Celestis and put 3 damps on him. He starts flying in and out of target range. I keep hitting with the triple damp, but our tacklers can't even get close. Your average Huginn can't catch one. One that is pimped out with faction gear, implants, and rigs has a chance, but still has to get lucky. The battle ends at a draw and we considered ourselves lucky. Skip ahead two hours and we have a 30 person blob on a bubbled gate. NP jumps through the gate like the camp wasn't there. He jumps back and forth about three times to make his point before getting bored and docking back in Empire. In each case the best we could do is ding his shields. Does this sound balanced? Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.02.05 23:13:00 - [640] Originally by: MrTripps The NP launches drones and starts with the usual high speed orbit and nos routine. The Raven counters with smart bombs. This pops the drones, but the Raven is almost down. adds to his "Reasons I Use Sentries" list. I forgot that one. ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY WTB: Friggin' portrait

Xurx Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.05 23:41:00 - [641] Has there been any official response by any of the devs ?
MOCC3	Posted - 2007.02.05 23:55:00 - [642] How about they don't change a thing? And let the game run its course. I run Naonphoon, I have also been killed by a nanophoon. Im quite sure that you will never see a fleet of nanoships. SO fleet combat will not change. Its only small gang warefare that has to evolve to the new threat..New Tactics new game plan.Im waiting to see the sitcky for nerf NOS-Domi's and Nerf this nerf that. WCS change was good and just. We all kno the simple way to kill a nano fitted ship. but there are also other ways. If one is chasing you not orbiting drop a cargo can. if he hits it he will slow down. How can you kil a nano fitted ship??? The most common are Phoons... 1)Sens damp 2)Rook/Falcon 3)Any means of Anti support. Now im sure someone is like it takes more than one ship to kill it. well yes. Its kinda like a Vagabond doing 6500ms. U can solo it. but its hard. Everyship can be beaten just try harder. flame off!
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.06 00:23:00 - [643] Originally by: MOCC3 How about they don't change a thing? And let the game run its course. how does that make any sense. Quote: I run Naonphoon, I have also been killed by a nanophoon. exaclty. re-read the last 20 pages and you'll see one of the only real ways to counter a nanoBS is with another nanoBS. Quote: Im quite sure that you will never see a fleet of nanoships.SO fleet combat will not change. Its only small gang warefare that has to evolve to the new threat and the way they evolve is everyone runs nano ships. Quote: ..New Tactics new game plan.Im waiting to see the sitcky for nerf NOS-Domi's and Nerf this nerf that. WCS change was good and just. It's unfortunate, but this is what is needed for the game to be balanced. It's just silly to think this would be the case. Hell I'd love my gankageddon back. Quote: Now im sure someone is like it takes more than one ship to kill it. well yes. Its kinda like a Vagabond doing 6500ms. U can solo it. but its hard. Everyship can be beaten just try harder. flame off! Every ship can be beaten. Nobody is saying that isn't the case. The problem is it's incredibly hard to beat a nanoBS. I tell ya what you get ccp remove the stacking nerf so my gankageddon still puts out +2k dps then I'II stop posting that I think nanoBS should be nerfed.
xHomicide	Posted - 2007.02.06 01:36:00 - [644] Edited by: xHomicide on 06/02/2007 01:39:32 Originally by: DunNa I've been trying my best to use a ceptor to get up to a nano ship and web/scram it. This works aslong as I have a friend jamming him so he can't nosf. We then need another ship to actually pop the bastard. That said to even be able to do this I have to have a rather pimped ceptor (your average ceptor setup goes around 3-4k maybe abit above. For this to work you need your inty atleast able to hit 5k hopefully more and even then aginst someone who goes all the way there is just no hope. For those interested in what I'm using.. Malediction 4x small nosf mwd, scam, web nano, istab, small rep Its based entirely around getting to a nano ship and tackling it. The really bad part about this is A, it doesn't always get the tackle because the nanoship can outrun it B, It requires atleast one other person with ecm (and praying that he gets good dice rolls) C, even then its still more than possible to get screwed. The fact its taking 2 (normally three for a decent chance) to even take on one ship, thats even considering those 2-3 ships are completely fitted/working together to stop that ship type (without themselves becoming nanoBS *****s). The huggin/rapier idea while novel just doesn't work and still requires another ship more often than not since multiple heavy nosf make poor little huggin cry. You will also need an arazu or very fast scrammers to scram the nanoship so it doesn't run. More like 1 decent ceptor and one raven with damps. Which are dam near the two most common ships in eve. In small gang situation, ANY AND ALL gangs should have a few damps and AT LEAST 1 fast ship. The fact is people are just BAD at playing eve. The average gang can deal perfectly fine with a nano-BS. If they cant, it is the fault of the gang and they need to start thinking about the ships they are going to bring instead of totally random BAD ships. The SAME things that counters nano-BS counters other ships in the game. You give up NOTHING by giving your gang the ability to counter them. The next person that says a nano-bs outruns a ceptor should be shot. ------ Besides that, nos need a nerf against small ships. Which is an issue that would reduce the effectiveness of nano-BS enough to satisfy the whiners while actually maintaining and increasing the strategic requirements of combat.
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.02.06 01:45:00 - [645] People can argue one way or the other. I have seen very little in the way of objectivity in this thread. What it comes down to is this - Dual MWD/AB setups were nerfed for many reasons... primarily because battleships were reaching speeds that CCP had never intended. The same thing is happening again. Those people who are dependent upon using nano-BSes to run and engage only when they have a huge margin for success had better start preparing for a nerf. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.06 02:00:00 - [646] Originally by: Tovarishch People can argue one way or the other. I have seen very little in the way of objectivity in this thread. What it comes down to is this - Dual MWD/AB setups were nerfed for many reasons... primarily because battleships were reaching speeds that CCP had never intended. The same thing is happening again. Those people who are dependent upon using nano-BSes to run and engage only when they have a huge margin for success had better start preparing for a nerf. /signed, i think its only a question of time, ccp must be working on it right now
Valea Silpha Death Monkey's With Knives Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.06 05:23:00 - [647] Originally by: Terell Originally by: Tovarishch People can argue one way or the other. I have seen very little in the way of objectivity in this thread. What it comes down to is this - Dual MWD/AB setups were nerfed for many reasons... primarily because battleships were reaching speeds that CCP had never intended. The same thing is happening again. Those people who are dependent upon using nano-BSes to run and engage only when they have a huge margin for success had better start preparing for a nerf. /signed, i think its only a question of time, ccp must be working on it right now Yup ... CCP have ALWAYS nerfed these kinds of set-ups .... WCS are a perfect example... All Reward and No Risk gets a whack with teh bat. I'd guess the hold up is trying to figure out how in the hell to get everything right in relation to each other. Theres no simple fix , so meh, give'em all a brather. I just like to think of it as Tuxford's backswing on the nerf bat, then one day BAM and Nano ships are over the back wall where they deserve to be. Ideally with no notice. And ideally while the server is still live if thats not too much to ask . It would cause me no end of amusement to see all those Nano BS stop dead in the water and die with billions of isk worth of faction loot on them. Oh well... A man can dream.... <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head
xHomicide Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.06 07:12:00 - [648] Edited by: xHomicide on 06/02/2007 07:09:32 Edited by: xHomicide on 06/02/2007 07:08:48 Originally by: Tovarishch People can argue one way or the other. I have seen very little in the way of objectivity in this thread. What it comes down to is this - Dual MWD/AB setups were nerfed for many reasons... primarily because battleships were reaching speeds that CCP had never intended. The same thing is happening again. Those people who are dependent upon using nano-BSes to run and engage only when they have a huge margin for success had better start preparing for a nerf. Because everyone was running around in combat with dual MWD BS....lool... no. Dual MWD cruisers were used in combat thats about it. It was just silly having people messing around going 1000x normal speed passing through 5 grids in a second. The fact that 'any' ship was reaching those speeds was broken. It had absolutely nothing do with people using fast BS in combat...nice try though. ___________________________________________________ http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.06 10:58:00 - [649] Edited by: JVol on 06/02/2007 10:54:52 Originally by: xHomicide Edited by: xHomicide on 06/02/2007 08:08:06 Although it does not take away the value of other BS it does reduce the value of tackling support, specifically ceptors; which is 100% perfectly countered by reducing the affect of NOS on smaller ships. Smaller ships are still faster, more agil, lock faster, and tackle better; sadly ALL of that goes to crap when they get nossed. This would give ceptors the ability to terminally tackle nano-BS. I agree with everything you said, except this part of your statement... If were going to go on the premise that an intys job is to tackle a BS, maybe get a web on him also and allow its gang to descend on it and kill it then... NOS is ok the way it is if the gang knows what they are doing. example A gang of 3 sees a lone BS sitting 40km off the gate in 0.0, for the sake of arguing we'll say the 3 man gang is a inty with a web and a 20km scram, a BC of your choice and a bs of your choice.. All with generic setups that include at least one of them having another scram, ok.. Now intys warps in on him, locks em up and has a point and web on.. the gang SHOULD have been aligned towards the target and in warp a few seconds after the inty says he's about to lock em down.. the bs is going to take at least 10 seconds give or take to target the inty, some times quit a bit more. The inty only has to prevent him from warping for a few seconds until the gang arrives and gets another Pont on allowing the inty to get out of nos range. From inty contact to gang contact their shouldn't be more than 30 second before another member takes over scramming duty's.. And I know the inty could be out of cap by them but its role is completed and it still did its job. NOW, if you expect an inty to be able to hold a bs for 5 minutes while your gang gets its head out of its butt then your GONNA hate nos.. I personally think nos should have the same skills as missiles to a degree, to increase range amount ROF and have sig bona's to small ships so a BS would still have the ability to shake an inty off its back after 20-40 seconds.
Noriath	Posted - 2007.02.06 10:59:00 - [650] Edited by: Noriath on 06/02/2007 11:03:11 Completly besides the discussion I'd like to make a point about ship speeds in eve in general. I think ships are way too slow if not heavily modded, and way too fast if they are. I believe that the whole issue with people wanting extremly fast ships and them being too powerful doesn't come from nanos alone, but much rather from the bigger problem, being that ship movement in Eve is unimportant to most ships, namely, everything that doesn't have at least an MWD. It just doesn't need to move, it just warps in, and hopes it's at optimal, aligns, and warps out if it isn't. Especially MWD is just a ridiculous module, this one single module increases your speed 5 times, even more if you fit the stabilizers and nanos. On the other hand, a battleship with no speed mods with good skills will barely move enough to really call it moving at all. I think in Eve we are facing a point in the game where a decision has to be made to tweak speeds at both the upper and lower end to more reasonable levels. Afterburners and MWDs recieved massive boosts in the past because people thought they were too weak, because when you used to hit an afterburner that only got you 50% more speed the result wasn't great if your ship was too slow to really go anywhere useful in the time it takes to fight in eve in the first place. But the real culprit here is base speed, not bad afterburners. I think ships should be a good 3-4 times faster then they are right now in general, however, afterburners and MWDs toned down to a more reasonable level. If your battleship does 500m/s base speed and your frig does 1500ms a 50% afterburner is a very good deal. In fact, I'd change the functionality of the MWD completly from Uber-Afterburner to an acctual mini-warpdrive. It wouldn't do anything except instantly teleport you 100km in the direction you are facing, with a minuite long cooldown or so. Also the whole system with warping should be revamped in my oppinion, and not hinge on aligning time at all, but instead have a set time to warp for any ship. In terms of nanos, they don't need to be changed a whole lot after that. once MWDs and afterburners are at a reasonable level modding base speed won't escalate into completly insane differences in speed anymore. All of those things would encourage movement on the battlefield instead of discouraging it like right now. Currently if you are not warp aligned you give up the biggest out you have, unless you are going 5km/s you can't possibly hope to catch up to a long range ship, if you do get close it will instantly warp since it is aligned, so essentially if you fail to warp to the right distance you cannot manuver anywhere useful before you die anyways. Having faster ships and less focuss on warp aliging would bring more movement to the game, make battles less static and seem more alive. The current speeds at which eve ships are moving are just too slow to matter in engagements between 100-200km, they don't become truely meaningful untill you are very close, within maybe 20km of the enemy where having a slight speed advantage can still mean the different of getting into your optimal or not. So, for all the problems Nanoships create, I don't believe we can adress the whole issue just by nerfing nanos. I believe there has a to be a serious effort to make sure that the disparity in speeds between speed modded ships and other ships isn't so gigantic that one basicly can't seriously move at all and the other can outrun any kind of serious atack in a few seconds.

ewqilibrium 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.02.06 11:07:00 - [651] Edited by: ewqilibrium on 06/02/2007 11:05:55 well duno what to say about nano ships and pilots who fly thet..last 10 BS i lost in fight against nono ships..with great pvp skills i make about 9-15 DMg with javelin torpedos, or mising them with autocanoons..i have great tank on most of my ships and sometime i put NOS..in lat batle i put 5 NOS on nano phoon but no use..duno what to say evry thinme when nano pilot kill me i get sick..i dont respect them a tall and if this continue i will go to hunt NPC or to play tetris..in 2 years of active PvP i never ever smack but when nano ship kill me i am so pised thet i cant explain..good pvp turning of and if nano dont get nerf it will be all players to fly nano ships or to make web on 25 km.. and uea in maximum skills in drones mine MEDIUM drones cant cach nano BS..thet is nice 2..dont wont to talk about ehavy or web drones..they are faster then missles..nano ships regard ewqi
Flitz Farseeker Gallente Eve guardians	Posted - 2007.02.06 11:13:00 - [652] Edited by: Flitz Farseeker on 06/02/2007 11:10:13 Finally a constructive post (okay maybe there are a few more hidden in amongst the whines) and one that I like very much, especially the bit about MWDs. Originally by: Noriath In fact, I'd change the functionality of the MWD completly from Uber-Afterburner to an acctual mini-warpdrive. It wouldn't do anything except instantly teleport you 100km in the direction you are facing, with a minuite long cooldown or so. I also think that any changes need to look at the impact of nanos, i-stabs and overdrives, although the latter seem to pretty much okay. Stacking penalties or limiting them to one per ship seems to be the easy solution. I mean how many times can you replace your internal components with lighter materials (nanos). You could still stick on a nano, istab and overdrive if you wanted silly speeds. Oh and my 2 isk worth, how come adding i-stabs reduces a ships mass but replacing bits of the structure with lighter materials (nanos) doesn't?
xHomicide Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.06 11:29:00 - [653] Originally by: JVol Edited by: JVol on 06/02/2007 10:54:52 I agree with everything you said, except this part of your statement... If were going to go on the premise that an intys job is to tackle a BS, maybe get a web on him also and allow its gang to descend on it and kill it then... NOS is ok the way it is if the gang knows what they are doing. example A gang of 3 sees a lone BS sitting 40km off the gate in 0.0, for the sake of arguing we'll say the 3 man gang is a inty with a web and a 20km scram, a BC of your choice and a bs of your choice.. All with generic setups that include at least one of them having another scram, ok.. Now intys warps in on him, locks em up and has a point and web on.. the gang SHOULD have been aligned towards the target and in warp a few seconds after the inty says he's about to lock em down.. the bs is going to take at least 10 seconds give or take to target the inty, some times quit a bit more. The inty only has to prevent him from warping for a few seconds until the gang arrives and gets another Pont on allowing the inty to get out of nos range. From inty contact to gang contact their shouldn't be more than 30 second before another member takes over scramming duty's.. And I know the inty could be out of cap by them but its role is completed and it still did its job. NOW, if you expect an inty to be able to hold a bs for 5 minutes while your gang gets its head out of its butt then your GONNA hate nos.. I personally think nos should have the same skills as missiles to a degree, to increase range amount ROF and have sig bona's to small ships so a BS would still have the ability to shake an inty off its back after 20-40 seconds. Honestly the main reason why people fly ceptors is because they are very entertaining to fly, not because they are amazingly affective. I think an inty, setup for pure tackling, SHOULD be able to tackle a BS for a long time. It is a ship dedicated to tackling. A 'good' ceptor is not free. As it is now any BS with a single nos shakes an inty off as fast as it can target it, so about 20 seconds. I see no reason why a BS should have to fit tackling gear as they do now-that SHOULD be the purpose of a ceptor/frig/support. Sadly Nos is so common in small gang combat that BS are now expected to have a scram. Not to mention there are endless other ways to detackle someone from a ceptor. Reducing the affect of a heavy nos on ceptors would still allow them to detackle themselves it just wouldn't be instant. I think it should take support to kill support and I think support should be the main mechanic that tackles people. For the most part, support continues to be responsible for tackling, as intended. However, this is becoming less and less the case as nos and nano-sized-bs are becoming more popular. If there is ANYTHING a nano-bs is overpowered at. It is its ability to nos off multiple tacklers like they were ants. Other than that I think nano-bs are one of the best elements in eve. ___________________________________________________ http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills
xHomicide Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.06 11:40:00 - [654] Originally by: ewqilibrium Edited by: ewqilibrium on 06/02/2007 11:05:55 well duno what to say about nano ships and pilots who fly thet..last 10 BS i lost in fight against nono ships..with great pvp skills i make about 9-15 DMg with javelin torpedos, or mising them with autocanoons..i have great tank on most of my ships and sometime i put NOS..in lat batle i put 5 NOS on nano phoon but no use..duno what to say evry thinme when nano pilot kill me i get sick..i dont respect them a tall and if this continue i will go to hunt NPC or to play tetris..in 2 years of active PvP i never ever smack but when nano ship kill me i am so pised thet i cant explain..good pvp turning of and if nano dont get nerf it will be all players to fly nano ships or to make web on 25 km.. and uea in maximum skills in drones mine MEDIUM drones cant cach nano BS..thet is nice 2..dont wont to talk about ehavy or web drones..they are faster then missles..nano ships regard ewqi Maybe you should stop trying to kill a nano-bs without support? Saying that you should be able to kill him because your character has high skills is pathetic. Welcome to the single thing a nano-bs dominates. THANK GOD eve is not won by having high skills, a better tank, and better guns. ___________________________________________________ http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills
Xurx Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.06 12:28:00 - [655] Originally by: ewqilibrium Edited by: ewqilibrium on 06/02/2007 11:05:55 well duno what to say about nano ships and pilots who fly thet..last 10 BS i lost in fight against nono ships..with great pvp skills i make about 9-15 DMg with javelin torpedos, or mising them with autocanoons..i have great tank on most of my ships and sometime i put NOS..in lat batle i put 5 NOS on nano phoon but no use..duno what to say evry thinme when nano pilot kill me i get sick..i dont respect them a tall and if this continue i will go to hunt NPC or to play tetris..in 2 years of active PvP i never ever smack but when nano ship kill me i am so pised thet i cant explain..good pvp turning of and if nano dont get nerf it will be all players to fly nano ships or to make web on 25 km.. and uea in maximum skills in drones mine MEDIUM drones cant cach nano BS..thet is nice 2..dont wont to talk about ehavy or web drones..they are faster then missles..nano ships regard ewqi I totally agree with you, I dont even wanna take part in any pvp action, when i hear the word nano (insert phoon or dominix of your choice). And all those ***** here trying to defend their cooky cutter nano setup should be ashamed to call themself pvp'ers. Your all just a bunch of quake kiddies, who dont understand what eve pvp is about....challenge...risk of loosing....not flying around with a setup that will give you 95% chance of getting away, and 95% chance of winning "the battle"... / rant off
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.06 12:29:00 - [656] I must say someyhing. half the problem is this thread. Before it, i would see a nanobs ever week. Now we face everyday full gangs of nanophoons. EVERY ship taht gets in our systems are nanoships! 100%!! And yes NanoBS need to be nerfed (but without nerfing nanoships of smaller sizes). A fleet of 30 people is unable to take 2 nanophoons out of the system. NanoBS should exist, but reaching up to 4 km/s or 5 not the now common 8 km/s ship. I now blame everything on the speed rigs!!! please CCp change the 15% bonus to 5% bonus. Make nanofiber speed bonus a percentage of pseed. Make agility stack nerfed. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
hotgirl933	Posted - 2007.02.06 13:32:00 - [657] Nano setups rely on sucking youre target dry of energy when u get there a 10% per nano stacking penalty on NOS should do the trick the faster u use youre MWD The less u can suck using NOS ( cap recahrgers but that takes away speed) creatign a short boost in speed that cant be sustained without excess NOS that should fix it quite nicley
G0rF Gallente The Causality Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.02.06 15:55:00 - [658] Edited by: G0rF on 06/02/2007 15:52:10 Just to add my (probably unwanted) two cents worth to an already oversubscribed arguement. Battleships should not be faster than Interceptors. Nanophoons at 7KM/s when a topped out, speed-pimped interceptor is running at 4.5KM/s is nonsense. EDIT: Damps are a reasonable defence, but won't kill anything. The Causality international MMO gamers' community
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:06:00 - [659] Originally by: Noriath Edited by: Noriath on 06/02/2007 11:03:11 Completly besides the discussion I'd like to make a point about ship speeds in eve in general. I think ships are way too slow if not heavily modded, and way too fast if they are. I believe that the whole issue with people wanting extremly fast ships and them being too powerful doesn't come from nanos alone, but much rather from the bigger problem, being that ship movement in Eve is unimportant to most ships, namely, everything that doesn't have at least an MWD. It just doesn't need to move, it just warps in, and hopes it's at optimal, aligns, and warps out if it isn't. ... Nice post and interesting ideas. I too would like to see less usage of MWD's, though one other way round that is to increase the range on short range turrets. Increasing the base speed and changing "Micro Warp-drives" to exactly that, is a good move though ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:08:00 - [660] A bit of an understatement for inties, wit a normal setup they can easily get 4-4.5 km/s. With speedmods and rigs 7 km/s are no real problem without snakes. Problem is that they cannot sustain a MWD + scrambler + web then. And by the time a nanoBS slows down it will be 50k away from the rest of the gang and the inty leeched dry.

Crimpp	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:17:00 - [661] Quote: Completly besides the discussion I'd like to make a point about ship speeds in eve in general. I think ships are way too slow if not heavily modded, and way too fast if they are. I believe that the whole issue with people wanting extremly fast ships and them being too powerful doesn't come from nanos alone, but much rather from the bigger problem, being that ship movement in Eve is unimportant to most ships, namely, everything that doesn't have at least an MWD. It just doesn't need to move, it just warps in, and hopes it's at optimal, aligns, and warps out if it isn't. Especially MWD is just a ridiculous module, this one single module increases your speed 5 times, even more if you fit the stabilizers and nanos. On the other hand, a battleship with no speed mods with good skills will barely move enough to really call it moving at all. I think in Eve we are facing a point in the game where a decision has to be made to tweak speeds at both the upper and lower end to more reasonable levels. Afterburners and MWDs recieved massive boosts in the past because people thought they were too weak, because when you used to hit an afterburner that only got you 50% more speed the result wasn't great if your ship was too slow to really go anywhere useful in the time it takes to fight in eve in the first place. But the real culprit here is base speed, not bad afterburners. I think ships should be a good 3-4 times faster then they are right now in general, however, afterburners and MWDs toned down to a more reasonable level. If your battleship does 500m/s base speed and your frig does 1500ms a 50% afterburner is a very good deal. In fact, I'd change the functionality of the MWD completly from Uber-Afterburner to an acctual mini-warpdrive. It wouldn't do anything except instantly teleport you 100km in the direction you are facing, with a minuite long cooldown or so. Also the whole system with warping should be revamped in my oppinion, and not hinge on aligning time at all, but instead have a set time to warp for any ship. In terms of nanos, they don't need to be changed a whole lot after that. once MWDs and afterburners are at a reasonable level modding base speed won't escalate into completly insane differences in speed anymore. All of those things would encourage movement on the battlefield instead of discouraging it like right now. Currently if you are not warp aligned you give up the biggest out you have, unless you are going 5km/s you can't possibly hope to catch up to a long range ship, if you do get close it will instantly warp since it is aligned, so essentially if you fail to warp to the right distance you cannot manuver anywhere useful before you die anyways. Having faster ships and less focuss on warp aliging would bring more movement to the game, make battles less static and seem more alive. The current speeds at which eve ships are moving are just too slow to matter in engagements between 100-200km, they don't become truely meaningful untill you are very close, within maybe 20km of the enemy where having a slight speed advantage can still mean the different of getting into your optimal or not. So, for all the problems Nanoships create, I don't believe we can adress the whole issue just by nerfing nanos. I believe there has a to be a serious effort to make sure that the disparity in speeds between speed modded ships and other ships isn't so gigantic that one basicly can't seriously move at all and the other can outrun any kind of serious atack in a few seconds . Sorry for the long quote bracket but this is worth a re-read if you skimmed it. As stated; the attraction to intys is they are fun to fly. Same with Nanophoons...fast is fun. But more importantly a mobile and dynamic battlefield is not just more fun, but much more involved, and if there's one thing the players of EvE like more then any other it's complexity.
Angelic Resolution Arcanum Defence Forces	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:22:00 - [662] I just had an interesting idea to the rigs part of the equation. Make it so they CAN'T be used on a ship with MWD or AB. Don't give nano's an increased sig radius though, we need our blockade runners.
Griseus Amarr Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:33:00 - [663] Originally by: G0rF Edited by: G0rF on 06/02/2007 15:52:10 Just to add my (probably unwanted) two cents worth to an already oversubscribed arguement. Battleships should not be faster than Interceptors. Nanophoons at 7KM/s when a topped out, speed-pimped interceptor is running at 4.5KM/s is nonsense. EDIT: Damps are a reasonable defence, but won't kill anything. Nano-phoon goes 2.5-3km/s comparing to 4-5km/s on ceptor High End nano-phoon goes 6-7km/s, ceptor 9+ Most replys telling that nano-i-phoons are unbalanced... Unbalanced to what ??? Rigged / Faction fitted phoon with implants can go up to 7km/s. And have no other defence except his speed. And lets compare it to Faction fitted Raven. Low grade Crystal Set vs Low grade Snakes. Large Gist Shield Booster vs Gist MWD. 3 speed rigs vs 3 cap recharge Rigs Passive hardeners vs no hardeners at all. 2 Nos on Raven vs 3-4 Nos on Typhoon. In these fittings he just won't able to brake ravens tank with low cap use on shield booster. And lets look on Blastertron 7 Electron blasters, 2 damage mods, Armor tank, Slave implant set. He just shred raven apart. Next. You cannot stop small mobile gangs. If you want to do so, you need place large bubble on one side of the gate and dictor on other. After jumping in, nano ship won't have any othes options except going back to gate, and all you need just jump after him and catch on MWDin out of shere. Even with few small ships you can kills him. Just DO it, not cry: He will kill us all! This works with any other small gang. And there is only one way to nerf nos - give them tracking speed same as turrets. Because basing on signature still kills small ships, because mostly MWDing, they have signature of cruiser at least. ------------------------- Hunter
Caletha	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:35:00 - [664] Although I'd hate to see this get nerfed, because flying a nanophoon has already been one of the more fun things for me in this game. Its ridiculous the speeds that I get out of my nanophoon. I recently purchased a partial lg-snake set (no omega, no cyb. 5 ), and a bunch of other implants (mostly the 3% versions) and I now reach a whopping 8267ms in a straight line and I orbit at +6000ms. I called my ship "Its like an exploit", because in all honesty, it is. Now one has to keep in mind that this ship + implants costs a truck load, 200m for the mwd, 150-200m for the domi nano's, 150m for the 15% mwd rigs, unknown (a LOT) for the implants (I think partial snake already set me back 400m-500m at least). Add it all together, and your looking at 1.2-1.5b investment. But its not invincible, I lost my previous Nanophoon to a gang that warped in a Huginn after I engaged their friend (vagabond jumped into a system, I went for it, 2 mins later his friends came). Noticed it too late, speed dropped to a halt within seconds (I first thought it was just the inty webbing me, and was getting my nos ready for it). Boom was the result. There's just one thing I hope, and thats that the powers-that-be (ccp) don't overnerf this. Its fun to fly these ships and they can currently be beaten, but even I agree that they need some type of nerf. Anyways, setting up an AC-pest for when this gets nerfed
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:52:00 - [665] Originally by: Griseus In these fittings he just won't able to brake ravens tank with low cap use on shield booster. With 2 vs 4 nos the raven will loose 20 cap/sec from getting nosses. Max reg/sec with 3 recharge rigs and max skills is 31 cap/sec. With 11 cap/sec he can reg with a gist LSB and l-g crystals about 30 hp/sec. Vs 60% resistance (which it won't have since there are no omni resistance passive harderners for shields) thats about 80 hp/sec. Even if you include the natural shield recharge and additional boosts from PDUs it cannot even tank 5 heavies, let alone 5 heavies + 4 torps. Quote: And lets look on Blastertron 7 Electron blasters, 2 damage mods, Armor tank, Slave implant set. He just shred raven apart. And if the raven tackles it and help arrives or if that mega jumps while travelling into a medium or bigger gatecamp it is dead. Quote: You cannot stop small mobile gangs. If you want to do so, you need place large bubble on one side of the gate and dictor on other. After jumping in, nano ship won't have any othes options except going back to gate, and all you need just jump after him and catch on MWDin out of shere. Even with few small ships you can kills him. Just DO it, not cry: He will kill us all! It will simply MWD the 10k out of the dictor bubble and warp before your ceptors can get to it.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.06 16:53:00 - [666] Originally by: MrTripps I was in a gang playing cat and mouse with a nano-phoon for several hours yesterday. We knew he was coming so we set out a Raven as bait. The NP launches drones and starts with the usual high speed orbit and nos routine. The Raven counters with smart bombs. This pops the drones, but the Raven is almost down. I warp in with a Celestis and put 3 damps on him. He starts flying in and out of target range. I keep hitting with the triple damp, but our tacklers can't even get close. Your average Huginn can't catch one. One that is pimped out with faction gear, implants, and rigs has a chance, but still has to get lucky. The battle ends at a draw and we considered ourselves lucky. Skip ahead two hours and we have a 30 person blob on a bubbled gate. NP jumps through the gate like the camp wasn't there. He jumps back and forth about three times to make his point before getting bored and docking back in Empire. In each case the best we could do is ding his shields. Does this sound balanced? If you knew you were going after a nanophoon, the raven should have had a webber and torps on it. If that phoon hung out long enough to get ther raven "almost" down, then the phoon should have gone pop! Why didn't you bring in a long range bs or two with lots of tracking? maybe a bb to jam him?? lots could have been done in that situation. The fact that you were unporepared to deal with his setup up doesn't make his setup "nerfable" On a side note, several members of my corp just popped a well fitted nanophoon flown by an almost "legendary" pilot. He was tough to catch, that's for sure, but it's not impossible. Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.06 17:27:00 - [667] Edited by: Aki Yamato on 06/02/2007 17:24:25 I hope you ARE some dev alt.. Originally by: Noriath Edited by: Noriath on 06/02/2007 11:03:11 Completly besides the discussion I'd like to make a point about ship speeds in eve in general. I think ships are way too slow if not heavily modded, and way too fast if they are. I believe that the whole issue with people wanting extremly fast ships and them being too powerful doesn't come from nanos alone, but much rather from the bigger problem, being that ship movement in Eve is unimportant to most ships, namely, everything that doesn't have at least an MWD. It just doesn't need to move, it just warps in, and hopes it's at optimal, aligns, and warps out if it isn't. .... 2speed lovers: Fine speed is cool but but is logical that speed will cost protection and firepower (not money money are not relevant), its logical if someone want speed he takes some small fast ship, same if some wants do air acrobacy he take ligh acrobat aircraft not Boeing 747. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.06 17:42:00 - [668] Originally by: Shyalud If you knew you were going after a nanophoon, the raven should have had a webber and torps on it. A NP will never get within web range. As I understand it, they out run torps. I'm not sure what good a long range bs would do in this situation as they orbit in heavy nos range and can get out of even large rail range before taking any significant dps. ECM is very useful for reducing the harm these ships can do (as stated I was in a Celestis, which is the Gal version of a BB), but that just gives you a draw instead of a kill. I respect the role these ships have, but still say they are a bit unbalanced. Congrats on the kill. :) Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.06 17:51:00 - [669] uhm, if he's in NOS range he's in Web range. You said the Raven was bait. If the NP was orbiting the raven, a sniper standing off the raven should be able to hit him. There's no way a NP could take the dmg from the Raven (which he may be able to outrun if he isn't webbed, but the raven can carry drones to kill the NP's drones) and the dmg from other ships. If it's just a matter of your frustration that you can't catch him, that's one thing, but him being able to evade isn't going to make it any easier for him to do you dmg. Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.06 17:56:00 - [670] uhm, if he's in NOS range he's in Web range (at least with drones) but a ceptor should be able to catch him and web him. You said the Raven was bait. If the NP was orbiting the raven, a sniper standing off the raven should be able to hit him. There's no way a NP could take the dmg from the Raven (which he may be able to outrun if he isn't webbed, but the raven can carry drones to kill the NP's drones) and the dmg from other ships. If it's just a matter of your frustration that you can't catch him, that's one thing, but him being able to evade isn't going to make it any easier for him to do you dmg. Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

xHomicide Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.06 20:03:00 - [671] Originally by: Aki Yamato Edited by: Aki Yamato on 06/02/2007 17:24:25 I hope you ARE some dev alt.. Originally by: Noriath Edited by: Noriath on 06/02/2007 11:03:11 Completly besides the discussion I'd like to make a point about ship speeds in eve in general. I think ships are way too slow if not heavily modded, and way too fast if they are. I believe that the whole issue with people wanting extremly fast ships and them being too powerful doesn't come from nanos alone, but much rather from the bigger problem, being that ship movement in Eve is unimportant to most ships, namely, everything that doesn't have at least an MWD. It just doesn't need to move, it just warps in, and hopes it's at optimal, aligns, and warps out if it isn't. .... 2speed lovers: Fine speed is cool but but is logical that speed will cost protection and firepower (not money money are not relevant), its logical if someone want speed he takes some small fast ship, same if some wants do air acrobacy he take ligh acrobat aircraft not Boeing 747. The isk arguement is in reply to everyone saying nano-bs are low risk. Simply put, they are not, because you are putting the value of 3-4 ships on the line every time you fly one. ___________________________________________________ http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills
Isonkon Serikain Gallente Band of Builders Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.02.06 20:09:00 - [672] Edited by: Isonkon Serikain on 06/02/2007 20:11:21 Originally by: Tovarishch People can argue one way or the other. I have seen very little in the way of objectivity in this thread. What it comes down to is this - Dual MWD/AB setups were nerfed for many reasons... primarily because battleships were reaching speeds that CCP had never intended. The same thing is happening again. Those people who are dependent upon using nano-BSes to run and engage only when they have a huge margin for success had better start preparing for a nerf. Hmmm some truth to that, I suppose... Although the dual mwd/ab setups were much more extreme than today's nano setups... I still think Ravens with precisions are a viable answer to nano BS... Maybe a huge stacking penalty is in order? Pity the fool
ShadowlordUK	Posted - 2007.02.06 20:57:00 - [673] Originally by: xHomicide Originally by: Aki Yamato Edited by: Aki Yamato on 06/02/2007 17:24:25 I hope you ARE some dev alt.. Originally by: Noriath Edited by: Noriath on 06/02/2007 11:03:11 Completly besides the discussion I'd like to make a point about ship speeds in eve in general. I think ships are way too slow if not heavily modded, and way too fast if they are. I believe that the whole issue with people wanting extremly fast ships and them being too powerful doesn't come from nanos alone, but much rather from the bigger problem, being that ship movement in Eve is unimportant to most ships, namely, everything that doesn't have at least an MWD. It just doesn't need to move, it just warps in, and hopes it's at optimal, aligns, and warps out if it isn't. .... 2speed lovers: Fine speed is cool but but is logical that speed will cost protection and firepower (not money money are not relevant), its logical if someone want speed he takes some small fast ship, same if some wants do air acrobacy he take ligh acrobat aircraft not Boeing 747. The isk arguement is in reply to everyone saying nano-bs are low risk. Simply put, they are not, because you are putting the value of 3-4 ships on the line every time you fly one. No matter how much they cost to fit, they are always going to be low risk because they simply cant be killed if they dont want to take significant risks. All these people saying nano bs can be killed with damps or whatever are sadly missing the point... its quite easy to make the nano bs run away.. (if you happen to be setup to beat nano ships..) its almost impossible to kill one. That makes nano ships pretty much zero risk. And yes there WILL be fleets of nano ships. Who WOULDNT want a fleet that can close on the enemy in seconds and withdraw at will with no losses... even if you dont think about all those enemy ships that are simply going to have their dmg severely reduced if not negated completely...
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.06 21:31:00 - [674] Originally by: Shyalud uhm, if he's in NOS range he's in Web range (at least with drones) but a ceptor should be able to catch him and web him. Sigh...please read the thread. Pay attention to the posts by Ryysa, as she knows what she is talking about. Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Aequitas Veritas TAOSP Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.06 21:41:00 - [675] Originally by: Noriath Edited by: Noriath on 06/02/2007 11:03:11 Completly besides the discussion I'd like to make a point about ship speeds in eve in general. I think ships are way too slow if not heavily modded, and way too fast if they are. I believe that the whole issue with people wanting extremly fast ships and them being too powerful doesn't come from nanos alone, but much rather from the bigger problem, being that ship movement in Eve is unimportant to most ships, namely, everything that doesn't have at least an MWD. It just doesn't need to move, it just warps in, and hopes it's at optimal, aligns, and warps out if it isn't. Especially MWD is just a ridiculous module, this one single module increases your speed 5 times, even more if you fit the stabilizers and nanos. On the other hand, a battleship with no speed mods with good skills will barely move enough to really call it moving at all. I think in Eve we are facing a point in the game where a decision has to be made to tweak speeds at both the upper and lower end to more reasonable levels. Afterburners and MWDs recieved massive boosts in the past because people thought they were too weak, because when you used to hit an afterburner that only got you 50% more speed the result wasn't great if your ship was too slow to really go anywhere useful in the time it takes to fight in eve in the first place. But the real culprit here is base speed, not bad afterburners. I think ships should be a good 3-4 times faster then they are right now in general, however, afterburners and MWDs toned down to a more reasonable level. If your battleship does 500m/s base speed and your frig does 1500ms a 50% afterburner is a very good deal. In fact, I'd change the functionality of the MWD completly from Uber-Afterburner to an acctual mini-warpdrive. It wouldn't do anything except instantly teleport you 100km in the direction you are facing, with a minuite long cooldown or so. Also the whole system with warping should be revamped in my oppinion, and not hinge on aligning time at all, but instead have a set time to warp for any ship. In terms of nanos, they don't need to be changed a whole lot after that. once MWDs and afterburners are at a reasonable level modding base speed won't escalate into completly insane differences in speed anymore. All of those things would encourage movement on the battlefield instead of discouraging it like right now. Currently if you are not warp aligned you give up the biggest out you have, unless you are going 5km/s you can't possibly hope to catch up to a long range ship, if you do get close it will instantly warp since it is aligned, so essentially if you fail to warp to the right distance you cannot manuver anywhere useful before you die anyways. Having faster ships and less focuss on warp aliging would bring more movement to the game, make battles less static and seem more alive. The current speeds at which eve ships are moving are just too slow to matter in engagements between 100-200km, they don't become truely meaningful untill you are very close, within maybe 20km of the enemy where having a slight speed advantage can still mean the different of getting into your optimal or not. So, for all the problems Nanoships create, I don't believe we can adress the whole issue just by nerfing nanos. I believe there has a to be a serious effort to make sure that the disparity in speeds between speed modded ships and other ships isn't so gigantic that one basicly can't seriously move at all and the other can outrun any kind of serious atack in a few seconds. This post has some very very nice thoughts in it. I hope the devs take notice of them! "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Spike 68 Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.02.06 22:03:00 - [676] indeed, most likely the biggest issue in game atm. Ive seen nanodomis go 8km/s. add that out to be about mach 23.5. sure np, its a spaceship and space is big right. not when a 105,000,000 kg battleship can accelerate from 0 m/s to 8km/s in a little under 4 sec. lest there is some sort of technology that I am unaware up, this is quite retarded. and on the role play aspect of EVE I doubt many humans would survive. but people cry, use the huggin, use the web drones yada yada. get real, 8km/s is a lot faster than any web drone. and most nano BS will mwd out of web range of a huginn before it even gets a lock. and if one even does manage to get a web on one the huge mass/thrust of BS usually shoot it out of web range yet again. ok, lets say you do get it webbed. gj, now you have 3 or 4 heavy nos killin your cap. to sum up -if we can use a nano bs to scout/tackle/chase down fast stuff. who needs any other ship class. I dont have a problem with Istabs or nanos, when fit to a frig or cruiser they are easier to stop with Istabs. I have a problem with them working so well on BS because of their mass/thrust makes them hard to slow down and with the heavy nos they are even more overpowered.
Futher Bezluden Minmatar Red Dwarf Mining Corps 5th Column	Posted - 2007.02.07 00:44:00 - [677] what's going to catch a ceptor BS? Mwd huggins and rapier aren't as fast even if suicide speed fit due to the ship taking so long to slow down that it's already in warp. Pair up a lachesis... maybe, but the moment the ninja BS is out of web range, it's piling on the speed again to get out of scram range. A couple of BS's added in and it might dent the shields before it warps off. Ceptors? Hell no. No Ceptor is going to do anything when it gets nos'd the moment it gets in web range. So we are talking about a ship the size of a football field or so pushing speeds that ceptors try hard to reach with speed implants and faction kit that require 2 huggin/rapiers, 1 arazu/lachesis, a couple of suicide ceptors, and a few battleships -all for one ship under the most ideal of circumstances which probably only happens 1 out of 10 times a nano/iStab/odj bs is encountered. Swing the nerfbat. But fast before they zoom off at 5000+ ms screaming "NOOOOOOOOB" in local at you. CCP, you created the monster, now track it down and kill it. Then deal with the use of motherships in low-sec as "Iwin" buttons. THUKKER -Be Paranoid
MoLeH Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.02.07 01:41:00 - [678] Originally by: Isonkon Serikain I still think Ravens with precisions are a viable answer to nano BS... Maybe a huge stacking penalty is in order? HaHaHaHa sorry that bit about precision cruise beeing the answer just made me laugh, my typhoon, RIP, did just short of 12km/s this took a high grade snake set, 3 propelant injection vents, 3 local hull i stabs, 3 local hull nanos, 1 local hull overdrive and a Gist X-type 100mn mwd, now i think thats roughly 2.6b i think total. But for that i could take 0.0 dmg off any missile that could hit me and i would rarely get hit by a BS i was orbiting. Unfortunatly the combination of lag and a 60 strong hostile gang laid my phoon to rest. GJ Fatal, i shall be back tomorow in another :) O, and im currently piecing together a NanoMach just waiting on 2 properlant injection vent 2's i think it should be able to reach just short of 15k, but well wait and see. P.S. WTB Shaqil's Speed enhancer for 600m (Speed is good )
Rik'tik'ticheck	Posted - 2007.02.07 03:04:00 - [679] well have been reading some of this thread, and as i am still just over 4 weeks old, i don't really have an opinion to start with havent run into any nano BS:s, but from the parts i have read of this thread, seems there are many that dislike this setup, and the only people why try to argue for them don't really seem to make any sense well i did some thinking about how to resolve the obvious problems of speed and manoverability nanos grant the big shipd with enough lows so let's think a bit about changing nanos to speed % not fixed 20-30m/s, so if we assume the 20m/s was meant to be what frigates gain from it this would i guess be quite close to 5% increase to speed (well on 400m/s that is) so if this would be added to base speed before navigation and ships/gangs modify it the fast frigates would be about in the same situation they are now, but BS:s would only get about 5-7m/s and the manoverability, wich would not yield anything unbalanced in top speeds, as even 8 of those would not raise base speed to 200m/s even on the faster ships, sure they would turn well and have deacent speed, but should not be all too game breaking. well ofcourse the % are just something from the top of my head, but this kinda aproach would not require a larger change to the mechanics or something major =) not that the stacking penalty aproach wouldn't work aswell, i just feel the % aproach feels more like what the small vs big ship effects should stand well feel free to shoot my idea to pieces, it's not like i am experienced of the game anyway
Father Weebles North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.07 04:53:00 - [680] ive flown with nano-domis/phoons before and the problem is nos if you dish out 1.8+bil for a hg snake implant u get lots of speed and rightfully deserve it, but nos right now is overpowered and its the reason why nano ships own atm "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."

Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.07 10:14:00 - [681] btw, any dev has post to explain to us what is the offical ccp point of view ?
Baudolino Gallente Forsaken Empire The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.07 11:59:00 - [682] Originally by: Montaire (...)I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run(...)If a Nano-Ship doesnt want to fight, you are NOT going to get it to fight. And THAT is what needs fixing. You can`t see it, but i`m suffering massive convulsions due to laughing.. So you engage a ship at a gate and he doesn`t want to fight. He manages to MWD to the gate, cause you don`t lock and web before he activates module, and you believe there is something wrong with the game??? Get a grip, kid. Quite understandable that a fast ship is difficult to kill close to a gate.
eXtas Kemono. Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.07 12:39:00 - [683] Originally by: Baudolino Originally by: Montaire (...)I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run(...)If a Nano-Ship doesnt want to fight, you are NOT going to get it to fight. And THAT is what needs fixing. You can`t see it, but i`m suffering massive convulsions due to laughing.. So you engage a ship at a gate and he doesn`t want to fight. He manages to MWD to the gate, cause you don`t lock and web before he activates module, and you believe there is something wrong with the game??? Get a grip, kid. Quite understandable that a fast ship is difficult to kill close to a gate. yeah I totaly agree. not everyone wants to die when they jump into a camp, u can log or if u have a mwd u will probobly get back to the gate. I like the option of geting back to the gate more :)
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.07 16:16:00 - [684] Originally by: Terell btw, any dev has post to explain to us what is the offical ccp point of view ? I wish they would. With my luck I'd spend two months training up another race's bs in order to compete just to have the whole setup hit by the nerf bat. I can see why they would keep them around. They do keep 0.0 from becoming total care bear land behind the gate camp. However, it is getting to the point that NP pilots are flying around a lot of empty systems while everyone else hides until they get bored enough to leave. That isn't fun for anyone. Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.07 16:47:00 - [685] Originally by: MrTripps Originally by: Shyalud uhm, if he's in NOS range he's in Web range (at least with drones) but a ceptor should be able to catch him and web him. Sigh...please read the thread. Pay attention to the posts by Ryysa, as she knows what she is talking about. Don't be an * just because I don't ride the nerf-mobile. If you can't fit a ceptor to catch a nano-bs then you need to run away from him. If someone has the isk to pay for it, the skills to fit it and use it...and you don't....then he SHOULD be able to get away from you. If you're outskilled/outclassed the answer is to get better, not nerf the guy. Originally by:** Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.07 16:51:00 - [686] Edited by: Shyalud on 07/02/2007 16:48:17 Originally by: MrTripps Originally by: Shyalud uhm, if he's in NOS range he's in Web range (at least with drones) but a ceptor should be able to catch him and web him. Sigh...please read the thread. Pay attention to the posts by Ryysa, as she knows what she is talking about. Don't be an * just because I don't ride the nerf-mobile. If you can't fit a ceptor to catch a nano-bs then you need to run away from him. If someone has the isk to pay for it, the skills to fit it and use it...and you don't....then he SHOULD be able to get away from you. If you're outskilled/outclassed the answer is to get better, not nerf the guy. Originally by:** Montaire (...)I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run(...)If a Nano-Ship doesnt want to fight, you are NOT going to get it to fight. And THAT is what needs fixing. This is rediculous. Why should you be able to MAKE anyone fight. Speed is as much part of PvP as anything else. If he's too fast for you, then you loose. Simple, get faster. Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Kru5ty Minmatar VersaTech Interstellar Ltd.	Posted - 2007.02.07 17:31:00 - [687] OK i think it is pretty fair to say that in layman's terms 1. The nanophoon, nanodomi and such are too fast 2. They can be killed but it is highly unlikely they will be. 3. They can scout, tackle and solo against many ships and either pop a couple and escape or simply escape. 4. The majority of people who defend them and say 'noobns, get hugginns/ceptors/dictors are likely nano BS flyers who know too well they can escape or kill a ship that tries to stop them and strays too far from the gang 5. And finnally, with this amount of a response and 'whine' as people seem to like to say it is pretty clear that the majority of peaple think these ships are overpowered and a huge pain in the ass, so rightly they should get nerfed in some way. At least then it will take more imagination than 'make your BS go as fast as possible and you probably wont die for a long time' approach. And for the record, I have witnessed nanoships entering hostile systems evading everything and anything that tries to catch them, while still killing several people and hightailing out of the system with not a hope in hell of stopping them. So. As ive seen in an earlier post, a possible way to improve the speed boost of modules would be to make them boost a percentage of speed and take into account the mass of the ship. In a similar way to how a MWD/AB works out its speed increase. This would result in a nanofiber giving for example a 15% increase to speed on a ship that is 1,000,000 kg but only an 8% increase to a ship that is 10,000,000 kg and so on. (ignore the math this is just for arguments sake) And the result would be that small ships get much more use out of speed mods while the heavier ships would still go much faster but could never outrun an interceptor or any other fast frigate for that matter. This would result in the roles of the small fast ships becoming more viable again and mean that you dont MWD away in your interceptor only to find a BS is staying in range or even catching up. So my point here i guess is this. MWD BS should never be outrunning a ceptor or any other small/mid sized fast(designed) ship Flame me if you will but im pretty sure this covers why so many people are fed up with the nano BS craze and its almost invulnerability to all but the most dedicated gangs.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.07 17:38:00 - [688] Originally by: Shyalud This is rediculous. Why should you be able to MAKE anyone fight. Speed is as much part of PvP as anything else. If he's too fast for you, then you loose. Simple, get faster. So to counter nanoBS you need nanoBS? Brilliant, so you just repeated one problem people have with nanoBS. They are their own best counter. Similar how ECM was it's own best counter, too. We've seen how that worked out. And nothing wrong with something being hard to catch. What is wrong, however is something hard to catch with the nospower and dps of a nanoBS. Ceptors are hard to catch which is balanced out by their weak dps. What balances out nanosetups?
Mercykiller III Caldari Delta team Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.07 18:09:00 - [689] Without cap u can not sustain those massive speeds, NOS is the problem here.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.07 19:08:00 - [690] Edited by: Shyalud on 07/02/2007 19:06:05 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Shyalud This is rediculous. Why should you be able to MAKE anyone fight. Speed is as much part of PvP as anything else. If he's too fast for you, then you loose. Simple, get faster. So to counter nanoBS you need nanoBS? Brilliant, so you just repeated one problem people have with nanoBS. They are their own best counterduh. Similar how ECM was it's own best counter, too. We've seen how that worked out. And nothing wrong with something being hard to catch. What is wrong, however is something hard to catch with the nospower and dps of a nanoBS. Ceptors are hard to catch which is balanced out by their weak dps. What balances out nanosetups? Well, if he's nano/stabbed out, then his armor is minimal...there's a weaknes. If your fighting a nano-bs and you'd rather take the "moral" highground, then a well fitted and skilled bs pilot should be able to do it...if he can nos you, you can nos him, he won't be able to take much dmg, and properly fitted any bs should be able to do considerable dmg to him with a tracking mod and rig or two. or, gasp fight fire with fire (read adapt) Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.07 20:01:00 - [691] Originally by: Shyalud Well, if he's nano/stabbed out, then his armor is minimal...there's a weaknes. Typhoon base armor + shield: 11680 Claw base armor + shield: 739 vaga base armor + shield: 2990 Come again? NanoBS = similar speed. WAY more hitpoint buffer. WAY more nos + dps. You might as well say that for a ship with 25000 shield and 1 armor it's "low armor is it's weakness". Quote: or, gasp fight fire with fire (read adapt) Yes, like people did with ECM. Which was so much fun when every single ship and an multispec or two fitted. Funny how "adapt" is always thrown around when we have an unbalanced setup and people run out of arguments to defend it. Always followed with a nerf for that, as seen with WCS and ECM. Plenty of "adapt" there too.
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.07 20:04:00 - [692] Originally by: Shyalud If you can't fit a ceptor to catch a nano-bs then you need to run away from him. Still haven't read the thread, huh? If you had you would have seen several posts that describe why this will not work on the types of ships we are talking about. And, really, drop the ad hominem. This isn't about one player, but the architecture of the game. Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Felix Dzerzhinsky Pirates of Destruction Union Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.07 21:03:00 - [693] I'm sure its been mentioned, and if it has not - then I will do so there. It is not the speed that makes the nano-setup so powerful, its the massive agility. Nurf the agility, and they will not be able to orbit you at such speeds. As it stands, anyone who says they are having fun with this setup likes to click on a target, click orbit, hit the nos and the mwd and shoot missles/launch drones. . .thats all it takes. to recap: nurf agility, nurf cap, and kill what little armor/shields they had to beggin with. If they are speed tanking, then make sure that the instant they mess up, they die.
SFX Bladerunner Bladerunners Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.02.07 21:45:00 - [694] wow... 23 pages of flamage up and down back and forth pro-nerfers and con-nerfers.. gg EVE Online community. my 2 cents: a corp mate of mine has a nano-phoon that goes 8km/s... he also has a crow that goes 20km/s. He uses local i-stabs and very expensive faction mwd's. stop whining about nano-bs's.. they are very isk/skill intensive to make work.. so they are allowed to be hard to catch.. just see it as a small-sized titan. (they're very expensive, and hard to catch) __________________________________________________ History is much like an endless waltz, the three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever..
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.07 21:45:00 - [695] Quote: The isk arguement is in reply to everyone saying nano-bs are low risk. Simply put, they are not, because you are putting the value of 3-4 ships on the line every time you fly one. I dont care about ISK, there is a natural balance between Protection/Firepower/Mobility and these ships simply brokes this natural laws. Yea Its BIG mistake of eve that guns weigh is ridiculus low, for example 1400mm artiliery with 1.5 tons in eve vs 15"/42 British Naval canon with 120 tons barrel only, so arment of the ship has almost zero imact to ship mass -> speed. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.07 22:23:00 - [696] And as has been said x times before, invest the same amount of money in other stuff - faction/officer weapons and/or tanks, any implants you want - and you do not get anything which has an overall equal strength as a nanosetup. It does not matetr if you look at a 300 mil or 3 bil setup, it is way more effecient than other similary priced setups. It is out of balance no matter what price.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 01:15:00 - [697] Originally by: MrTripps Pay attention to the posts by Ryysa, as she knows what she is talking about. You should link to this killboard instead. On the other hand, I'm happy that the discussion is swaying towards nos nerfage, also xHomicide made some really nice points. It has been said again and again, nos is why nanoBS make ceptors/other fast ships obsolete... There's nothing like heavy nos to tell an interceptor "GET OFF ME". Also heavy NOS makes them able to speedtank all day long. I'm all for a stacking penalty on NOS, but rather no stacking penalty on neuts - so cap killer setups would be viable, and pure NOS setups would be nerfed. N.F.F. Recruitment
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.08 01:46:00 - [698] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: MrTripps Pay attention to the posts by Ryysa, as she knows what she is talking about. You should link to this killboard instead. On the other hand, I'm happy that the discussion is swaying towards nos nerfage, also xHomicide made some really nice points. It has been said again and again, nos is why nanoBS make ceptors/other fast ships obsolete... There's nothing like heavy nos to tell an interceptor "GET OFF ME". Also heavy NOS makes them able to speedtank all day long. I'm all for a stacking penalty on NOS, but rather no stacking penalty on neuts - so cap killer setups would be viable, and pure NOS setups would be nerfed. how's that not going to kill the amarr recons?
Father Weebles North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 03:56:00 - [699] this will sound strage but how bout nos work fine for 10-20 seconds like normal, and after that they take your own cap to keep the nos working so nos would in effect be useless after a 1 minute and if u keep nossing your ship stops (overheated). Granted that will affect curse's and stuff but possibly they could get a bonus. just something to think about "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."
Koloch Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.08 04:24:00 - [700] Originally by: Father Weebles this will sound strage but how bout nos work fine for 10-20 seconds like normal, and after that they take your own cap to keep the nos working so nos would in effect be useless after a 1 minute and if u keep nossing your ship stops (overheated). Granted that will affect curse's and stuff but possibly they could get a bonus. just something to think about first off I agree that nos needs to be fixed. having said that how does nerfing nos fix the fact that a nanoBSs are near impossible to catch? that is part of the problem people are complaining about.

Father Weebles North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 04:39:00 - [701] Originally by: Koloch Originally by: Father Weebles this will sound strage but how bout nos work fine for 10-20 seconds like normal, and after that they take your own cap to keep the nos working so nos would in effect be useless after a 1 minute and if u keep nossing your ship stops (overheated). Granted that will affect curse's and stuff but possibly they could get a bonus. just something to think about first off I agree that nos needs to be fixed. having said that how does nerfing nos fix the fact that a nanoBSs are near impossible to catch? that is part of the problem people are complaining about. nano-ships dont have very good damage first of all so they rely on 3-4 heavy nos to break an opponent's tank as well as feed their capictor so if they cant nos 24/7 like now then nano-ships wont be able to 1 take all the cap from their opponent and 2 wont have the cap to run an mwd for very long. "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."
Angelic Resolution Arcanum Defence Forces	Posted - 2007.02.08 05:34:00 - [702] I find it amusing. People saying nanophoons and dominix's have no DPS. THEY. HAVE. DRONES. Idiots :P. 5 T2 ogres will own even a battleship in no time. Sure kill the drones.. smart and all but useless to most people as by the time you target them you're already into "screwed mode". To those saying, Ceptors, hugin and dictors. Ceptors get insta popped or light drones stuck on them. Hugin all on it's own will get raped. And dictors. Don't make me laugh. Put up with it, nano battleships are a side effect CCP never intended for and they will be nerfed. Time and patience. And to those wondering about Dev response.. notice how this thread is sticked? Means they're reading it and paying attention to what the majority of us want and what a minority want to exploit.
xHomicide Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.08 05:40:00 - [703] Edited by: xHomicide on 08/02/2007 05:36:38 Originally by: Angelic Resolution I find it amusing. People saying nanophoons and dominix's have no DPS. THEY. HAVE. DRONES. Idiots :P. 5 T2 ogres will own even a battleship in no time. Sure kill the drones.. smart and all but useless to most people as by the time you target them you're already into "screwed mode". To those saying, Ceptors, hugin and dictors. Ceptors get insta popped or light drones stuck on them. Hugin all on it's own will get raped. And dictors. Don't make me laugh. Put up with it, nano battleships are a side effect CCP never intended for and they will be nerfed. Time and patience. And to those wondering about Dev response.. notice how this thread is sticked? Means they're reading it and paying attention to what the majority of us want and what a minority want to exploit. There is nothing a nano-bs can do it 'rape' a hugin. Honestly, there nothing that can 'rape' a hugin period. WTF who said anything about dictors? ___________________________________________________ http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 06:48:00 - [704] Originally by: Angelic Resolution Hugin all on it's own will get raped Perhaps you should read the thread better. Huginn can easily solokill a nanoBS, if it's properly fitted. N.F.F. Recruitment
Gyro DuAquin1 Tri Optimum Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.08 09:33:00 - [705] this thread is funny, too many ppl with no clue talking about things, they onley experienced in the forums. Nano ships are the hype of the month, as it was the thorax or pulse lasers on Battleships. A decent 2men gang can kill a nano bs, and it can be easily neutralized, just get ur facts a bit straight and dont just run there with torps ravens and rail megas.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.08 09:41:00 - [706] Originally by: Ryysa Edited by: Ryysa on 08/02/2007 04:33:11 Originally by: Koloch Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: MrTripps Pay attention to the posts by Ryysa, as she knows what she is talking about. You should link to this killboard instead. On the other hand, I'm happy that the discussion is swaying towards nos nerfage, also xHomicide made some really nice points. It has been said again and again, nos is why nanoBS make ceptors/other fast ships obsolete... There's nothing like heavy nos to tell an interceptor "GET OFF ME". Also heavy NOS makes them able to speedtank all day long. I'm all for a stacking penalty on NOS, but rather no stacking penalty on neuts - so cap killer setups would be viable, and pure NOS setups would be nerfed. how's that not going to kill the amarr recons? Simple - add a bonus to them. Quote: having said that how does nerfing nos fix the fact that a nanoBSs are near impossible to catch? that is part of the problem people are complaining about. NanoBS are not impossible to catch because of their speed. If someone spends 2bil on a nanobs + implants, you can spend 50m on a ceptor that will be able to catch up to it - speed is not the issue here. The issue is, that when a ceptor starts to catch up, the nanobs puts a nos on him, woops MWD shut off... That's the reason you can't tackle nanobs with ceptor, not because it goes too fast. With max skills/factiongear/full hg snake, your nanobs still won't go over 11km/s [no gang modules/skills/stuff, before you whine]. Whereas an inty, which will cost way less will easily attain 15k/s and more with a snake set and faction mwd. - So you see, it's not the speed that is the problem. you are correct on pointing what makes nanoships not easily counterable. But there is still some issue with speed. The issue taht the base number of low slots is more relevant than the base speed of the ship when trying to attain a speed setup. Thins should be balanced. Its much harder to make a stabber go as fast as a tphoon than wih the typhoon. That is not right. Nanos MUST be a percentage of base speed of the ships. l the matari superior base speed is a ridiculowsly pahethic advantage, because it can be completely negated if the enemy ship has 1 more low slots (as any ammarian and most gallente have on same class) Nos must: never take out the last 5 or 10% of capacitor form target and form this point on they should d rain the cap of the NOS ship. Other alternative is the nos stack nerf. Or reduction on Heavy NOS range. Or a signature value to nos..... If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
eXtas Kemono. Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.08 10:39:00 - [707] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Angelic Resolution Hugin all on it's own will get raped Perhaps you should read the thread better. Huginn can easily solokill a nanoBS, if it's properly fitted. yepp I totaly agree, even without faction mods for u whiners :) 2007.02.07 10:15 Victim: xxxxxx Alliance: xxxxx Corp: xxxxxxxxxxx Destroyed: Dominix System: Lirerim Security: 0.6 Involved parties: Name: eXtas (laid the final blow) Security: 1.9 Alliance: Privateer Alliance Corp: Kemono. Ship: Huginn Weapon: Valkyrie II Destroyed items: X-Large Shield Booster II Heavy 'Knave' I Energy Drain Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I Gist B-Type 100MN MicroWarpdrive Local Hull Conversion Inertial Stabilizers I Local Hull Conversion Overdrive Injector I Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I (Cargo) Local Hull Conversion Nanofiber Structure I (Cargo) Local Hull Conversion Inertial Stabilizers I (Cargo) Fried Interface Circuit, Qty: 117 (Cargo) Alloyed Tritanium Bar, Qty: 81 (Cargo) Hornet II, Qty: 2 (Drone Bay) Vespa II, Qty: 5 (Drone Bay) Berserker I, Qty: 4 (Drone Bay) Ogre I, Qty: 2 (Drone Bay) Hammerhead II (Drone Bay) Valkyrie II (Drone Bay)
Baudolino Gallente Forsaken Empire The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 10:53:00 - [708] All these whines are extremely annoying. Not because they`re mostly uncreative and based on lacking orgnizational and PvP skills, but.. because the share weight of uncreative, can`t-play-the-game-without-a-manual kind of players cries for justice and equality and sameness, might actually change something that doesn`t need changing. Both nano domi and nano phoon can be handled. Nossing ships can be handled. Someone said that you can`t beat those ships unless you`re prepared- lol.. You will not beat any of the ships i fly unless you`re prepared. IF YOU`RE NOT PREPARED- DON`T GET CAUGHT! in 99% of all instances- dying is your own fault.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 11:33:00 - [709] Edited by: Aramendel on 08/02/2007 11:33:29 Originally by: Ryysa Huginn can easily solokill a nanoBS, if it's properly fitted. Correct. However, for example any properly fitted curse can also kill any non-nano BS (2bil+ officer fitted ones included). So it's not like that nanoBSs have an unique vulnerablility here. There are still far too few counters for them comapred to other ships. (I know you weren't implying that, but comments like this can easily be twisted into that. Like "See - it can be killed, it's fine.") Originally by: Baudolino Both nano domi and nano phoon can be handled. Nossing ships can be handled. Yes and no. They are not more difficult to counter than any other solo BS. But neither are they easier to counter. But the core difference is: When you counter a non-nano BS this way you kill it in 90% of all situations. When you counter a nanoBS it flees in 90% of all situations. Same performance, less risk. This is what makes them imbalanced.
Angelic Resolution Arcanum Defence Forces	Posted - 2007.02.08 12:57:00 - [710] Tested it on SiSi during DT. Hugin pilot tries to get into position, nanophoon warps away giving the huginin a few torps for it's trouble. Second time: Nanophoon fits 5 ogres, hugin locks the nanophoon down and the hugin got owned by 4 torps, 4 nos and 5 ogres. So for once the nano's didn't do a damn thing (Phoon went to 75% structure or so). Third time: Nanophoon tried the MWD + torp trick, didn't work. Launch drones, got a little bit webbed but got out of webber range. Hugin got owned by ogres + torps. Thoughts?

here'n'there	Posted - 2007.02.08 13:05:00 - [711] i wonder, if MWD always add mass (50000000kg) when used, as it do now..
Trind2222 Amarr Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.08 13:44:00 - [712] Originally by: Baudolino All these whines are extremely annoying. Not because they`re mostly uncreative and based on lacking orgnizational and PvP skills, but.. because the share weight of uncreative, can`t-play-the-game-without-a-manual kind of players cries for justice and equality and sameness, might actually change something that doesn`t need changing. Both nano domi and nano phoon can be handled. Nossing ships can be handled. Someone said that you can`t beat those ships unless you`re prepared- lol.. You will not beat any of the ships i fly unless you`re prepared. IF YOU`RE NOT PREPARED- DON`T GET CAUGHT! in 99% of all instances- dying is your own fault. so you are saying that i fly my cruser wrong that my interceptor is faster then a nano batlle ship that my sniper batle ship that dosent hit a noano ship becose most of us are a noob and you are not. This is not whine this is about balance.
eXtas Kemono. Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.08 14:10:00 - [713] Originally by: Angelic Resolution Tested it on SiSi during DT. Hugin pilot tries to get into position, nanophoon warps away giving the huginin a few torps for it's trouble. Second time: Nanophoon fits 5 ogres, hugin locks the nanophoon down and the hugin got owned by 4 torps, 4 nos and 5 ogres. So for once the nano's didn't do a damn thing (Phoon went to 75% structure or so). Third time: Nanophoon tried the MWD + torp trick, didn't work. Launch drones, got a little bit webbed but got out of webber range. Hugin got owned by ogres + torps. Thoughts? get a new huginn pilot or try to refit the ship... a) use a setup that dont use cap so u dont care if u are nossed (webbers use 3 cap so they still work fine with 4 heavy nos on u and guns dont use cap) or b) use a injector c) use dampners so he cant nos u and heavy drones are slow as f*** anyway and huginn is good at poping them if u fail to make a setup that can outrun them (huginn can go over 5km/s without gang) d) use faction scrambler and he cant do anything, if u fail to tank the dmg u need to rethink youre setup
AmarrCitizen040606	Posted - 2007.02.08 14:25:00 - [714] given nano ships are harder to tank and have their own way of flying them. i do not accept the high risk arguement though, was the same with gankageddons and they got nerfed as well although i'd rather see the gankageddon back than the nano stuff removed
Broka Sampson	Posted - 2007.02.08 14:27:00 - [715] I like the idea of speed tanking (in certain situations), but what about when they are running your warp bubble. Are webbers the ONLY way of blowing them up? Are there other tactics someone wouldn't mind naming that help with such a scenario. ECM isn't going to help much if they are just running the gate; any help is appreciated.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 14:32:00 - [716] Originally by: Broka Sampson I like the idea of speed tanking (in certain situations), but what about when they are running your warp bubble. Are webbers the ONLY way of blowing them up? Are there other tactics someone wouldn't mind naming that help with such a scenario. ECM isn't going to help much if they are just running the gate; any help is appreciated. Advice: Learn to PvP, Gatecamping is not PvP, not in my book at least, it's BvP, Blob vs Player. If the ship went back to the gate and went away, means that you successfully prevented it from entering your system. N.F.F. Recruitment
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 14:35:00 - [717] Originally by: Angelic Resolution Tested it on SiSi during DT. Hugin pilot tries to get into position, nanophoon warps away giving the huginin a few torps for it's trouble. Second time: Nanophoon fits 5 ogres, hugin locks the nanophoon down and the hugin got owned by 4 torps, 4 nos and 5 ogres. So for once the nano's didn't do a damn thing (Phoon went to 75% structure or so). Third time: Nanophoon tried the MWD + torp trick, didn't work. Launch drones, got a little bit webbed but got out of webber range. Hugin got owned by ogres + torps. Thoughts? I'll be able to fly huginn in about a week, we can do 1v1, You bring nanoship of choice, I bring huginn. I am 99% sure you will die before i reach half shield. Hell, it's possible to beat nanoships with vagabond, or acpest easily... just that they'll run away once they are losing. N.F.F. Recruitment
Melicien Tetro Gallente FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.08 14:47:00 - [718] I love nanos/inerts. Ha. I said it. I see no problem with such a high risk, caution geared style of play to be hit with the nerf bat, especially when you put all your ship on the line to play like that. It seems to me that the only people who disagree with them are people who don't think they're smart enough to not get victimized by them. These people also tend to be the same people who want every battle to play out civil war style, with big blobs pew-pewing at each other until one side is dead or gives up. I also think that nanos and inerts are really what matar needed. Hit and run guerrilla fighters, hard to catch, but sort of meat if they get caught. Also sort of solidifies their position as shield tankers, wouldn't you think? I don't think anyone should QQ about getting eaten by a nano-ship one on one. It's funny that we hear people talking about CCPs horrible plots to turn eve into a fleet combat game, and to stamp piracy, but when I see what looks to me like some of the biggest love that the small gang/solo pirate has ever gotten, everyone gets up in arms. You know a good way to counter nano ships? Bring one with you. I tried to fight a shark with a pistol underwater once, and I'll be damned if he didn't laugh at me and eat me. Sharks need a ******* nerf. True story.
Broka Sampson	Posted - 2007.02.08 14:56:00 - [719] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Broka Sampson I like the idea of speed tanking (in certain situations), but what about when they are running your warp bubble. Are webbers the ONLY way of blowing them up? Are there other tactics someone wouldn't mind naming that help with such a scenario. ECM isn't going to help much if they are just running the gate; any help is appreciated. Advice: Learn to PvP, Gatecamping is not PvP, not in my book at least, it's BvP, Blob vs Player. If the ship went back to the gate and went away, means that you successfully prevented it from entering your system. Ryysa It is not about PVP, it's about protecting alliance territory from people trying to enter it who do not belong there. You don't like Blob's that is fine, but that doesn't mean they are not neccessary to stem the flow of traffic in and out of a chokepoint to your territory. Anyone else got an answer?
Trind2222 Amarr Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.08 15:26:00 - [720] Yes all can get in to a nano ship that is not the problem the problem is that frigs and smal cuser gang will never uced agen all will train to nano ships in end you are in a game there the fast ship wins the slow ships are like don't uce slow ships they only good in big blobs all will be requierd to tran for fast ship if you not in fast ship you even you have high skill points you can froget join that corp. I don't want to see eve rueend becose unbalance if you don't have balance in agame it will be no point of palying that becose you can no longer uce the ship type you like becose evry one is ucig a ships that are so fast that you newer gona catch them becose you are in a slow ship. You may find all ways you want to conter a nano setup but in the end the nano pilot fly away safe unlles hi get in to a big blob.

Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.08 15:44:00 - [721] I've no problem with the speeds of nano-ships, the agility ? maybe that needs some consideration, but what I believe needs to change is the additional power granted to them by 'NOS' weaponary. Fast moving ships should be have very weak 'staying' power, they should be hard to hit (until webbed), they should be able to dictate range they should have the benefit of being able to disengage from combat more easily than a tanked battleship - these are the benefits of maneuvorability on a battlefield.. What they should not be able to do is kill a similar class of vessel that is tanked out to be slow moving and have a shield/armour tank fitted. They should be able to harry it, keep it pinned for a short period of time, perhaps long enough for support to arrive, but after about a minute of combat, the tanked ship should be in a position to forice the nano ship to disengage. By Making NOS's affectiveness worsen at higher speeds, so your 250m/s domi will still drain as much as it does, but when it goes 4k m/s its NOS's are severely weakened. You could also reduce NOS affectiveness based on size category of a ship (hvy nos vs small ship would be alot weaker) This will make a tanked BS practically immune to the nos effect of nano ships. It will also mean inteceptors are able to chase down and land a web on their target without being drained dry by a nano NOS ship in 1 pulse (they'd get the benefit of being small and also the fact their target is fast moving and has additional penalties to their nos). Sure the inty should get drained unless its fitted with small nos itself, but it should be able to hold the nano-ship a short time, long enough for allies to maybe get closer to it to bring their higher cap webs & scramblers to aid. It brings some danger to flying a nano-ship
Marc Zhorr White Wolves Defence league The OSS	Posted - 2007.02.08 15:55:00 - [722] Edited by: Marc Zhorr on 08/02/2007 15:53:42 nvm
Marc Zhorr White Wolves Defence league The OSS	Posted - 2007.02.08 15:55:00 - [723] Edited by: Marc Zhorr on 08/02/2007 15:53:42 nvm
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 16:13:00 - [724] Edited by: Shyalud on 08/02/2007 16:18:09 Edited by: Shyalud on 08/02/2007 16:14:35 Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 07/02/2007 20:07:52 Originally by: Shyalud Well, if he's nano/stabbed out, then his armor is minimal...there's a weaknes. Typhoon base armor + shield: 11680 Claw base armor + shield: 739 vaga base armor + shield: 2990 Come again? NanoBS = similar speed. WAY more hitpoint buffer. WAY more nos + dps. . Good grief, this argumant can be used to say that a ceptor should never be used to tackle anything. 1 vs 1, you'd have to be a moron to go against a BS in a ceptor. But in a gate camp, hunting pack, etc...different story. Originally by: MrTripps Originally by: Shyalud If you can't fit a ceptor to catch a nano-bs then you need to run away from him. Still haven't read the thread, huh? If you had you would have seen several posts that describe why this will not work on the types of ships we are talking about. And, really, drop the ad hominem. This isn't about one player, but the architecture of the game. Listen Mr. Pompous...you can warp out. Him being in a nanoship or not, if you can't win...leave. As far as ad hominem (misused) and...pot, kettle, black. The "you" in my statment wasn't used to talk about 1 particular person, or even the person I was replying to. Replace you with them, anyone, someone...doesn't matter. Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 16:13:00 - [725] Edited by: Shyalud on 08/02/2007 16:18:09 Edited by: Shyalud on 08/02/2007 16:14:35 Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 07/02/2007 20:07:52 Originally by: Shyalud Well, if he's nano/stabbed out, then his armor is minimal...there's a weaknes. Typhoon base armor + shield: 11680 Claw base armor + shield: 739 vaga base armor + shield: 2990 Come again? NanoBS = similar speed. WAY more hitpoint buffer. WAY more nos + dps. . Good grief, this argumant can be used to say that a ceptor should never be used to tackle anything. 1 vs 1, you'd have to be a moron to go against a BS in a ceptor. But in a gate camp, hunting pack, etc...different story. Originally by: MrTripps Originally by: Shyalud If you can't fit a ceptor to catch a nano-bs then you need to run away from him. Still haven't read the thread, huh? If you had you would have seen several posts that describe why this will not work on the types of ships we are talking about. And, really, drop the ad hominem. This isn't about one player, but the architecture of the game. Listen Mr. Pompous...you can warp out. Him being in a nanoship or not, if you can't win...leave. As far as ad hominem (misused) and...pot, kettle, black. The "you" in my statment wasn't used to talk about 1 particular person, or even the person I was replying to. Replace you with them, anyone, someone...doesn't matter. Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.08 16:32:00 - [726] Well becose this flaming is endles an no simple solution has been found I bring here my proposal: SPEED MASS THRUST BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 16:52:00 - [727] Originally by: Shyalud Good grief, this argumant can be used to say that a ceptor should never be used to tackle anything. 1 vs 1, you'd have to be a moron to go against a BS in a ceptor. But in a gate camp, hunting pack, etc...different story. Not really. And if nanoBS would only be able to tackle and had only ceptor DPS people would not complain about them. The point is that they have more dps, more nos and a higher hitpoint buffer than ceptors (or vagas, for that matter) while having similar speeds. They do not have a "weak tank" - compared to other ships with similar speed their tank is insane. And if you now want to answer that it is not compareable because they are BSs and the other ships not, why do they then achieve the speed of those ships?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 16:52:00 - [728] Originally by: Shyalud Good grief, this argumant can be used to say that a ceptor should never be used to tackle anything. 1 vs 1, you'd have to be a moron to go against a BS in a ceptor. But in a gate camp, hunting pack, etc...different story. Not really. And if nanoBS would only be able to tackle and had only ceptor DPS people would not complain about them. The point is that they have more dps, more nos and a higher hitpoint buffer than ceptors (or vagas, for that matter) while having similar speeds. They do not have a "weak tank" - compared to other ships with similar speed their tank is insane. And if you now want to answer that it is not compareable because they are BSs and the other ships not, why do they then achieve the speed of those ships?
Father Weebles North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 16:56:00 - [729] Originally by: Tom Gunn I've no problem with the speeds of nano-ships, the agility ? maybe that needs some consideration, but what I believe needs to change is the additional power granted to them by 'NOS' weaponary. Fast moving ships should be have very weak 'staying' power, they should be hard to hit (until webbed), they should be able to dictate range they should have the benefit of being able to disengage from combat more easily than a tanked battleship - these are the benefits of maneuvorability on a battlefield.. What they should not be able to do is kill a similar class of vessel that is tanked out to be slow moving and have a shield/armour tank fitted. They should be able to harry it, keep it pinned for a short period of time, perhaps long enough for support to arrive, but after about a minute of combat, the tanked ship should be in a position to forice the nano ship to disengage. By Making NOS's affectiveness worsen at higher speeds, so your 250m/s domi will still drain as much as it does, but when it goes 4k m/s its NOS's are severely weakened. You could also reduce NOS affectiveness based on size category of a ship (hvy nos vs small ship would be alot weaker) This will make a tanked BS practically immune to the nos effect of nano ships. It will also mean inteceptors are able to chase down and land a web on their target without being drained dry by a nano NOS ship in 1 pulse (they'd get the benefit of being small and also the fact their target is fast moving and has additional penalties to their nos). Sure the inty should get drained unless its fitted with small nos itself, but it should be able to hold the nano-ship a short time, long enough for allies to maybe get closer to it to bring their higher cap webs & scramblers to aid. It brings some danger to flying a nano-ship agreed "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."
Father Weebles North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.08 16:56:00 - [730] Originally by: Tom Gunn I've no problem with the speeds of nano-ships, the agility ? maybe that needs some consideration, but what I believe needs to change is the additional power granted to them by 'NOS' weaponary. Fast moving ships should be have very weak 'staying' power, they should be hard to hit (until webbed), they should be able to dictate range they should have the benefit of being able to disengage from combat more easily than a tanked battleship - these are the benefits of maneuvorability on a battlefield.. What they should not be able to do is kill a similar class of vessel that is tanked out to be slow moving and have a shield/armour tank fitted. They should be able to harry it, keep it pinned for a short period of time, perhaps long enough for support to arrive, but after about a minute of combat, the tanked ship should be in a position to forice the nano ship to disengage. By Making NOS's affectiveness worsen at higher speeds, so your 250m/s domi will still drain as much as it does, but when it goes 4k m/s its NOS's are severely weakened. You could also reduce NOS affectiveness based on size category of a ship (hvy nos vs small ship would be alot weaker) This will make a tanked BS practically immune to the nos effect of nano ships. It will also mean inteceptors are able to chase down and land a web on their target without being drained dry by a nano NOS ship in 1 pulse (they'd get the benefit of being small and also the fact their target is fast moving and has additional penalties to their nos). Sure the inty should get drained unless its fitted with small nos itself, but it should be able to hold the nano-ship a short time, long enough for allies to maybe get closer to it to bring their higher cap webs & scramblers to aid. It brings some danger to flying a nano-ship agreed "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."

Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 17:08:00 - [731] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Shyalud Good grief, this argumant can be used to say that a ceptor should never be used to tackle anything. 1 vs 1, you'd have to be a moron to go against a BS in a ceptor. But in a gate camp, hunting pack, etc...different story. Not really. And if nanoBS would only be able to tackle and had only ceptor DPS people would not complain about them. The point is that they have more dps, more nos and a higher hitpoint buffer than ceptors (or vagas, for that matter) while having similar speeds. They do not have a "weak tank" - compared to other ships with similar speed their tank is insane. And if you now want to answer that it is not compareable because they are BSs and the other ships not, why do they then achieve the speed of those ships? I just don't agree with this concept except that a BS should not have the agility of the smaller ship, and that it should be easier to hit then the smaller ship, even at equal speeds. I.E. If (on earth) an Elephant and an Antelope were running at the same speed (a stretch, I know) it would be easier to hit the Elephant then the Antelope simply due to it's size. In space, the size of an object doesn't dictate it's speed. I agree that it should take longer for a BS to reach higher speeds, and that it should not be able to manuever as quickly. Game mechanics should, and I think do, make it easier to hit the bs at the same speed as a smaller ship travelling at that speed. Make sense? Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.02.08 17:58:00 - [732] You know, frankly, I gotta say that I'm enjoying all the fuss nanoships are creating now. I used them before iStabs made them common, and I'm going to continue to use them when they're nerfed. I just love hearing people complain and whine when they're killed by an "exploting interceptor BS." It only makes it better if you bump haulers and slow, stabbed BSes while you kill them; the whining only multiplies from there. They're effective and make people cry, and that's good enough for me. ;) ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 18:08:00 - [733] Originally by: Nicocat You know, frankly, I gotta say that I'm enjoying all the fuss nanoships are creating now. I used them before iStabs made them common, and I'm going to continue to use them when they're nerfed. I just love hearing people complain and whine when they're killed by an "exploting interceptor BS." It only makes it better if you bump haulers and slow, stabbed BSes while you kill them; the whining only multiplies from there. They're effective and make people cry, and that's good enough for me. ;) I guess, in the end, it all boils down to that. Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 18:39:00 - [734] Originally by: Shyalud I just don't agree with this concept except that a BS should not have the agility of the smaller ship, and that it should be easier to hit then the smaller ship, even at equal speeds. I.E. If (on earth) an Elephant and an Antelope were running at the same speed (a stretch, I know) it would be easier to hit the Elephant then the Antelope simply due to it's size. In space, the size of an object doesn't dictate it's speed. I agree that it should take longer for a BS to reach higher speeds, and that it should not be able to manuever as quickly. Game mechanics should, and I think do, make it easier to hit the bs at the same speed as a smaller ship travelling at that speed. Make sense? It's not about logic, it's about balance. The latter is always more important in eve than the first (also, as a sidenote, the "space" physics in eve behave more like a underwater simulator). When you have a certain ship and/or setup which has a far greater cost/benefit ratio than everything else it leads to a homogenization where everyone and their alt will use these setups because they are simply so much better than any alternatives. Which was seen pretty clearly with ECM or gankgeddons. Which is bad for the game. To repeat what I have said multiple times already in this htread, pre-kali nanophoons were already a pretty viaable setup. They were strong in the right hands, but not so strong that you would laugh at anyone who was using another typhoonsetup. Basically, their were not overpowered or underpowered but pretty balanced. With kali and rigs/instabs their main strength - speed - got a 60% boost. Their counters remains virtually unchanged. What doyou get when you boost a balanced setup significantly and leave it's counters alone?
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 18:54:00 - [735] If you didn't boost it significantly, what would be the point of introducing new content affecting ships? When I first started playing EVE there were four classes of ships...Frigs, Cruisers, Battleships, and Industrials. The first major patch (if I remember correctly) changed the speed of these classes and in doing pretty much eliminated the role of the cruiser. It's speed being not much better then a Battleship and it's Damage output considerably less. Since, there have been more additions in the cruiser class then in any other (someone may prove me wrong there) to compensate for the diminished or non-existant roll of the cruiser. By making the new cruisers (TechII, etc) they revived that role. Now, considering that really only teir 1 battleships (minus the scorp) can really benifit from the nano setup, what's to say that one of the other tiers won't be altered to compensate in the near future. So, rather then removing a role, you create new ones. I smell U-HACs comming (ULtra Heavy Assault Ships) well, maybe not, but it sounds cool..... Don't nerf em, give us something new to fight them!!! Don;t go backwards, go forwards!!! (anyone think of any other euphamisms??) Originally by: Jules The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 19:26:00 - [736] Exept such "solutions" usually do not work. Again, take ECM. ECCM was/is a pretty good counter against it - it's problem, however, was that it was useless against anything else. Why use a specialized counter which is only good vs one thing when the item it counters is ALSO an excellent counter vs itself and is on top of this also useful vs other setups?
xHomicide Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.08 19:40:00 - [737] Originally by: Angelic Resolution Tested it on SiSi during DT. Hugin pilot tries to get into position, nanophoon warps away giving the huginin a few torps for it's trouble. Second time: Nanophoon fits 5 ogres, hugin locks the nanophoon down and the hugin got owned by 4 torps, 4 nos and 5 ogres. So for once the nano's didn't do a damn thing (Phoon went to 75% structure or so). Third time: Nanophoon tried the MWD + torp trick, didn't work. Launch drones, got a little bit webbed but got out of webber range. Hugin got owned by ogres + torps. Thoughts? Web, and stay in web range....its not like the huginn cant move. nanoed huginn has no issue outrunning ogres and torps. Should take ZERO damage. Time the injector correctly before you mwd cycle. ___________________________________________________ http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:01:00 - [738] Originally by: Aramendel Exept such "solutions" usually do not work. Again, take ECM. ECCM was/is a pretty good counter against it - it's problem, however, was that it was useless against anything else. Why use a specialized counter which is only good vs one thing when the item it counters is ALSO an excellent counter vs itself and is on top of this also useful vs other setups? I agree, Things such as Sensor Boosters and enhancers should have an effect against ECM. Anything that boosts your sensor should have to be overcome. But, there is a counter to speed...several in fact...nos, and web for starters. There are bonuses to your own speed and cap. There are lots of modules that help you counter the nanophoon. IF the pilot of a nanophoon has sunk tons of isk into it to make it the fastest thing out there, then my question is why shouldn't it be the fastest thing out there? With all the t2 goodies, rigs, implants, skills and training time it takes to make this thing the fearsome "omfg-nerfit" ship that it is, there will only be a relatively small amount of folks that can build it and use it effectively. It's not as horrendous a problem as everyone seems to think. Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:01:00 - [739] Originally by: Aramendel Exept such "solutions" usually do not work. Again, take ECM. ECCM was/is a pretty good counter against it - it's problem, however, was that it was useless against anything else. Why use a specialized counter which is only good vs one thing when the item it counters is ALSO an excellent counter vs itself and is on top of this also useful vs other setups? I agree, Things such as Sensor Boosters and enhancers should have an effect against ECM. Anything that boosts your sensor should have to be overcome. But, there is a counter to speed...several in fact...nos, and web for starters. There are bonuses to your own speed and cap. There are lots of modules that help you counter the nanophoon. IF the pilot of a nanophoon has sunk tons of isk into it to make it the fastest thing out there, then my question is why shouldn't it be the fastest thing out there? With all the t2 goodies, rigs, implants, skills and training time it takes to make this thing the fearsome "omfg-nerfit" ship that it is, there will only be a relatively small amount of folks that can build it and use it effectively. It's not as horrendous a problem as everyone seems to think. Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:05:00 - [740] Did you even read what I wrote before? Webs, damps, etc are identical to pre kali. Speed is 60% higher. Te setup was balanced before without the 60% speed increase. What is balancing it now?

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:05:00 - [741] Did you even read what I wrote before? Webs, damps, etc are identical to pre kali. Speed is 60% higher. Te setup was balanced before without the 60% speed increase. What is balancing it now?
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:11:00 - [742] Originally by: Aramendel Did you even read what I wrote before? Webs, damps, etc are identical to pre kali. Speed is 60% higher. Te setup was balanced before without the 60% speed increase. What is balancing it now? Originally by: Shyalud If you didn't boost it significantly, what would be the point of introducing new content affecting ships? Did you read my response? Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:11:00 - [743] Originally by: Aramendel Did you even read what I wrote before? Webs, damps, etc are identical to pre kali. Speed is 60% higher. Te setup was balanced before without the 60% speed increase. What is balancing it now? Originally by: Shyalud If you didn't boost it significantly, what would be the point of introducing new content affecting ships? Did you read my response? Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:25:00 - [744] Edited by: Aramendel on 08/02/2007 20:23:59 See post #722 The problem is that if you introduce "significant boosts" you are not increasing content but removing it. Because if you make a setup too strong you will have eventually only that setup flying around. Boosting stuff without balancing it somehow does not work.
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:43:00 - [745] Ok.. just a thought.. If a tractor beam could pull a ship in, close enough to web??
MrTripps Gallente	Posted - 2007.02.08 20:50:00 - [746] Originally by: Aramendel With kali and rigs/instabs their main strength - speed - got a 60% boost. Their counters remains virtually unchanged. What doyou get when you boost a balanced setup significantly and leave it's counters alone? Thank you. This is exactly my point. The average nanoBS is tough, but has a reasonable chance of getting taken down. The extreme nanophoons are damn near invincible. If one does get popped it is usually due to rare luck or pilot error. Restate: 1) The super NPs are clearly unbalanced. 2) Some small change may be needed, but they should still have their role in hit-and-run raids. 3) More then a nerf they need a more effective counter. Preferably one that does not require two months to train. Since this thread has been in tail-chasing mode for some time now I will leave it to finer minds. Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.08 21:05:00 - [747] Edited by: Shyalud on 08/02/2007 21:01:51 ok, look at it a different way. What if someone spent an equal amount of time (say a raven pilot) and money on maximizing the ship? With equal amount of money, comparable skill training (in the appropriate areas) and similar but obviously ship/systems specific implants and rigs. Would this pilot in this raven be horibly outmatched by the nanophoon? Remember, equal money spent on approriate implants, rigs, equipment and skills..... Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Ethyn	Posted - 2007.02.08 21:30:00 - [748] Originally by: Sh'irna Originally by: Forum Troll Yes, and I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that nanos are nerfed in the patch at the end of this month. Finally. It is not nanos causing the problem but inertial stabilizers. The effect of reduced mass is good but there needs to be a cap to it so that these speeds can not be done with a BS. Don't screw the effects on others ships just becuase you don't like the effects on this one. As discussed before I don't think these are hurting the game. what this requires is smarter play. If there is going to eb a nerf, just make it affect the class of ship in question. And not the ships that ARE supposed to go fast. BTW I don't feel that it is wrong for a phoon to go that fast. Ethyn GO fast or die!
Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2007.02.08 21:55:00 - [749] Edited by: Christopher Dalran on 08/02/2007 21:52:48 * !IMPORTANT! * STEP BY STEP ANTI NANO/I-STAB INSTRUCTIONS This is a little trick i learned a while back while trying to hit some smaller faster frigates using my large guns durring a mission a while back and it works equally well for fast orbiting battleships moving at 3 km/s +. I;ve been debating heavily keeping this information to myself but i'm concerned nano's and i-stabs might take a swing from the nerf bat if i dont release this information. First your going to need to reduce your top speed to < 25% of your max, you turn fastest at or below these speeds. Second your going to want to make sure that you have added transversal velocity to your display, if not do it as this will tell you what chance you have to hit. After you have done that you need to manually fly your ship, your going to want to have it spin around in circle almoast as if spinning like a top. Of course its not going to spin stationary but you'll get prety close under 25% max speed. To do this you instruct your ship to fly directly backwards but 1 or 2 degrees to the side you want it to spin. Keep an eye on your targets transversal, you'll notice that if you play with your max speed you can varry the speed your ship spins (slower speed = faster spin). The goal here is to try and find a target speed that makes you spin at just the right speed to match the orbiting battleship. You should notice something interresting, your targets transversal takes a nose dive through the floor. Yes you guessed correctly, your adding the rotational velocity of your ship to your turrents causing them to actually have to track much less. Coincidentally the last movie The Last Starfighter inspired me to try this.
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.02.08 21:57:00 - [750] What if missiles didn't launch if you're moving faster than their flight speed? </random thought> ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!

Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.08 22:10:00 - [751] Originally by: Christopher Dalran Edited by: Christopher Dalran on 08/02/2007 21:52:48 * !IMPORTANT! * STEP BY STEP ANTI NANO/I-STAB INSTRUCTIONS This is a little trick i learned a while back while trying to hit some smaller faster frigates using my large guns durring a mission a while back and it works equally well for fast orbiting battleships moving at 3 km/s +. I;ve been debating heavily keeping this information to myself but i'm concerned nano's and i-stabs might take a swing from the nerf bat if i dont release this information. First your going to need to reduce your top speed to < 25% of your max, you turn fastest at or below these speeds. Second your going to want to make sure that you have added transversal velocity to your display, if not do it as this will tell you what chance you have to hit. After you have done that you need to manually fly your ship, your going to want to have it spin around in circle almoast as if spinning like a top. Of course its not going to spin stationary but you'll get prety close under 25% max speed. To do this you instruct your ship to fly directly backwards but 1 or 2 degrees to the side you want it to spin. Keep an eye on your targets transversal, you'll notice that if you play with your max speed you can varry the speed your ship spins (slower speed = faster spin). The goal here is to try and find a target speed that makes you spin at just the right speed to match the orbiting battleship. You should notice something interresting, your targets transversal takes a nose dive through the floor. Yes you guessed correctly, your adding the rotational velocity of your ship to your turrents causing them to actually have to track much less. Coincidentally the last movie The Last Starfighter inspired me to try this. huahuahau if that works fellow.. You are my hereo.. would be so dammm funny.. huahauhauahua If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
ZUDD Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.02.09 00:06:00 - [752] Having flown nano ships for years, and more recently having tried a nano Dominix, there is one simple solution to the problem that will nerf Battleships that travel 4000 m/s and not ships like the vagabond or even ceptors that players want to speed boost. All that has to be done is to add a cargo hold modifier to each nanofiber. If each one takes off 10% of your total cargo hold, it will have serious consequences to Battleships that have 7 low slots compared to cruisers that have 4-5 and will have barely an effect on frigates that have 3 or less low slots. Why a cargo hold nerf and not something else like Nos? I donÆt think people who suggest things like a mass increase or a nos nerf have ever flown a nano BS. The ship survives of cap 800s if you decrease the cargo bay the nano BS will not be as viable as a solo pwnmobile, a Battleship that has 70% less cargo hold is going to fit only 1 reload of 800s for its injector. Adding a cargo modifier to nano and inertial stabs will not nerf speed ships into non-existence, it will balance them out.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 02:41:00 - [753] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 02:42:14 Originally by: Shyalud ok, look at it a different way. What if someone spent an equal amount of time (say a raven pilot) and money on maximizing the ship? With equal amount of money, comparable skill training (in the appropriate areas) and similar but obviously ship/systems specific implants and rigs. Would this pilot in this raven be horibly outmatched by the nanophoon? ... Don't think that nano-phoon would kill it. Might get away, but wouldn't kill it. Not "might" get away, but WILL get away. Even if you would have bothered to fit something like a "warp disruptor". Of cource it is possible to make antisetups against nanoships. The problem, however, is that 90% of these setups only cause the ship to escape. If other ships meet something which counters their setup they do not flee, but die. Basically, the risk/reward for nanosetups is broken. When you need to decide between a setup where you either kill or die or one where you either kill or flee it gets rather obvious which one will be preferred.
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.09 03:16:00 - [754] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 02:42:14 Originally by: Shyalud ok, look at it a different way. What if someone spent an equal amount of time (say a raven pilot) and money on maximizing the ship? With equal amount of money, comparable skill training (in the appropriate areas) and similar but obviously ship/systems specific implants and rigs. Would this pilot in this raven be horibly outmatched by the nanophoon? ... Don't think that nano-phoon would kill it. Might get away, but wouldn't kill it. Not "might" get away, but WILL get away. Even if you would have bothered to fit something like a "warp disruptor". Of cource it is possible to make antisetups against nanoships. The problem, however, is that 90% of these setups only cause the ship to escape. If other ships meet something which counters their setup they do not flee, but die. Basically, the risk/reward for nanosetups is broken. When you need to decide between a setup where you either kill or die or one where you either kill or flee it gets rather obvious which one will be preferred. well, maybe your biggest counter to rampant nanoships is the sheer amount of money it takes to build one versus the reward for having built it. What's the point if you can't kill anything worth killing? I can run most camps in a well fitted Ares at a much cheaper price tag, and can haul anything I need to in it if I need to run camps to do it. No sense wasting the billions on skills, rigs, implants, etc to do it. If you nerf the nanos people will find other ways to get cheap ganks. Just ADAPT Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
JVol	Posted - 2007.02.09 03:38:00 - [755] The more I think about it the more I like the idea of tractor beams pulling a ship closer to you, just like cargo cans.. To pull a "nanoed" ship closer to you in a ship that has No I-stabs or nanos should be easy since your going to be much heavier than the NP.. one tractor beam and 2 webs = dead nanoBs
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.02.09 04:14:00 - [756] Originally by: Aramendel Did you even read what I wrote before? Webs, damps, etc are identical to pre kali. Speed is 60% higher. Te setup was balanced before without the 60% speed increase. What is balancing it now? It's obviously balanced. Please give my lasers a 60% damage boost. That would obviously be balanced in the same way. PEW PEW PEW!!!!! Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
xHomicide Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.09 08:50:00 - [757] Originally by: Aramendel Did you even read what I wrote before? Webs, damps, etc are identical to pre kali. Speed is 60% higher. Te setup was balanced before without the 60% speed increase. What is balancing it now? Because there are no such things as damp rigs ___________________________________________________ http://www.razor-eve.org/killboard/?a=kills
Happster Polaris Project	Posted - 2007.02.09 09:16:00 - [758] What i find ironic about this subject is that people whine about a ship that is as it should be consider what role the Minmatars has. As ive read and people so nice put it, these are the advantages of Minmatars : 1. Speed 2. Alpha strike 3. Versality #1 Is in question here. Remove the speed the phoon has, and remove one of the Minnies advantage.... #2 The Tier 3 Amarr ship has now a higher Alpha strike then any Minnie ship, so that advantage has gone.. #3 This can be looked at in different manners. Not being good at anything, but decent in everything doesnt really mean a good thing. As ive seen in EVE you have to excell in something to do well. And to do very well you group the best in each region and you get a great result. The other side of the coin is that sure it takes a **** load of skills to be good at minnies. But as many say, its a fun race to play as you can shield tank, armor tank, short range, long range and so on... Anyway...this wasnt ment as a minnie whining post. More like a point at removing the speed advantage, you should see what you do to the advantage we Minmatar has. If Minmatars are supose to have a speed advantage, maybe add stacking penalty on those modules. But, grant less penalty on minnie ships... All the good ships by minnies relies on speed...
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.09 10:27:00 - [759] Naobs are NOT expensive for god's sake. If you fit 1 Bil ina a Battleship but it can live 5 times longer than a common 200 mil BS. It is as cheap as a common setup! Other issue is any uber setup can be easily countered by an specific cheap setup with Ewar usually. But the extreme nanobattleships need a very expensive coutner.. the minamtar recon ships. Change the bellicose TP bonus to a 20% range bonus toweb per level and everyone will be happy. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 11:32:00 - [760] Originally by: Shyalud well, maybe your biggest counter to rampant nanoships is the sheer amount of money it takes to build one versus the reward for having built it. What's the point if you can't kill anything worth killing? Killing is not the issue. Surviving anything unless you made a pilot error is it. Eve is a very risk-reward based game. You can pimp up your ship with billions and make it a good deal stronger - however, if you make an error or meet an overwhelming force you still die. Quote: I can run most camps in a well fitted Ares at a much cheaper price tag, and can haul anything I need to in it if I need to run camps to do it. No sense wasting the billions on skills, rigs, implants, etc to do it. If you nerf the nanos people will find other ways to get cheap ganks. Just ADAPT To repeat myself, if nanoBS would have the dps, nospower and hitpoint buffer of a ceptor (or even force recon) noone would complain about them. Originally by: xHomicide Because there are no such things as damp rigs And which difference do they make exactly vs nanoships? Originally by: Happster #1 Is in question here. Remove the speed the phoon has, and remove one of the Minnies advantage.... Balancing something != removing something. Pre-kali the nanophoon was a pretty viable, balanced setup. A racial identity does not justify something to be too strong. Look up the history of the gankgeddon.

Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.09 12:04:00 - [761] Listen, I once put three MWDs on a domi and got it over 1mil km/s. Though you could, you didn't see anyone doing because it didn't do anything for you except make you go fast..... If you can't kill anything with your setup, it's not a very good setup. People just need to learn how to counter it and the fad will end on it's own. Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 12:32:00 - [762] Originally by: Shyalud Listen, I once put three MWDs on a domi and got it over 1mil km/s. Though you could, you didn't see anyone doing because it didn't do anything for you except make you go fast..... You saw plenty of double MWD ravens. Which COULD kill stuff pretty nicely while being more or less invicible themselves. Quote: People just need to learn how to counter it and the fad will end on it's own. To the contrary, it will only strengthen itself - since the best counter to nanosetups are nanosetups themselves.
E Vile	Posted - 2007.02.09 12:45:00 - [763] No offense to anyone flying them, I don't blame you, but Nanophoons melt better then chedder. What good are smaller fast ships when a battleship can break the 10km mark. Put a stacking penalty on nanos/stabs, or make it so the big ships get less a bonus then small ones, or both. I am not one to cry nerf, but put battleships in the roll of battleships and bring back the small fast ship role.
Angeles Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2007.02.09 13:04:00 - [764] Originally by: E Vile No offense to anyone flying them, I don't blame you, but Nanophoons melt better then chedder. What good are smaller fast ships when a battleship can break the 10km mark. Put a stacking penalty on nanos/stabs, or make it so the big ships get less a bonus then small ones, or both. I am not one to cry nerf, but put battleships in the roll of battleships and bring back the small fast ship role. /signed Nanos are for noobs you dont need any specific skill to fit these, and to see a domi going 8.5km/s is just ridiculous
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.09 13:27:00 - [765] Edited by: Shyalud on 09/02/2007 13:24:00 Originally by: Aramendel To the contrary, it will only strengthen itself - since the best counter to nanosetups are nanosetups themselves. Well, you're wrong. There are plenty of counters, as many have pointed out. But, good luck with getting them nerfed. Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 14:06:00 - [766] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 14:03:23 Originally by: Shyalud Well, you're wrong. There are plenty of counters, as many have pointed out. But, good luck with getting them nerfed. Correction: there are plenty of ways to make them flee. But not more as for other ships. The only real counter to them - as in being able to kill them - are minnie recons or other nanoBS. With the latter being more effective. If you have to decide to pick between counters you usually pick the most effective one. Which are, as said, nanoBS themselves.
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.09 14:22:00 - [767] Originally by: ZUDD Why a cargo hold nerf and not something else like Nos? I donÆt think people who suggest things like a mass increase or a nos nerf have ever flown a nano BS. While your idea is not a bad one, your presumption is both pompous and quite false.
Angelic Resolution Arcanum Defence Forces	Posted - 2007.02.09 14:42:00 - [768] Originally by: xHomicide Originally by: Angelic Resolution Tested it on SiSi during DT. Hugin pilot tries to get into position, nanophoon warps away giving the huginin a few torps for it's trouble. Second time: Nanophoon fits 5 ogres, hugin locks the nanophoon down and the hugin got owned by 4 torps, 4 nos and 5 ogres. So for once the nano's didn't do a damn thing (Phoon went to 75% structure or so). Third time: Nanophoon tried the MWD + torp trick, didn't work. Launch drones, got a little bit webbed but got out of webber range. Hugin got owned by ogres + torps. Thoughts? Web, and stay in web range....its not like the huginn cant move. nanoed huginn has no issue outrunning ogres and torps. Should take ZERO damage. Time the injector correctly before you mwd cycle.
Phelan Lore Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.02.09 14:43:00 - [769] Originally by: Christopher Dalran Edited by: Christopher Dalran on 08/02/2007 21:52:48 * !IMPORTANT! * STEP BY STEP ANTI NANO/I-STAB INSTRUCTIONS This is a little trick i learned a while back while trying to hit some smaller faster frigates using my large guns durring a mission a while back and it works equally well for fast orbiting battleships moving at 3 km/s +. I;ve been debating heavily keeping this information to myself but i'm concerned nano's and i-stabs might take a swing from the nerf bat if i dont release this information. First your going to need to reduce your top speed to < 25% of your max, you turn fastest at or below these speeds. Second your going to want to make sure that you have added transversal velocity to your display, if not do it as this will tell you what chance you have to hit. After you have done that you need to manually fly your ship, your going to want to have it spin around in circle almoast as if spinning like a top. Of course its not going to spin stationary but you'll get prety close under 25% max speed. To do this you instruct your ship to fly directly backwards but 1 or 2 degrees to the side you want it to spin. Keep an eye on your targets transversal, you'll notice that if you play with your max speed you can varry the speed your ship spins (slower speed = faster spin). The goal here is to try and find a target speed that makes you spin at just the right speed to match the orbiting battleship. You should notice something interresting, your targets transversal takes a nose dive through the floor. Yes you guessed correctly, your adding the rotational velocity of your ship to your turrents causing them to actually have to track much less. Coincidentally the last movie The Last Starfighter inspired me to try this. * !IMPORTANT! * STEP BY STEP ANTI NANO/I-STAB INSTRUCTIONS Push F1 through F8. If you don't have long range large turrets fitted you will hit. His sig is so big that you are literally inside the nanoship. - Originally by: mazzilliu npcing is a f***ing exploit
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.09 15:25:00 - [770] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 14:03:23 Originally by: Shyalud Well, you're wrong. There are plenty of counters, as many have pointed out. But, good luck with getting them nerfed. Correction: there are plenty of ways to make them flee. But not more as for other ships. The only real counter to them - as in being able to kill them - are minnie recons or other nanoBS. With the latter being more effective. If you have to decide to pick between counters you usually pick the most effective one. Which are, as said, nanoBS themselves. Wrong. Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2007.02.09 15:29:00 - [771] Originally by: Phelan Lore Originally by: Christopher Dalran * !IMPORTANT! * STEP BY STEP ANTI NANO/I-STAB INSTRUCTIONS Push F1 through F8. If you don't have long range large turrets fitted you will hit. His sig is so big that you are literally inside the nanoship. as for using close range weapons thats the whole point, the nano battleships use their speed to stay OUT of web range and inside scrammer range. If you have a blaster that can hit at 15-20km i would realy like to get one of those. However are you suggesting that the signature radius of the ship is somewhere around 20km actually considering you inside the ship? I've got to admit i never thought blasters would ever work at that range but i will ask some corpies to help me check and see.
Noriath	Posted - 2007.02.09 16:04:00 - [772] The problem with all of this is that even if you do manage to hit a nanoship, and even if you do manage to do some damage, as soon as the pilot realizes that he might acctually lose the fight all he has to do is double-click and within a few seconds he is out of your scram range and can warp off. The real power of the nanoship is that it can avoid any fight it can't win. It's just another chapter in the long line of no-risk tactics that sweep Eve because nobody wants to grind, but everyone wants to kill.
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.09 16:27:00 - [773] Originally by: Noriath The problem with all of this is that even if you do manage to hit a nanoship, and even if you do manage to do some damage, as soon as the pilot realizes that he might acctually lose the fight all he has to do is double-click and within a few seconds he is out of your scram range and can warp off. The real power of the nanoship is that it can avoid any fight it can't win. Your describing the effect of speed and/or maneuvoring on a battlefield, which in itself is not actually a problem - not only nano-ships have the ability to dictate range, engagement distance and possess the ability to disengage when the fight doesn't appear to have a good outcome. The faster ship in an engagement always has this ability, this is not limited to just nano-ships, but interceptors, any ship with a MWD vs a ship without etc.. - in fact other ship types also have the option of safely disengaging from combat (snipers for example can warp out safely if they setup with safe spots and warp in spots correctly). The argument that a ship is overpowered because it can warp away so easily is somewhat invalid because you would also have to apply to all other classes of ships that have just as easy time disengaging - not limited to fast attack ships like inteceptors, vagabonds but also ship types such as snipers who with a planned out set of safe spots can also disengage with no risk if the battle looks bad.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.09 16:29:00 - [774] Originally by: Christopher Dalran as for using close range weapons thats the whole point, the nano battleships use their speed to stay OUT of web range and inside scrammer range. If you have a blaster that can hit at 15-20km i would realy like to get one of those. However are you suggesting that the signature radius of the ship is somewhere around 20km actually considering you inside the ship? I've got to admit i never thought blasters would ever work at that range but i will ask some corpies to help me check and see. Neutron Blaster Mega with NULL. Ever Tried? Or even Antimatter... Armageddon with MegaPulse. Megathron with some tracking mods and 350mm rails II (nearly lost my 7km/s nanophoon to this). Tempest with AC's falloff is like close to 30km with barrage, and with EMP it has enough falloff still to easily kill nanoship before it kills you. N.F.F. Recruitment
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 16:51:00 - [775] Originally by: Tom Gunn The argument that a ship is overpowered because it can warp away so easily is somewhat invalid because you would also have to apply to all other classes of ships that have just as easy time disengaging - not limited to fast attack ships like inteceptors, vagabonds but also ship types such as snipers who with a planned out set of safe spots can also disengage with no risk if the battle looks bad. Problem here is that all these ships have other drawbacks. Snipers will die horribly if they jump into a gatecamp, also have low dps - lower than a nanoBS - and no nos and cannot stop a target from warping away on their own. Ceptors have even less dps and only a minimal HP buffer and are more vulnerable to nos. Force recons also have low dps and outside the pilgrim no nos. And are easier to lock down when they engage a target (especially the pilgrim, since it has no range bonus). Vagas dps, nos and hitpoint buffer is also below that of nanoBSs.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:25:00 - [776] Edited by: Aki Yamato on 09/02/2007 18:22:17 Aramendel and Noriath are right ! Combination of huge speed/maneuverability, satisfactory protection and fine firepower is deadly and out of balance betwen protection/firepower/mobility. You cant find such machine as nanobs on present battleffiels becose logic and laws works here but in eve does not. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
ZUDD Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:29:00 - [777] Originally by: Tom Gunn Originally by: ZUDD Why a cargo hold nerf and not something else like Nos? I donÆt think people who suggest things like a mass increase or a nos nerf have ever flown a nano BS. While your idea is not a bad one, your presumption is both pompous and quite false. Maybe you could enlighten me how a mass increase that makes you go slower is good for a module thats designed to increase your speed? Maybe CCP could change the item description to: "Fit this module to take up an empty slot" after they are nerfed.
Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:32:00 - [778] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Christopher Dalran as for using close range weapons thats the whole point, the nano battleships use their speed to stay OUT of web range and inside scrammer range. If you have a blaster that can hit at 15-20km i would realy like to get one of those. However are you suggesting that the signature radius of the ship is somewhere around 20km actually considering you inside the ship? I've got to admit i never thought blasters would ever work at that range but i will ask some corpies to help me check and see. Neutron Blaster Mega with NULL. Ever Tried? Or even Antimatter... Armageddon with MegaPulse. Megathron with some tracking mods and 350mm rails II (nearly lost my 7km/s nanophoon to this). Tempest with AC's falloff is like close to 30km with barrage, and with EMP it has enough falloff still to easily kill nanoship before it kills you. Never been too awfully fond of blasters unless its on a fast to be honest but null ammo on large neuts could give you the range. Normally i'm toting railguns around so i just figured out a good way to snag nano ships with horrible tracking. In any case they alwayse run away and to be brutally honest i realy dont care and nobody else probably should either, If i'm fighting someone its usually to keep them away from something so if they want to run away with their tails between their legs I win since i got exactly what i want. If your in low sec or 0.0 and your corp/alliance has a carrier then all you have to do is assign fighters to someone and have them attack the nano battleship. They can run and jump all they want but the fighters are just going to follow them around and pop them somewhere else. You could go completly nutz with tracking computers, If you fly armor tanked ships like me then you dont need to worry about mid slot tanks and since they are never going to get into web range you dont even need to fit them or a scrammer. However if all your mining and other activities are now inside Hidden exploration locations like me (honestly with what you find in them its not worth doing anything else) then you dont even need to worry about nano-ships. In fact you'll be happy if they make an appearance as their MWD will not work.
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:45:00 - [779] Edited by: Nicocat on 09/02/2007 18:42:56 Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Christopher Dalran as for using close range weapons thats the whole point, the nano battleships use their speed to stay OUT of web range and inside scrammer range. If you have a blaster that can hit at 15-20km i would realy like to get one of those. However are you suggesting that the signature radius of the ship is somewhere around 20km actually considering you inside the ship? I've got to admit i never thought blasters would ever work at that range but i will ask some corpies to help me check and see. Neutron Blaster Mega with NULL. Ever Tried? Or even Antimatter... Armageddon with MegaPulse. Megathron with some tracking mods and 350mm rails II (nearly lost my 7km/s nanophoon to this). Tempest with AC's falloff is like close to 30km with barrage, and with EMP it has enough falloff still to easily kill nanoship before it kills you. I think when people think "I can't defend against Nanophoons," they're flying ravens 9 times out of 10. At least, that's what populates our KB nowadays. Also, medium rails hurt nanoships. So do medium missiles. And, as stated, heavy guns with some tracking comps will wreck one pretty good. Stupid geddon nearly nuked me... Edit: Oh, and the range to hit for many nanoships is more like 25-28km, since they often fit faction disruptors. I know I certainly do. Keeps me out of counter-nos range ;) ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:59:00 - [780] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 17:05:04 Originally by: Tom Gunn The argument that a ship is overpowered because it can warp away so easily is somewhat invalid because you would also have to apply to all other classes of ships that have just as easy time disengaging - not limited to fast attack ships like inteceptors, vagabonds but also ship types such as snipers who with a planned out set of safe spots can also disengage with no risk if the battle looks bad. Problem here is that all these ships have other drawbacks. Snipers will die horribly if they jump into a gatecamp, also have low dps - lower than a nanoBS - and no nos and cannot stop a target from warping away on their own. Ceptors have even less dps and only a minimal HP buffer and are more vulnerable to nos. Force recons also have low dps and outside the pilgrim no nos. And are easier to lock down when they engage a target (especially the pilgrim, since it has no range bonus). Vagas dps, nos and hitpoint buffer is also below that of nanoBSs. I've a hard time believing that a sniperthron has less dps than a nanophoon (7xT2 425mm vs 4 T2 torps), i'd need to see numbers to believe that. They do of course not carry a 20km scrambler because by their nature have no need for it - they do have the benefit of blowing ships up without the defender ever getting in range to target them. Of course they are easy prey if they are engaged at point blank range, but thats just part of their role and 9/10 times due to pilot error or laziness to switch safe spots. Ceptors cost a fraction of a price of a BS, so sure they have less hp, but they do fly twice as fast (with equivalent fittings and implants, inties can reach well in excess of 10-12km m/s), making them untrackable and unhittable by anything except another frigate. They have a weakness when nos'd but at the same time can carry a micro cap injector to ensure they don't get sucked dry and made helpless by a hvy nos. Vaga's are a middle ground between an inty and nanophoon, its ultimately a fast attack cruiser so its a no brainer that its armament and durability is less than a BS - but i'd argue thats exactly how it should be. As for Force recons, they are one of the few ships able to take down a nano BS 1 vs 1.

Lygos Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2007.02.09 20:03:00 - [781] Please don't globally nerf the speed setups. Just increase the sig penalty of the inertial stab so that laser weapons can track them easily in and out of nos range. (From +10km-scorch range). It might even help cruise missile users a little. Aside from their NOS, they have paper thin defenses, so NOS vs. Lasers is less of an issue. It would be the best recent rock paper scissors change you could make to help out Amarr. We need mid-range combat. Gallente and Min dominate close range, while Caldari dominate long range fleet battles. Amarr need this. A fun nerf for the NOS would be to make Neuts use no cap, but instead diminish maximum capacitor on both ships. We'll see how long they can sustain mwd then. If it makes life hard on the industrial pilots (oh noes) then it will just boost the escort industry. win win. --- T2 Risk \| Corp Divisions
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.09 20:27:00 - [782] Originally by: Christopher Dalran Never been too awfully fond of blasters unless its on a fast to be honest but null ammo on large neuts could give you the range. Normally i'm toting railguns around so i just figured out a good way to snag nano ships with horrible tracking. In any case they alwayse run away and to be brutally honest i realy dont care and nobody else probably should either, If i'm fighting someone its usually to keep them away from something so if they want to run away with their tails between their legs I win since i got exactly what i want. Ok, so, let me see. You know NOTHING about this game, and you want to be safe from nanoships with your PvE setup... You're sad, please stop posting. Quote: If your in low sec or 0.0 and your corp/alliance has a carrier then all you have to do is assign fighters to someone and have them attack the nano battleship. They can run and jump all they want but the fighters are just going to follow them around and pop them somewhere else. Clueless ftw, nanoship easily PWNS fighters, every time I get fighters on me, I just laugh because they can't catch me and I can kill them. Also fighters don't follow you around when you jump. Quote: You could go completly nutz with tracking computers, If you fly armor tanked ships like me then you dont need to worry about mid slot tanks and since they are never going to get into web range you dont even need to fit them or a scrammer. 2 TC will do fine. Quote: However if all your mining and other activities are now inside Hidden exploration locations like me (honestly with what you find in them its not worth doing anything else) then you dont even need to worry about nano-ships. In fact you'll be happy if they make an appearance as their MWD will not work. Exactly why did you post this post here? I doubt anyone cares what you do and how you get your isk. Your entire post can be summed up with: Buhuu, my carebear fitted mega can't hit nanoship with longrange rails without tracking mods. And fighter drones pwn!!!1111 I mean really... at least give a SLIGHT thought to whether your posts are contributing ANYTHING to the topic at hand before writing 1 page of random blabber. N.F.F. Recruitment
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 20:49:00 - [783] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 20:47:20 Originally by: Tom Gunn I've a hard time believing that a sniperthron has less dps than a nanophoon (7xT2 425mm vs 4 T2 torps), i'd need to see numbers to believe that. Fully maxxed out and with 3 damagemods a mega does 350 dps. A typhoon with 4 siege2, 1 BCU2 and 5 berserker2 - using tech 1 ammo and the heavy drones with the 3rd worst dps - does 564 dps. AND has 4 heavy nos on it's target. If you do not believe me run the numbers yourself, it's not exactly difficult. Quote: Ceptors cost a fraction of a price of a BS, so sure they have less hp, but they do fly twice as fast (with equivalent fittings and implants, inties can reach well in excess of 10-12km m/s), making them untrackable and unhittable by anything except another frigate. They have a weakness when nos'd but at the same time can carry a micro cap injector to ensure they don't get sucked dry and made helpless by a hvy nos. Price is no argument for balance at all - or do have HACs now suddenly more HP than a BS because they cost more? Also, while inties can fly 10-12 km/s they cannot hit anything at these speeds (outside the crow which as very very very weak dps). And what exactly should those inties with only 2 medslots do? Remove themselves from the game? Quote: Vaga's are a middle ground between an inty and nanophoon, its ultimately a fast attack cruiser so its a no brainer that its armament and durability is less than a BS - but i'd argue thats exactly how it should be. Exept that it costs about as much as a nanoBS. See your price argument above - or do you only use it when it is convenient? Quote: As for Force recons, they are one of the few ships able to take down a nano BS 1 vs 1. I would love to see you 1v1 take down a nanobs with a pilgrim, arazu or falcon. The only ship of them which can do it is the rapier. --------------- And, anyway, what you ignored is the low dps of all these ships. If nanoBS would only do 200 dps and would have no nos noone would complain about them. 500 dps and 4 heavy nos are a completely different ballpark, though.
John Blackthorn Foundation R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.02.09 20:54:00 - [784] After scanning through these posts I wonder how many of you have actually fought a nano-b.s. A real game example. I jumped my typhoon through the gate, there was an enemy typoon on the other side. He targets, I say ok, looks like this might be a good fight. Just a few seconds later I am being nos'ed, droned, and cruise missles. He is circling me doing 8,000 m/s. I am firing my four torps, 5 heavy drones, and 2 nos. My drones could not hit, my torps could not catch up to the ship to hit. Was quite entertaining watching my trops fly in circles around me chasing the nanno ship. It took a while but being nos'ed, webed, and scrambed. I finaly died. Torps, and turrets can't hit a b.s. doing that kind of speed.. Fact is.. a cepter can't even do that speed.... It's a game breaking tactic....
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.09 21:01:00 - [785] Originally by: John Blackthorn Fact is.. a cepter can't even do that speed.... It's a game breaking tactic.... Fact is, your quite wrong. A ceptor can easily go faster than the fastest nano ship in the game. What you mean to say is a low SP pilot in a 10 million ill equipped, throw away ceptor can't fly as fast as a 1 billion isk+ fitted and equipped Nano BS. Invest a 'lil Isk and your ceptor will easily fly faster than any nano ship out there.
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.09 21:54:00 - [786] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 20:47:20 Short of being in a gang of frigates, inteceptors aren't about dps, they are about tackling when fighting BS's - sure there are inties who've killed BS pilots, but thats not the norm. As for the vagabond, it has a smaller sig radius and much stronger shield resists w/less firepower - but again, thats because the vagabond is a ship focused about fast attack, not raw damage like some other hac's. Last time i checked, the rapier is a recon ship - others can also make a nano ship useless, an arazu can bring its targetting range to below 10km, and a falcon is an ecm ship.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 22:58:00 - [787] Edited by: Aramendel on 09/02/2007 23:04:19 - It's not what they are "about" it's about how they are balanced. Speed and hitpoints/dps are usually mutually exclusive - you have either ships which have high speed and low hitpoints/dps or the other way around. Not both. - The vaga still has far less effective hitpoints. And less dps. And almost no nos. If you think the smaller sig makes that balanced vs nanoBS..well..reality check? - Rapier is a force recon SHIP. You spoke in plural. Which implies more than one out of all recons. And 1v1. Alone. Without support. So, no, an arazu can make a nanoBS flee, but not kill it. If the nanoBS careful, that is. If it really knows that the arazu is alone it will just fly close to it, target it at close range and kill it and there is nothing the arazu can do against that but cloak and retreat before the nanoBS has finished it's 1-2 min lock. The falcon will be eaten alive by it's heavy drones when it misses an ecm cycle. And, again, cannot do anything to stop it from fleeing. Oh, and you are STILL ignoring the core point - nanoBS have a WAY bigger hitpoint buffer and WAY higher dps and nos than other high survivability/mobility ship/setups. You can try to argue around this as long as you want to, this fact won't suddenly vanish. If they are to be balanced they either need lower survivability or lower dps. You cannot keep the cake and eat it.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.09 23:22:00 - [788] Originally by: John Blackthorn It took a while but being nos'ed, webed, and scrambed. I finaly died. Don't mean to personally attack you, but from what I've experienced, you are not someone I class as competent pvper. Anyhow, here is what you do in the following scenario: 1. You could have not been webbed unless he used officer webber for 1b+, in that case you deserve to die. 2. You should not have aggressed or deagressed if he had nano fitting, tanked him for 40 sec, approached the gate back and jumped through the gate, he could have never killed you in that time. If you had no propulsion mod, you deserve to die, if you didn't have cap injector you deserve to die too. Quote: Torps, and turrets can't hit a b.s. doing that kind of speed.. Fact is.. a cepter can't even do that speed.... It's a game breaking tactic.... Wrong. While torps indeed can't do anything at that speed, 1. Turrets can hit easily, let me guess, you were using artillery ratting setup on your phoon and got pwned? buhuu. Maybe read the thread, ac's can easily hit, train your skills. His sig is so big, that you don't need to almost have any tracking. 2. My claw goes 13km/s. And it's about 5 times cheaper fitted than my typhoon, which goes 7km/s. Person in question had snake set + faction mwd. Now if you get snake set + faction mwd on speedfitted ceptor, you can easily go 15k++ in gang. 3. Is it game breaking, that you got owned in your poor ratting setup, because you're too stupid to fit a propulsion mod and deagress at gate? hardly, it just shows you don't know how to pvp. N.F.F. Recruitment
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.09 23:26:00 - [789] Originally by: Aramendel If they are to be balanced they either need lower survivability or lower dps. You cannot keep the cake and eat it. Actually vaga has more tank than nanobs, but you can't speedtank on a vaga all the time, because it has tracking, so when you are dealing damage, you have to slow down. And also, gank vaga has about 75% of the dps of a nanoship, but what it lacks is the 4 nos to make the opponents tank shut off - this is what really kills people, the damage isn't all that great. N.F.F. Recruitment
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.09 23:48:00 - [790] Well, base without the 2 LSE2. A typhoon could also mount one and the domi 2, but it would not make much sense because they already have big HP buffers.

Noriath	Posted - 2007.02.10 04:12:00 - [791] Originally by: Tom Gunn Your describing the effect of speed and/or maneuvoring on a battlefield, which in itself is not actually a problem - not only nano-ships have the ability to dictate range, engagement distance and possess the ability to disengage when the fight doesn't appear to have a good outcome. The faster ship in an engagement always has this ability, this is not limited to just nano-ships, but interceptors, any ship with a MWD vs a ship without etc.. - in fact other ship types also have the option of safely disengaging from combat (snipers for example can warp out safely if they setup with safe spots and warp in spots correctly). The argument that a ship is overpowered because it can warp away so easily is somewhat invalid because you would also have to apply to all other classes of ships that have just as easy time disengaging - not limited to fast attack ships like inteceptors, vagabonds but also ship types such as snipers who with a planned out set of safe spots can also disengage with no risk if the battle looks bad. I agree with all of this, but if you have read my other post you would know that I think that the disparity in speed between a speed fitted ship and a regular ship in eve is much too extreme. A fast ship should have the benefit of picking its range of engagements and being harder to catch, yes, but outrunning a slower opponent should be a gradual process, take enough time that the possibility exists that he will still kill you. It should be be doubleclick, wait three seconds, gone.
Lygos Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.10 05:22:00 - [792] This just reinforces my assertion that we need a mid-range mod which can negatively affect either the target's agility or mass. One of each would be even better. Just think of any ship orbitting you at high speed. Push a button and watch them slingshot to a higher orbit as their ship decelerates to compensate. Laugh. Turn it off. Repeat. Would give a renewal to the role of heavy tacklers like AFs. --- T2 Risk \| Corp Divisions
eXtas Kemono. Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.10 06:52:00 - [793] Originally by: Aramendel Well, base without the 2 LSE2. A typhoon could also mount one and the domi 2, but it would not make much sense because they already have big HP buffers. and who flys a vaga without 2 LSE2 ? a vaga will tank a typhoon extremly long and its guns will hitt the phoon easy because of the huge sig... but I am not saying u should engage a phoon with vaga anyway because it will just get nossed :) and for putting a LSE2 on phoon/domi ist kinda pointless because it doesnt have any resists, they might use a shield booster but even then a turret ship will eat tru it easy if it can track (actemp, bthron, vaga...)
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.02.10 08:27:00 - [794] Here is the actual DPS of a gank Vaga, one with Hail (extremely unrealistic) and one with Barrage, compared against a Dominix with Ogre IIs/no guns and the typical nanotyphoon setup of 4 siege II/Ogre IIs. The true DPS of a Nanophoon and Nanodomi compared against a gank Vagabond (3 dmods) with Tech 2 Ammo. Originally by: Aramendel The vaga still has far less effective hitpoints. And less dps. And almost no nos. If you think the smaller sig makes that balanced vs nanoBS..well..reality check? This observation is pretty much spot on. Even a gank vaga that is not suicidal (ie not using hail) has to slow down to do damage, and can't shut off the enemy tank. Nano bs do trackless damage, don't slow down to do it, turn off an enemy tank while simultaneously doing 1/3rd more damage than a gank HAC. They also have better defense because of overall hp. It's plain to see nanobs are overpowered, especially when compared to the tech 2 speed specialist ship, the Vagabond. Originally by: Ryssa You should not have aggressed or deagressed if he had nano fitting, tanked him for 40 sec, approached the gate back and jumped through the gate, he could have never killed you in that time. Not necessarily true. Any decent nano bs pilot doesn't need a web because they can just bump you waaaayyyy away from a gate or station. I have seen nano bs bump carriers off stations with ease. Inertia guarantees that after the bump they will be carried out of web range, even when dealing with other battleships. Originally by: Ryssa My claw goes 13km/s. And it's about 5 times cheaper fitted than my typhoon, which goes 7km/s. Person in question had snake set + faction mwd. Now if you get snake set + faction mwd on speedfitted ceptor, you can easily go 15k++ in gang. I still think that is too fast, but I dont' worry about a claw as much because of tracking means that it can't do damage at those speeds (or very little). You also can't shut off tanks with a claw. You astutely note this in your next post. Originally by: Ryssa ...vaga...has tracking, so when you are dealing damage, you have to slow down. And also, gank vaga has about 75% of the dps of a nanoship, but what it lacks is the 4 nos to make the opponents tank shut off - this is what really kills people, the damage isn't all that great. Well the standard nano domi does have about 25% more dps than a gank Vaga with WAY more hp and offensive options than the Vaga. A nanophoon has 4 nos in addition to 33% more dps than a full out gank Vaga. Even not considering the incredibly potent nos additive effect on offense, the nanophoon is already doing 610 dps. And honestly 600 dps is pretty darn good for non-tracking, non-cap, flexible damage type weaponry that still leaves 4 slots open for nos. You see, an Apoc flying 3500km/s is laughable. Even with 4 nos and speed it coulnd't kill much of anything. It's the combination of trackless weapons, stupidly high speeds/low mass, and nos that makes the Nanobs solopwnmobiles. And eve doesn't tolerate solopwnmobiles. They simply aren't balanced and the devs need to nerf them to preserve game balance and diversity. Nyxus The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.10 10:12:00 - [795] Edited by: Ryysa on 10/02/2007 10:10:12 Originally by: Nyxus Here is the actual DPS of a gank Vaga, one with Hail (extremely unrealistic) and one with Barrage, compared against a Dominix with Ogre IIs/no guns and the typical nanotyphoon setup of 4 siege II/Ogre IIs. The true DPS of a Nanophoon and Nanodomi compared against a gank Vagabond (3 dmods) with Tech 2 Ammo. So basically exactly what i said :) Also please do count falloff rigs with barrage, gives you 10-15% more damage in falloff. Oh, and vaga has 5x small t2 drones, that's nearly another 100 dps with perfect skills. Originally by: Nyxus Originally by: Aramendel The vaga still has far less effective hitpoints. And less dps. And almost no nos. If you think the smaller sig makes that balanced vs nanoBS..well..reality check? This observation is pretty much spot on. Even a gank vaga that is not suicidal (ie not using hail) has to slow down to do damage, and can't shut off the enemy tank. Nano bs do trackless damage, don't slow down to do it, turn off an enemy tank while simultaneously doing 1/3rd more damage than a gank HAC. They also have better defense because of overall hp. It's plain to see nanobs are overpowered, especially when compared to the tech 2 speed specialist ship, the Vagabond. yep, agree, that's what i said. Quote: Originally by: Ryysa You should not have aggressed or deagressed if he had nano fitting, tanked him for 40 sec, approached the gate back and jumped through the gate, he could have never killed you in that time. Not necessarily true. Any decent nano bs pilot doesn't need a web because they can just bump you waaaayyyy away from a gate or station. I have seen nano bs bump carriers off stations with ease. Inertia guarantees that after the bump they will be carried out of web range, even when dealing with other battleships. It's nearly impossible to bump a BS who is moving with AB/MWD towards gate, even if you sit in the middle of the gate, ask any nanopilot (myself included). It's just really hard to bump a moving target. Originally by: Nyxus Originally by: Ryysa My claw goes 13km/s. And it's about 5 times cheaper fitted than my typhoon, which goes 7km/s. Person in question had snake set + faction mwd. Now if you get snake set + faction mwd on speedfitted ceptor, you can easily go 15k++ in gang. I still think that is too fast, but I dont' worry about a claw as much because of tracking means that it can't do damage at those speeds (or very little). You also can't shut off tanks with a claw. You astutely note this in your next post. Yes, but as I said, he said that a ceptor can't reach similar speed, I said it can reach a much faster speed with less effort. Originally by: Nyxus Well the standard nano domi does have about 25% more dps than a gank Vaga with WAY more hp and offensive options than the Vaga. A nanophoon has 4 nos in addition to 33% more dps than a full out gank Vaga. Even not considering the incredibly potent nos additive effect on offense, the nanophoon is already doing 610 dps. And honestly 600 dps is pretty darn good for non-tracking, non-cap, flexible damage type weaponry that still leaves 4 slots open for nos. Did I ever say that nanoships are not imba? perhaps you should read the rest of the thread - Yes, I fully agree that this is ridiculous. Originally by: Nyxus You see, an Apoc flying 3500km/s is laughable. Even with 4 nos and speed it coulnd't kill much of anything. It's the combination of trackless weapons, stupidly high speeds/low mass, and nos that makes the Nanobs solopwnmobiles. No **** sherlock. N.F.F. Recruitment
Ling Xiao	Posted - 2007.02.10 11:18:00 - [796] I don't see the problem, maybe a little toning down would be nice but not a full-blown nerf.
Caletha	Posted - 2007.02.10 13:11:00 - [797] Yesterday I had a 1 vs 1 with my corp members Abaddon, and while orbiting him at 6000ms, he was hitting me just fine. Although in real 1 vs 1 he wouldnt have killed me (I would have ran away), the fact that he was hitting me without too much issues was special. Granted he did fit several tracking computers on his ship.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.10 14:06:00 - [798] IMO such tests are pretty meaningless, though, since you do not get any meaningful number of closerange ships which have multiple tracking comps fitted. Test fittings need to pass a sanity test - "would I undock with this fitting" - otherwise you'll just end up with extreme fittings which you never see in open PvP because they are far to specialized and will die to anything outside that which they were designed to counter.
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.10 14:18:00 - [799] The DPS figures quoted on the phoon are skewed to T2 torps doing full damage - something they aren't going to achieve on smaller ships. When comparing a shield extended on a Tech 1 BS vs a ship like the vagabond, remember the latter gains a greater benefit from having a T2 extender fitted over a BS due to the huge difference in resists. To me, the killer of the nanophoon is its NOS - even 600 dps isn't going to slay a tanked BS in a hurry if it has its cap to play with, the problem is that the phoon can mount 4 hvy nos' to suck BS's dry - i firmly believe the problem is with NOS, not with nano fittings. If NOS's were reduced in power the faster you go, so that 4x hvy NOS were reduced to 25% effectiveness when flying at the speeds nano BS go at, you'd see tanked BS's actually tanking, instead of having no cap to do anything with - in fact, a tanked BS would be able to use its NOS much more effectively than the nano ship flying around it.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.10 14:26:00 - [800] Originally by: Tom Gunn The DPS figures quoted on the phoon are skewed to T2 torps doing full damage - something they aren't going to achieve on smaller ships. Neither will large guns of a sniping BS. Quote: When comparing a shield extended on a Tech 1 BS vs a ship like the vagabond, remember the latter gains a greater benefit from having a T2 extender fitted over a BS due to the huge difference in resists. Which is pretty much canceled by it's inability to deal any damage at highspeed. Exept that of it's 5 small drones, that is. Quote: To me, the killer of the nanophoon is its NOS - even 600 dps isn't going to slay a tanked BS in a hurry if it has its cap to play with, the problem is that the phoon can mount 4 hvy nos' to suck BS's dry - i firmly believe the problem is with NOS, not with nano fittings. If NOS's were reduced in power the faster you go, so that 4x hvy NOS were reduced to 25% effectiveness when flying at the speeds nano BS go at, you'd see tanked BS's actually tanking, instead of having no cap to do anything with - in fact, a tanked BS would be able to use its NOS much more effectively than the nano ship flying around it. It would still have far more dps than other highspeed / high survivability setups then though.

Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.10 14:48:00 - [801] Quote: To me, the killer of the nanophoon is its NOS - even 600 dps isn't going to slay a tanked BS in a hurry if it has its cap to play with, the problem is that the phoon can mount 4 hvy nos' to suck BS's dry - i firmly believe the problem is with NOS, not with nano fittings. If NOS's were reduced in power the faster you go, so that 4x hvy NOS were reduced to 25% effectiveness when flying at the speeds nano BS go at, you'd see tanked BS's actually tanking, instead of having no cap to do anything with - in fact, a tanked BS would be able to use its NOS much more effectively than the nano ship flying around it. It would still have far more dps than other highspeed / high survivability setups then though. And here's where we fundamentally disagree. A nano battleship (regardless of class) can mount heavy weapons - battleships are designed to have heavier firepower than cruisers who in turn have heavier firepower than frigates - battleships should have more hitpoints than a cruiser, and should be able to tank better - the exception perhaps being some nifty command ship or hac tanks - to me, thats how the game should be. There's nothing wrong with those mechanics - the smaller ships inties and fast attack ships can still outpace a nano BS - which to me is how it should be - i'd agree there would be a problem if nano BS were flying faster than a similarly skilled pilot/equipped inteceptor - but the fact is, they don't. A nano BS does not have the DPS of a shield tanked raven with BCS's in its low slots, it doesn't have the dps of your run of the mill gankathron or gankageddon - assuming your figures are correct (was that with/without T2 ammo btw?) it has more dps than a sniper sitting off outside lock range, which is equally difficult to kill given it can warp away. It does have survivability on its side, which is attributed to speed, but so do all fast ships - i can't remember my crow getting caught in a bubble long enough to get locked and killed. i'm not saying that can't happen, it probably can, but so can catching a nanophoon in a gatecamp - i've been part of it. To me the argument of reducing all battleships to having no alternative setups other than being semi-stationary targets firing at each other like some reincarnation of napoleonic war seems ridiculous given the diversity that eve tries to make possible. The problem I see with nanoships is their ability to render slower moving tanked BS's tanks useless - something a nerf to NOS would resolve. Fast moving ships dictating engagement range and having the option to withdraw is just warfare as it should be - its one of the main reasons cavalry was so effective.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.10 15:23:00 - [802] Originally by: Tom Gunn And here's where we fundamentally disagree. A nano battleship (regardless of class) can mount heavy weapons - battleships are designed to have heavier firepower than cruisers who in turn have heavier firepower than frigates - battleships should have more hitpoints than a cruiser, and should be able to tank better - the exception perhaps being some nifty command ship or hac tanks - to me, thats how the game should be. There's nothing wrong with those mechanics - the smaller ships inties and fast attack ships can still outpace a nano BS - which to me is how it should be - i'd agree there would be a problem if nano BS were flying faster than a similarly skilled pilot/equipped inteceptor - but the fact is, they don't. The problem is that the heavier firepower and more hitpoints come at a price for battleships - significantly lower effective speed. Frigates and cruisers (or, better - "cruiser": the only one which can achiever higher speeds than nanoBS is the vaga which has a 25% speed bonus)..anyway, they can achieve higher speeds than nanoBS, yes. However, at these speeds they cannot do any dps. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. With one exeption - the missile crow. Which does less than 100 dps. So their higher speed does not really mean anything there, because they cannot use it and at the same time be an effective combat ship. NanoBS can. It's not about maximum speed, it's about the maximum effective speed where they can keep functioning as combat ships and not highspeed shuttles. If heavy drones and torp launchers would become inactive as soon as the controlling ship would fly more then 3 km/s then you might have a point.
Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.10 17:35:00 - [803] Originally by: Aramendel The problem is that the heavier firepower and more hitpoints come at a price for battleships - significantly lower effective speed. However, at these speeds they cannot do any dps. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. With one exeption - the missile crow. Which does less than 100 dps. So their higher speed does not really mean anything there, because they cannot use it and at the same time be an effective combat ship. NanoBS can. It's not about maximum speed, it's about the maximum effective speed where they can keep functioning as combat ships and not highspeed shuttles. If heavy drones and torp launchers would become inactive as soon as the controlling ship would fly more then 3 km/s then you might have a point. A crow (missile frigate) can maintain a high velocity and do effective damage because it uses missiles The crow is effective at a higher speed over say a taranis. Its dps is less than a taranis when the taranis is at its optimal range/tracking speed. A typhoon (missile battleship) can maintain a high velocity and do effective damage because it uses missiles The Typhoon is effective at a higher speed over say a gankageddon. Its dps is less than a gankageddon when the gankageddon is at its optimal range/tracking speed. See where i'm going with your argument ? You could in theory make a nanogeddon, fitted exactly like a nanophoon except with heavy lasers instead of torps. I'd imagine in this scenario it would act exactly like a taranis fitted for pure speed, i.e. it suffering from the same tracking problems. Now we're comparing like for like - only we're highlighting the difference between missile boats over short range turrets - high dps (damage effected by tracking speed) vs non trackable weapon systems with lower dps and non instant damage etc. And this is where i don't follow your thoughts - your suggesting deactivating weapons at high speeds - if we do it to torps, do we do it to cruise missiles also - and surely if we do it to cruise missiles, we gotta do it to all missiles - what about the crow pilots? are we suddenly nerfing them too by making rockets and standard launchers ineffective? As for having points, its not that I or any other sensible poster on this thread doesn't have one, its just that we may or may not disagree with you.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.10 17:48:00 - [804] Quote: To me the argument of reducing all battleships to having no alternative setups other than being semi-stationary targets firing at each other like some reincarnation of napoleonic war seems ridiculous given the diversity that eve tries to make possible. YES ! That is purpose of battleship ! No other ! That Diversity what you are talking about is availabkle only to small pool of ships. You need to realize that diversity is also in selecting right class of the ship for specific tasks. If this selection is overcomed by one solopwnmobile fitable for every situation we can screw rest of the ships. There are many task witch BS should never perform. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Shyalud Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.10 17:52:00 - [805] Simply put there are a number of counters to the nano-bs. You simply do not wish to see it. Get off the nerfmobile, and put your energy into killing nanophoons. Quote: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.10 19:11:00 - [806] Originally by: Tom Gunn As for having points, its not that I or any other sensible poster on this thread doesn't have one, its just that we may or may not disagree with you. Wrong. You base your argument of incorrect facts. You say that nanoBS are ok because one t2 cruiser and ceptors can be made faster than it. However you totally ignore that - unlike nanoBS - they cannot do anything involving weapons at these speeds. So their higher speed is completely meaningless because they cannot use it. Meaning that "they have higher speed" argument has no value. It's not valid. You certainly may have opinion here, but no point, because the arguments you base it on are incorrect. The only, singular ship you could compare nanoBS to is the crow in this aspect. Which, has has been said, has very low dps even for high-survivability ships. NanoBS have the same advantage and very high dps for high survivability ships. That it is a BS does zip to justify it being stronger there - the devs stated themselves multiple times that BSs should not be the ultimate solo-pown-mobiles. If you think that I am afraid the powers to be disagree. You are right on one aspect, though - the problem are in the end trackless weapons if combined with high speed setups. The problem can be solved by change the effeciency of these weapons at high speed or nerf nanoBS. Since you yourself stated that a missle (and drone!) nerf in this apsect might open a too huge can of worms the only really viable solution left are to nerf nanoBSs.
HankMurphy Pelennor Swarm Eternal Rangers of Terror	Posted - 2007.02.10 23:27:00 - [807] Edited by: HankMurphy on 10/02/2007 23:30:06 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Tom Gunn As for having points, its not that I or any other sensible poster on this thread doesn't have one, its just that we may or may not disagree with you. Wrong. You base your argument of incorrect facts. You say that nanoBS are ok because one t2 cruiser and ceptors can be made faster than it. However you totally ignore that - unlike nanoBS - they cannot do anything involving weapons at these speeds. gular ship you could compare nanoBS to is the crow in this aspect. Which, has has been said, has very low dps even for high-survivability ships. NanoBS have the same advantage and very high dps for high survivability ships. That it is a BS does zip to justify it being stronger there - the devs stated themselves multiple times that BSs should not be the ultimate solo-pown-mobiles. If you think that I am afraid the powers to be disagree. You are right on one aspect, though - the problem are in the end trackless weapons if combined with high speed setups. The problem can be solved by change the effeciency of these weapons at high speed or nerf nanoBS. Since you yourself stated that a missle (and drone!) nerf in this apsect might open a too huge can of worms the only really viable solution left are to nerf nanoBSs. ancient Chinese proverb say: man who stand on toilet, high on pot hmm... no thats not the one i'm looking for.. ah, got it: ancient Murphy proverb say: if you find yourself posting 82 times in one thread, either your logic is flawed Originally by: Aramendel words words words words words, NERF OR you just have no clue how to get your point across. either way, really starting to look like just trolling and i think everythingthing that can be said on the topic has been. (in short, stFu comes to mind, let us bow our heads and pray for a lock?) Originally by: Shyalud Simply put there are a number of counters to the nano-bs. You simply do not wish to see it. Get off the nerfmobile, and put your energy into killing nanophoons. shhh!! dont you know pvp now takes place on the forums? newb Hi, my name is Huginn. Slap a mwd, a couple domi webbys and a domi scram (or similar) on me and then give me a gang invite. Who knows, i may have something to offer?!? (and at relative equal cost to what your dreaded superphoon put into his implants and mwd)
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.10 23:36:00 - [808] Originally by: HankMurphy trolling without bringing any arguments ...or maybe I have to say (read: repeat) the same thing 20 times to 20 different people.
HankMurphy Pelennor Swarm Eternal Rangers of Terror	Posted - 2007.02.10 23:45:00 - [809] Edited by: HankMurphy on 10/02/2007 23:42:58 Originally by: Aramendel For example, this repeatantly used one. As has been said by multiple people it does not really help much. At a gate it can get back and jump no matter which setup the huggin uses. In a belt it will get in warp as soon as it sees it warp in before the huggin can get a lock. yeah, its point counterpoint. I say 'you cant catch em all' you say 'nerf' . the point i was making is you've posted like 4 times on every page of this thread. either you've taken it on yourself to turn any useful discussion on the topic to an endless point counterpoint or your just posting because your obsessed with getting a nerf. i understand sometimes you need to repeat yourself. i've posted my opinions in here and other threads on the subject. BUT either way, after a certain number of posts, no matter what your saying, its stops being productive. what are you going to post next that hasn't possibly been covered in teh last 27 pages?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.11 00:20:00 - [810] And the point I am making is that there are quite regulary new people using the old arguments which have already been discussed to the ground. You are quite right that everything what could be said has been said already on this topic - but we still get new people using [pointlessargument which has been invalidated 20 pages ago]. Then I am replying to them. Because a) I like to discuss game mechanics and b) I am the honest opinion that we have an imbalance here. So when someone posts "It's fine, BS are supposed to pown everything smaller, they cost 20 bil so it is balanced and a minnie recon will make all nanoBS in the same system instantly implode." I will answer him and I do not care in the slightest if I said that thing already 10 times. Because it has already been said does not make it suddely wrong. If you call people posting arguments which have been brought up already multiple times and have been invalidated by other people (not only me) because they have holes you could drive a titan through "useful discussion" then I'm pretty happy to "disrupt" it. -------------------- In the end the whole nanoship issue can be reduced to one simple line of thought: - pre-Kali nanophoons already existed. And were used as viable setup. - post-Kali they recieved with instabs and rigs approximately a 60% speed boost. - ways to kill them were not boosted at all, ways to drive them off were not boosted by the same amount (exept other nanosetups) Basically, nanoBSs get a significant boost with kali. This gives us 2 possibilities: - nanoBS were too weak pre-kali and are now "balanced" (where I would heavily disagree because I can point you to pre-kali vids which are showing nanophoons killing stuff without much of a problem) or - nanoBS were balanced pre-kali and now got a major boost without introducing anything which balances this boost

Tom Gunn Caldari North Eastern Swat	Posted - 2007.02.11 06:17:00 - [811] Edited by: Tom Gunn on 11/02/2007 06:22:03 Originally by: Aramendel Wrong. You base your argument of incorrect facts. You say that nanoBS are ok because one t2 cruiser and ceptors can be made faster than it. However you totally ignore that - unlike nanoBS - they cannot do anything involving weapons at these speeds. If your going to call people out on who's actually right and wrong on any debate as opposed to accepting a differing of opinion, you better sure as hell make sure you've got your own facts right - which i hasten to add, you haven't. I also don't appreciate you putting false words into my mouth - while i've used them as examples (since their descriptions have been used multiple times in the past by other posters), at no time have I said only inties and vagabond can go faster than nano BS's - those are your words, not mine (words that are quite false I might add). Not just inties and vagabonds can achieve speeds faster than a nano BS - there are several ships can go faster than nano BS's if you fit them for speed, don't go calling others incorrect when your posting blatent falsehoods on the thread yourself. I'll also add that some of those ships also use trackless weaponary, meaning that the typhoon does not share a setup that is mutually exclusive with the crow. You also seem to miss the entire point i made - i'm not sure if that was a mistake, or your just repeating a reply to an argument over and over again but thats not what i get at in my earlier post. This in no way means battleships should be solo pwn mobiles as you comment, and as anyone who goes out regularly and pvp's knows, battleships are far from this, there are many many modules and ships that can be used in a variety of ways to avoid/mitigate or reduce damage, down to completely negating it with things varying from ecm, dampning, to just plain and simple avoiding optimal range, velocity or reducing sig radius etc. As for 'meaningless speed' - if you can't think what use an inty or another ship has going over 10k m/s, then i'd go hang out in some inty gangs. I sure as hell find a use for my speed, and i've yet to hear a single gang member i'm grouped with turn around and say 'geez, can we get someone without skirmish warfare as gang leader, i'm going too fast'. As for your conclusion, no that isn't the only viable solution - its the only viable solution that you post and just happen to think is right. Your wrong if you honestly believe that claim, and yes, it comes over as very 'trollish' when you post something like that then claim another view is wrong because they don't agree with your solution. There is more than one way to boil an egg or in the case of eve, weaken a configuration. Its a shame if your truely unable to see that.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.11 06:42:00 - [812] Originally by: Tom Gunn Not just inties and vagabonds can achieve speeds faster than a nano BS - there are several ships can go faster than nano BS's if you fit them for speed. And I am sure you would not mind sharing with us the ships and setups that acieve this. As well as the way that they reach 11000 hit points and ~500 DPS. [quote[This in no way means battleships should be solo pwn mobiles as you comment, and as anyone who goes out regularly and pvp's knows, battleships are far from this, there are many many modules and ships that can be used in a variety of ways to avoid/mitigate or reduce damage, down to completely negating it with things varying from ecm, dampning, to just plain and simple avoiding optimal range, velocity or reducing sig radius etc. You define "solopwnmobile" as "a ship that always destroys the other ships". This definition is incorrect and obfuscates the info. It is a straman. Where as the arguement it attacks is "Nanoships are invincible and always destroy their target" when the arguement in question truly is, "Nano-battleships exist in a state where they obfuscate smaller specialized setups that do the same role, while still being stronger than any single ship in any engagement. They provide the role of interecptor, bumper, primary damage dealer, and capacitor warfare. While, at the same time being vulnerable to only a few select setups and ships, and not nearly vulnerable enough to make up for the benefits of flying a nanoship. In the majority of non-fleet combat situations there is no reason but skilled trained and money on hand to not fly a nanobattleship. As well, in the majority of non-fleet combat situations there is no reason to fly anything other than a nano-bs other than skills currently on the character over any tech 2 fitted battleship." ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.11 10:14:00 - [813] yay, I agree with Goumindong for a change :D N.F.F. Recruitment
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.11 13:15:00 - [814] 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.
SLAPNUTZ	Posted - 2007.02.11 21:16:00 - [815] i started using thenanophoon over 3 months ago as ppl out there will recognise its a fun ship but imo its no longer that uber as the suprise factor of it has now gone as every tom **** and nooby has one or a variant its good for ferrying my bpo's fast but i fnd its inability to tank to be a good enuff reason to not use it anymore plus there easy to stop or slow down but i aint gonnatell you how and 4k ms nah that exageration happy hunting
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.12 00:27:00 - [816] Originally by: SLAPNUTZ i started using thenanophoon over 3 months ago as ppl out there will recognise its a fun ship but imo its no longer that uber as the suprise factor of it has now gone as every tom **** and nooby has one or a variant its good for ferrying my bpo's fast but i fnd its inability to tank to be a good enuff reason to not use it anymore plus there easy to stop or slow down but i aint gonnatell you how and 4k ms nah that exageration happy hunting Sorry mister leet, my phoon goes 7k/s, want screenshots with that? You don't really know what you are talking about, do you? N.F.F. Recruitment
Shadowraven213 Caldari Madison Industrial Co. Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.12 01:24:00 - [817] 27 pages and no dev has posted? /me starts to setup his speedgank raven
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.02.12 01:51:00 - [818] Originally by: SLAPNUTZ 4k ms nah that exageration happy hunting Actually Moleh has (or had) a phoon that went 10km/s. He was the #1 tackler for our fleet. It was unbelievable to watch. He was so fast the interceptor tacklers waited for him to get close and warped to him. Nyxus PS- I have seen a crow do 26km/s (prolly similar implants & setup to moleh) but they are just so fragile and do so little dps you don't see many of them. The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.12 01:57:00 - [819] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: SLAPNUTZ i started using thenanophoon over 3 months ago as ppl out there will recognise its a fun ship but imo its no longer that uber as the suprise factor of it has now gone as every tom **** and nooby has one or a variant its good for ferrying my bpo's fast but i fnd its inability to tank to be a good enuff reason to not use it anymore plus there easy to stop or slow down but i aint gonnatell you how and 4k ms nah that exageration happy hunting Sorry mister leet, my phoon goes 7k/s, want screenshots with that? You don't really know what you are talking about, do you? Must not, 4km/s is tech 2 max relevent skills with no implants, no skill hardwiring, and no gang bonuses. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.12 02:20:00 - [820] Edited by: Aramendel on 12/02/2007 02:22:44 Originally by: Goumindong Must not, 4km/s is tech 2 max relevent skills with no implants, no skill hardwiring, and no gang bonuses. Well, actually it's around 5.5 km/s for a nanophoon with 5 t2 nanos, 2 LH instabs and t2 MWD and 12 km/s for the best of the best faction MWD and max implants (including full HG snakes and Shaqils 8% speed implant). 3 t1 vents and maxxed skills of cource for both. Although such a setup won't be able to fit 4 heavy nos and 4 siege launchers and using t2 nanos might be considered faction equipment, at least in price. /edit: and for ****s and giggles, 14.5 km/s with 3 t2 vents. 20 km/s with the full gang bonus from a skirmish mindlink of a maxxed claymore pilot. Now THAT will be a fast phoon.

Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.12 02:31:00 - [821] not sure, last time i checked t2 nano's werent that expensive. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Shamhutante	Posted - 2007.02.12 02:40:00 - [822] WHen I started playing this game a few years ago, Inties could outrun 'most' missiles (all but rocket/standards/maybe heavies) while orbitting a 'tackled' BS, the missile changes awhile ago nerfed this and ever since then the great crusade for stupendous speed was undertaken! I'm sure there wasn't this hue and cry or calls for "Nerf the missiles" The 2 main ships for this 'abuse' are the Nos-Domi and Phoon, Phoon being favourite for its missiles.. (and to be honest, you don't need seige launchers, rigs and uber implants, you can make it "effective" with cruise missiles and virtually no cost!)The Phoon really has NO OTHER ROLE in this game! If you want to Nerf-bat the Nanno-Phoon, you really need to Nerf-bat all 'never-miss' missiles (which will of course gimp the Crow!)
Gioto	Posted - 2007.02.12 05:32:00 - [823] i dont want it nerfed. a gank can tear it apart, people are just threatened by it. plus i like my nanos, dont want them nerfed
mematar Delictum 23216	Posted - 2007.02.12 07:34:00 - [824] I tried against a Nanophoon with my Sleipnir. It just didnt stand a chance, I tore it apart with 720mm II. Tracking wasnt a problem at all. Ideal gang that should catch a nanobs any day: Jammer ship (Rook, Falcon, Scorp or similiar), Gisti Crow and some long range damage dealer (Tempest, Sleipnir, Muninn?). Scorp jams, Crow tackles, Tempest shoots the **** out of it. No chance for the Phoon, no chance. Like many have stated, people who blob dont like the fact that someone can actually survive their blob instead of just getting ganked horribly.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.12 08:02:00 - [825] Originally by: mematar I tried against a Nanophoon with my Sleipnir. It just didnt stand a chance, I tore it apart with 720mm II. Tracking wasnt a problem at all. Ideal gang that should catch a nanobs any day: Jammer ship (Rook, Falcon, Scorp or similiar), Gisti Crow and some long range damage dealer (Tempest, Sleipnir, Muninn?). Scorp jams, Crow tackles, Tempest shoots the **** out of it. No chance for the Phoon, no chance. Like many have stated, people who blob dont like the fact that someone can actually survive their blob instead of just getting ganked horribly. 3 Nanophoons does the job better. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.12 08:22:00 - [826] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: mematar I tried against a Nanophoon with my Sleipnir. It just didnt stand a chance, I tore it apart with 720mm II. Tracking wasnt a problem at all. Ideal gang that should catch a nanobs any day: Jammer ship (Rook, Falcon, Scorp or similiar), Gisti Crow and some long range damage dealer (Tempest, Sleipnir, Muninn?). Scorp jams, Crow tackles, Tempest shoots the **** out of it. No chance for the Phoon, no chance. Like many have stated, people who blob dont like the fact that someone can actually survive their blob instead of just getting ganked horribly. 3 Nanophoons does the job better. Wrong, first of all all of those 3 nanophoons must be able to go faster than the phoon they are trying to catch. It's a lot easier and cheaper to make a fast crow than a fast nanophoon. So, that means that those 3 ships (crow, dmg dealer, scorp), will be a lot cheaper than that one nanophoon. 3 Nanophoons can't deal damage, unless one of them has web, also, provided they can catch up to the nanophoon they're chasing. I was tackled with my nanophoon by 2 nanophoons + 10 man gang with skirmish warfare mod so they went faster than me. Guess what, I selfdestructed before they got me. So please don't make bold statements. And actually to kill phoon solo you need: 1x huginn with 28km scram + istabs/rigs... But you only pvp on the forums, you wouldn't know N.F.F. Recruitment
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.12 10:41:00 - [827] I dont see how they are worse, they arent prone to missing a jam, they cant be NOS'd to death, you cant run away from them as easily, etc etc. In a nano game its whose cap lasts the longest, and the larger blobs cap will last longer. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2007.02.12 10:59:00 - [828] I don't think it should be nerfed. Instead they should break it up and make there be a 3tier system like afterburners and mwds. Have nanos and inertials have a frigate sized ones, cruiser sized and battleship sized. Only makes sense. The same module shouldn't be changing say 10000lbs in a frigate and then pop it into a battleship and it's a 1,000,000 lbs. Pop a 1mn afterburner into a cruiser and it'll give you an extra 10m/s this is how it should work for nanos-inertials. Then on top of that. At such speeds vampires and such should be rendered useless. Just like as if you had large turrets on there. They wouldn't hit crapppola. Personally I've been ratting and nanophoon came in to kill me. Unfortunately for him I had about 15 friends who basically immediately came to my rescue. None of them could actually touch him. Our elite frigates couldn't even catch up to him after he fled away. I sold his 5 heavy tech 2 drones for quite a bit. His loss for being an idiot.
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2007.02.12 11:01:00 - [829] ALSO. If he didn't have a nanophoon he would have had something else just as deadly. The difference being is that he would have been caught and destroyed without being able to flee off to 300km away in like 10 seconds.
Pry Maraai Amarr Unseen University	Posted - 2007.02.12 11:31:00 - [830] Battleships orbiting in speeds over 5km/s ruins the game in several ways imho. - The illusion of mass and size is gone the second you see a typhoon accelerate and spin like a paper kite. - Interceptors have no longer any role. Why spend time skilling for T2 ships, when a BS can do the job a lot better. It looks really funny when small gangs are using 2 battle ships for tackling and battlecruisers for damage. - They are too hard to counter (not impossible though). You need a gang to specially setup to counter them, or you have to have a lot more ships than them. (minnie recons should be popular soon) - They are too easy to fly. Everyone flies a forum recipy nanophoon today. Not because they allways loved the minmatar ships, but because they know its free kill mails. And if you feel like you might be in trouble, just run away and lose nothing. I think it should be possible to achieve speeds like 4-5km/s in a battleship. But that should take every trick in the book, snakes, besta nanos/i-stabs and everything. And even then the handling should be apropriate for a huge mass in a zero friction environment. ηβπ

retzki	Posted - 2007.02.12 11:40:00 - [831] Originally by: hotgirl933 its a fun ship its balanced not many can fly em fun ship -> maybe. balanced -> Haha. No. not many can fly em -> Haha. No. Dunno where you come from, but we see nanoships all day. Small ships which fly <5000m/s are rare. It is idiotic - and by far not balanced in any way.
Capt Dirk	Posted - 2007.02.12 11:50:00 - [832] Edited by: Capt Dirk on 12/02/2007 11:48:18 Originally by: Anila's Delight another thread on this? Its an imaginative setup created by someone who has the skills to fly it. If CCP nerfed everything when someone posted NERF THIS AND NERF that eve would be very boring. Someone has created an immaginative setup that is popular because it is effective whilst soloing. Its good, but not perfect. There is bound to be some kind of weakness and it encourages new tactics to be defeated. People just dont like it because they cant have it for themselves or dont like something different that they cant beat. The good thing about set ups in eve is that you never know what to expect. Before you flame me, no, i dont have the skills to fly one. Very true its really just a good solo gank ship but has its weaknesses, a good bs can tank it all day long 4 darkblood? wah, rigs have made big changes in ship setups triple armor reps, cap rig etc people just simply have to adapt, nerfing the nanos or itertias is wrong and yes im flying the damn thing q=)
Starlinger	Posted - 2007.02.12 11:56:00 - [833] Where ir really a problem? Make a gatecamp behind gate! Must have one gangmebmer in covert op cloaked ship be before gate un typed in gang chat few chars as sign that nanoship come and jump through. Gang behind gate make a warp buble and prepare use 2..4 webs... and nanos die. P.S. sorry for use alt
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.12 12:16:00 - [834] Originally by: Starlinger Where ir really a problem? Make a gatecamp behind gate! Must have one gangmebmer in covert op cloaked ship be before gate un typed in gang chat few chars as sign that nanoship come and jump through. Gang behind gate make a warp buble and prepare use 2..4 webs... and nanos die. P.S. sorry for use alt Nano will MWD back to gate with no problem. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.12 12:43:00 - [835] Originally by: Capt Dirk a good bs can tank it all day long 4 darkblood? wah, rigs have made big changes in ship setups triple armor reps, cap rig etc It is quite possible to rig a BS so it reps have a 52% higher effeciency, just like they can boost it's MWD effeciency by 52%. However, reps do not work well when all cap has been nossed. Also, high speed is a better maximum dps tank as reps. If one ship cannot hit you 10 ships cannot either. If you can rep the dps of 1 ship you usually cannot rep that of 10. And lastly, IMO the drawback of speed rigs is a joke. The max armor penality does not really hurt them - the speed penality of armor rigs however...
Starlinger	Posted - 2007.02.12 13:01:00 - [836] Originally by: Aki Yamato Originally by: Starlinger Where ir really a problem? Make a gatecamp behind gate! Must have one gangmebmer in covert op cloaked ship be before gate un typed in gang chat few chars as sign that nanoship come and jump through. Gang behind gate make a warp buble and prepare use 2..4 webs... and nanos die. P.S. sorry for use alt Nano will MWD back to gate with no problem. Why? 3 or 4 webs (90% slow down) that reduce speed totally by 99% make even nanoship moving 70m/s that is 1% from 7000m/s ... and nanos haven't tank.
Jitterian	Posted - 2007.02.12 13:08:00 - [837] so .. the description for nanos ... "replaces parts from the hull with lighter stuff " .. now how much can u really take out until u will see through ur hull , stack'em . and lets say u are in ur ferrari on the highway at top speed and sudenly an nano-bus outruns u by far and u eat his dust . interceptors outrun by battleships .. come on thats all :) yes i am against nano ships
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.12 13:36:00 - [838] Originally by: Starlinger Why? 3 or 4 webs (90% slow down) that reduce speed totally by 99% make even nanoship moving 70m/s that is 1% from 7000m/s ... and nanos haven't tank. Next time maybe try something out before posting. Or looking through the thread. This has been posted x times already before. Webs do not decellerate a ship instantly. Even if you have a sensorboosted minnie recon it will take at least 3 seconds to activate the webs (1 sec uncloaking lag, 1 sec targeting, 1 sec web module lag). By that time the nanoBS will already have already multiple km/s and will be at least halfway to the gate. Then it will slow down...slowly. Not fast enough to make it stop before it reaches jump distance.
Geld Ned	Posted - 2007.02.12 13:46:00 - [839] I don't want to die to a 50 vs 1 fight. Any ship should die in a 50 v 1 fight. You making this statement again proves my point. Nano setups are VERY difficult to kill... and you are flying an expensive setup around because you understand that fact. Thanks. ===== Well any ship should die. Ok. Only swith off "friendly fire" and make explosions hurt for all be close. I guess it makes a game and a role of inties more fun. Especially for those 50vs1 lovers.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.02.12 14:03:00 - [840] Originally by: Christopher Dalran Edited by: Christopher Dalran on 08/02/2007 21:52:48 * !IMPORTANT! * STEP BY STEP ANTI NANO/I-STAB INSTRUCTIONS This is a little trick i learned a while back while trying to hit some smaller faster frigates using my large guns durring a mission a while back and it works equally well for fast orbiting battleships moving at 3 km/s +. I;ve been debating heavily keeping this information to myself but i'm concerned nano's and i-stabs might take a swing from the nerf bat if i dont release this information. First your going to need to reduce your top speed to < 25% of your max, you turn fastest at or below these speeds. Second your going to want to make sure that you have added transversal velocity to your display, if not do it as this will tell you what chance you have to hit. After you have done that you need to manually fly your ship, your going to want to have it spin around in circle almoast as if spinning like a top. Of course its not going to spin stationary but you'll get prety close under 25% max speed. To do this you instruct your ship to fly directly backwards but 1 or 2 degrees to the side you want it to spin. Keep an eye on your targets transversal, you'll notice that if you play with your max speed you can varry the speed your ship spins (slower speed = faster spin). The goal here is to try and find a target speed that makes you spin at just the right speed to match the orbiting battleship. You should notice something interresting, your targets transversal takes a nose dive through the floor. Yes you guessed correctly, your adding the rotational velocity of your ship to your turrents causing them to actually have to track much less. Coincidentally the last movie The Last Starfighter inspired me to try this. I tried this extensively around 6 months back. It didn't work then, I came to the conclusion that just as the tracking formula doesn't take in to account orbiting a stationary target, neither can it take into account rotation in trying to hit an orbiting target (I had my Megathron on Sisi travelling at 4 m/sec at various rotation rates trying to hit an orbiting frigate with Null L, prior to the tracking nerf). I'll test it again, but I'll have to say not convinced... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'

Aki Yamato	Posted - 2007.02.12 15:46:00 - [841] Originally by: Starlinger Originally by: Aki Yamato Originally by: Starlinger Where ir really a problem? Make a gatecamp behind gate! Must have one gangmebmer in covert op cloaked ship be before gate un typed in gang chat few chars as sign that nanoship come and jump through. Gang behind gate make a warp buble and prepare use 2..4 webs... and nanos die. P.S. sorry for use alt Nano will MWD back to gate with no problem. Why? 3 or 4 webs (90% slow down) that reduce speed totally by 99% make even nanoship moving 70m/s that is 1% from 7000m/s ... and nanos haven't tank. Have you try it ? During the pos jump cloak effect 2s+- you are capable to turn and accelerate to 4000m/s and practicaly reach the gate in average nanobs. BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Echo Etch Vengeance of the Fallen Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.12 17:30:00 - [842] These ships can't be stopped easily, no matter what people say. You can put up a warp bubble on top of a gate, right before a gate, whatever. These ships sail right through it. Interdictors have problems catching them, it is nearly impossible to touch them. Requiring a T2 ship with T2 gear to come near one of these things ensures that anybody who hasn't been playing the game for at least a year is pretty much SOL when it comes to having one of these things around. I'd say that these things are a good way to ensure that any new player that comes up against them is going to be pretty ****ed with the game.
Manada	Posted - 2007.02.12 18:19:00 - [843] Stress on the nanoship and auto destruction should be applied as a result of flying against physics law.
mallina Caldari Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.12 18:56:00 - [844] Originally by: Manada Stress on the nanoship and auto destruction should be applied as a result of flying against physics law. i hereby fully endorse this post. "1% or higher loss of structural integrity per second of battleship cornering at 3km/sec" it would give hull reps a purpose
Victor Ivanov Liberty Rogues Coalition of Carebear Killers	Posted - 2007.02.12 19:26:00 - [845] Originally by: Geld Ned I don't want to die to a 50 vs 1 fight. Any ship should die in a 50 v 1 fight. You making this statement again proves my point. Nano setups are VERY difficult to kill... and you are flying an expensive setup around because you understand that fact. Thanks. ===== Well any ship should die. Ok. Only swith off "friendly fire" and make explosions hurt for all be close. I guess it makes a game and a role of inties more fun. Especially for those 50vs1 lovers. PvB for the win! Who needs Nanoships when you can blob your enemy! My two cents? I say we nerf the blobbers. Also, although I have made my initial disdain for nanoships clear on multiple occasions, I fully applaud the concept of a ship that can make blobs run for their lives. And yes, I see blobbing as possibly the single most depressing aspect of Eve at the moment.
Gort Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.02.12 20:20:00 - [846] Blobs are tangential, at best, to this topic. Go start your own thread if you want to talk about blobs. I, a Matari Recon driver, support the nerfing of nano BS's, and am here to let you know that multiple Fleeting webbers are useless against nano ships because they are up to speed before you can get the webbers on them, and simply coast to the gate (or out of range) in a few seconds. I'm willing to give that to a true speed ship, like an inty or a Vagabond, but not to a BS. That's just lame, and utterly ruins the immersive quality of the game. There's a reason they're called "heavies." But the module effects have borked that. My 0.02, Gort Low-tech sig: "When in doubt, empty the magazine."
solarwinds ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.02.12 22:04:00 - [847] Interdiction spheres which act like deadspace as well, no MWD within their limits. And significant penalties to hull and armor for all the agility and mass reduction. Webs with 20km range, 10km optimal, 10km falloff. A skill to add 10%/level to web and warp scram range as well. Multiple webs should affect inertia - no more coasting to gates on a single burst, but rather being stopped halfway to the gate instead. With the above scenarios, nanoships and 12km/s Crows and Vagabonds are no longer total pwn, they have multiple counters, but are still viable tactics. That's the way it should be.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.12 22:31:00 - [848] Originally by: solarwinds Interdiction spheres which act like deadspace as well, no MWD within their limits. Would kill ALL MWD setups. Outside of ultra-speed BSs there is not that much of a problem with them IMO.
Manada	Posted - 2007.02.12 22:33:00 - [849] Examples of the ship stress you can find in every simulation or quazi simulation game. It is pretty normal that spacecraft or aircraft have some penalized stats when overspeed, stall etc. In most of cases the result is its autodestruction. In our case penalized stats is structure of the ship. I understand structure as a not only a next "hit-point-able" layer of the ship, but also as a core of the ship's hull in most of nano-ships shrinked to 10% of normal stats. Devs should really look on the problem. In terms of tests, filled last night my Geddon with full of nano-crap and inertia stuff. Even with Tech I modules without any problems could fly 2455 - 2600m/s. In my feelings its a simple, overlooked glitch exploited by players. Flames welcome Originally by: mallina Originally by: Manada Stress on the nanoship and auto destruction should be applied as a result of flying against physics law. i hereby fully endorse this post. "1% or higher loss of structural integrity per second of battleship cornering at 3km/sec" it would give hull reps a purpose
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.12 22:47:00 - [850] Originally by: Goumindong I dont see how they are worse, they arent prone to missing a jam, they cant be NOS'd to death, you cant run away from them as easily, etc etc. In a nano game its whose cap lasts the longest, and the larger blobs cap will last longer. well all the nanophoons must go faster than the nanophoon they are trying to tackle (more expense) and without a web it takes ages to nos him down 5+ min if he has full cap charges. Also missiles and drones dont do **** at high speed you know :P So i'd say crow + scorp + ganker = better than 3x nanophoon for ganking nanophoon. N.F.F. Recruitment

Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.13 02:04:00 - [851] Its only a question of time, im sure will correct the mistake and nano-bs will be nerfed
Risandaar Contraband Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.02.13 07:30:00 - [852] The problem is the combination of some modules with certain ships. I-stabs, nanos, Nos and weapons that don't need tracking on fast Battleships are the ultimate combination atm. As has been stated there is not much you can do to catch one of these ships if it doesn't want to be caught, which is in my point of view unbalanced. Eve has always been some sort of sciccors - rock - paper but atm there is not much to counter one of these ships.
grootvader	Posted - 2007.02.13 09:31:00 - [853] I believe the unbalance exist because the acceleration takes the inertia into account where the deaceleration does not. After turning of your engines your ship comes to a halt because of friction (yeah yeah i know, no friction in space) If you have the same friction but less inertia you should come to a halt a lot sooner. So instead of adjusting a module I suggest you adjust the way a low inertia, high friction ship behaves when the engines are turned off/webbed.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.13 11:55:00 - [854] Originally by: Starlinger Where ir really a problem? Make a gatecamp behind gate! Must have one gangmebmer in covert op cloaked ship be before gate un typed in gang chat few chars as sign that nanoship come and jump through. Gang behind gate make a warp buble and prepare use 2..4 webs... and nanos die. P.S. sorry for use alt seems you never tried is did you? Last time we tried.. we had a huggin with 2 webs and more 8 webs from frigs on him and 5 battleships attacking him. He got away with 80 % armor yet... If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.13 11:56:00 - [855] Edited by: Kagura Nikon on 13/02/2007 11:52:27 Originally by: grootvader I believe the unbalance exist because the acceleration takes the inertia into account where the deaceleration does not. After turning of your engines your ship comes to a halt because of friction (yeah yeah i know, no friction in space) If you have the same friction but less inertia you should come to a halt a lot sooner. So instead of adjusting a module I suggest you adjust the way a low inertia, high friction ship behaves when the engines are turned off/webbed. inertia already affect deacceleration If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Xurx Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.13 12:33:00 - [856] 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...
Rellik B00n Vale Heavy Industries SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.13 13:26:00 - [857] im rapidly heading towards a "cant beat em join em" strategy on this one. I totally agree Nanoships need a big fat swing of the nerfbat however that may be done. In the meantime a lot like snipers, WCS-ed ships and the like im training for a nano-bs. Maybe the message will get to CCP better if everyone in the game ends up flying the same ship....
Rufus Toya	Posted - 2007.02.13 14:03:00 - [858] It is time we nerf these 12km/s BS I can't stand hwo fast they move 12km/s!!!! zomg lawl QQ
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.13 14:05:00 - [859] Originally by: Rellik B00n im rapidly heading towards a "cant beat em join em" strategy on this one. I totally agree Nanoships need a big fat swing of the nerfbat however that may be done. In the meantime a lot like snipers, WCS-ed ships and the like im training for a nano-bs. Maybe the message will get to CCP better if everyone in the game ends up flying the same ship.... Nanoships do not need nerf. NanoBATTLESHIPS need nerf, and the perspective that the numb er of low slots is the most important thing to achieve high speed. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Adago Vilon	Posted - 2007.02.13 15:02:00 - [860] Could we link web strength to signature radius? I think this would be an excellent balance to the nanoBS debate. I think it's ok that BS's can go quickly within reason. I tested 3 fleeting webs (on huginn) on an 11km/s domi and managed to just about slow it down as it passed me. I had to mwd to reduce the relative motion and of course this was under test conditions so not representative of a real fight. However, making webs more effective against larger sig targets would certainly help while not removing the nanoBS which I love. Fitting I-stabs has been cited as one of the main causes of speed. The drawback of the Istab is the sig penalty. Making webs work 'faster' against higher sig ships will help slow the BS much faster and make them more vulnerable. So inties would be able to catch and snare BS more effectively. Also it would make webs slightly less effective vs inties, making them more survivable which I think is a good thing as well. Thoughts?

Ombrae BoBo Corp R i s e	Posted - 2007.02.13 15:18:00 - [861] I dont like nano setup, there enough post to explain why, and other posts about "save my IWIN key!" as well that I dont care. /me is for a inertia / nano / mwd nerf - BoBo -
Troubadour Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.02.13 16:16:00 - [862] I think NanoBS are perfectly balanced and you all need to quit whining just because you can't afford one. If you can't kill them it's because you aren't trying hard enough and/or fail.
Mikeli Soth	Posted - 2007.02.13 16:31:00 - [863] Originally by: Troubadour I think NanoBS are perfectly balanced and you all need to quit whining just because you can't afford one. If you can't kill them it's because you aren't trying hard enough and/or fail. Now, im not sure you have read the past 28 pages of argument. Im not gonna go back and check every post to make sure that you have. That said, there has been a great argument made against what you have just stated. They are not balanced, for previously stated reasons. if you are going to say that, please, for the love of all that is EvE, if you are going to put up, put up something that will back up your argument. Otherwise, don't talk. Have a nice day.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.13 16:36:00 - [864] Originally by: Adago Vilon Fitting I-stabs has been cited as one of the main causes of speed. They aren't. On nanoBS at least. Exchange 2 LH nanos with 2 LH instabs -> 8% speed boost for a typhoon Fit 3 vent rigs -> 48% speed boost
Centurin Citizens of E.A.R.T.H. E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.02.13 17:07:00 - [865] The best way to deal with nanoships is to encourage everyone to fly them. Honestly, once everyone is flying around doing 5km/s in a BS, CCP will be forced to do something about it. ----------------------------------------------- "It's great playing Caldari Online, isn't it?" by Xori Ruscuv
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.13 18:04:00 - [866] 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.
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions New Age Solutions Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.02.13 21:31:00 - [867] 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) ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!
Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.14 02:28:00 - [868] any dev answer about this problem ?
Shandling Minmatar cotton buds FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.14 05:29:00 - [869] It's easy to ignore one post, it's not easy to ignore 20 at once. :P
Ysolde Xen Minmatar Liberal Trading Co Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.02.14 09:22:00 - [870] Don't mind me, I'm just amused that the battleship people used to set aside their bickering differences to flame together, the poor old Typhoon, is now causing a major headache. Go flying dustbin! Ah, such is the cycle of nerfage and boosting ----- It's not a crap ship, you're just flying it all wrong.

Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.14 11:07:00 - [871] Originally by: Ysolde Xen Don't mind me, I'm just amused that the battleship people used to set aside their bickering differences to flame together, the poor old Typhoon, is now causing a major headache. Go flying dustbin! Ah, such is the cycle of nerfage and boosting I think I need to start "nerf nosdomi" threads on as many alts as possible, maybe we get a cool sticky too! N.F.F. Recruitment
Ulric Denrai Amarr Ascent of Ages R i s e	Posted - 2007.02.14 11:13:00 - [872] Interceptors needs to be the fasted ships in the came ,not a BS. Other point that makes me sick is a nano bs with cloak. So the only ship that can cloak had to be a Cov ops.Getting sick from all those guys that are hanging for 24/7 in your home system in cloaked ships. Nice when you are a Amarr isn`t .
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.14 11:38:00 - [873] Well, ceptors ARE still the fastest ship in the game, they cann still be made faster than a BS. The problem is that a nanoBS can themself tackle anything but these extreme ceptor setups while not being remotely as vulnerable to nos and having BS class nos power and dps.
WeaponsHot	Posted - 2007.02.14 11:44:00 - [874] I don't see all this long topic be an issue with nanoBS at all Simple because to get all that speed a BS will lose module slots for defense/attack capabilities. Therefore its just one setup for speed like any other setup such as tank/snipping etc. Always with Pros/Cons. Beside that there are always an reaction to an action... there are always ways to take them down.
Xurx Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.14 12:05:00 - [875] Read the 29 pages before you make such stupid pro-nano-bs arguments please....
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.14 12:52:00 - [876] Originally by: Xurx Read the 29 pages before you make such stupid pro-nano-bs arguments please.... Qft. Looks like all the arguments have been fairly well covered in this thread. CCP, pretty much everybody who doesn't fly one (and some that do) are in agreement that a nerfbat swing is needed. So make with the swinging. sgb
MMoroz Stercus Accidit.	Posted - 2007.02.14 13:10:00 - [877] I would like to point to everyone that there is nothing wrong with bs going faster than intercpetor - we are talking about cosmos. More place bigger engines The only problem are inertia stabilizers their stats should depend on mass of a ship so: 1)they could use cap - small ships small cap needs, big ships big cap needs or 2)powergrid and cpu requirements should depend on mass of the ship
Ugleb Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.14 13:21:00 - [878] Originally by: Rawthorm The Nanophoon/dommie isnt the brain child of a few smart people. It's a rehash of the old Cavalry ravens and may I remind people that the Cavalry ravens of old were nerfed (The multi-MWD) for being near invincible. Fact of the matter is this new trend can not be allowed. Its one counter (the web) isnt effective as these ships have enough interia still to get out of range and warp off. Not to mention they can outrun anything that could possibly try to get a web on it. Only way these setups can stay in game is if webs have an imeditate effect in halting your ship, instead of letting it cruise down to its now lowered speed with inertia. I am agreeing with an EST member on a public forum. That's how messed up the situation is. Rawthorm, some is forgiven. Not all, but a bit. Not only are nano BS stupidly unrealistic but they render other ships obsolete. Why bother with an inty when a bs can go faster and has more hp? Webbing is not a good counter due to the BS drifting through web range and out again on inertia. Bumping relies on being lucky enough to have a ship in a position to get a bump in so thats hardly a counter 'tactic'. A nano BS is only liable to go down to a larger group setup specifically to catch it in a relatively 'controlled' situation. Otherwise forget it.
Yuleth Gix	Posted - 2007.02.14 16:29:00 - [879] Originally by: JVol Originally by: Serzath Some questions: what is the role of a battleship? i think the answer is, tanking and do damage to stationary installations and other equaly or bigger ships (bs's dreads, carriers etc). what is the role of smaller sized ships? i think the answer is, protecting the larger ships vs hostiles What is the role of an interceptor i think the answer is, as the name sugests....intercepting other ships. If above answers are correct...then we now have a ship with a module setup that doesn't fit in his role.... OK, here it is finally. THIS is the narrow minded thinking that is fueling all of the "nerf it" if it doesn't fit into their cookie cutter molds. The above questions, are ridiculous, as are the "wrong answers" to them...The dev's wouldn't give us so may options if the ships HAD to fill the roles of conventional thinking and nothing more. Basially everyone is crying so hard because it is possible to spend a few billion on riggings and officer mods to make a ship that doesn't conform with their preconcieved notions of the ROLE said ship is supposed to be taking on. So wait... it sounds to me like you're upset because you can't predict easily what to expcect an encounter to be like just by knowing what ship is on the scanner... hmmmm go cry somewhere else.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.14 20:36:00 - [880] Originally by: Yuleth Gix Basially everyone is crying so hard because it is possible to spend a few billion on riggings and officer mods to make a ship that doesn't conform with their preconcieved notions of the ROLE said ship is supposed to be taking on. So wait... it sounds to me like you're upset because you can't predict easily what to expcect an encounter to be like just by knowing what ship is on the scanner... hmmmm go cry somewhere else. if by "a few billion" you mean "300m" then yes, you spend "a few billion" A tech 2 typhoon for 300m will hit 5km/s at max skills. This isnt out of line for a tech 2 battleship, but the quality of how it flies certianly is. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"

D'kar Minmatar Dark Times Tech.	Posted - 2007.02.14 22:34:00 - [881] I'm honestly surprised we haven't heard from one of the higher ups about this dicsussion - seems to me that almost 30 pages of discussion should draw some attention, but then again... What do I know? Answer - Not much... :) I've had limited encounters with the nanophoons, but when I did, they are near impossible to get in range unless you are really fitted right... and then I'm not sure how well the tactics will work against them... either way, there's a lot of people commenting on this apparent balance issue and it seems that the devs should step in and make some kind of statement... but I'll simply refer to my previous comment... Ref > What do I know? _______________ Dark Times Tech
HankMurphy Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2007.02.14 22:48:00 - [882] Originally by: D'kar I'm honestly surprised we haven't heard from one of the higher ups about this dicsussion - seems to me that almost 30 pages of discussion should draw some attention uh, they stickied the topic so that tells you they aren't ignoring it. not everyone gets to have a job like me and spend all day commenting and replying on the forums. I think they may actually have work to do Originally by: D'kar I'm not sure how well the tactics will work against them... either way, there's a lot of people commenting on this apparent balance issue and it seems that the devs should step in and make some kind of statement... but I'll simply refer to my previous comment... Ref > What do I know? While the squeeky wheel normally gets the oil, in eve, when you have over 100,000 wheels, your brain starts to drown out the squeeking noise after awhile. the devs dont give in to issues over the # of pages the topic reaches on the forums. they sticky this so all the ppl can talk it out and in the end, they will make the changes they think should be made.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.14 23:31:00 - [883] Originally by: D'kar I'm honestly surprised we haven't heard from one of the higher ups about this dicsussion - seems to me that almost 30 pages of discussion should draw some attention, but then again... What do I know? Most discussions dont need developer comment. But all of the large ones get noticed. You can rest easy that the developers have seen and read the thread. And if they havent, one of the forum handlers will point it out to them. Comments by devs are dangerous things due to expectations they cause. Even the small "we're looking at it" causes people to make assumptions. When taking into account the community reaction to developer comments it is fairly easy to see why few are made and why they need to be as clear as possible. As such, you probably shouldnt expect a developer comment until they have decided and agreed to do something concrete about it. But even if they dont say anything, they have certianly seen the thread and are likly considering what to do. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Zxepa	Posted - 2007.02.15 09:24:00 - [884] They're only a few ships that can actually go nano effectively: Nanoyrimidon Nanonix Nanotar Nanophoon Nanocurse Nanocane (with an exception to the vagabond) Now, the only ones that can actually maintain their cap for more then 45 seconds: Nanonix Nanophoon Nanocurse The ones that can be rendered completely useless with a few well aimed pot shots or even a smartbomb: Nanonix (Drones) Nanocurse (Drones) The conclusive real issue: Nanophoon Much praised by its pie's and much maligned by its karebears, the nanophoon-class battleship has always been one of the most horrifically overpowered spacefaring vessels around. Its distinguishing aspect - and the source of most of the controversy - is its sheer nanobillity, variously seen as either a lack of care for eve players or a deliberate "oops" on ccp's part.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.02.15 10:51:00 - [885] Noticed how no-one uses overdrive injectors? Un-used modules are always a good indicator of an imbalance somewhere. As I see it, if you want such extreme speed you should have to use overdrives and have the manoeuvrability of a flying brick (and momentum to boot). ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Wizzkidy	Posted - 2007.02.15 17:12:00 - [886] As stated by Tux in his Dev Blog, the way speed works at the moment is flawed and all you guys moaning about nona BS - well there is your answer. Now please tell me that BS should do that speed - no MWD nerf on the way - if this effects ceptors im sure there correct it for those too
Fenderson OLE Mining Corp Miners With Attitude	Posted - 2007.02.15 18:31:00 - [887] i would be alot happier if these setups could at least be countered by the ship that is supposed to have the role they have stolen. if interceptors could catch nanoBS and somehow not be nossed to death, they would be (imo) balanced. As it stands, a well outfitted inty can catch up to a nanoBS but its pointless to try due to the nos factor. i dont see a problem with nanocurse, as they are still fairly easy to kill on straight damage and are not as fast as their BS counterparts. so my 2 cents on this discussion is NERF NOS. not completely, but at least give it a factor of either sig radius or tracking. got new corp, need new sig. mail me ingame.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.02.15 20:01:00 - [888] 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.
xOm3gAx Caldari Stain of Mind DAMAGE INC...	Posted - 2007.02.15 20:17:00 - [889] I FIGURED OUT A FIX!!!! ok enough with the caps already not sure if someone else mentioned it or nto but i got an idea to fix nano ships... 10-20% reduction to max velocity bonus of micro warp drives and 5-10% reduction to after burners. Eg: a 500% MWD would be (assuming the 20% reduction) 400% MWD after the first 320% after the second and 258% after the third (not point after that) A 100% afterbruner would be (assuming 10% reduction) 90 then 81 then 71.9 etc. Problem solved. Even if u mix in istabs it nerfs it pretty bad so its not sploitable anymore. And if istabs are going to be a problem just add a 5% penalty to each for the use of each istab. since they dont produce a speed increase that should suffice. this would make it so you would have to do a mix of istabs / nanos / overdrives to get any decent speed for a true nano kit and event hen its no longer an unfair advantage. As for people who use them on ceptors (this includes myself) adapt or die =) There are alot of other kits for frigs that don't include speed mods taht are just as effective. ----------- "Mercinaries never die, we just go to hell to regroup." -xOm3gAx '99
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions New Age Solutions Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.02.15 22:35:00 - [890] Originally by: welsh wizard 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. Devblog occured several days after I posted that, so whatever. I'm still using it to the bitter end. ---------------------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!

Pavlinka Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.15 22:47:00 - [891] i just hope, if they will nerf nanoBSs, that will not affect other ships like ceptors/vagabond and why u all dont take target distruptor or sth like that and just distrupt him .... he will not be able to shoot and np, u will not kill him but he also cant Pavlinka & Pavlinecka
jamesw Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.02.15 23:15:00 - [892] People in nano BS are obviously not concerned by the fact they have 1/2 the hull they usually have. Indeed, if you never get hit, having 50% of your original hp really doesnt matter, and if a nano ship gets caught it will die either way due to no tank. I say change nanofiber penalty from -15% hull hp, to -15% capacitor capacity. This hits nanoships where it hurts. That is all. And no, i havent read this thread at all, so if its been suggested already, its been suggested again. -- Latest Vid: Domination!
Kwerkus Ilf Mutually Assured Distraction	Posted - 2007.02.16 00:09:00 - [893] Just wanted to refute a couple of quotes from the recent dev blog about speed: Quote: When going into a fight we want people to commit to a fight. That means when you go into a fight you are risking your ship or ships, not just warping in on anything and if you can't handle it you just warp off. Doesn't this run counter to the whole idea of skirmish warfare, guerrilla warfare -- ie. the entire point of the Minmatar? This statement needs to be retracted or restated so that it makes sense relative to the role that Minmatar are supposed to play in the game. Yes speed needs a nerf, but the dynamics of the game don't dictate that you should have to be fully committed in every fight -- that is boring and favors blobbing. I like the ideas that favor nerfing ridiculous speed (like battleships going 4km/s) but please don't overdo this one. Incremental change is a lot easier to callibrate than sudden massive shifts. Quote: Disable the cap injector when the mwd is active isn't really a perfect solution as you'd probably be able to sustain it with few cap modules and nosferatus. It however would make such a setup a lot more vulnerable to being nossed itself. This just makes nos more powerful than it already is -- you would need nos to sustain a MWD and nos is able to stop MWDing ships... hmm, ya think the nanocurses are going to get a lot more popular if this happens? Anyway, I like guerilla tactics. Please don't ruin them with ham-fisted patching. -K -K [URL=http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4499216][/URL]
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.16 00:33:00 - [894] Originally by: jamesw People in nano BS are obviously not concerned by the fact they have 1/2 the hull they usually have. Indeed, if you never get hit, having 50% of your original hp really doesnt matter, and if a nano ship gets caught it will die either way due to no tank. I say change nanofiber penalty from -15% hull hp, to -15% capacitor capacity. This hits nanoships where it hurts. That is all. And no, i havent read this thread at all, so if its been suggested already, its been suggested again. Ok and this doesn't hurt inties, stabbers, vagabonds and any other ships which were designed for speed exactly how? N.F.F. Recruitment
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.16 00:57:00 - [895] It would prolly hurt them, but not even remotely as much. A vaga or inty do not really need to fit a single nano for viable setups (even speedsetups). A nanoBS needs to fit at least 3 nanos. Although a nano cap penality would not have much of a balancing effect - the "bad" nanoships do not mainly rely on their cap recharge to power their nos, but on cap from their target and injectors.
Terell Princeps Corp	Posted - 2007.02.16 01:49:00 - [896] Just one world,.... THXS !!!....thxs ccp for nerfing nano-bs
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill	Posted - 2007.02.16 02:28:00 - [897] Edited by: CoLe Blackblood on 16/02/2007 02:30:32 "When going into a fight we want people to commit to a fight." Two different styles of air-to-air combat were prevalent in World War II. The Japanese Zero, for instance, was a dogfighter. It's strength was being able to turn and fight at low speeds. In contrast, the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, was an energy fighter. It relied on keeping its speed high, hitting hard and fast, then getting distance from its target to repeat its attack. If it tried to turn with a Zero, to knife-fight with it, it was dead. But through its superior speed it could dictate a fight by hit-and-run tactics. "Combat in EVE was always supposed to be more about tactics and strategy rather than twitch movement." The energy fighter had different tactics than did the dogfighter. Strategy should not require everyone to stand 100km away from one another blasting with their muskets. We might as well don red coats, and we know how that fight went. The nanoship is far from a twitch fighter, it is an energy fighter, using hit and run tactics to gain superiority. Slowing it down kills it. I can understand the developers wanting more strategy in-game. If nanos are nerfed so be it, but that's not how you get more strategy, that's cutting out a whole faction of it. ~CoLe Blackblood
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.16 04:21:00 - [898] Yes, but the energy fighter had to get in range of the knife fighter in order to be successfull. Nano-BSs dont and simply stay away the entire time. Your equivelent of sitting at 100km and slugging, except orbiting at 22km and launching missiles. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill Blood Raiders Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 04:49:00 - [899] yes but the dogfighter could not get a gun solution on a fast range-dictating fighter, only by forcing a head-on pass(bad for both) or rolling to get a quick snap-shot as the energy fighter passed by. Roll back Pre-Kali before you nerf MWD ~CoLe Blackblood
Mortuus Minmatar Just-fun Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.02.16 06:48:00 - [900] That whole energy fighting thing is a great example if EvE was similar to aerial combat in any way. Its much closer to WW2 naval combat. ex-Occassus Republica <3

Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.16 07:42:00 - [901] Originally by: CoLe Blackblood yes but the dogfighter could not get a gun solution on a fast range-dictating fighter, only by forcing a head-on pass(bad for both) or rolling to get a quick snap-shot as the energy fighter passed by. yes, but non-nano ships cant get a gun solution on a nanoship at all. There is no chance to foce a head on pass or rolling to get a quick snap-shot as the energy fighter passed by. Not that Eve is like that anyway, except maybe for frigates. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.16 08:55:00 - [902] Edited by: Aramendel on 16/02/2007 08:55:14 Just got an idea which would nerf the problem while keeping the other ships basically unchanged. Or maybe it's just a brainfart..tell me. Copied from the information portal: Originally by: tux For example overdrives increase velocity, nanofbers agility and inertia stabilizers mass. Well we might then switch the istabs and nanos around as it really makes more sense that nanofibers reduce mass. The only problem is that I'm afraid that the agility mod will be sort of useless. Its quite possible that this alone could fix the whole issue without needing to tinker with MWDs. If ODs would give a speed boost (unchanged to what they are now, although it might be a good idea to boost t2 ODs to domination stats similar to how t2 nanos are now compared to domi nanos), instabs only a -20% inertia boost (would still be useful on haulers, although it should get stacking nerfed) and nanos only -15% mass it would severly cripple the bigger nanosetups while not having asm uch of an effect to other ships. For, example, a Typhoon with 4 t2 nanos and 3 LH instabs has right now +150 m/s speed, 22% of it's old inertia and 68% of it's mass. If the speed items get changed like they are above and the phoon fits 3 t2 (40 m/s) ODs, 2 instabs and 2 nanos he would +120 m/s speed, 66% of it's inertia and 74% of it's mass. And also 64% of it's cargo room, aka less space for cap charges. Would result in it having only 83% of the previous max MWD speed and 3 times of it's previous inertia. If that is still considered too fast you could give ODs only a max 30 m/s speed boost (and loose the cargo penality), then the max speed would be 73% of what it is now. But I think the vastely reduced agility won't make a further velocity reduction necessary. Advantages: - ceptors wouldn't get hurt much if at all since the agility bonus from nanos and instabs is not really needed by them due to their already high base agility - blaster ships usually do not fit speedmods so won't be effected by this Ultra-highspeed ceptors would still exist, though, but with the exeption of the crow they cannot do dps at these speeds.
ImmortaL ZoorZ coracao ardente	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:39:00 - [903] Nerf nano's I fly with people that use them and against people that use them and there just stupidly overpowered unless you have a tripple webbing huggin or rapier. Im not so **ed about the nano curse or cruiser sized **wits its more the fact a ship the size of a battleship can go that fast and have nothing to stop it 4 cruise/siege 4 heavy nos is impossible to counter solo unless your flying one aswel. Give them a stacking penalty or something this has been going on too long and made me not wanna play the game (buhu) for the first time in years the otherday but i still have faith in the common sense of the playerbase and dev's to do something about this/whine over
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill Blood Raiders Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:12:00 - [904] Edited by: CoLe Blackblood on 16/02/2007 13:12:03 Originally by: Mortuus That whole energy fighting thing is a great example if EvE was similar to aerial combat in any way. Its much closer to WW2 naval combat. true true. You have a point. But the only problem with that is how quickly fights last, making everything seem like one big dogfight. I see it as a combination of the 2 different types of warfare right now. Rigs are the problem, not MWD. Roll back pre-Revelations ~CoLe Blackblood
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:23:00 - [905] Rigs are fine with everything else due to stacking penalties. As noted in the dev blog the problem lies in the fact that so many factors affect speed - base speed, mwd boost, mass etc. I'm still looking at a sliding cap usage scale as a good way of reducing the problem, but making the various speed mods stack with each other would also work. After all why should you be able to fit 3 rigs and 7 low slot mods that all increase your speed when I can only fit 3 damage mods to improve my damage? sgb
CoLe Blackblood Murder-Death-Kill Blood Raiders Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 15:58:00 - [906] Yeah its just that the introduction of rigs, and I guess the change to iStabs, made it possible to get bigger ships in excess of 4k. With only snake implants as the extra speed enhancer beyond standard ship and skill adjustments prior to Rev we did not have a problem. Maybe to remove/change speed rigs for larger class ships is the answer. Rigs are the problem, not MWD. Roll back pre-Revelations ~CoLe Blackblood
xenodia Gallente RONA Corporation RONA Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 17:58:00 - [907] Originally by: CoLe Blackblood Edited by: CoLe Blackblood on 16/02/2007 02:30:32 "When going into a fight we want people to commit to a fight." Two different styles of air-to-air combat were prevalent in World War II. The Japanese Zero, for instance, was a dogfighter. It's strength was being able to turn and fight at low speeds. In contrast, the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, was an energy fighter. It relied on keeping its speed high, hitting hard and fast, then getting distance from its target to repeat its attack. If it tried to turn with a Zero, to knife-fight with it, it was dead. But through its superior speed it could dictate a fight by hit-and-run tactics. "Combat in EVE was always supposed to be more about tactics and strategy rather than twitch movement." The energy fighter had different tactics than did the dogfighter. Strategy should not require everyone to stand 100km away from one another blasting with their muskets. We might as well don red coats, and we know how that fight went. The nanoship is far from a twitch fighter, it is an energy fighter, using hit and run tactics to gain superiority. Slowing it down kills it. I can understand the developers wanting more strategy in-game. If nanos are nerfed so be it, but that's not how you get more strategy, that's cutting out a whole faction of it. The problem with your analogy is that the nanophoon is effectively both types. It has the speed of an "energy ship" like the p-47 thunderbolt, but it also has the turning ability of the dogfighter. To continue your analogy, the nanophoon is like the p-51 mustang when it first arrived on the scene. Faster and more maneuverable than everything else around, but somewhat brittle if caught. The problem is that theres simply no single ship in EVE (other than another nanophoon) that can catch a nanophoon AND hold it long enough for someone else to kill it. Thus far the best counter ive seen is a force of at least 3-4 ships including an Arazu, Huginn, ECM ship, and a damage dealer. So... I guess as long as you have a 4-1 numerical advantage over the nanoforce you are facing, and half of your people fly faction fitted recons... all is well This signature space for rent
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 18:52:00 - [908] Originally by: CoLe Blackblood Yeah its just that the introduction of rigs, and I guess the change to iStabs, made it possible to get bigger ships in excess of 4k. With only snake implants as the extra speed enhancer beyond standard ship and skill adjustments prior to Rev we did not have a problem. Maybe to remove/change speed rigs for larger class ships is the answer. But a mwd nerf for those ships only would fix it nicely. Maybe with smaller effects for the other ships using it. Personally I'm not sure about some of the other solutions but I'm happy with the sliding cap scale. sgb
Zorn Aldridge	Posted - 2007.02.17 01:00:00 - [909] It is in my Opinion that an Inty should be the fastest ships in the game...thus why they have thier name. It is sad when you have top notch Navigation skills..and you are in a Nano, and Officer MWD on a interceptor and a BS can pull away from you as if you were sitting still. You have Battleships outrunning missles, and rendering all other ships in the game defensless. Sure...A hugin or raiper can in theroy slow down a Nano Phoon or Vaga.. but as we have stated it isn't a instant Slow down. They can still coast to gate..or in warp out. It's sad when you have to have a very specific gang setup to counter a single non capitol ship. Hell...even webbie drones are useless against the Nano Craze. It's similar to the WCS issue in fighting. They could flee at anytime and had no real wishes to fight. I hope CCP does a similar thing to the nano/ inertia phase and keeps them to a travel setup. If you want to fight with those things...it's gonna be costly to you in some fashion. I've witnessed a Vaga going 16k a second..which is rediculous...and I had a nano phoon go 8k on me....which was a good 3k more then I was doing in my NANO MWD Crow, now...how can anyone tell me that is good for the game!
Capt Dirk	Posted - 2007.02.17 01:05:00 - [910] Well, clearly it seems no one really knows what the actual nerf will be, although I've noticed the price in t2 nanos drop significantly. Can anyone answer when this mysterious nerf will occur?

Ernest Graefenberg Minmatar Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.17 04:38:00 - [911] Originally by: smallgreenblur Rigs are fine with everything else due to stacking penalties. Uh, they don't stack. Quote: After all why should you be able to fit 3 rigs and 7 low slot mods that all increase your speed when I can only fit 3 damage mods to improve my damage? sgb Which part of 'the intention was to make fights last longer' did you not follow?
Capt Dirk	Posted - 2007.02.17 09:28:00 - [912] Indeed, there are no penalties to stacking rigs except for the drawback. With a properly fitted battleship with rigs, a nanophoon should be (is) no more than a mosquito.
Grytok	Posted - 2007.02.17 13:22:00 - [913] Edited by: Grytok on 17/02/2007 13:19:28 If you want to stop a BS hitting those ridiculous speeds, then change the boni of the Modules. Inetria Stabilizer: 15% Inertia, -10% Structure HP Nanofibre: 10% Speedbonus, with stacking-penalty like Hardeners Overdrives: 15% Speedbonus and -10% Agility Problem solved and leaves Ceptors and other little Ships with few Low-Slots unaffected. .
Ernest Graefenberg Minmatar Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.18 05:03:00 - [914] Originally by: Zorn Aldridge It is sad when you have top notch Navigation skills..and you are in a Nano, and Officer MWD on a interceptor and a BS can pull away from you as if you were sitting still. You apparently don't have top-notch multiplication skills. A Gistii A-Type 1MN Crow without snakes is faster than a Gist X-Type 100MN Cruise Nanophoon with LG Snakes before Omega (in other words, the Crow is about ~20% faster if neither has Snakes). With Omega the 2x Istab / 5x Nano II 'phoon is somewhat faster than an unsnaked Crow, but accelerates worse. Regardless, said Crow locks faster / much less vulnerable to turrets and costs under 1/5th of the Typhoon. Also, there are no officer 1MN MWDs. Anytime you feel like not embellishing to try and prove a point that does not exist is fine by me.
SugarDaddy Comando Vermelho Kith of Venal	Posted - 2007.02.18 10:09:00 - [915] Back in the day PVPers where proud to not use WCS, cause that means we would stay and fight no matter what, but today.....MOST wanna be PVPers use this nano ****. Cant understand CCP, first they nerf dual MWD so ppl dont have like 1-2k speed, then they nerf WCS and then they create this magical formula where it¦s way worst than before...whrer ppl have more speed and more chance to avoid combat. I dont use WCS and am damn proud to say that wont use this NANO stuff. CCP is trying HARD to screw the game (Nanos, BoD, etc)BUT I WONT QUIT.
Jack Soul Freelancer Union Unaffiliated	Posted - 2007.02.18 11:33:00 - [916] Why not just put a hard limit on the number of nanos and Istabs you can fit (like they did with MWD's back in the day). Say 3 in total (You could have some RP reason like "to many nanos reduces the hull to dangerous levels, and is now banned by concord" or something). This would still let smaller ships to be fast and fun as they should be. Also it won't nerf loads of minmatar setups, but will stop BS's getting to those silly (and broken) speeds. ********* Blue are the life-giving waters, taken for granted, they quietly understand... Once happy turquoise armies lay opposite ready, but wonder why the fight is on...
Pax Uranus Pimpin Women Near You	Posted - 2007.02.18 12:49:00 - [917] Here's a funny idea: (Stacking Nanofibers and Inertial Stabs) + MWD = constant degradation of large ship hulls (aka: structure damage) while the MWD is burning. Or something like that.
Malachi Nefzen Caldari Insane Decision	Posted - 2007.02.18 16:55:00 - [918] just prevent MWD and nosf from being active at the same time, it fixes everything
Kimvestor	Posted - 2007.02.18 18:59:00 - [919] Or just cap the mass reduction to max. 15%.... solves it as well...
Gauss Belloid Prison Break Inc.	Posted - 2007.02.18 21:06:00 - [920] Another possible way to make nanoBS less overpowered is to up the signature penalty on BS mwds and adjust the missile dmg formula accordingly - making missiles actually do some damage to fast BSs and making turrets able to hit them.

Bryg Philomena Green Lantern Corps	Posted - 2007.02.19 00:56:00 - [921] Edited by: Bryg Philomena on 19/02/2007 00:53:23 everyone is saying nerf the i-stab, nerf the nano... why? adapt! how about this: nerf the bs!! Or better yet make other ships better!! Make certain interceptors immune to NOS, so they can get near enough to web it without being reduced to nothing in an instant. I am tired of EvE's constant need to nerf everything and its need to make the game so slow paced. Warp in, orbit, f1 f2 f3, cycle rep, wait.. cycle rep, then say gf when one dies. Why doesnt eve have some fast paced ships designed for fast pace? I love interceptors, they're fast. But pack little punch and cant take a hit. SAME WITH NANO SHIPS. They cant take a hit. CCP, design a teir 3 interceptor designed to really combat FAST ships. Say have ONE turret/missile hardpoint, 2 high slots, 5 mid slots, 4 low slots. Nerf cargo space to say 50 m3. Add a BONUS to MWD and web strength and range, high sig radius. Immune to NOS. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=465618
Arilanus Doshenko Ascendant Strategies Inc. The Volition Cult	Posted - 2007.02.19 01:56:00 - [922] Edited by: Arilanus Doshenko on 19/02/2007 01:53:23 I've got no problem with nano-matar ships (annoying as they are!) because it fits the 'raider' style of the Matar. Other races using nano-ships.. shame on you! ;) I think the problem with nano ships at present is that whilst the nano/istabs are fitted at the expense of armor reps/whatever, they are far too effective at what they do. Having never flown one I can't say, but it appears from reading this thread that the trade-off isn't balanced. But a possible solution... give nanos/istabs the stacking penalty? Wouldn't solve the problem, but might mitigate it a little? [insert awesome Photoshop character banner here]
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.19 10:33:00 - [923] Originally by: Bryg Philomena I love interceptors, they're fast. But pack little punch and cant take a hit. SAME WITH NANO SHIPS. They cant take a hit. 500 dps and 4 heavy nos = "little punch"? 10.000 hitpoints = "can't take a hit"?
Dray Caldari Finite Horizon	Posted - 2007.02.19 15:37:00 - [924] who really needs the nano ship nerfed tbh, 0.0 ratting pilots?, who if caught by most ships will go down anyway? Nano ships are good, very good infact but not unstoppable, and its not rocket science figuring out to stop them, think, thats all, just think.
hybridundertaker Amarr Beagle Corp	Posted - 2007.02.19 15:41:00 - [925] Edited by: hybridundertaker on 19/02/2007 15:41:42 few days ago i saw my corps mate, know for his speed setups catch a fast inty in a dominix. I laughed my ass of... ok enought joking now nerf it... nano/istabs/overdrives should decrease mwd top speed bonus and nanos need to give % based bonus imo. Realistically when u would remplace heavier components with lighter the speed increase would be proportional to mass change and top speed would be top speed before nanos multiplied by mass reduction. Multiplication is percentage based and not absolute bonus. edited: overdrives could however give absolute bonuses while nerfing agility, it would keep bss balanced. I have no objections to bss going fast in straight lne, why not if they sacrifice their slots and cap for it... however a sensible pilot wit much more agil ship class should be able to outmaneouvre a bs. It is redicoulous to see monsters with thousands of tons orbiting like inties...
PeveS The Edge Foundation	Posted - 2007.02.19 15:50:00 - [926] What about (BoD) Crows that go way over 20km/s? Yes over 20.000 m/s. I saw one that go 26.000 m/s and one of 22.000 m/s. Exploit or reality? Base speed was about 1000 m/s.
Dark Flare Caldari Corpus PCG	Posted - 2007.02.19 19:40:00 - [927] Originally by: Malachi Nefzen just prevent MWD and nosf from being active at the same time, it fixes everything Er. Apart from that it'll ruin half of the Minmatar ships?
Malachi Nefzen Caldari Insane Decision	Posted - 2007.02.19 20:03:00 - [928] Originally by: Dark Flare Originally by: Malachi Nefzen just prevent MWD and nosf from being active at the same time, it fixes everything Er. Apart from that it'll ruin half of the Minmatar ships? and how does it do that?
MoLeH Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.02.20 03:55:00 - [929] I like nanophoons, mine does 18km/s and i havent managed to build my tech 2 rigs or get the shaqil's implant I WANNA GO FASTER!
Ryysa North Face Force	Posted - 2007.02.20 05:24:00 - [930] Originally by: MoLeH I like nanophoons, mine does 18km/s and i havent managed to build my tech 2 rigs or get the shaqil's implant I WANNA GO FASTER! In gang with maxed claymore maybe. N.F.F. Recruitment

Minigin Caldari Zephyr Enterprises Inc. Astral Wolves	Posted - 2007.02.20 07:51:00 - [931] ok ima tell you all a secret... the solution to all your problems lies in a group of tackler frigs ^^''' i find the double web rifter is very effective! just make sure someone has scram on him... but really if yo uhave at least double web on him and he has mwd on then his sig rad will really screw him up!
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.20 09:56:00 - [932] Originally by: Ryysa In gang with maxed claymore maybe. Should have that already with 18 km/s. Theoretical max speed for a nanophoon are 20 km/s with 5 t2 nanos/2 instabs or 22 km/s with 5 domi ODs/2 instabs.
Chirinako Caldari Legionari Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.02.20 14:34:00 - [933] Originally by: Topaz Skydiver Thanks to nanos and inertial stabs, something like the hurricane is actually fun to fly. And the speed fits to the optics of the ship and the race. /signed Nanophoons are a more common sight these days. Minmatar ships are designed for speed, that's how it's always been. Coming up against a Triumvarte pilot I believe was named Elliot Manchild in Querious recently, made me realise the beauty of the nanophoon when piloted well. We had a 17 man gate camp with about 6 interceptors capable of 8000m/s or MORE. Elliot Manchild jumped into us in his Nanophoon. Once he decloaked, it took him a mere 4 seconds to speed to the edge of the large bubble and initiate warp. By the time our interceptors had locked him and got within Scram range, he was out. As annoying as it was to try and counter, I couldn't help but admire the cheekyness of this ship. 1 on 1, a well fitted nanophoon would most likely eat any other battleship setup for breakfast and spit out the spare armour plating. It's annoying to try and counter, but amusing to watch.
Andreya	Posted - 2007.02.20 17:19:00 - [934] Adapt or die!?!?!?!? thats the only thing ive ever seen on these forums that actually make me angry!!!... train huggin/rapier ?! NOONE in eve shoudl have to train months to 'attempt' to stop one of these ships.. even if they can stop them they still need a gang to kill them as a huginn would die to any nano battleship/curse adpating would mean swap a few mods out to kill a certain type of ship, yes thats ok... but to train for 2 months to fly a ship who can slow it down but cannot kill it... screw that. 10.5km machariel.... 7.6km domi (who outran my speed fittted sabre then nos'd killed me) not cool, specially fo rus small ship pilots who specialized in intys and dictors
Andreya	Posted - 2007.02.20 17:34:00 - [935] and to you gusy who are saying these battleships are 'fun' to fly, im sure they are, but ever thought of the guys who have spent their whole time training interceptor skill, and are getting outran by a battleship? it sucks, and has ruined alot of fun for us. adapt? no, i shouldnt have ot stop flying a ship thats meant to be the fastest (intys) to train a battleship to keep my edge in combat (not to mention completely waste all my inty support skills, like guns and inty5)
Nicocat Caldari New Age Solutions New Age Solutions Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.02.20 20:54:00 - [936] Update: 1 Rapier, 3 intys, 2 arbitrators, 1 Domi, and a couple other piddly ships is not enough to stop my nanophoon. Hmm... maybe I DO need a nerf... ;) gg anyhoo, Axiom. Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!
MoLeH Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.02.21 04:04:00 - [937] I wish you people complaining about nanodomi's and phoons outrunning your ceptors would shut the hell up, put as much isk or effort into a ceptor and it outruns a nanoBS. as i allready stated my nanophoon does 18km/s with a claymore in my gang, but my claw without any rigs does 19.5km/s now if i add rigs im guessing i would hit 25km/s in the claw. You see that makes my claw a fair bit faster than my phoon right? now stop whining that ur craply setup cepters cant outrun or catch a well setup nanoBS, next youll be complaining that your tech 1 geddon cant beat a fully tech 2 geddon.
Neesa Corrinne Black Watch Legionnaires Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.21 06:05:00 - [938] Moleh: You totally miss the point here. In fact you miss it by such a large margin that I'm left wondering if you have paid any attention at all to this thread. I don't care how fast your ship goes. I don't care that you can make an inty go faster. The point of this thread is that Battlecruiser and Battleship class ships should not ever be travelling 4000m/s or more. It's not their role. Those of us who have a problem with this tactic have a problem with the fact that the intercepter is rendered utterly ineffective because of the fact that battleships can now attain intercepter speeds, without any of the drawbacks of being an interceptor, such as low HP's and low DPS. Also, the problem here is not chasing down these ships. Sure, I can fit an interceptor that will easily chase down a nanophoon.... when I get there I will have four heavy NOS on me, 5 T2 drones and pop like a g*****under a fat woman's stiletto's. A nanophoon warps into a gate camp? No problem, he simply waits out his jump timer while waving at us in local and then mwd's back to the gate for an easy escape. A buddy of mine put 3 faction webs on a nanophoon at a gate camp today as soon as he appeared and his inertia still carried him to the gate and he jumped. If you want twitchy who-can-click-their-mouse-faster combat, then please please go back to playing Halo and racking up headshots.
Hellspawn01 Amarr Falcon Advanced Industries	Posted - 2007.02.22 20:23:00 - [939] I cant be arsed to read all 31 pages but IMO it should get a nerf like the dual MWD nerf some time ago. BS doing the job of ceptors and ceptors cant tackle such ships isnt the way of eve. On the other side, dont nerf clever ppl. Ship lovers click here
Myra Rodan	Posted - 2007.02.22 21:07:00 - [940] Originally by: Andreya train huggin/rapier ?! NOONE in eve shoudl have to train months to 'attempt' to stop one of these ships.. even if they can stop them they still need a gang to kill them as a huginn would die to any nano battleship/curse adpating would mean swap a few mods out to kill a certain type of ship, yes thats ok... but to train for 2 months to fly a ship who can slow it down but cannot kill it... screw that. That's ridiculous. Of course you should have to train for months to be able to effectively counter this. The pilot of the nonophoon had to train for months in order to be able to achieve that kind of speed, and you want CCP to just hand you something that will take you a day to train that will defeat it? Are you nuts? Adapting isn't just switching out equip. Adapting is thinking a way around the problem. Adapting is changing your way of thinking. Adapting is training new skills. Adapting is doing something different than what your opponent is expecting. How do you think the person who first made a nanophoon did it? He looked at many, many, many different combinations of equipment for what would be the most effective. Now it's your turn.

Mikeli Soth Gallente Alpha Initiative	Posted - 2007.02.22 21:39:00 - [941] Edited by: Mikeli Soth on 22/02/2007 21:37:37 Edited by: Mikeli Soth on 22/02/2007 21:35:58 Ok, let us put up a challenge to any who wish to take it upon themselves. You are gatecamping, and up comes a nanophoon going, lets say, 12km/s, using whatever most common build there is to get him that fast. Just for s&g, he is 100 km away and fast on his way to getting to the gate. You have 2 ships MAX that you are able to use to counter said nanoship (all the other ships are just to far away to make a difference). spend however much money you feel like on both ships. What would you use to kill this nanoship? Feel free to debate and post who takes up this challenge.
Lucius Amarriantis Amarr Ordo Occultus Deus THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY	Posted - 2007.02.22 21:40:00 - [942] Apologies if this has been said already - but im not spending god knows how long trawling through 31 pages of whinging. Its quite simple really - a nanophoon has taken the pilot quite some time to fund and learn to fly properly and the ship that should bring them down woiuld and should require the same - and they do. Stick yourself in a curse, get recon to 5 for that 36km nos and neut range witht he sickest nos/neut bonuses of any ship to be quite frank - mwd yoourself in his general direction and laugh wholeheartedly at the ships complete lack of movement or warping out due to the fact he is completely devoid of cap - hit the nano ships where it hurts - they are more dependant on cap than a bloody gankageddon. Come on people adapt. Yeah sure there is gonna be anerf now as tux has mentioned but I feel he has done a little disservice to the game in doing so - there are always going to be ships youi cant defeat with "your own" ship - this is where team play comes in.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.22 22:55:00 - [943] Originally by: jamesw Zomg Nano Nightmare YARR hehe... N.F.F. Recruitment
MoLeH Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.02.23 01:29:00 - [944] Originally by: Mikeli Soth Edited by: Mikeli Soth on 22/02/2007 21:37:37 Edited by: Mikeli Soth on 22/02/2007 21:35:58 Ok, let us put up a challenge to any who wish to take it upon themselves. You are gatecamping, and up comes a nanophoon going, lets say, 12km/s, using whatever most common build there is to get him that fast. Just for s&g, he is 100 km away and fast on his way to getting to the gate. You have 2 ships MAX that you are able to use to counter said nanoship (all the other ships are just to far away to make a difference). spend however much money you feel like on both ships. What would you use to kill this nanoship? Feel free to debate and post who takes up this challenge. Hes heading to the gate from 100km in a 12km/s nanophoon, well unless hes damn lucky and uses autopilot and theres no lag at all in the system and autopilot manages to jump him, so thats fairly unlikely the more likely option is hell bounce about 30km off, now when he turns to get back to the gate u can hit him with webs while hes turning, if u get them on him while hes turning he wont speed up anywhere near as quickly and will struggle to get to the gate, 2 webs will take a 12km/s nanophoon to somewhere around 120m/s i think, so youll probably want 3. Youll also want 4+ nos to keep his cap lowish so hes gonna run out of cap boosters, once hes slow just give him a bump away from the gate, but make sure you webber stays in range. Ok now if he is running from the gate you want a claw with a domination scrambler and propelant injection vents and a snake set, which is roughly what the phoon needs to do the 12km/s. So your claw has that gear and is doing about 25km/s i think now this is enough to keep him well out of nos range and hell outrun the cruise and drones so he wont die, and a claw should keep the mwd going constantly so its just a matter of time till the phoon uses all his cap boosters and cant use his mwd anymore cos he cant nos anyone. at this point u can bring in your buddy in a gankship with longer than 20km range. And if u get one when it attacks someone at a station or belt he can never escape so its just a case of waiting out his cap, also a bhaalgorn with 2 officer webbers and lots of nos will take down a nanophoon
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.23 10:27:00 - [945] Originally by: Mikeli Soth Edited by: Mikeli Soth on 22/02/2007 21:37:37 Edited by: Mikeli Soth on 22/02/2007 21:35:58 Ok, let us put up a challenge to any who wish to take it upon themselves. You are gatecamping, and up comes a nanophoon going, lets say, 12km/s, using whatever most common build there is to get him that fast. Just for s&g, he is 100 km away and fast on his way to getting to the gate. You have 2 ships MAX that you are able to use to counter said nanoship (all the other ships are just to far away to make a difference). spend however much money you feel like on both ships. What would you use to kill this nanoship? Feel free to debate and post who takes up this challenge. spend as much money as I want? Ok.. I use a DD.. next ? :P Seriously.. just put any MWD ship to go into its direction to collide with him... If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Akat Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.02.23 15:17:00 - [946] Originally by: Myra Rodan Originally by: Andreya train huggin/rapier ?! NOONE in eve shoudl have to train months to 'attempt' to stop one of these ships.. even if they can stop them they still need a gang to kill them as a huginn would die to any nano battleship/curse adpating would mean swap a few mods out to kill a certain type of ship, yes thats ok... but to train for 2 months to fly a ship who can slow it down but cannot kill it... screw that. That's ridiculous. Of course you should have to train for months to be able to effectively counter this. The pilot of the nonophoon had to train for months in order to be able to achieve that kind of speed, and you want CCP to just hand you something that will take you a day to train that will defeat it? Are you nuts? Actually, I think your nuts. It takes far less time to train to use MWD and slap on a few named nanos and istabs than it takes to train cruiser 5 AND recons. The point is, if you put enough istabs on a BS, you have the agility and speed that rivals the majority of interceptors. Start adding rigs and implants and your pretty ******* invincible unless your a complete idiot. The entire nano/istab trend pretty much makes interceptors obsolete and useless besides fast lock time.
SoldierOfJustice Kurai-Komichi	Posted - 2007.02.23 20:20:00 - [947] The nano-istab-nos combo has ruined the game. Dont tell me "adapt or die" and such comments cause they only show how much you dont want to adapt with nerfed nanos/nos. Simple facts about nano setups: 1) They have no tank so more pg for more nos (especially on nano domi) 2) They are uncatchable. Dont even start the bull**** about the minmatar recons, cause they simply wont do the job most of the time. 3) Due to their high speed I cant think of any other ship that can actully do dmg on them in close range. Cruise raven maybe? but then the dmg would be low cause of the speed factor. Lets not start a movement to keep nanos and another to nerf them. Its really easy to find what should be done if you go back and check what battleships should do, and am sure they werent supposed to be big intys for young players. The solutions to nano setups could be: 1) Nos nerf. Nos is simply way to overpowered. Takes what..... few hours to train for it even with low attributes. And having teh chance to fit many nos mods on same ship doesnt make it easier nor is it required. Guns have low dps with newbie skills but nos gets full efficiency as soon as you can use it??! hmm, that could be changed ;). 2) Nano nerf. To me it sounds too rediculous that you can keep making your battleship lighter by removing stuff from it (thats what nanos do) and then flying at highspeeds which according to physics will put even greater forces on that ship wich should result in that the ship gets destroyed cause the hull would be too weak! (dont forget teh insane speeds eve ships travel at). Nanos dont seem to work well on battleships, they simply give too much boost! 3) MWD nerf. MWD could simply be nerfed so ppl cant run it as long as they can do atm. I doubt it was supposed to be so "runnable" when the devs thought of the MWD idea. Nano battleships doing 3km/s and higher will change even teh sniper battles. If they land 200km away they simply mwd to the enemy and pwn what cant warp out in time. Welcome to the new eve where everything gets messed up ^^ I personally tested a nano domi. not a single fitting was t2, all t1 and cheap. Could do about 2km/s, with 4 heavy nos. That setup nearly costed my enemy an absolution! He couldnt shoot and even if he had the cap he couldnt track me. I personally want it to be more fair for the absolution (for example) since the man put alot of sp in that ship. Vagabonds are supposed to have highspeeds. But nano bs? I hope ccp does something about the nano ships cause the issue alrdy ruined enough ^^.
Chen Chura	Posted - 2007.02.23 21:47:00 - [948] Originally by: Montaire I have worked with my Huginn. THREE Domination Webbers, thats as good as they get. And I cant make a Nano-phoon or a Nano-Domi fight if they dont want to. They can ALLWAYS get to the gate and run. Because nothing will stop that inital burst of his MWD, near instalty getting him to 1500 meters per second. He then glide to the gate no matter how many Huginn's you have. For the sake of fun we tried catching the same one with two Huginn's (Huginni ? Huginnseses ?) - no difference. If a Nano-Ship doesnt want to fight, you are NOT going to get it to fight. And THAT is what needs fixing. Allow me to demonstrate my ignorance in things PvP. I am new to the game and only have an industry character. Question: Can the Nano ship force you to fight if you absolutly do not want to? If not then I dont see the problem... while you have the right to TRY to kill others they also have the right to TRY to run. You are not entitled to the actual kill. You are only entitled to attempt it and see if you are successful. If the Nano can FORCE you to stay and fight a lossing fight when no one can do similarly to them, then they are like god mode chosing who lives and who dies. If you can both run then the Nano is just a scavanger preying on those too stupid to chose their battles wisely. But it's not fair.... I didn't get to kill him. Life isn't fair. But I do admit that it wouldn't be a streach to make an argument for stacking nerfs on Nano's and Inertia Stabilizers... Still it isnt worth it if the only thing Nanos are hurting is someone's pride. *SO... Can Nano keep their prey from running?*
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.23 22:39:00 - [949] Not if the prey fits nos + decent tank, or wcs + tank. You can counteract wcs by bumping, but it's not too easy to bump someone until they die, if they try to warp out all the time. It's almost impossible to kill a properly set up nos dominix with a nano setup.... N.F.F. Recruitment
Darax Thulain Minmatar Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.23 22:43:00 - [950] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: jamesw Zomg Nano Nightmare YARR hehe... Nanomare? Thats so old. Darax

Shaemell Buttleson Darwin With Attitude	Posted - 2007.02.23 22:50:00 - [951] Nanophoons. Do I like them? Not really. Do I think they can go faster and are more agil than they should be? Hell yes! Do I use them? Yes, but mainly because PPL i go roaming with like them. Are they hard to kill? Depends on how willing you are to fight in them against decent targets. I lost 2 today to well organised gangs with webbers (not even recon). If you use them like the gatecamping carebears used to snipe with a rack of WCS and stay aligned then you are safe. So basicly it depends on the pilot you are trying to fight. Will I be upset when they are nerfed/changed or balanced? Not in the slightest as there are plenty of other fun things to fly! Will I be glad when something is done to reduce the overall top speed of all ships in general? Yes. some ships like Intis should allways go fast but with speeds of things over 10km/s now I think it's broken. Flame suit on!
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.23 23:31:00 - [952] Originally by: Ryysa Not if the prey fits nos + decent tank, or wcs + tank. WCS are no real argument, because WCS work against every single other ship as well. Of cource there are ways in eve to avoid combat, but it fitting a full rack of WCS (with the tradeoff of making the ship usless for PvP) or the much loved logoffski, which works vs nanoBS just as well as against every other ship. Notice the last part of that sentence, non-ultra-survivability setups have just the same problems. If anything nanoBS are the best ship for stabbed up ships, because the only way to keep those from fleeing is bumping - which nanoBS can do best. In short, you can answer Can the Nano ship force you to fight if you absolutly do not want to? with a definite "yes". However, it is the wrong question. A nanoBS as an unique advantage, so it would also need an unique disadvantage if you want to use it as balance argument. Something which only effects them and not all ships. This makes ECM, damps and WCS no viable answers there. There the only real answer is: if you are in another BS with at least an equal amount of nos and a good tank. But this is again no real "see they are balanced" argument. Because every single other BS outfit also has their nemesis - there is none which can kill ALL other outfits. In short: it has targets it is weak against. Yes. But, again, so has every other ship/setup. The problem here is that if other ships/setups encounter their "bad" target they die in most cases. A nanosetup will flee in most cases.
Terazuk Amarr FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.02.24 08:04:00 - [953] MINES! Wheeeeeee oh sh... BOOOOM! -~- Take the above post seriously at your peril -~-
Felzius Gallente Phoenix Wing Alektorophobia	Posted - 2007.02.24 17:45:00 - [954] Whoever is calling wcs a counter to nanoships, you're not gonna warp out with 0 cap, now are ya ^^ Just lost dominix to "return to dronebay" bug, and an ares got owned by nanogeddon and pilgrim ^^ I'm out of ships, going to bed now. bye bye
Red Crown Kudzu Collective	Posted - 2007.02.24 22:22:00 - [955] I think the problem is the nanofibers themselves. They make no sense. Whats next? Nanotitan? 300 M/S of sheer terror? Imagine the bumping. And well, lets try to keep it real? Would a massive battleship be going 5000 meters a second? The inertia involved would rip it apart, especially if its structure was made of cotton. "EVE is the worst MMORPG. Except for all the other ones." [KUDZU] = Coalition.
Tohmu Blackwing	Posted - 2007.02.25 10:08:00 - [956] Nano-Phoons and nano-Domis are bad for game balance. How? Consider the progression of ships in the game. Consider their ôintendedö roles. (I will ignore PvE because when you PvE, any ship can be used û I will also skip many of the classes. Frigates û small, fast, cheap. Good for tackling. Good for harassment. Good for scouting. Interceptors û same, but more of the above û except cost. Destroyers û frigate killers. Not so fast. Not very good armour. Great gank û light weapons. Cruisers û fleet support ships, still cheap but specialize in specific roles, like gank, tank, support (repping, EWAR). Battlecruisers û cruiser killers. Really, they excel at this. They are good multi-role ships, however, but they lack the speed and firepower to move very far from their intended roles. They often excel at tanking. Battleships û the king of the jungle. No need to elaborate here. NOTE: These are simplified explanations. Please donÆt bother to flame me for missing some. Ok û now consider that there is a progression of ôrolesö in this game. Light ships have their roles, heavies have theirs. If you are innovative, you can fit a ship to ôjumpö a role or two, for example: fit a cruiser for tank so that it can take on a BC. (1 role jump) fit a BC for massive tank so that it can outlast a BS. (1 role jump) Fit a cruiser for speed to act as a heavy tackler. (2 role jumps) So, you can see ships that can move one or two ôrolesö from their designed purpose (I use this term lightly, the game encourages flexibility û and that is a good thing). Again, I did not try to include ALL of the possible innovative uses for ships in the game. Now lets look at the nano-phoon. You take the heaviest non-capital ship in the game (BS) and slap on a few mods and poof you have an instant interceptor û jumping 4 roles! This is clearly absurd. The most common arguments go something like this: 1.ôThese people have taken the time to train the skill to fly a ship like this û give them a break! If you donÆt like it û train up the skills to fly one yourself!ö Orà. 2.ôEvery time someone comes up with something innovative, it gets nerfed! DonÆt nerf this innovation û it is fun!ö Orà 3.ôThese ships cost a lot and if they lose one, it is a significant investment!ö Orà 4. ôI finally have a ship that I have fun with!ö (read as: I can own s**t in this ship. DonÆt take it away from me!) à 5.Or my personal favourite: ôJust train Minmatar!!!ö Contintued...
Tohmu Blackwing	Posted - 2007.02.25 10:09:00 - [957] .... continued... There are a number of problems with these arguments: 1.I might be inclined to agree with you except for one problem û not every race in the game can do this. THIS IS UNBALANCE. If you want to allow such a massive jump in ship roles, then you cannot limit them to one or two races. This is simply just too big of an advantage for one race of ships (here is where the Minmatar fanbois start to flame). But before you flame me just consider if the shoe was on the other footà oh waità IT WAS ONCE. I have not been in the game long enough to see this in person, but I have talked to people who have used something called the ôCavalry Raven.ö Fit multiple MWDs on a Raven, the speed boost stacksà. Instant ô4-role jumpingö, tanking, missile spewing death. People complained û it was nerfed. It was clearly a game mechanic exploit that provided a clear advantage to one race of ships (Ravens are the king of missile hell). As to training up skills to fly one as a counter û see my argument to #4 below. 2.This is a good argument, except that it doesnÆt address just HOW BIG an innovation this is to the game. You are jumping the most powerful ships in the game (non-capital) 4 roles to cover what is the domain of the smallest ships. This is really too much. DonÆt believe me? Then try the logic in reverseà Imagine a mod that had no stacking penalties, no limits, that gave interceptors the PG and CPU necessary to fit 4 cruise missiles. Imagine the Crow with 4 T2 Cruise. 9K/sec, spewing missiles and zooming off. Would you agree with this? WouldnÆt people who have ôspent the time to train the skillsö to fly a battleship feel like they have been cheated? Now a ship that costs roughly + the cost of a BS can fly faster than they can target it and still have the firepower of a BS. This is an equally absurd creation. Bottom line, if you want a ship to have the ability to jump 4 roles, then why cant ALL ships jump just as many roles? What about a BC that had the firepower of a dreadnaught or carrier? Is that balanced? I donÆt think so. 3.I am not interested in how much a nano-phoon costs û if price was the only limitation to performance in EVE, then everyone would be buying ISK on e-bay. 4.Too bad. I donÆt believe in the ôI win EVEö fitting. Have fun with something else, or play a different game. The nano-phoon might not exactly be an ôI win EVEö button, but it is definitely overpowered. Just because it is fun 4 you doesnÆt make it good for the game. 5.This is the most absurd suggestion people make û and yet these forums are littered with suggestions like this. If the game requires you to completely retrain your skill base just to counter one ship THEN THERE IS CLEARLY AN IMBALANCE! Period. This goes for the arguments that you should just train up a Huginn or a Curse to take on a nano-phoon. It doesnÆt take much (reasonable) thought to figure that out. Let me restate that last one clearly: If the game requires you to completely retrain your skill base (train Minmatar!) just to counter one ship THEN THERE IS CLEARLY AN IMBALANCE! Period.
Master Arrow	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:01:00 - [958] I think its funny that every nano-pilot is saying "adapt" Thats the biggest load of BS. ALL ships in the game can be taken 1v1 with the right counter ship. A nano-ship requires a full gang of ships that all have specific roles in taking down a nano and have to be used effectively and error free in order to kill the nano-ship. That is far too overpowered for 1 ship to be able to take on a gang of ships and not even have to really worry about losing his ship. The other arguement is they paid a lot and spent a lot of time training to use it. Theres far more ships that require far more skills to fly that can be killed much easier than a nano-ship. So your isk/sp arguement is basically void. Therefore, NERF it already...A BS that is faster and just as agile as an interceptor is just totally defiant on game mechanics and design. CCP is trying to improve pvp and encourage it, yet it allows one ship setup that is so overpowered that it has destroyed the whole pvp part of the game.
Tohmu Blackwing	Posted - 2007.02.25 12:39:00 - [959] Hmm... just thinking about this a bit more... Maybe someone could write up this "long list of skills" that a nano-phoon pilot must train "just to be able to use it...?" If these are general purpose skills that EVERYONE uses, then you can TAKE THEM OFF YOUR LIST! They don't count! General purpose skills (as in, EVERYONE has them - or should): Navigation IV (V if you fly an inty - required) Acceleration Control IV Afterburner IV (required for Evasive Maneuvering) Evasive Maneuvering IV (V if you fly an inty - required) High Speed Maneuvering III Spaceship Command IV Strike these from your list. Show me a pilot who PvPs and DOES NOT have these skills and I will eat my Raven. These are just a basic list of skills that everyone should have. They simply DON'T count for your "long list of skills to properly train a nano-phoon." I am curious what else is required, beyond taking these skills to V...? (note: High Speed Maneuvering V is not required - it is just handy). Some of these skills should probably be at higher levels for PvP setups - I just put them at a basic minimum. I am sure there are skills needed to fly a nano-phoon effectively beyond this list - but don't even think about including Minmatar Battleship as one of them. You fly Minnie ships, I fly Caldari. Listing the skill needed to fly the ship in question is NOT proof that you had to train really hard to fly a nano-phoon. I had to train just as hard to fly that Raven... So.... what other skills are required to make you go really fast? I see only the list above as required skills - with some taken to level V. If you already fly Interceptors, it would only require Acceleration Control and Spaceship Command to V from what I can see. That is about a 20 day investment, hardly the "massive investment" of time used to justify unbalancing the game this much...
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.25 16:14:00 - [960] I just had a thought. I'm not sure if it was mentioned but why not increase the cap usage on the MWD, remove the cap penalty and put a huge agility penalty on it? It occurs to me that the whole point of the MWD originally was just for a sudden burst of speed that applies in a straight line. Wouldn't something like this work best?

Dendrin Koljn Minmatar Elite United Corp	Posted - 2007.02.25 17:24:00 - [961] take it as read that i think these need, tweaking, as no single ship should be able to successfully beat so much solo. 1. When the MWD is 'ON' all other mods cant be activated. - Mwd just uses to much power or 2. While the MWD is 'ON' lasers do 50% more damage to shields - because so much power is diverted to the mwd hybrids do 25% more to shields, 25% more to armour - see above + below Proj do 50% more dam to armour - due to the much higher impact speeds of solid ammo.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.25 17:41:00 - [962] Originally by: Felzius Whoever is calling wcs a counter to nanoships, you're not gonna warp out with 0 cap, now are ya ^^ Yes. Yes you are. Dear God, somebody put him out of my misery... sgb
RoyAraym	Posted - 2007.02.25 19:16:00 - [963] Your nemesis is a nano-bs??? If the answer is "yes"... My question: If you are in a nano-bs with webber??? See your nemesis, fly on it, stop it, let your gang destroy it. No more camping-pirates can avoid to jump in a gate, if a pilot do it manualy (warp to 0 m --> jump)... ... so a nano-bs is functionally only in a pvp situation, and if she (for me a "ship" is a "she") is going to combat with anonther identical nano-bs?? Win the gang/group with more nano-bs??? The counter-ship of a nano-ship is probably the same nano-ship. And the fortune of non nano-ship to be the key to jump in battle and select the nano-ship stopped and destroy them... The key of a victory is not "one ship" but the way "to use all the ship together"...
F Apparition Minmatar Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.25 22:52:00 - [964] Edited by: F Apparition on 25/02/2007 22:49:09 Just throwing an idea in here, but how about making it so that the faster your ship goes, your HP decreases by %? I'm tired, slightly drunk and bored out of my skull. Don't flame me. Originally by: Derek If EVE gave you oral sex every time you used it people would still complain.
DeTox MinRohim Madhatters Inc. Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.26 01:52:00 - [965] Edited by: DeTox MinRohim on 26/02/2007 01:54:36 Just got owned in my interceptor by a lonely Machariel doing 12k/s (non-stop) shooting torpedoes, guns, drones on me, completly nossed and scrambled at 20km (minimum more or less depending on his circling around me) while having fighters on his ass, a Raven, a Domi, and another ship I don't even remember... I usually say "GF"... (not the smack-talker kind at all, I despise this). But on this one ? I mean... like... ffrppprrrffllleeeaaaase.. P.S.: Forgot to mention that he easily popped the raven before switching to me... oh... and did I mentioned that he took all his time to loot the friggin raven wreck ?... yea he did... So here goes another ffrppprrrffllleeeaaaase.. ------ ~~Proud member of the !s~~ I take no responsability for your paranoia ! This sig space is Read-only !
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.26 02:25:00 - [966] Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Edited by: DeTox MinRohim on 26/02/2007 01:54:36 Just got owned in my interceptor by a lonely Machariel doing 12k/s (non-stop) shooting torpedoes, guns, drones on me, completly nossed and scrambled at 20km (minimum more or less depending on his circling around me) while having fighters on his ass, a Raven, a Domi, and another ship I don't even remember... I usually say "GF"... (not the smack-talker kind at all, I despise this). But on this one ? I mean... like... ffrppprrrffllleeeaaaase.. P.S.: Forgot to mention that he easily popped the raven before switching to me... oh... and did I mentioned that he took all his time to loot the friggin raven wreck ?... yea he did... So here goes another ffrppprrrffllleeeaaaase.. Losing interceptor to nanobs is retarded, just warp next time, he can never lock you before he warps out. I love people who try to burn out from my nanobs [which has very expensive setups + snake implants]. While if you just hit warp and you are in cruiser or smaller, a nanobs will never get a lock on you before you get out. Exchange "machariel" and "12km/s" with hugin and dualweb in your post, and you will realize you would have died all the same, because you don't know how to play the game. The fact that you got owned in your ceptor has nothing to do with nanobs being overpowered. They are overpowered, but not because of your stupidity. N.F.F. Recruitment
DeTox MinRohim Madhatters Inc. Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.26 02:43:00 - [967] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: DeTox MinRohim blabla Losing interceptor to nanobs is retarded, just warp next time, he can never lock you before he warps out. I love people who try to burn out from my nanobs [which has very expensive setups + snake implants]. While if you just hit warp and you are in cruiser or smaller, a nanobs will never get a lock on you before you get out. Exchange "machariel" and "12km/s" with hugin and dualweb in your post, and you will realize you would have died all the same, because you don't know how to play the game. The fact that you got owned in your ceptor has nothing to do with nanobs being overpowered. They are overpowered, but not because of your stupidity. Dude (or dudette), since you weren't there and you don't have a clue about how it went on, I'll excuse the useless, uninformed and uncalled trash-talk. THAT was retarded. If you truly think I wasn't trying to get away out of this one the millisecond I saw how ridiculous it was going, think again. I NEVER could get away out of cap I was and blablabla. Me loosing my interceptor to it is the lowest of my concerns and my stupidity had nothing to do with it (your kind really must get down of your highness sometimes - it's a game ffs). The circus that it was (overpowered and unbalanced as it is) is what I'm pointing at. Now of course, my post may not have led you to understand that... I say whatever. ------ ~~Proud member of the !s~~ I take no responsability for your paranoia ! This sig space is Read-only !
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.26 10:12:00 - [968] The current counter for nano-bs that I have found runs as follows: 1) Bait the silly nano bs that do cruiser dps with a tanked to hell tier 3 bs. 2) Sit there and laugh at them for a few moments. 3) Jump your nano-bs in, and get him to get a web on one of the enemy nano-bs. 4) Jump the rest of your gang in and utterly gankwtfpwn the tackled nano-bs. 5) Watch his mates run like scared wabbits. 6) Rinse and repeat with the next nano-bs gang. What's the problem with the above scenario? That's right, you have to use the same idiotic setup to catch them as they use, wasting at least one of your valuable bs. And it only works on dumb pilots lacking in scouts. No other counter seems to work, short of a massive interceptor blob. Huginns and rapiers die or get nossed in seconds, don't get me started on them. Feel free to fix this at any point ccp. sgb
Mangus Thermopyle Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.26 12:10:00 - [969] Maybe nanophoon is slightly to fast, but dont nerf inerta/nanos now that they finally made BS really fun to fly. Besides, you have to gimp your setup pretty badly, meaning a nanophoon will be eaten alive against normally setup BSes unless he can use range/speed to his advantage. In other words, pretty similar to many other ships like for example the vaga.
Rekam Evarg Caldari Union Of Xtreme Military The Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 13:41:00 - [970] Hiya Sorry but I havent read all 33 pages of this thread, so sorry if this as been adressed already.. I have had a idea of a fix for this problem, I posted it else where so here is the link, Linkage As you can see, its not a straight nerf but a balance, that allows those players who wish to use this type of ships to do so, but at a risk. Lets not just stop everyone using them, lets just make them think about their choice.... Rek RekamEvarg Oh Hello, You can see the pub from here. No Animals were harmed in the writing of this post

smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.26 15:59:00 - [971] Originally by: Rekam Evarg Hiya Sorry but I havent read all 33 pages of this thread, so sorry if this as been adressed already.. I have had a idea of a fix for this problem, I posted it else where so here is the link, Linkage As you can see, its not a straight nerf but a balance, that allows those players who wish to use this type of ships to do so, but at a risk. Lets not just stop everyone using them, lets just make them think about their choice.... Rek An interesting idea, but with a couple of problems as i see it: -The difficulty vs nanoships is often not how much damage you do when you hit, but more a case of ever hitting them at all. -I'm fairly sure ccp never intended bs to go over a few k/s. -You're creating yet more calculations that need to be constantly done, don't forget we are trying to reduce lag all the time not create more! Apart from that, it looks like a solid idea. I'm still behind nerfing nanobs but keeping ships that are designed to go fast tho. sgb
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.26 18:07:00 - [972] Originally by: Derran I just had a thought. I'm not sure if it was mentioned but why not increase the cap usage on the MWD, remove the cap penalty and put a huge agility penalty on it? It occurs to me that the whole point of the MWD originally was just for a sudden burst of speed that applies in a straight line. Wouldn't something like this work best? Figured I'd quote myself here rather than retype. I was thinking of numbers so what about a 75-80% agility penalty when MWD is in use? That way you can still have your burst of speed but your turning ability makes it unviable to keep in orbit while the MWD is on.
ArtemisEntreri	Posted - 2007.02.26 20:12:00 - [973] Originally by: Derran Originally by: Derran I just had a thought. I'm not sure if it was mentioned but why not increase the cap usage on the MWD, remove the cap penalty and put a huge agility penalty on it? It occurs to me that the whole point of the MWD originally was just for a sudden burst of speed that applies in a straight line. Wouldn't something like this work best? Figured I'd quote myself here rather than retype. I was thinking of numbers so what about a 75-80% agility penalty when MWD is in use? That way you can still have your burst of speed but your turning ability makes it unviable to keep in orbit while the MWD is on. You already get an agility nerf, and this would only nerf ships that don't have nano tbh, nerfing agility = nerfing acceleration therefore hurting ships like blasterthron approaching a target etc. MWD is not the problem imo
Ash Vincetti Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.02.26 23:17:00 - [974] The way I see it, there are two possible solutions that are at all elegant. One poster above has suggested the idea of splitting the propulsion mods into frigate/cruiser/battleship sizes. Personally i think the issue is a matter of playing with numbers, which shouldn't affect the game too greatly. Before revelations, iStabs did not come with a mass decrease, it was simply an agility bonus. Once Revelations came out, the mass reduction of the inertial stabilizer, in addition to the agility increase of them, and the nanos, in conjunction with the rigs, caused ships (battleships especially, with it's multitude of lowslots) to reach speeds they were not intended to reach. The problem goes from a full snake implant + rigs + iStabs/Nanoed interceptor reaching 16km/s, to that of a similar battleship reaching upwards of 6km/s. With that tidbit of history in mind, what should be done is have the values of all the propulsion mods & rigs adjusted down. If they were all halved, then those 6km/s become 3, and the 16km/s become 8km/s. Perhaps graded on some sort of curve with stacking penalties, so that the interceptors at the lower levels can achieve similar results than before Revelations, but after 2 of each type, diminishing results really start to sink in. This will naturally have to be tested, and done over several patches to see how the setups and gameplay are affected, but those are my .02 isk on the matter. I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel in this issue. If after adjusting the propulsion mods, we continue to see nano battleships abused, then we can start looking into other alternatives, such as the nos/mwd/cap booster/etc nerfs that seem so incredibly ill-conceived. ----- /ash
Akat Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.02.26 23:17:00 - [975] Originally by: ArtemisEntreri Originally by: Derran Originally by: Derran I just had a thought. I'm not sure if it was mentioned but why not increase the cap usage on the MWD, remove the cap penalty and put a huge agility penalty on it? It occurs to me that the whole point of the MWD originally was just for a sudden burst of speed that applies in a straight line. Wouldn't something like this work best? Figured I'd quote myself here rather than retype. I was thinking of numbers so what about a 75-80% agility penalty when MWD is in use? That way you can still have your burst of speed but your turning ability makes it unviable to keep in orbit while the MWD is on. You already get an agility nerf, and this would only nerf ships that don't have nano tbh, nerfing agility = nerfing acceleration therefore hurting ships like blasterthron approaching a target etc. MWD is not the problem imo Agreed. I've heard talk of an MWD nerf and I think it would be a travasty to nerf them when they aren't the problem. The problem IS the istab. Put enough on and a BS is as agile and sometimes faster than an inty. MWDs have enough penalties as it is.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:59:00 - [976] Originally by: Ash Vincetti The problem goes from a full snake implant + rigs + iStabs/Nanoed interceptor reaching 16km/s, to that of a similar battleship reaching upwards of 6km/s. Try 6 km/s without snakes on a nanophoon (can get a nanophoon to over 7 km/s without any snake implant). Quote: With that tidbit of history in mind, what should be done is have the values of all the propulsion mods & rigs adjusted down. If they were all halved, then those 6km/s become 3, and the 16km/s become 8km/s. The general speed is no real problem - the high speed "oversized" ships can achieve is. Also, such a change would nerf all ships which plainly do not need any nerf, especially all closerange turret setups. Perhaps graded on some sort of curve with stacking penalties, so that the interceptors at the lower levels can achieve similar results than before Revelations, but after 2 of each type, diminishing results really start to sink in. This will naturally have to be tested, and done over several patches to see how the setups and gameplay are affected, but those are my .02 isk on the matter. I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel in this issue. If after adjusting the propulsion mods, we continue to see nano battleships abused, then we can start looking into other alternatives, such as the nos/mwd/cap booster/etc nerfs that seem so incredibly ill-conceived.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.27 03:03:00 - [977] Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Dude (or dudette), since you weren't there and you don't have a clue about how it went on, I'll excuse the useless, uninformed and uncalled trash-talk. THAT was retarded. Truth hurts? Quote: If you truly think I wasn't trying to get away out of this one the millisecond I saw how ridiculous it was going, think again. I NEVER could get away out of cap I was and blablabla. That means, you went into nos range of nanobs. And it had time to lock you. The time for a nanobs to lock you is about 12-20 seconds, depending if it has sensor booster and if you have MWD on. That means, you had about 5-6 seconds to initiate warp. 5 Seconds is more than enough to see 6000m/s on the velocity column at the overview. Again, if you lose a ceptor to a nanobs, it either had 3 sensor boosters [which it can't have without uber gimping it's setup] or you just weren't paying attention. I'd say it's the latter. Quote: Me loosing my interceptor to it is the lowest of my concerns and my stupidity had nothing to do with it (your kind really must get down of your highness sometimes - it's a game ffs). The circus that it was (overpowered and unbalanced as it is) is what I'm pointing at. Your inability to pvp has everything to do with it. You are in ceptor/ship highly vulnerable to nos without injector with low tank. You see nanobs? You GTFO, I can warp out my vagabond from a nanobs before it locks me every time, and you can't warp out your CEPTOR? Quote: Now of course, my post may not have led you to understand that... I say whatever. The only thing there is to understand, is that losing a ceptor to a nanobs is a silly mistake. A lot of people do that mistake, but burning away from something that is going faster than you is not very smart [when you can just warp in 2-3 seconds, before said ship has a chance to lock you]. Quote: Originally by: Ryysa Exchange "machariel" and "12km/s" with hugin and dualweb in your post, and you will realize you would have died all the same...snip on the stupid rest Never said otherwise... but the same huggin surviving fighters, domi, raven and else support ? mmm..... mktksbye My hugin can survive fighters, domi, raven and support easily. In fact, my hugin goes over 5km/s. But hey - I'll leave it to you to discover how to pvp in this game, it wouldn't be fun if everything was spoonfed to you now would it? I am not saying nanobs is not overpowered, proportional increase of lowslots => speed is not right, period. Since bigger ships get more slots. But losing a ceptor to a nanobs and then justifying that it was not pilot error makes me laugh :) N.F.F. Recruitment
Zalathar Minmatar Biometaloid INC	Posted - 2007.02.27 10:38:00 - [978] Nano-ships do not necessitate atwitch movement reflex. Nanos are a form of well thought-out strategy! It is not a simple solution, and if u nerf nanos, u would have to nerf snipers too, because the concepts are very similar. Do damage, and avoid it. Nerfing nano ships would also be ANOTHER serious blow to the minmatar. If someone has invested the time, money and thought to make a nano ship, let him have it.u just have to web them and kill the drones, then they are in trouble, beacause they will have a practically non-existant tank.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.27 11:48:00 - [979] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: DeTox MinRohim My hugin can survive fighters, domi, raven and support easily. In fact, my hugin goes over 5km/s. Good to see you vary your setup from ship type to ship type buddy sgb
Imhotep Khem Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.27 12:34:00 - [980] I put my rapier on a nano-phoon before. He slid into the gate under the pause my domination webbifier. Nothing I could do about it. I suppose we could have a Sabre jump through and bubble him. But how many different types of ships and pilots should it take to bring down a single battle ship and still be called balanced? ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'.

Miss CJB Gallente In White Suits	Posted - 2007.02.27 14:32:00 - [981] Edited by: Miss CJB on 27/02/2007 14:30:45 not shore if its bean said allready, havent read all 33 pabes, but wouldnt it be cool and make RP sence, if mwd's didnt work inside warp disruptore bubles? this would provide another counter to nano BS's, other than minni recons. edit: oo, and bost officor webs Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24000 bytes -Taiatia ([email protected])
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 15:09:00 - [982] Was already suggested, no good idea since you might as well remove all ships which rely on a MWD from the game then. Including inties, shortrange turret ships and blockade runners.
Sartaron Amarr Neo-Tek	Posted - 2007.02.27 15:44:00 - [983] Well, haven't read all 33.... said before.... But: The reason, why the nano-bs have to go is: It just looks stupid, kills game-experience and is totally agains any logic.(Well, the fixed nano-bonus is) It makes makes no sense, that those big ships go that fast. Or keep the relations and make the game unplayable: Make inties go 30km/s. There is no other solution than to change this. Just put a cap on each ship based on its base speed after navigation skill. Like that it can't be raised by more than 100% or so. Just picked the number. Dunno whether it makes sense. But something like this has to be done with each ship. Some more, some less. Or any other solution, that stops this madness. Or give 8 lows to each ship, so that we can make each ship a perfect nano-ship.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.27 15:49:00 - [984] Originally by: ArtemisEntreri Originally by: Derran Originally by: Derran I just had a thought. I'm not sure if it was mentioned but why not increase the cap usage on the MWD, remove the cap penalty and put a huge agility penalty on it? It occurs to me that the whole point of the MWD originally was just for a sudden burst of speed that applies in a straight line. Wouldn't something like this work best? Figured I'd quote myself here rather than retype. I was thinking of numbers so what about a 75-80% agility penalty when MWD is in use? That way you can still have your burst of speed but your turning ability makes it unviable to keep in orbit while the MWD is on. You already get an agility nerf, and this would only nerf ships that don't have nano tbh, nerfing agility = nerfing acceleration therefore hurting ships like blasterthron approaching a target etc. MWD is not the problem imo I'm not a speed freak so I never really paid much attention to that. Whenever I used a MWD, it was only just to get a boost in a straight line. Doesn't it seem odd that acceleration is based on agility instead of mass? Agility seems more like a stat for maneuverability and difficulty to hit than a stat for propulsion. It seems the only thing mass is tied to is your top speed. You'd think doing it so mass affects speed and acceleration and agility affects only manueverability and difficulty to hit (along with sig radius) would make more sense.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.27 16:33:00 - [985] It's a bit of a naming issue. The agility mod is not really an agility mod. Nanofibers and instabs give beside their speed/mass bonus not a +agility bonus but a negative inertia modifier. And inertia is the force of your mass which is slowing down your acelleration (not really correctly phrased, but you get the idea). The problem really is that outside of changing the physics of space-time the only way to reduce the inertia of an object is to reduce it's mass because it's a direct result of it. The -inertia mod is basically something which is physically impossible.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.27 21:11:00 - [986] Originally by: Imhotep Khem I put my rapier on a nano-phoon before. He slid into the gate under the pause my domination webbifier. Nothing I could do about it. I suppose we could have a Sabre jump through and bubble him. But how many different types of ships and pilots should it take to bring down a single battle ship and still be called balanced? Glad some one was able to get the right words to put it in the proper perspective. This is what should be said to all people who don't think interceptors known as battleships should be changed.
Ernest Graefenberg Minmatar Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.28 01:24:00 - [987] Originally by: Derran Originally by: Imhotep Khem I put my rapier on a nano-phoon before. He slid into the gate under the pause my domination webbifier. Nothing I could do about it. I suppose we could have a Sabre jump through and bubble him. But how many different types of ships and pilots should it take to bring down a single battle ship and still be called balanced? Glad some one was able to get the right words to put it in the proper perspective. This is what should be said to all people who don't think interceptors known as battleships should be changed. If every ship that can reapproach a gate and jump, necessitating aggro management or bumping from the opposition, is overpowered - then we need to rethink pretty much every shipclass except industrials.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.28 10:46:00 - [988] Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 10:45:35 Difference is that most of those ships are not able to do that in a full combat setup, but only in travelsetups. Also, even if a blasterhtorn could get back to the gate (where I am not sure, I do not think he can acellerate fast enough to be unable to be slowed down before he reaches the gate)..anyway, even if this case a single 08/15 fitted inty should have no problem to jump through and hold him until some of your gang can jump through as well, even if the BS has a 2 bil faction fit. Assuming he does not log, that is, but thats another story. Vs a nanobs you would need at least a nanoed inty and a nanoed minnie recon.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.28 13:55:00 - [989] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 10:45:35 Difference is that most of those ships are not able to do that in a full combat setup, but only in travelsetups. Also, even if a blasterhtorn could get back to the gate (where I am not sure, I do not think he can acellerate fast enough to be unable to be slowed down before he reaches the gate)..anyway, even if this case a single 08/15 fitted inty should have no problem to jump through and hold him until some of your gang can jump through as well, even if the BS has a 2 bil faction fit. Assuming he does not log, that is, but thats another story. Vs a nanobs you would need at least a nanoed inty and a nanoed minnie recon. Don't forget that apart from those two, needed just to tackle the ship, you will also need enough firepower, spare tacklers, and ecm to kill the bs before it nosses or kills every thing capable of slowing it down. You need about 4-5 ships to have an even chance of catching and killing a nano-bs, which is also roughly the amount you need to take out a carrier. Remind me where this was meant to happen? sgb
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.28 14:57:00 - [990] Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 14:54:53 Not necessarily. A hug/rapier can easily use 2 webs, 2 damps, MWD and faction scram. Even if the phoon has a sensorbooster it won't be able to target the minnie recon back if it stays more than 24k away from him. If nanoed up it can easily speedtank any drones on it until help arrives (or it is able to kill the drones on it's own). You need the ceptor to keep the phoon from warping before the minnie recon can lock on him and minnie recon to lock him down. It's perfectly able to do so on it's own. Could still fail if you have bad luck (like jumping in 35k from the phoon), though. And still a lot more (highly specialized) effort than you need vs anything else.

smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.28 16:52:00 - [991] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 28/02/2007 14:54:53 Not necessarily. A hug/rapier can easily use 2 webs, 2 damps, MWD and faction scram. Even if the phoon has a sensorbooster it won't be able to target the minnie recon back if it stays more than 24k away from him. If nanoed up it can easily speedtank any drones on it until help arrives (or it is able to kill the drones on it's own). You need the ceptor to keep the phoon from warping before the minnie recon can lock on him and minnie recon to lock him down. It's perfectly able to do so on it's own. Could still fail if you have bad luck (like jumping in 35k from the phoon), though. And still a lot more (highly specialized) effort than you need vs anything else. You're asuming that there is only one nanobs :) In my experience they often come in packs. But i do see your point, that setup could work, although with one sensorbooster on vs 2 damps I believe lock range is something on the lines of 30-40ks so you are still vulnerable to drones. Also, you are hoping that the nanobs is happily sitting 24ks from you while you lock him, dampen him, and get to your preferred range. The idea is sound but not as practical as could be, and requires at least 2 specialised ships setup just for this operation... sgb
Chelmar II	Posted - 2007.02.28 16:55:00 - [992] Excuse my ignorance since I have never flown a Typhoon, but it seems that a nossie boat, if given enough time and probably a faction stasis web, could easily take a fully fitted nanophoon. I haven't read the entire 32 pages before, so I'm not sure if the idea was offered/disproved already.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.28 16:59:00 - [993] Originally by: Aramendel Not necessarily. A hug/rapier can easily use 2 webs, 2 damps, MWD and faction scram. Even if the phoon has a sensorbooster it won't be able to target the minnie recon back if it stays more than 24k away from him. If nanoed up it can easily speedtank any drones on it until help arrives (or it is able to kill the drones on it's own). You need the ceptor to keep the phoon from warping before the minnie recon can lock on him and minnie recon to lock him down. It's perfectly able to do so on it's own. Could still fail if you have bad luck (like jumping in 35k from the phoon), though. And still a lot more (highly specialized) effort than you need vs anything else. Setting aside the fact for now that this whole istab+nano+MWD essentially makes frigate sized ships obsolete, that still makes it required to have at least 3 ships to stop 1 (rapier/huguinn to slow it down, interceptor to scramble, another ship for real damage). And that is assuming you catch it on the OTHER side of the gate and one of your key ships didn't aggro so can't follow. Also you have to assume that the BS pilot did not fit a sensorbooster which may let him get a lock on the huguin/rapier before it can dampen it (I don't think it'd have enough strength with just 2 dampeners, btw), one dampener would be negated and then the nanoBS would likely have enough time to stick its drones on the rapier or Huguinn. There is alot of things that would have to go perfect and still alot of ships just to take out one.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.28 18:27:00 - [994] Originally by: smallgreenblur But i do see your point, that setup could work, although with one sensorbooster on vs 2 damps I believe lock range is something on the lines of 30-40ks so you are still vulnerable to drones. Also, you are hoping that the nanobs is happily sitting 24ks from you while you lock him, dampen him, and get to your preferred range. Phoon lock range is 23.5k with one SB2 and LRT4 vs 2 t2/muon damps with SS4. I am using damps extensively myself and made very sure that I know exactly what they can and cannot do. Also, the nanobs can happily lock the huggin initially. One cycle of 4 heavy nos will only drain half the huggins cap (and that is assuming the ceptor got ignored and no nos was used on him)), their cooldown are 12 seconds and by that time the webs should have slowed the nanoBS down sufficently that the huggin will be in absolute control of the range. Heavy (or med) drones are also no problem because a properly nanoed up huggin does 4 km/s (without snakes), they are simply too slow to reach him. And even with half of his cap gone he can speedtank them for 30 seconds till the cavallery arrives. Quote: and requires at least 2 specialised ships setup just for this operation... Of cource. I never said otherwise or that that is balanced. Originally by: Derran And that is assuming you catch it on the OTHER side of the gate and one of your key ships didn't aggro so can't follow. It doesn't aggroes because it aggroing does absolutely nothing if he runs to the gate. While you are in the very process of locking you will see at once if the nanophoon will make a run for the gate or will try to warp off. It's rather obvious. If he is going to the gate (aka to the center of your fleet) a smart huggin pilot will not agress him - other ships with 10km webs can web him just as well there. Quote: Also you have to assume that the BS pilot did not fit a sensorbooster which may let him get a lock on the huguin/rapier before it can dampen it (I don't think it'd have enough strength with just 2 dampeners, btw), one dampener would be negated and then the nanoBS would likely have enough time to stick its drones on the rapier or Huguinn. See above.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.02.28 18:27:00 - [995] Originally by: smallgreenblur But i do see your point, that setup could work, although with one sensorbooster on vs 2 damps I believe lock range is something on the lines of 30-40ks so you are still vulnerable to drones. Also, you are hoping that the nanobs is happily sitting 24ks from you while you lock him, dampen him, and get to your preferred range. Phoon lock range is 23.5k with one SB2 and LRT4 vs 2 t2/muon damps with SS4. I am using damps extensively myself and made very sure that I know exactly what they can and cannot do. Also, the nanobs can happily lock the huggin initially. One cycle of 4 heavy nos will only drain half the huggins cap (and that is assuming the ceptor got ignored and no nos was used on him)), their cooldown are 12 seconds and by that time the webs should have slowed the nanoBS down sufficently that the huggin will be in absolute control of the range. Heavy (or med) drones are also no problem because a properly nanoed up huggin does 4 km/s (without snakes), they are simply too slow to reach him. And even with half of his cap gone he can speedtank them for 30 seconds till the cavallery arrives. Quote: and requires at least 2 specialised ships setup just for this operation... Of cource. I never said otherwise or that that is balanced. Originally by: Derran And that is assuming you catch it on the OTHER side of the gate and one of your key ships didn't aggro so can't follow. It doesn't aggroes because it aggroing does absolutely nothing if he runs to the gate. While you are in the very process of locking you will see at once if the nanophoon will make a run for the gate or will try to warp off. It's rather obvious. If he is going to the gate (aka to the center of your fleet) a smart huggin pilot will not agress him - other ships with 10km webs can web him just as well there. Quote: Also you have to assume that the BS pilot did not fit a sensorbooster which may let him get a lock on the huguin/rapier before it can dampen it (I don't think it'd have enough strength with just 2 dampeners, btw), one dampener would be negated and then the nanoBS would likely have enough time to stick its drones on the rapier or Huguinn. See above.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.28 18:29:00 - [996] Originally by: Chelmar II Excuse my ignorance since I have never flown a Typhoon, but it seems that a nossie boat, if given enough time and probably a faction stasis web, could easily take a fully fitted nanophoon. I haven't read the entire 32 pages before, so I'm not sure if the idea was offered/disproved already. I can fly pretty much everything and trust me, it doesn't look as easy as it sounds. The best I have been able to do is fight a nanodomi to a draw with my nonistab/nano typhoon and I did it by destroying his drones. A nanodomi isn't generally as much of a problem because of this but the other ships are. The majority of pilots who use the setup stay beyond even faction web range as they just need to keep you scrambled so you can't escape. You can't quite NOS them to death as they are just nossing you back anyway plus the majority of them use cap boosters to keep things running. The typhoon is the strongest one to use this way because of its large amount of grid and high slots and large drone bay but I have seen many other battleships set up with istab and nanos like a Tempest and Megathron. A typical typhoon setup is 4 NOS with 4 missile launchers.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.28 18:29:00 - [997] Originally by: Chelmar II Excuse my ignorance since I have never flown a Typhoon, but it seems that a nossie boat, if given enough time and probably a faction stasis web, could easily take a fully fitted nanophoon. I haven't read the entire 32 pages before, so I'm not sure if the idea was offered/disproved already. I can fly pretty much everything and trust me, it doesn't look as easy as it sounds. The best I have been able to do is fight a nanodomi to a draw with my nonistab/nano typhoon and I did it by destroying his drones. A nanodomi isn't generally as much of a problem because of this but the other ships are. The majority of pilots who use the setup stay beyond even faction web range as they just need to keep you scrambled so you can't escape. You can't quite NOS them to death as they are just nossing you back anyway plus the majority of them use cap boosters to keep things running. The typhoon is the strongest one to use this way because of its large amount of grid and high slots and large drone bay but I have seen many other battleships set up with istab and nanos like a Tempest and Megathron. A typical typhoon setup is 4 NOS with 4 missile launchers.
Seriya Caldari GalacTECH Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy	Posted - 2007.02.28 18:34:00 - [998] Edited by: Seriya on 28/02/2007 18:31:05 Not believing that MWD is really the problem, I made this topic to dispute Tux's proposed MWD nerf. If you would rather see action taken other than a MWD nerf (or no action at all) please chime in on there. :)
Seriya Caldari GalacTECH Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy	Posted - 2007.02.28 18:34:00 - [999] Edited by: Seriya on 28/02/2007 18:31:05 Not believing that MWD is really the problem, I made this topic to dispute Tux's proposed MWD nerf. If you would rather see action taken other than a MWD nerf (or no action at all) please chime in on there. :)
Bernardo Guii	Posted - 2007.03.01 01:43:00 - [1000] Originally by: Zalathar ...Nerfing nano ships would also be ANOTHER serious blow to the minmatar. If someone has invested the time, money and thought to make a nano ship, let him have it... Short answer: Ahh.... NO! I don't care if you invested a week to fly that ship (and it isnt much more than that) - the rest of us have to "invest time and money" in OUR ships too... or don't we count?? I get tired of hearing the same arguments from the same group of people. The "it takes SOOO long to train a nano ship" crew are just full of it. Most of the skills that you are counting as "required" for nano-ships are "required" for everyone. Don't think you can count skills like Navigation and Evasive Maneuvering as "your" skills. Everyone needs them and probably already has them. Meh... all of this was covered by this post. Best argument I have seen so far: Originally by: Tohmu Blackwing The most common arguments go something like this: 1.ôThese people have taken the time to train the skill to fly a ship like this ? give them a break! If you donÆt like it ? train up the skills to fly one yourself!ö Orà. 2.ôEvery time someone comes up with something innovative, it gets nerfed! DonÆt nerf this innovation ? it is fun!ö Orà 3.ôThese ships cost a lot and if they lose one, it is a significant investment!ö Orà 4. ôI finally have a ship that I have fun with!ö (read as: I can own s**t in this ship. DonÆt take it away from me!) à 5.Or my personal favourite: ôJust train Minmatar!!!ö There are a number of problems with these arguments: 1.I might be inclined to agree with you except for one problem, not every race in the game can do this. THIS IS UNBALANCE. If you want to allow such a massive jump in ship roles, then you cannot limit them to one or two races. This is simply just too big of an advantage for one race of ships. But before you flame me just consider if the shoe was on the other footà oh waità IT WAS ONCE. I have not been in the game long enough to see this in person, but I have talked to people who have used something called the ôCavalry Raven.ö Fit multiple MWDs on a Raven, the speed boost stacksà. Instant ô4-role jumpingö, tanking, missile spewing death. People complained ? it was nerfed. It was clearly a game mechanic exploit that provided a clear advantage to one race of ships. 2.This is a good argument, except that it doesnÆt address just HOW BIG an innovation this is to the game. You are jumping the most powerful ships in the game (non-capital) 4 roles to cover what is the domain of the smallest ships. This is really too much. DonÆt believe me? Then try the logic in reverseà Imagine a mod that had no stacking penalties, no limits, that gave interceptors the PG and CPU necessary to fit 4 cruise missiles. Imagine the Crow with 4 T2 Cruise. 9K/sec, spewing missiles and zooming off. Would you agree with this? WouldnÆt people who have ôspent the time to train the skillsö to fly a battleship feel like they have been cheated? Now a ship that costs roughly ? the cost of a BS can fly faster than they can target it and still have the firepower of a BS. This is an equally absurd creation. Bottom line, if you want a ship to have the ability to jump 4 roles, then why cant ALL ships jump just as many roles? What about a BC that had the firepower of a dreadnaught or carrier? Is that balanced? I donÆt think so. 3.I am not interested in how much a nano-phoon costs. If price was the only limitation to performance in EVE, then everyone would be buying ISK on e-bay. 4.Too bad... 5. This is the most absurd suggestion people make ? and yet these forums are littered with suggestions like this. If the game requires you to completely retrain your skill base just to counter one ship THEN THERE IS CLEARLY AN IMBALANCE! Period. This goes for the arguments that you should just train up a Huginn or a Curse to take on a nano-phoon. QFT!

Maenia Gracilis	Posted - 2007.03.01 10:41:00 - [1001] There is no 'nanophoon problem' that requires any kind of 'solution'. Be careful what you wish for people, sure as death and taxes that nerfbat will do more damage than you can possibly imagine. Again.
Yuki Ori	Posted - 2007.03.01 11:34:00 - [1002] i think the top speed of nano ships isnt the big problem, reducing it would harm close combat ships to get in range of their weapons. its the agility wich makes them so good in ganking, reduce agility to a max. wich a BS can have and you have a much greater chance of escaping/shooting them down. without the aility of an cruiser/frig an nano BS will only be good for appraoching but not for orbiting opponents with 6km/s
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.03.01 11:44:00 - [1003] Originally by: Maenia Gracilis There is no 'nanophoon problem' that requires any kind of 'solution'. Be careful what you wish for people, sure as death and taxes that nerfbat will do more damage than you can possibly imagine. Again. sgb wonders if this person flys nano-bs... Just don't overnerf it ccp. All we need is for bs to be what I will tentatively call 'normal' again. sgb
Redbad Minmatar Be Inspired Inc.	Posted - 2007.03.01 12:17:00 - [1004] One nerf will place another setup into relative better position, should that be nerferd then also? And after that nerf another setup will be nr1. Should that be nerfed then also? There is a counter to every setup, but you have to think out of the box. Start doing that and adapt. join us today!
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.03.01 14:02:00 - [1005] Originally by: Redbad One nerf will place another setup into relative better position, should that be nerferd then also? And after that nerf another setup will be nr1. Should that be nerfed then also? There is a counter to every setup, but you have to think out of the box. Start doing that and adapt. Ok firstly I have adapted quite nicely thanks. Any one of my ships is quite happy taking on a solo nanobs, at least to a stalemate point. In gangs, I have a friend who goes 12k/s or more in a bs and happily tackled the idiots for us. We also have huginn pilots who lock them down. Generally this means that any nano-bs gang we run into of similar numbers loses one ship and the rest run away. Exactly how is this thinking out of the box tho? All you're doing is taking a fairly obvious counter and using it to help you blob somebody to death. The fact that it works nicely just means I get to sit there and laugh at all the nano-bs pilots that run away. Does this mean it ain't broke? No. Nano bs are very very broken and need fixing. To answer your other points, if nano-bs are nerfed then the people with way too much money and the ones that follow the FOTM will of course find something new, or go back to something old (remember when it was dual MWD ravens? Gankageddons?). That setup then gets balanced. Then the next, then the next. Will a final destination in mind not of bland playing, but A GAME WHERE NO SETUP IS OMGWTFBBQ overpowered. People who persist in thinking about 'nerfs' will never understand the importance of 'balance'. Sure we could leave nano-bs as they are. At the moment about half the pilots I encounter in bs in 0.0 are flying a similar setup. That number will only increase. End result - everybody flying the same setup, everybody not in a bs is screwed. Wow, I can't wait, can you? Balance away chaps. Only try not to overdo it :) sgb
sweetheart Black Reign FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.01 14:21:00 - [1006] I havn't read the 1st 33 pages , so this has more then likely been said loads , NERF the NanoPhoons , and NonoDomi's etc etc .. BS's doing 6km/s+ is madness , and as soon as they get into a fight they think they might not win , zip they are gone and a webber wont keep them for more then a few seconds .. GET THE NERF BAT OUT !!! .............................................. To Win is Everything
n0thing A Black Knight Corp	Posted - 2007.03.01 16:08:00 - [1007] Same here well, havent had patience to read thru 30+ pages, but why not just add stacking effect to nanos? Each nano have decreased effect so afte 3rd one theres barely any use of it? tnx,
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.02 04:23:00 - [1008] Some reading for you guys: From WarCry interview found on first page. Originally by: "WarCry" Have the changes you've made to the pre-existing ships worked out the way you designed? Have there been any occurrences of player-created fittings that you feel might have found a possible exploit? Was answered: Originally by: "Noah Ward (Hammerhead)" Is this a subtle reference to the "NanoPhoon?" The fix to inertial stabilizers has given speed freaks the opportunity to get some pretty insane speeds but I wouldn't call these setups exploits. These setups sacrifice all of their tanking for speed so if they are caught they are dead. It just requires players to change up their tactics. That said, there are some battleship setups that use all of the best equipment which can sustain such high velocity we feel it breaks immersion so we're looking into how we can solve that. We don't want to nerf players who have worked hard to get the best implants and speed mods so we're treading lightly. So there you go - CCP /is/ trying not to overnerf speed setups. Which is a good thing. N.F.F. Recruitment
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.02 04:33:00 - [1009] Edited by: Ryysa on 02/03/2007 04:31:41 Originally by: n0thing Same here well, havent had patience to read thru 30+ pages, but why not just add stacking effect to nanos? Each nano have decreased effect so afte 3rd one theres barely any use of it? You really should read the thread. You are just wasting forum space. A nanophoon with lvl4 acc control, lvl5 navigation, 3x local istabs, 3x t2 nanos, t2 mwd, 3% speed hardwirings, t2 mwd, not in gang would still go: (150+30+300.87+300.57)1.251.03(1+(5.51.151.151.151.21.03(150/((100+50)(1-0.15)(1-0.150.87)(1-0.150.57))))) = 4683m/s (5035m/s without stacking nerf). Now that's not an uber nanophoon setup. A nanophoon setup with lg snakes, gist b-type mwd, and in gang with lvl5 skirmish warfare + zor's 5% mwd/ab implant, would for comparison go: (150+30+300.87+300.57)1.251.031.33831.1(1+(6.331.151.151.151.21.031.05(150/((100+50)(1-0.15)(1-0.150.87)(1-0.15*0.57))))) = 8243.29m/s (8863m/s without stacking nerf) So i'd say, stacking nerfing velocity bonus from nanos is kinda.... utterly pointless? N.F.F. Recruitment
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.03.02 09:22:00 - [1010] Correct Rys, the obvious way around that is to make all the mods that affect this top speed stack together in some way, perhaps excluding implants so the people that spend insane amounts of isk on snakes and stuff still get their bonus... sgb

Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.02 10:44:00 - [1011] Originally by: smallgreenblur Correct Rys, the obvious way around that is to make all the mods that affect this top speed stack together in some way, perhaps excluding implants so the people that spend insane amounts of isk on snakes and stuff still get their bonus... sgb What really needs to get stackingnerfed in some way is agility + mwd boost amount stuff. In which case, 3 vent rigs would multiply the mwd boost factor by 1.151.150.871.150.57 instead of 1.15^3. That combined with a nanofiber nerf + less agility, would make nanobs fairly unviable, while interceptors, vagabonds and other smaller ships wouldn't be nerfed as hard. Meaning that - base speed of ships would have a meaning again. The biggest problem is the ability of sustain MWD with nos and that base speed can be compensated with amount of lowslots. BS => low base speed => high amount of lowslots <=> Cruiser => moderate base speed => moderate amount of lowslots <=> Interceptor => high base speed => low amount of lowslots. See where I am heading? N.F.F. Recruitment
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.02 11:11:00 - [1012] You broke the forum, Ryysa Stacking nerfing the nanos speed boost wouldn't change much - stacking nerfing the -inertia boost would have a rather significant effect though. Both nanos and instabs have this bonus, so instead 3 there are 6 effects which would share the penality. In numbers - instead having with 6 nanos+instabs 38% of it's unmodifed agility you would only get 63% of it's old agility instead. Basically, the maximum agility would be about that what you get right now if you fit 3 LH instabs.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.03.02 12:45:00 - [1013] Yeah i see where you're going, but as far as i can tell the easiest way to get there is just to make all the mods that affect speed and agility stack. So if you have 3 nanos and 3 i-stabs, 3 of those modules are faily pointless. Same with rigs, more than 3 things that affect agility or mass or speed will also remain pointless. sgb
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.03 03:13:00 - [1014] Originally by: smallgreenblur Yeah i see where you're going, but as far as i can tell the easiest way to get there is just to make all the mods that affect speed and agility stack. So if you have 3 nanos and 3 i-stabs, 3 of those modules are faily pointless. Same with rigs, more than 3 things that affect agility or mass or speed will also remain pointless. sgb Not possible with the way speed is calculated right now... This would mean a huge change in MWD attributes etc etc... N.F.F. Recruitment
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated Free Trade Coalition	Posted - 2007.03.03 18:10:00 - [1015] Think of it this way.. A faction fitted gankageddon(yes the real gankageddon before the damage mod nerf)vs a nanophoon 1v1 who would win? The gankageddon was considered wayyyy too overpowered in its time,and cant even touch the nanophoon of today,therefore the nanophoon is probably overpowered. Now you might say"well its like saying which is better a hammer or a knife"not really,if you think about it any other ship would be nossed(faction fitted)to hell and killed by its drones,but the nanophoon just keeps damaging the gankageddon. If you want to see if a ship is overpowered then see how it would perform against a ship that was also previously thought of as overpowered and youll get your answer. __________________________________________ Yes it is great being amarr. I am minmatar,fly amarr,use gellente drones and am in caldari space.
EveJoker	Posted - 2007.03.04 08:17:00 - [1016] After losing three tanked phoons to nanobs I bit the bullet and tried them out mostly due to the lack of setups I could find to counter them. imho speed of the bs isnt the issue, all its tank is sacrificed for speed. What is stupid is a massive bs orbiting at high speed (agility bonus), and their near instant alignment and warp. My suggestion to fix this is to give web drones a huge buff, increasing their speed to around 15-20km/s and boosting slightly their "webification". This would allow for some much more interesting tactics to evolve ingame. Im also interested in hearing other ideas for counters rather than a "nerf". I do agree it is broken and something needs to be done, however I feel a subtle change will suffice rather than being hit big time with the nerf bat. A sniper fleet makes short work of a nanobs too ;) This is all just my personal opinion btw, Im looking forward to get back to my tanked phoon, just as soon as the nanopirates leave our area.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.04 09:12:00 - [1017] Edited by: Ryysa on 04/03/2007 09:12:07 Originally by: goodby4u Think of it this way.. A faction fitted gankageddon(yes the real gankageddon before the damage mod nerf)vs a nanophoon 1v1 who would win? The gankageddon was considered wayyyy too overpowered in its time,and cant even touch the nanophoon of today,therefore the nanophoon is probably overpowered. Now you might say"well its like saying which is better a hammer or a knife"not really,if you think about it any other ship would be nossed(faction fitted)to hell and killed by its drones,but the nanophoon just keeps damaging the gankageddon. If you want to see if a ship is overpowered then see how it would perform against a ship that was also previously thought of as overpowered and youll get your answer. You are totally clueless. Old school gankageddon without hp boosts would kill even current nanophoon (with snake implants) in about 5-6 seconds. You do know that megapulse/autocannons/blasters with null can track nanophoons just fine right? How about READING THE THREAD? >.< And i don't see wtf you are talking about nos. Old gank geddon setup was: 8x megapulse, 20km scram, 2x sensor boosters (or 1x tc+1x sensor booster), 7x hs II, 1x tracking enhancer. It did about 1200 dps with max skills iirc. Nanophoon without HP buffs from revelation/kali, would have like 1/2 of it's current hitpoints, meaning it'd have a total of about... 6000-7000hp... That's woohoo 5 seconds of fire from the gank geddon to kill it, the nanophoon most likely wouldn't even be able to warp out. N.F.F. Recruitment
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.03.04 18:04:00 - [1018] Well Ryssa, you ignore resistances there, but its still pretty quick. Normalized HP will be a bit larger. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.03.04 18:46:00 - [1019] Originally by: Ryysa Edited by: Ryysa on 04/03/2007 09:12:07 Originally by: goodby4u Think of it this way.. A faction fitted gankageddon(yes the real gankageddon before the damage mod nerf)vs a nanophoon 1v1 who would win? The gankageddon was considered wayyyy too overpowered in its time,and cant even touch the nanophoon of today,therefore the nanophoon is probably overpowered. Now you might say"well its like saying which is better a hammer or a knife"not really,if you think about it any other ship would be nossed(faction fitted)to hell and killed by its drones,but the nanophoon just keeps damaging the gankageddon. If you want to see if a ship is overpowered then see how it would perform against a ship that was also previously thought of as overpowered and youll get your answer. You are totally clueless. Old school gankageddon without hp boosts would kill even current nanophoon (with snake implants) in about 5-6 seconds. You do know that megapulse/autocannons/blasters with null can track nanophoons just fine right? How about READING THE THREAD? >.< And i don't see wtf you are talking about nos. Old gank geddon setup was: 8x megapulse, 20km scram, 2x sensor boosters (or 1x tc+1x sensor booster), 7x hs II, 1x tracking enhancer. It did about 1200 dps with max skills iirc. Nanophoon without HP buffs from revelation/kali, would have like 1/2 of it's current hitpoints, meaning it'd have a total of about... 6000-7000hp... That's woohoo 5 seconds of fire from the gank geddon to kill it, the nanophoon most likely wouldn't even be able to warp out. Depends on the speed of the nanoship, anything over about 6 or 7k/s and even a/cs etc have trouble tracking. Plus no web on gankageddon so close range orbiting ftw. dps was about 1500 with drones from what I remember. Nasty stuff, I can only get about 1100 these days :( As the dude above said, the problem's not so much with the speed as the agility. It'll get sorted soon tho methinks. sgb
Veetor Gallente Acme Manufacturing	Posted - 2007.03.04 23:04:00 - [1020] And the top speed is limited by? Air resistance? LOL! The limiting factor should be acceleration...should take awhile but every ship should be close to as fast as its propellant reaction speed.

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.05 00:28:00 - [1021] Eve physics do not represent actualy space physics AT ALL already anyway, so any argument which starts with "But realistically..." is already pre-doomed. It is a game.
jamesw Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.03.05 03:52:00 - [1022] I am still thinking on this one. As stated in this thread many times, the nerf should affect multiple-nano-using-ships while not really affecting much else... I am not trying to advocate any one solution over another, and I havent fully read the thread, so I am guessing that most of these suggestions have already popped up, but here goes anyway... Looking back at previous "iWin" setup nerfs, I believe, holds the answer. Nerf Type 1: Stacking Penalty. This type of nerf would stack all of the attributes that are affected by a nano/istab/speed rig - the way damage mods and armor hardeners are already stacked. Nano 1: 100% effect Nano 2: 80% effect Nano 3: 50% effect etc. Nerf Type 2: Multiple Module limit. This goes the way of the Dual MWD/AB nerf. Simply don't allow more than 1 or 2 modules of a particular type to be fit to a ship. A hard limit of 1 or 2 nanos, 1 or 2 istabs (or 1 or 2 total of either) would be my suggestion. *Nerf Type 3: Multiple Module Penalty.* / Module Relationship Penalty** (jamesw's favourite) Same nerf that happened to the Cap Power Relay shield tanks. Remember Apocs with triple XL-Shield Boosters, Ravens running XL+Amp boosters forever? How was that nerfed? -10% penalty to shield boosting per cap power relay installed. This is a much more tricky kind of nerf, as you run the risk of hurting smaller ships too much, even if they only fit 1 or 2 nanos. The great thing about this type of nerf is that it can much more specifically address an issue like this. Essentially, a look at the whole setup that is causing the problem is required. The problem in general seems to be a bs loadaed with NOS + Nano's/iStabs + MWD. I can see two basic relationships that might be good for this nerf, that can really hurt a nos ship without too much penalty to other setups that might only feature 1 or two of the modules in question. Problem Relationship 1: Multiple Nano/iStab + MWD. Example Nerf: +5% MWD cap usage PER Nano/iStab. This hurts bs a lot more than it hurts frigates (but it still hurts frigs) Problem Relationship 2: Multiple Nano/iStab + Multiple NOS. Example Nerf 1: -10% Nos amount PER Nano/iStab. Example Nerf 2: -10% Nano/iStab effectiveness per Nos. Example Nerf 3: -10% Ship Agility per active Nos. Oh, and just to add one last suggestion to the list. It's more a general nerf to NOS, but I do not think it is as important as the nano+nos problem. I saw a while back a suggestion to make a ship with smartbombs do damage to a ship that is actively nossing it, regardless of smartbomb range. This would be a great idea too. -james out -- Latest Vid: Domination!
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.05 07:17:00 - [1023] no offence james, but that's just retarded. The problem of nanobs is being able to run mwd forever off nos. Hardlimiting number of istabs/nanos is stupid. Stacking penalty (AS I SHOWED ALREADY) is pointless without reworking the entire speed formula. N.F.F. Recruitment
jamesw Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.03.05 07:56:00 - [1024] Originally by: Ryysa no offence james, but that's just retarded. The problem of nanobs is being able to run mwd forever off nos. Originally by: jamesw Problem Relationship 1: Multiple Nano/iStab + MWD. Example Nerf: +5% MWD cap usage PER Nano/iStab. This hurts bs a lot more than it hurts frigates (but it still hurts frigs) Problem Relationship 2: Multiple Nano/iStab + Multiple NOS. Example Nerf 1: -10% Nos amount PER Nano/iStab. Example Nerf 2: -10% Nano/iStab effectiveness per Nos. Example Nerf 3: -10% Ship Agility per active Nos. I agree with you that stacking penalty, or hard limit is perhaps not the way to go. I was merely pointing out ways things have been nerfed in the past. What do you say to the things I re-quoted for you. -- Latest Vid: Domination!
R3dSh1ft Caldari FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.03.05 11:42:00 - [1025] i found the solution. you have one "internal hull" modification slot per ship. it can take a nano/istab or overdrive. ONE. fixed. plates/expanded cargo are unaffected (cos they arent broken) and because they are external hull modifications (you stick a layer of plates outside your ship, or attach another section the back of your ship for cargo... nice and simple to understand and implement. ______________________________________
000Hunter000 Gallente Magners Marauders	Posted - 2007.03.05 12:13:00 - [1026] Interesting, This thread seems to have become a pro vs the anti nano whiners aka the ones pilotting the nanoships vs the ones beeing attacked by nanoships. Question: as anyone actually looked for a realistic counter vs nano setups (and no whining about it on the forum is not a realistic counter ) I know there are ships outthere with boni towards webbies but those are t2 ships i think? is it possible for a (any) T1 ship to catch a nanoship? Anyways in general i don't think a BS is supposed to go 5-8km/sec but thats impo. Resized tag... again... hope this pleases the tag ninjas from ccp... again :p
Arkanjuca Caldari The Edge Foundation Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2007.03.05 12:18:00 - [1027] Edited by: Arkanjuca on 05/03/2007 12:15:49 Just like the damage control? i would love to stack that nanos are surely broke, or you fly one, or you¦re dommed, if it is not an imbalance, hell, i dont know what imbalance is anymore... so gimme back my ultra-jamming griffin "It,s a good day do flight"
Sloth Arnini ORIGIN SYSTEMS	Posted - 2007.03.05 14:25:00 - [1028] Normally, I wouldn't bother posting, but I was thinking about nano-BS on the bus to uni today (I'm very sad) and came up with a small idea of my own. It's probably not original, but I haven't read all this discussion. Incidentally, I've not done any serious maths (numbers hurt my head), and my intention is not to remove high speed warfare completely, indeed, the hope is that the following changes would enhance it. The fundamental idea: give nanos a percentage based increase rather than a flat m/s increase. I suggest 6-9% (from unnamed to best named). Leave I-Stabs as they are, or maybe nerf their percentages slightly. What I think will be the effects: Nanofibres become more useful for frigates. I-stabs become more useful for BS, ensuring neither module is useless. Fast frigates will go even faster- hopefully enough to catch nano-BS. If this isn't the case, then raise frigate base speeds somewhat (although poorly fitted frigs shouldn't be able to catch faction pimped BS, good named fitting should). However, they'll need to burn towards the BS to catch it: the increased sig radius makes them more vulnerable to missiles until they can get into a position parallel or orbiting. This gives the BS a window of opportunity to fight back. Minmatar retain their speed advantage at all ship classes. BS can still go quickly, but frigates can move like the wind as well (as they should). BS need to rely slightly more on their MWD than they do now (no nanos=no base speed bonus) and so probably take something of a hit to their maximum speed. Nanoships may even receive a targeted NOS nerf: because it is possible that they will be swarmed by fast frigates, they may want to devote a couple of highs to point defence (i.e. guns). That means a Nanophoon might want to swap out a missile and a NOS for a couple of guns to ward off frigates- which means a cut in DPS and cap sucking ability, meaning the main target has a better chance of surviving. Drones and torpedoes will be useless when frigates are moving as fast as the BSes. Who knows, we may even see Dominixes fitting GUNS! I think these small changes could make high speed combat more tactical, and hence more exciting. It adds another major factor in the trade offs necessary to make a viable setup. It also increases the involvement of player skill for all involved. The frigate tacklers will die if they just keep following the nano-BS. They'll probably fly into torpedoes with MWDs burning and go SPLAT (I'd guess so anyway, not an expert on missiles and high speeds). At one point they need to get orbiting, or maybe match speed travelling parallel (not behind) the nanoship. The nano-BS on the other hand needs to maneouvre to put the tacklers behind himself so he can minimise their transversal and ping them with his defensive guns or torpedoes. You may say this doesn't eliminate the problem of inties getting NOSed until they can't use their MWD, and yes, frigate packs will probably take casualties. My answer is simple. Don't take 3 or 4 inties/fast frigs. Take 5. Or 6. If you can't deploy that many, you need to be more careful when nanoships are around. Or fly your own nanoship of course.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.03.05 14:27:00 - [1029] Originally by: Veetor And the top speed is limited by? Air resistance? LOL! The limiting factor should be acceleration...should take awhile but every ship should be close to as fast as its propellant reaction speed. You lose eve, and also real life. To elaborate: There are only a few things limiting speed in space. 1. The amount of particles you collide with. 2. The amount of time you have to accelerate in. 3. The General Theory of Relativity. Ignoring number one, since I haven't hit any meteorites in eve yet, let us address numbers 2 and 3. Since the General Theory of Relativity tells us that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, let us assume that is our theoretical top speed. Since eve = real life, I demand that, given sufficient time to accelerate and propulsive material, my nanophoon be allowed to reach speeds of aproximately 2.99 x 10^8 m/s, or two hundred and ninety-nine thousand kilometers per second. I also demand that this ship be allowed to be used as a kinetic missile, hitting any pos or object at speeds close to that of light and turning most of its mass into energy, thereby obliterating said object and a significant percentage of nearby celestial objects (planets, moons etc). To conclude - EVE != either real life or science fiction. Guys, keep your posts constructive, ie either: a) Nanoships are not broken because... b) Nanoships are broken, I have read most of this thread, and I think this is the best solution... c) Something amusing yet relevant.
CasC Gallente Cash Money Brothers O X I D E	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:01:00 - [1030] Okey i dont know if this has been said, but frankly i dont feel like reading 34 pages of wine to find out! There is a couple of things you can do against a nanophoon or nanodomi, and its called Smartbombs. without drones the nanoships dont deal nearly as much dmg as a heavy fitted ship on the same lvl. The problem is fetching them and killing them. But hey, a dictor at the gate with 3 webs mounted, Hell it aint going anywere. its gives the other ships enough time to get a lock and start there webbers. Hell there is webber drones to! Use your imagination and everything can be overcommed. Though i think it should be nerfed. If not, hell we just have to deal with it. As soon as there is good countermessure ppl will stop flying them. They dont have any plates or anything for tank so its pretty easy to kill them once your able to. This is just what i think.

Mokou Fujiwara	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:34:00 - [1031] Part 2 Balancing options: Raise the base speed of all ships, so while the speed ratios between each ship is simular, the actual gap is much more noticible, making speed a more important factor, even for a slow ship, but nerf the MWD and Afterburners to accomodate the changes, lowering the gap between the fastest base speed, and that of the fastest possible speeds. Give the NOS some kind of tracking/signiture size system, simular to missiles and guns, making Large NOS less useful against smaller targets. Make Nanofibres all percentile values, so larger, slower ships benifit less on an absolute scale than smaller and faster ships. Create a new module that makes it easier to hit a large, fast moving ship. Create a new module that makes it easier to slow down a fast moving ship from a longer distance. Reduce the benifits of rigs for speed, or give them more substantial downsides. Reduce agility bonus to I-Stabs for larger ships. Add stacking penalties when Nanos and I-Stabs are used together. Make ships take stress damage if it tries to manouver at excessive speeds for it's size/weight. Make MWDs less capable of sustained flight, and make them only capable use in bursts. Increase the effect of signal size, making even small gaps have larger effect for shooting and any other use, IE Frigates become hard to hit with Medium guns/missiles, and near impossible to hit with large, even when stationary. (Hasn't been mentioned, my own idea) Now, my personal opinion is that the nano-BS is only overpowered in that it it does obsolete many ship types. While a drastic change is not needed, as the idea of a high-speed, quick response BS is pretty neat, the ability to speed-tank so effectivly for prolonged periods of time upsets many aspects of naval combat quite a bit. The Nos is the biggest perpretator that leads to this, as it can be maintained for as long as the Nano-BS has targets with filled Cap. Not just this, but it also neutralises any small target that tries to tackle or otherwise disable the Nano-BS's speed-tank, effectivly eliminating all small target threats. I believe this is the primary factor which lets the Nano-BS grow too powerful, and causes the greatest inbalance within the game.
Mokou Fujiwara	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:46:00 - [1032] Part 3 The most adequate solution IMO would be to make NOS as well as Energy Neuts more like missiles, using a sig radius system to tone down the effects on drastically smaller ships. This won't just allow small ships like interceptors to engage the Nan-BS effectivly, allowing larger units to deal with it, it also allows ACs and HACs more combat viability, as they seem to not be used too much by dedicated PVPers. Ontop of this, if smaller ships had an easier time evading opossing shots, but at the same time, had improved accuracy against larger and quickly moving targets, it may increase the use of cruisers and other small, direct combat oriented ships. If a cruiser can reliably hit a NanoBS (relative to BSs), while evading the majority of the damage that it would take on, then that would theoretically improve the situation without any true nerfs that directly affect the NanoBS. Two or three cruisers would be the natural enemy of any NanoBS, while it still retains all of it's advantages against larger ships. An added bonus, would be that Frigs would also gain their own bonuses to this, and would be effective against BCs, and and even Cruisers, as long as they don't pack Assault Missile Launchers, or any kind of light weapons. Thanks to this, any decent small fleet would be comprised of a few BSs and BCs, a small squadren of Cruisers, followed by a small wing of various Frigs, each with their own duties, each covering the other, and no ship size group would be completly comprised of ECMs, tacklers, ect, but rather have a compliment of combat vessels. Well, presuming that something could be done about the drones. I would say that drones are the one thing that screws up any frig that isn't dedicated to either ECM or tackling. But that's not the point. Either way, this is my opinion, and especially that of one who has reletivly little PVP experience. However, despite this, my own personal solution until there's any dev actions regarding this issue, is to use a passive shield setup. At max skills, a high resist passive shield tank, with a few missiles/projectile weapons, plus a pair of energy neuts should stop any Nano-BS from doing any decent amount of damage before running out of cap. This is only a preventative measure, as a setup like this cannot beat a perceptive Nano-BS pilot, as the second he sees his cap fall halfway after a few seconds of combat, the pilot will definately run away to prevent any more cap loss. Even if the pilot does not run away, the energy neuts also give a second bonus, as it also eliminates your own cap, leaving little for the opposition to take, and thus, the opposing pilot would run out of cap one way or another, and Noses would lose their their effectiveness. Another advantage is that it is still pretty PVP viable IMO, if you use a ship that gives additional shield resists at least, as the resist amplifiers take quite a few mid slots. Because of this though, I can only see the Rokh, Drake and maybe the Ferox as effective ships for this, thus limiting the counters to less than half of the popular Caldari ships, and still screwing over any Gallente and Ammar pilots, thus still unbalenced. Besides, it still cannot beat a competent Nano-BS pilot, but at least it won't lose to one either.
Noesis Dream	Posted - 2007.03.05 18:38:00 - [1033] Disclaimer: This is not a whine, nor a troll. Just an honest observation. Your reading is appreciated. I think its kind of comical that people use the argument that the nano ships sacrifice all of their tanking ability for speed. What they fail to understand is that the speed IS their armor. In fact I would argue its far better than armor or shields. Especially in the hands of a capable pilot. So in reality, they aren't sacrificing anything with regards to tanking ability and yet they are gaining a critical element. One formally forbidden by Battleships... speed. Case in point, even if I have a great tanking battleship, if that battleship is webbed and locked down its going to die. If I have a fast battleship that is webbed and locked down its still going to die but it also has the advantage of being able to avoid most lock down situations on account of its immense speed. And to justify their existence by saying that they cost alot of money is not a very valid argument either considering the circumstances. True, mother ships are very powerful craft that cost alot of money to justify this power. But they fulfill a certain role and the amount of money and time required to get into one, and make one, makes them very rare in the game. This rarity does not make their presence very unbalancing. The nano ships on the other hand are still affordable by a large percentage of the eve population. Their relative power compared with how prevalent they are within the game makes them unbalancing. In addition, the nano ships really have no defined role. They do all things exceptionally well. They are fast, tough, hit hard, and if needed could even provide exceptional e-war. This goes against why many people, including myself, love EVE. Traditionally the game has been all about ships which rely on other ships to support their relative weaknesses. Frigates, Cruisers, Interceptors, Interdictors all relying on each other to create a harmonious killing machine. The nano ship changes this dynamic. Essentially being able to perform nearly all the roles traditionally provided by a fleet of mixed ships. If they suddenly allowed nano ships to carry dictor launchers the atrocity would be complete.
Laechyd Eldgorn Caldari Caldari Mercenary Legion	Posted - 2007.03.06 12:17:00 - [1034] I find it hilariously unbalanced that bigger ship you get, faster you can fly, just because you get more low slots than i.e. kestrel you can fly faster in i.e. raven. When I started this game I thought frigates and destroyers were meant to be fast and agile... If you ask me (and no one probably does) big ships generally should be always slower than smaller ones, with few exceptions maybe, no matter what modules you stuff into them.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.06 15:29:00 - [1035] Originally by: Mokou Fujiwara Battleships should not be allowed to move faster than a typical MWD Cruiser/Frigate. Wrong, They should not be able to do that for any sustained period of time. I'd like to say, Battleships should not be allowed to be more maneuverable and move faster for extended time than a typical mwd cruiser/frigate. Speed is irrelevant. As long as you go in one line, you can go 20km/s for all i care, you won't achieve much. Quote: A ship that is dependant on being a speed tank should not have over ten times the total HP of almost every other speed tank. Actually, my vagabond has more HP than my nanophoon, then again, my vagabond can't speedtank all the time. Quote: A ship that is dependant on being a speed tank should not be able to beat the DPS of a HAC or Battle Cruiser. This is a skewed argument. Speedtanking ships should not be able to beat the DPS of a HAC or Battle Cruiser while speed tanking all the time. Basically dps is irrelevant. The point is, ships with good dps should not be able to perma speedtank (like phoon does now). Quote: A Battleship should not be able to push speeds exceeding 4km/s at a constant rate for extended periods of time (greater than a ten minutes). That's irrelevant, any constants are irrelevant. A speedfitted ship should still be possible, but it should not be possible to make a battleship that has good dps and can speedtank forever. Actually, any BS that can speedtank forever, shouldn't be able to be effective in pvp. Quote: No ship should be practically completly immune to gate camps. Screw you. Yes they should. Gatecamping is 0 skill pvp. However, ships shouldn't be immune to gatecamps with a pvp fitting, unless they are specialized (interceptor, matari cruisers/hacs). Quote: No ship should require a specially set up ship to counter it. Actually this is a moot point. How do you counter an mwding arazu without specifically fitting for it? Quote: No ship should be able to withdrawl combat at will except for Interceptors and ships set up to run blockades. Learn to pvp. Actually any ship that does not go into webrange to deal damage can withdraw from a fight. This includes snipers etc. They just should be a lot less effective (damage or whatever wise) than ships that commit to a fight. Quote: Nos whine That hardly is a nanobs problem, nos is just screwed the way it is atm. Quote: ECM ships can only do so much before they're torn apart by five heavy drones, even after the Nano-BS is locked down. Wrong, if nanoBS is locked down, it's dead. When you can't achieve a lock, you can't choose which target you attack with drones, most dedicated EW ships have faster locking time than nanobs. Quote: A good, aware Nano-BS pilot will never be taken down, as the pilot will always stay away from any unfavourable situation, and most of the time, it can still deal damage before it runs. In theory, but if you use some baiting tactics you can easily kill nanophoons. Even good pilots. But I agree, In theory also, unless you screw up badly, you can't die. Quote: A Nano-BS offers the greatest safty-line for any aware pilot with a decent damage output compared to any other ship archetype. Wrong, try a mothership. Quote: Almost every time, it is impossible to make a kill against a Nano-BS, the outcome of any battle against one will always be a loss, or the Nano-BS runs away. Wrong, use baiting techniques instead of "the blob". Your pro-nano points are also pretty much counter points, or at least i disagree with all of them. But I am biased, and I believe nanobs should be nerfed. Originally by: jamesw What do you say to the things I re-quoted for you. Did you know that SYMPTOMATIC treatment is the wrong way to go towards certain DISEASES? think about it. Your suggestions are pointless, you need to look at the bigger picture. N.F.F. Recruitment
Tohmu Blackwing	Posted - 2007.03.06 18:24:00 - [1036] Edited by: Tohmu Blackwing on 06/03/2007 18:22:14 Originally by: Mokou Fujiwara ... Pro-Nano-BS points: (1) A good Nano-BS set-up costs billions of ISK, much more to risk than most other Battleships. (2) Nano-BSs require a large investment of skills, and thus, is only fair that a similar skill investment is required. Overall, a good summary of the ideas in this thread - gonna use your post to highlight some fallicies by the pro-nanoBS crowd... (1) Ah... can someone please provide an example of how these "billions of isk" are spent to make a nanoBS feasible? I will admit that I could be wrong, but I thought the biggest expense was the faction MWD - which only runs a few hundred million, right? Oh - please do not bother to count the NORMAL items that everyone else would have to fit to make a BS feasible in PvP - like weapons (including NOS) ... Just what is DIFFERENT that costs so much to make a nanoBS?? (2) This idea keeps getting repeated - and unless I have missed something, I just don't see this "large investment of skills" to fly a nanoBS. Can someone please list these skills? DO NOT BOTHER COUNTING skills that EVERYONE uses (or should use), including: Navigation (everyone should have this to IV, period... required to take it to V if you fly Interceptors of any race) Spaceship Command (again, everyone should have this to IV or V - its a low rank skill, take the 5 days to train it) Acceleration Control (if you PvP then this skill should be at IV) Evasive Maneuvering (definately take this to III, and really its worth it to go to IV for everyone) Afterburner IV (required for Evasive Maneuvering) High Speed Maneuvering (this one should also go to III) These skills do not count towards this "large investment" that nanoBS pilots keep talking about. Everyone needs these skills (IMHO), so they simply do not count. Take these skills to V? Ok, your up to a whopping 20 day investment in training time. Not exactly what I would count as "large" or even "significant." I regularly have skills in the two week range - just for one skill. I dont consider that to be a "large" investment - and definatly not one that allows me to dominate so completely on the battlefield the way that nanoBS do now. Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Mokou Fujiwara No ship should be practically completly immune to gate camps. Screw you. Yes they should. Gatecamping is 0 skill pvp. However, ships shouldn't be immune to gatecamps with a pvp fitting, unless they are specialized (interceptor, matari cruisers/hacs). Did I just see that??? Did a member of the Privateer Alliance just say that gate camping is a 0 skill PvP tactic??
Mokou Fujiwara	Posted - 2007.03.06 19:40:00 - [1037] I'd like to take a moment, and re-state that the pro/con points at the beginning of my posts were not my own opinion. They were the points offered and put up throughout the 34 pages of this topic, and do not reflect my beliefs about this issue. Just a summery, and as fair and complete of one as possible. I do not think that a good gate-camp should be unbeatable. I for one, hate gate-camps, do not endorese them, or anything that makes them stronger. And just like for gate-camps, the other points were also not my opinion. I have clearly stated where my own views start, and I would appreciate it if you take that into consideration before replying to my posts. That said, I agree, the Nano-BS uses few skills that practically every PVPer already uses, as well as costing little more than your typical PVP BS (aroung 300-400 mil I beleive for a decent Nano-BS), and I doubt you really need more to fulfill the minimum requirements to be very difficult to defeat. Also, as I have said before, I do believe that a NOS nerf would be a large step towards fixing this problem, however, being such a touchy subject (with several of it's own threads), I will not say anymore about right now. This is it for now. Please do not flame me for just putting together those points that others have made. My own opinions are clearly set separate from those.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.03.06 22:24:00 - [1038] Isn't the real issue just the fact that a battleship now becomes what it is not supposed to be? Namely a ship with the more maueverability and speed than a frigate and lots more firepower. I'm boggled over the reason why some people would think that it is not right for a BS to do this. I like the sound of another poster's idea I saw about changing the nanos to be a percentage instead of a set amount.
Tohmu Blackwing	Posted - 2007.03.06 22:41:00 - [1039] Originally by: Mokou Fujiwara I'd like to take a moment, and re-state that the pro/con points at the beginning of my posts were not my own opinion. They were the points offered and put up throughout the 34 pages of this topic, and do not reflect my beliefs about this issue. Just a summery, and as fair and complete of one as possible. ... This is it for now. Please do not flame me for just putting together those points that others have made. My own opinions are clearly set separate from those. Sorry Mokou, I actually wasn't flaming you. I guess that wasn't clear enough. I said that it was a good summary of the previous arguments - I was only quoting you on two of the "pro nanoBS" arguments to try to get an answer from people on that side of the argument. I would like to hear from someone who supports nanoBSes to answer my two questions. 1) what is this huge investment of cash that you need to spend to make a nanoBS? Is it the MWD that costs more? Anything else? 2) what is this huge investment of time for skills that you need to spend to fly a nanoBS? I keep hearing these arguments, and, as of yet, no one has been able to answer this. I personally think there is no substance to these arguments and they just keep getting rehashed without any fact-checking.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.07 01:11:00 - [1040] Edited by: Aramendel on 07/03/2007 01:11:35 Not one of the pro-nanoBS crowd, but I'll try to answer regardless: 1.) People are usually referring to HG snakes for the multiple bil setups. Unless you get silly and use faction heavy nosses and t2 rigs you do not get over 500 mil if you use the best deadspace MWD. With t2 and cheap implants (~300 mil) you can get around 5 km/s. With the cheaper faction MWDs and LG snakes it's around 8 km/s (~1 bil, half of that for LG snakes). And with HG snakes and the best MWDs it goes over 10 km/s (prolly 3-4 bil, ~2 bil for the snakes). With keeping 1-2 lows free for RCU and/or BCU and without gang boni. If you dedicate all lows to speed, use t2 rigs and the best implants and a maxxed claymore pilot for gang assist boni you can get >20 km/s with a phoon. 2.) Pretty much what you already stated. Nav 5 (generally good skill), evasive 5 (needed for ceptors), SC 5 (needed for all t2 cruisers and BCs) are IMO out of the picture. The only "good" skills which aren't part of the general skilling would be accelleration control 5 (and that is still only a "good idea" and not essential, it's only a 3-4% speed boost from lvl 4). And high speed maneuvering 5, but this is, again, no "must have" but just nice. Compared to, lets say, t2 large guns for snipers trainingtime for a nanoBS is a joke.

Mokou Fujiwara	Posted - 2007.03.07 02:24:00 - [1041] Sorry if I came off pretty hard. I just really hate it when I take a lot of time to make a good post, then people just tear it apart for the wrong reasons, or just plain apear to, and not have actually read it (I'm not pointing fingers, it just happens, and I hate it regardless). Now, if the snakes implants are practically the only real reason why people say it's so expensive to make good a Nano-BS, then it's kinda like saying that a high-efficiency shield tank is incredibly expensive and deserves to "pwn j00 @ll!!!!11!" with a perma-tank because it cost a few bil for the crystal implants. I guess that's kinda another strike against Nanos then?
jamesw Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.03.07 04:32:00 - [1042] Sorry, but you don't need 2 billion isk, or snakes of any kind to take advantage of this totally broken game mechanic. I havent flown a nano bs since before christmas, and I never invested much time OR money in them. Even with a Dominix + Gist MWD setup, Beta Nanofibers and a couple of cheap +3% implants, you can still behave like an interceptor. All that for not much more than 100 mil. At the time I flew them, my Dominix went only 500m/s slower than my Taranis. It could orbit anything at 18km, warp scramble, nos and not get hit. Result: use of a totally broken game mechanic for 100m. I'm all for BS topping out at a high speed when set up for it, but they sure as hell shouldnt turn like ceptors at the same time. -- Latest Vid: Domination!
DeTox MinRohim Madhatters Inc. Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.07 05:56:00 - [1043] Edited by: DeTox MinRohim on 07/03/2007 06:03:28 Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: DeTox MinRohim blabla Truth hurts? ahem... sorry... need more than that I assure you and according to your other posts, your light smack kind of conversation seems to be the way you embelish your arguments (wich are usually a good read though) so don't worry. Originally by: Ryysa Quote: ...blablabla. That means, you had about 5-6 seconds to initiate warp. 5 Seconds is more than enough to see 6000m/s on the velocity column at the overview. Again, if you lose a ceptor to a nanobs, it either had 3 sensor boosters [which it can't have without uber gimping it's setup] or you just weren't paying attention. I'd say it's the latter. The 5 seconds was apparently more than enough for him to get on me being that he was 40km away from me when I went out of warp at the place, lock me, and scramble me. Not sure I remember exactly but I think he was already running towards me when the warp got off so 40km was nothing for him at his speed. Add a bit of lag (but not too much, not saying it was a lag problem... well... I hope so), maybe a split of a second to check the overview for his speed as I had more than enough time to see that there was something wrong. But even before that 5th second... was nothing left to do. The next 5 seconds was all he needed to poof my ship. Slow reaction ? maybe, still not the point.I can't comment his setup, you probably know more about it according to your other posts. Not argumenting that. Originally by: Ryysa Your inability to pvp has everything to do with it. You are in ceptor/ship highly vulnerable to nos without injector with low tank. You see nanobs? You GTFO, I can warp out my vagabond from a nanobs before it locks me every time, and you can't warp out your CEPTOR? zzz... with all due respect, the size of your e-peen is of no interest to me and it is surely not the subject. I never pretended being the most experienced PvPer but there are also some situations that whatever you say, you'll missed some facts by not being there yourself. Maybe there was something I could have done different... who cares... it's not the point. Originally by: Ryysa The only thing there is to understand, is that losing a ceptor to a nanobs is a silly mistake. A lot of people do that mistake, but burning away from something that is going faster than you is not very smart [when you can just warp in 2-3 seconds, before said ship has a chance to lock you]. I'm not sure I said it was not a mistake (but I won't even bother reading past pages). I jumped into something and unlike you like to pretend, the outcome was inevitable in that case. But the goal was to point the bits of info I gathered from this situation that is not balanced. Speed mostly and without no apparent problem to do full damage at full orbitting speed (nice tracking - mm... think he was using torps though). Not the kill itself wich again, was not really the point, only the showstarter. Originally by: Ryysa My hugin can survive fighters, domi, raven and support easily. In fact, my hugin goes over 5km/s. And I can read all this and fall asleep... next. Originally by: Ryysa But hey - I'll leave it to you to discover how to pvp in this game, it wouldn't be fun if everything was spoonfed to you now would it? WTS - modesty ? Originally by: Ryysa I am not saying nanobs is not overpowered, proportional increase of lowslots => speed is not right, period. Since bigger ships get more slots. But losing a ceptor to a nanobs and then justifying that it was not pilot error makes me laugh :) I agree but again, I am not justifying my ceptor loss as "not my mistake"... only pointed the unreasonable balance issues that triggered or helped that loss to happen. Won't bother reading the rest, most have been said and Devs probably already have a fair idea what to nerf or how to nerf. ------ ~~Proud member of the !s~~ I take no responsability for your paranoia ! This sig space is Read-only !
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.07 11:33:00 - [1044] Edited by: Ryysa on 07/03/2007 11:30:38 Originally by: Tohmu Blackwing Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Mokou Fujiwara No ship should be practically completly immune to gate camps. Screw you. Yes they should. Gatecamping is 0 skill pvp. However, ships shouldn't be immune to gatecamps with a pvp fitting, unless they are specialized (interceptor, matari cruisers/hacs). Did I just see that??? Did a member of the Privateer Alliance just say that gate camping is a 0 skill PvP tactic?? Seriously, if you want to flame PA, then do it on the proper forum. I'll say it one, and one time only. PA is a entity consisting of many different corps/alliances. People join, pay 50m/week and have lots of targets in empire. There are no ties and no commitments whatsoever, if some corps prefer to gatecamp in empire - i prefer to fight in 0.0, and take the extra targets as a bonus when coming back home. And yes, i think gatecamping is 0 skill pvp. And I also think that your intelligence level is heavily lacking if you bring privateer alliance into a discussion on the Ships & Modules board, especially while not showing your corporation or alliance on the left side of the post? Pathetic. Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Stuff Let me sum it up. You basically just flamed me without giving any counter arguments and said "you are boring". Then you admitted that you died because you screwed up. Well great, thanks for proving me right. Oh and btw, have you ever flown a battleship/do you own one? Please do put 1 sensor booster on it and then try to lock a friend with an interceptor. I assure you it will take a LOT longer than 5 seconds. N.F.F. Recruitment
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.07 11:57:00 - [1045] Ryysa wind your neck in mate. The dude whose post you ripped apart has spent a very long time making it by looking through the entire thread and summarizing it. Some of his arguments are debatable, but the point is he has very kindly put pro and con in one place for us all. I think he deserves an appology for your post. To the dude who wrote it, thanks a lot, was an interesting and well put together read. sgb
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.07 13:04:00 - [1046] Originally by: smallgreenblur Ryysa wind your neck in mate. The dude whose post you ripped apart has spent a very long time making it by looking through the entire thread and summarizing it. Some of his arguments are debatable, but the point is he has very kindly put pro and con in one place for us all. I think he deserves an appology for your post. To the dude who wrote it, thanks a lot, was an interesting and well put together read. sgb If you read carefully, you will note my last post wasn't directed at the guy who summarized everything. And imo he did a very fine job summarizing it, the problem is, it will just be buried upon pages and pages again. I just stated, that i heavily disagree with some of the stuff he wrote (since it was written perhaps a wee bit one-dimensional). Anyway, imo we need to stop whining at eachother and concentrate on the issue at hand :x And to "Mokou Fujiwara", sorry if I offended you, your contribution to the thread is appreciated :) N.F.F. Recruitment
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.07 13:12:00 - [1047] Yeah i just saw your post halfway up the page and got annoyed :P I hope ccp 1) deals with this situation soon, or at least puts some proposals on the board, and 2) doesn't overreact and kill all ships that use speed, it makes for some nice variety... sgb
DeTox MinRohim Madhatters Inc. Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.07 16:04:00 - [1048] Edited by: DeTox MinRohim on 07/03/2007 16:04:19 Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Stuff Let me sum it up. You basically just flamed me without giving any counter arguments and said "you are boring". Then you admitted that you died because you screwed up. I don't recall having flamed you (at least not first). Please reread. You flamed me. And I tried to keep down the flame clichT in answering you. But... if your interpretation leads you to flamage. Not my fault. As for the mistake, I didn't say "I screwed up". Please reread... or not... don't care. OT. I told how it happened. The time it took him to target and lock me should give more hints to you than me (from what I can judge) what setup he had. But if you don't take it into account and prefer to flame my pvp abilities, that's no argument either. Originally by: Ryysa Well great, thanks for proving me right. You didn't explained how the situation I gave could happen except flaming my pvp abilities, please try again. I am all willing to know about it. (sincerily) Originally by: Ryysa Oh and btw, have you ever flown a battleship/do you own one? Yes... but never a nanos I admit. Doesn't bring anything to the little story I gave of how it happened though as I wasn't the one flying the nano. So could only give my side of how it happened. Originally by: Ryysa Please do put 1 sensor booster on it and then try to lock a friend with an interceptor. I assure you it will take a LOT longer than 5 seconds. And I know that and believe you (like I already said) and I even snipe a bit but as already told, I also admitted I don't have a uber experience of it... so I "respectfully", "sincerily" ask now: How many sensor boosters or else he could have had to do what he did in how I report my situation ? Note that while I don't like to rely on lag or such crappy reason, maybe the guy saw me coming on his screen before I even see him on mine. But even with that, I fear it would've add only 1 or 2 seconds on him. (Please don't flame my computer now he he) The explanations may be various and you seem to only give as a reason that it's impossible. It happened. Timeframe can vary a few seconds but not too much. So the beef remains, He could target, lock, scramble, nos and killed me inside a range of 10 seconds. (12 seconds max probably) He was around 40km from me when I went out of warp (add a lower or higher 5km range as the overview is sometimes late) but probably already running full speed in my direction. That I got away or not is not the issue. That's what happened and would like to know how it was possible, the rest is candy. ------ ~~Proud member of the !s~~ I take no responsability for your paranoia ! This sig space is Read-only !
Mokou Fujiwara	Posted - 2007.03.07 21:43:00 - [1049] Sorry if I came out a bit harsh. I probably overreacted. I probably just read a bit too much between the lines, and get things that aren't really there, are were unintended. Well, directly regarding the issue though, I believe the best fixes would also effect the game in general (such as the general speed boosts/sig radius effect boost) causing too much change to even the casual player who's never even knew about the Nano-BS issue in the first place, or would obsolete the high-speed BS and also, inadvertently, encourage blobs even more. Strangely enough, I believe that Nano-BSs actually deter blobs to an extend, making smaller blobs less effective. What this means, is that speed is one of the best detriments towards blobbing. Make speed central to your gang, then it'll be very difficult to blob yourself, but also makes it difficult for your opponent to blob well. Let me put up an example: Say, you get a trio of Nano-BSs(the cheaper variety) that encounter a trio of regular BSs (say, a pair of blaster boats and a missile boat or something). The Nanos engage their targets, circling them all. Each they all concentrate on a single target, however, they orbit the entire group as if it was one. When they NOS, they do a single cycle to the closest opposing ship at the time, not NOSing the same target, so they don't have to stay within 20k or so of the same target at all times, but instead, just within 20k of any one of the ships when the cycle ends. Say, they do the same thing with the warp disruptors. Complicated, I know, but presume it ends up working. The regular BSs all target one Nano, and fire away. They hit, miss, whatever. They also try to use their warp disruptors on seperate targets, maybe a jammer as well. That one Nano that got pounded on could disengage to a safe distance, say 40k or so. Quickly, I might add. Blaster wouldn't be able to hit it well, even with MWD off, and the missile boat can only do so much by itself, especially since it could concentrate on healing. Meanwhile, the remaining two Nanos keep up their engagement, and the two blasterboats and the missileboat retarget to one of the remaining two, ignoring the non-engaging Nano. Say, they keep this up until the second Nano is about to hit armour, and disengages. By this point, the targetted BS should be pretty low in HP, if not dead already. But it's a three on one anyways, so it's alright. Or maybe not. The first disengaged Nano would be somewhat recharged by now, and would re-engage, turning it into a three on two, which will soon become a two on two, with one guy recharging. This keeps going for a few minutes, maybe another Nano would disengage, and the resting Nano would comeback. Eventually, all three BSs would be defeated, leaving three Nanos left as the winners, at no losses, and maybe armour damage. Hull damage at worst. This, is an aplication of high-speed BSs that would theoretically work out well, if we were talking about more balenced Nano-BSs (one that speed tanks so well that it takes no damage at all). This is also what I believe that Eve should be like. Well, not exactly. With a slight NOS fix, I would believe that the Nano-trio would lose if it engaged a pair of regular BSs, accompanied by a pair of Frigs with webs, or even just plain two Inties and four assault frigs. This could hurt blobbing on all but the highest levels. Even discouraging larger groups sometimes. In theory anyways.
jamesw Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.03.07 22:47:00 - [1050] Originally by: Mokou Fujiwara ... Strangely enough, I believe that Nano-BSs actually deter blobs to an extend, making smaller blobs less effective. What this means, is that speed is one of the best detriments towards blobbing. Make speed central to your gang, then it'll be very difficult to blob yourself, but also makes it difficult for your opponent to blob well. Let me put up an example: Say, you get a trio of Nano-BSs(the cheaper variety) that encounter a trio of regular BSs (say, a pair of blaster boats and a missile boat or something). The Nanos engage their targets, circling them all. Each they all concentrate on a single target, however, they orbit the entire group as if it was one. When they NOS, they do a single cycle to the closest opposing ship at the time, not NOSing the same target, so they don't have to stay within 20k or so of the same target at all times, but instead, just within 20k of any one of the ships when the cycle ends. Say, they do the same thing with the warp disruptors. Complicated, I know, but presume it ends up working. The regular BSs all target one Nano, and fire away. They hit, miss, whatever. They also try to use their warp disruptors on seperate targets, maybe a jammer as well. That one Nano that got pounded on could disengage to a safe distance, say 40k or so. Quickly, I might add. Blaster wouldn't be able to hit it well, even with MWD off, and the missile boat can only do so much by itself, especially since it could concentrate on healing. Meanwhile, the remaining two Nanos keep up their engagement, and the two blasterboats and the missileboat retarget to one of the remaining two, ignoring the non-engaging Nano. Say, they keep this up until the second Nano is about to hit armour, and disengages. By this point, the targetted BS should be pretty low in HP, if not dead already. But it's a three on one anyways, so it's alright. Or maybe not. The first disengaged Nano would be somewhat recharged by now, and would re-engage, turning it into a three on two, which will soon become a two on two, with one guy recharging. This keeps going for a few minutes, maybe another Nano would disengage, and the resting Nano would comeback. Eventually, all three BSs would be defeated, leaving three Nanos left as the winners, at no losses, and maybe armour damage. Hull damage at worst. This, is an aplication of high-speed BSs that would theoretically work out well, if we were talking about more balenced Nano-BSs (one that speed tanks so well that it takes no damage at all). This is also what I believe that Eve should be like. Well, not exactly. With a slight NOS fix, I would believe that the Nano-trio would lose if it engaged a pair of regular BSs, accompanied by a pair of Frigs with webs, or even just plain two Inties and four assault frigs. This could hurt blobbing on all but the highest levels. Even discouraging larger groups sometimes. In theory anyways. That sort of scenario is, in my opinion, exactly what the problem is. Also, a 3v3 is not exactly an example of nano bs combatting a blob. BS that can orbit other BS at 20km without any risk?? BS with the agility to travel at 4km/s and turn like a frigate? Thats not right, and not how eve should be. Big ships = turn slow. Small ships = turn fast. Anyone remember the time when a gang roaming deep into hostile 0.0 was composed of interceptors??? For a gang of 3 or 4 interceptors it took loads of skill to take even an NPC hunting BS down, let alone a PVP BS, or a defence gang! Nowadays, you take 3 nano bs, are basically immune to any defence that might show up, and can kill (gank) anything with little effort. I believe there is a way to fix this, and that it lies in some kind of penalty to the obscene agility afforded to Nano Bs at this point. Reducing the effect of Nanos/ iStabs / Nos when used on a speedship is the way imo. -- Latest Vid: Domination!

WarMongeer	Posted - 2007.03.08 05:55:00 - [1051] Although I don't really have anything to add here (I would but everyone I agree with has already posted my opinion three or four times over I'm sure); I do have questions with regard to how to counter these setups, damage wise, with the objective of driving them away, until some part of these setups get the eventual nerf. The infested area in question usually has nanoBS pilots in pairs and triplets. From my skimming of this thread, I understand that: medium beam lasers track well enough to hit these ships (@ anywhere from 3km/sec to 12km/sec), yes/no? medium rails, ditto of the above? heavy missiles will do some damage, but not a whole lot? light missiles an option? Or ineffective? t2 light drones? Anything else I'm missing here that would hit these things? Any help appreciated.
Mokou Fujiwara	Posted - 2007.03.08 18:05:00 - [1052] Jamesw, I actually don't think there's too much problems with my scenario, unless if I'm missing more than I think I am. It shows that a speed tank BS trio (after a nerf that is) being able to beat a trio of traditional BSs without support, but only because of better strategy. If you look closer at the example, you should note that a the Nano-BS would have to disengage after only a short engagement time, and have to recharge outside the regular BS's range. With a dedicated speed tank setup and skills, it could only tank for a short period of time, much shorter than a typical "static" shield/armour tank. They would only win by taking advantage of their speed for more than just a tank, but to also dictate range, and available targets, all the while having to manage their own systems. A setup like this would require quite a lot of effort and personal skill to execute, but would be quite effective. I'm talking about something like a 4km/s setup being a high end one at that too. Nothing like what we currently have. Especially one that could easily be defeated by a single interecpter replacing one of the BSs, which in turn could be beaten by a regular group of BSs, which are beaten by a group of Nano-BSs, ect. A rock/paper/scissors type of design would benifit Eve, I believe, and it keeps Nano-BSs viable at that. A win win scenario, I would say.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.09 10:29:00 - [1053] Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Originally by: Ryysa Oh and btw, have you ever flown a battleship/do you own one? Yes... but never a nanos I admit. Doesn't bring anything to the little story I gave of how it happened though as I wasn't the one flying the nano. So could only give my side of how it happened. Based on this your entire argument is flawed, please do get a nanobs, not even an expensive one, fly it, and the come back to this thread. Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Originally by: Ryysa Please do put 1 sensor booster on it and then try to lock a friend with an interceptor. I assure you it will take a LOT longer than 5 seconds. And I know that and believe you (like I already said) and I even snipe a bit but as already told, I also admitted I don't have a uber experience of it... so I "respectfully", "sincerily" ask now: How many sensor boosters or else he could have had to do what he did in how I report my situation ? (Although it may not be necessary anyway, 35 pages of explanations can do the trick anyway). It takes me about 15-20 seconds ot lock an inty with 1 sensor booster on a battleship, and i do have signature analysis on 5. Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Note that while I don't like to rely on lag or such crappy reason, maybe the guy saw me coming on his screen before I even see him on mine. But even with that, I fear it would've add only 1 or 2 seconds on him. (Please don't flame my computer now he he) Irrelevant. Originally by: DeTox MinRohim The explanations may be various and you seem to only give as a reason that it's impossible. It happened. Timeframe can vary a few seconds but not too much. So the beef remains, He could target, lock, scramble, nos and killed me inside a range of 10 seconds. (12 seconds max probably) He was around 40km from me when I went out of warp (add a lower or higher 5km range as the overview is sometimes late) but probably already running full speed in my direction. That I got away or not is not the issue. No, he can not have killed you within 10 seconds. A nanobs is using either drones or trackless weapons like torpedoes/cruise missiles. They are subject to penalties. Now even if he did have 2 sensor boosters on (5 mids on machariel), and he did lock you within 10 seconds, to kill you he'd need at least 15-20 more seconds, seeing as machariel has 4 launcher slots without rof bonus and probably some small drones. However this is not relevant, by the time he has y ou locked down and nosed you're screwed anyway. Originally by: DeTox MinRohim That's what happened, the rest is candy for the devs to work on. And now, if it wasn't a nanoBS. If i was in my vagabond, and it was exactly the same situation. It would take me about 6-7 seconds to lock your ceptor, and about 5 seconds more (2-3 volleys from t2 guns) to pop you. And I do go quite fast with my vagabond also. Or if i was in my hugin, You would die even more terribly (dual webbed). The thing is, if he came out of warp 40km from you, and then locked you and mwded to you, he would be NEXT to you before he achieved lock (nano mach goes between 9k-13k with decent fitting). Basically, it would take him at least 20-25 seconds to kill you. In comparison, my vagabond can kill you in 10 seconds. Is my vagabond overpowered too? Hell, a stabber would have killed your inty, because you pay zero attention to what's going around you when you pvp. When you learn to truly pilot an interceptor, you won't be ganked by vagabonds and nanobs. Until then - good luck. You died due to pilot error, stick to your battleships where you just have to put your guns, your tank on and wait who pops first. N.F.F. Recruitment
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.09 10:37:00 - [1054] Originally by: Mokou Fujiwara stuff about theoretical 3v3 Now in practice, in a proper 3v3, with proper setups, the nanobs will have a hard time breaking anything's tank for a while (until it's injector charges last). Now close range guns hit nanobs [blasters, ac's, pulses]. Also, if each of the 3 BS that are tanked fits a web, they just have to spread out. At one point or the other, if the nanobs mindlessly orbit, then their orbit paths will cross with the 3 bses, they will get dual or triplewebbed, and if everyone focuses fire on tha nano bs at the right moment, it will damn near instapop. Also, you can forget about trying to fight 3 pvp fitted bs with close range guns with 3 nanobs. You will get ripped apart, sure the 3 bs won't kill the 3 nanobs, but that's fine. Now imagine if those 2 tanked bs instead have one hugin with them, and the 2 tanked bs use logistics drones. Nanos just won't engage, because they know at least one of them will go down. Your argument only works if it's 3 nanophoons vs 3 ravens none of which have speed mods nor webs. Or if the 3 normal bs are piloted by very incompetent pilots and the 3 nanobs by very competent pilots. I fly both nanobs and normal tanked bs, trust me, nothing tells a nanophooon to GTFO better than my tanked AC tempest, most warp in armor :) N.F.F. Recruitment
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.09 11:41:00 - [1055] The nanobs in that situation are only broken because they can just run away every time things are looking bad (generally even with one web on them). The other bs can't. sgb
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.09 13:36:00 - [1056] Originally by: smallgreenblur The nanobs in that situation are only broken because they can just run away every time things are looking bad (generally even with one web on them). The other bs can't. sgb Yep, and they do a LOAD more damage than all the specialized ships that can do the same (+ have nos). N.F.F. Recruitment
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.09 13:38:00 - [1057] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: smallgreenblur The nanobs in that situation are only broken because they can just run away every time things are looking bad (generally even with one web on them). The other bs can't. sgb Yep, and they do a LOAD more damage than all the specialized ships that can do the same (+ have nos). Very good point.
DeTox MinRohim Madhatters Inc. Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.09 13:47:00 - [1058] Originally by: Ryysa blabla Whatever you need to make you feel the way you need to feel. It happened the way I described, however you care to turn it around to justify it is impossible. Your opinion on my Pvp abilities are as usual useless and brings nothing to the arguments you are bringing that are interesting... but still doesn't explain how it could have happened this way. Your numbers look all good... but then again. It happened. Originally by: Ryysa No, he can not have killed you within 10 seconds. Yes he did... but if you prefer calling people liars... Originally by: Ryysa It would take me about 6-7 seconds to lock your ceptor, and about 5 seconds more (2-3 volleys from t2 guns) to pop you. Strange... I've said multiple times 10 to 12 seconds. 6+5=11... Not bad. We now know that it's possible in a vaga. Now for his Machariel setup, I'm sure you'll find the appropriate setup to cover the last second and turn around the 6-7 into the 4-5. That it was an exception or not, maybe it was but the ultimate goal of this whole thread is not about this particular situation or your opinion on my Pvp abilities. In any case, consider yourself the winner of this useless debate as I won't bother answering further posts from you on this subject. It happened, that's all. Sometimes, situations occur that if you can't explain them, flaming or relying solely on the "pilot error" reason for the one that presented them to you doesn't bring anything to the overall debate. Regards ! And have fun all trying to find the right nerf stick. I don't rely on whining as Ryysa cared to put it, I feel there is a slight nerf to be done on this, not necessarily as hard as some suggested but still a little something. ------ ~~Proud member of the !s~~ I take no responsability for your paranoia ! This sig space is Read-only !
Del ReyII Caldari	Posted - 2007.03.09 18:03:00 - [1059] I know its been said before, I didn't read the thread really fully, and there are points that I have read that are better made than I could ever put across, but I just have to chime in. I dont expect a reply to my post, I am just posting my support of the nano-crap nerf. In all my time in eve I dont remember a single change that has messed up gameplay this much. The fact that its been over 3months and its still hasn't been changed is even more maddening.
neur0n 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.03.09 19:55:00 - [1060] Originally by: jamesw That sort of scenario is, in my opinion, exactly what the problem is. Also, a 3v3 is not exactly an example of nano bs combatting a blob. BS that can orbit other BS at 20km without any risk?? BS with the agility to travel at 4km/s and turn like a frigate? Thats not right, and not how eve should be. Big ships = turn slow. Small ships = turn fast. Anyone remember the time when a gang roaming deep into hostile 0.0 was composed of interceptors??? For a gang of 3 or 4 interceptors it took loads of skill to take even an NPC hunting BS down, let alone a PVP BS, or a defence gang! Nowadays, you take 3 nano bs, are basically immune to any defence that might show up, and can kill (gank) anything with little effort. I believe there is a way to fix this, and that it lies in some kind of penalty to the obscene agility afforded to Nano Bs at this point. Reducing the effect of Nanos/ iStabs / Nos when used on a speedship is the way imo. on a 3v3 being one of the ships a huginn pilot with decent skills i'd say the nanophoons would be pretty much screwed. Nano ships are just as much of a tactic as any other tactic in the game and people instead of whining should adapt. - Originally by: Masta Killa ASCN - The way their frigfleets kamikaze on our missiles is horrifying. We can't afford to keep buying more and more missiles only to have them destroyed by ASCN frigs!

Dag'olar	Posted - 2007.03.09 19:56:00 - [1061] Okey dokey. I've flown nanophoons, and i've beek killed by nanophoons, and i don't see a problem. First, it's not nanophoons that are the problem, but nano-domi's. Typhoons you maybe have four torps or something launching away. Point is, AC's don't track fast enough. So you ahve four launchers, that depending on your target may or may not be effective. Sure you can nose things to high heaven, but you might have a hard time killing a few things. Nanodomi's have drones. lots of them. so as long as your orbit at 20 or 25km you can let your drones rip things to pieces. As mentioned, if you nerf nano's and istabs, you kill a whole bunch of imaginative setups, nano-cane's included. Nano's and intertia stabilizers are the only real things that allow you to make a speed setup. If you nerf them, you just killed one of three possible tanks. not good. Nano-phoons and domi's arn't invinsible. I lost a nanophoon to a few very imaginative cruisers and inty's. Dictor dropped a bubble, inty webbed me, and i had two cruisers, and the dictor using sensor dampners on me. I couldn't lock the targets: they were so small, and my sensors were so f'd up, i was looking at 70 seconds to lock the inty. Kinda makes nosing them diccifult. Nanophoons and domi's having no tank whatsoever once they start taking damage, it was only a matter of time before i was gone. THE POINT IS: There are ways to take down nano-battleships. And you don't need a nanobattle ship yourself. All you need is some imaginative solutions. One of the best aspects of this game is comming up with imaginative setups that no one thought of that reap havoc among others until someone ewually imaginative comes up with a solution. STOP YOUR WHINING AND LOOK FOR A SOLUTION, RATHER THAN WAITING FOR CCP TO MAKE ONE FOR YOU.
Joahanas Stone Caldari Confederation of Red Moon	Posted - 2007.03.09 20:04:00 - [1062] I really don't see the point in the nerfing other than maybe a little. Why not leave BS's to drop their armor for speed mods. If you want to catch a nano BS use a nano BS. The damn things are all over 0.0 now and really don't **** me off as much as cloaked AFK alts. We have already blown away a few of the nano ships with using a small cruiser/frig group. amazing how well probs, webs, and scrams work together. Yes they can run around and hide in order to gank a lonner. But it is fun chasing them around. Then to pop them and pod soooo nice to know how much it cost them in iskies.
Derran Minmatar Khumatari Holdings Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.03.09 20:12:00 - [1063] Heeelloooooooooooooooo? taptap Is this thing on? The problem with whole 'nanobs' thing is that they are faster and more maneuverable than frigates. While yes, they are quiet a strong setup, the real point is they really replace frigate size ships.
Xasz G.H.O.S.T	Posted - 2007.03.09 20:26:00 - [1064] Originally by: Joahanas Stone I really don't see the point in the nerfing other than maybe a little. Why not leave BS's to drop their armor for speed mods. If you want to catch a nano BS use a nano BS. The damn things are all over 0.0 now and really don't **** me off as much as cloaked AFK alts. We have already blown away a few of the nano ships with using a small cruiser/frig group. amazing how well probs, webs, and scrams work together. Yes they can run around and hide in order to gank a lonner. But it is fun chasing them around. Then to pop them and pod soooo nice to know how much it cost them in iskies. I think we're missing the point here. I have no issue whatsoever with regular nano setups. It's the FACTION nano setups, doing upwards of 9km/s indefinatly that bug me.
Joahanas Stone Caldari Confederation of Red Moon	Posted - 2007.03.09 21:39:00 - [1065] My post was more in fun than anything else. but the main difference in the nano ships that do this totally insane speed costs a hell of alot of isk. The people making the super speed killers are paying probably as much for the single ship as my entire hanger. For me, I am typically broke. I bought my first Gistii A type 1mn for my malediction. What 50 mil? for one piece. I spend most of my time ratting or ganging up and going after baddies in the region. I look at the people that make these insane ships like the same people that buy a ferrari. Most of what I can tell from the forums though is that a few battle ships can fly faster than standard, well set up, frigs. With nos on these battle ships, they take out the tacklers. IMO, If I paid in upwards of 500 plus mil for a ship, I would hope I could handle a small group of T1 or T2 tacklers. Now if you could make an insane speed BS ship for cheap, it would be more of a problem. I tried to make a nanophoon without faction gear or rigs or implants. Not such a good set up. with faction, plus rigs, plus implants... yeah crazy and super expensive.. not even gonna try and figure the price. If you really want to slow them down... have CCP increase the mass of the BS's. I would hate to see it though. Also, a side note.. anyone else notice how much more difficult the complexes have gotten??? Faction gear is also alot harder to get now.
Ka'kelam	Posted - 2007.03.10 08:43:00 - [1066] Ditto. Your spending a hell of alot of isk to have a really, realy big frig. Frigs are used as tacking ships. nano-bs's are used as solo pvp mobiles. Big difference in role there. Ever see a nano-phoon in a fleet battle? no. it wouldn't last five second between the mwd lighting it up like a christmas tree and no tank to speak of.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.10 11:26:00 - [1067] Originally by: DeTox MinRohim Edited by: DeTox MinRohim on 09/03/2007 20:52:14 Originally by: Ryysa other stuff Whatever you need to make you feel the way you need to feel. It happened the way I described, however you care to turn it around to justify it is impossible... call me liar if you want, it happened. As for the rest... Regards ! Have fun all trying to find the right nerf stick. I don't rely on whining as Ryysa cared to put it, I feel there is a slight nerf to be done on this, not necessarily as hard as some suggested but still a little something. I do not disagree that nanoships should be nerfed, I merely pointed out, that they should not be nerfed because you do not know how to pilot an interceptor. There are a lot of reasons that they are unbalanced, you being a bad interceptor pilot not being one of them. You fit the typical "OMGIGOTPWNED I heard it's imbalanced somewhere OH let me whine on the forum" style for me. If you would think even a tiny little bit, the nanobs wasn't the reason you died - there could've been a vagabond, a stabber, two other ceptors or a myriad of other ships instead of that nanobs, and you would've died exactly the same. If you don't get it, then you fail at pvp. NanoBS should be nerfed because they carry battleship firepower + nossing ability in tandem with speed that only specialized ships are supposed to reach, so they are able to disengage from fights while providing a lot more firepower than ships designed for it. Meaning they make those ship classes obsolete. NanoBS should not be nerfed because some random guy goes on forums and cries how his ceptor got killed in a situation where it would have gotten killed by a lot of other shipclasses. Hope you see my point now? N.F.F. Recruitment
DeTox MinRohim Madhatters Inc. Maelstrom Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.10 12:38:00 - [1068] Edited by: DeTox MinRohim on 10/03/2007 12:38:34 Originally by: Ryysa You fit the typical "OMGIGOTPWNED I heard it's imbalanced somewhere OH let me whine on the forum" style for me. I can see how my first post led you to "fit" me that way but that's where your judgement was too fast even though I admit that the way it was written was baiting that kind of judgement. Because you "suppose" you would have done differently in an uninformed situation doesn't mean you can judge anyones Pvp abilities the way you do (or the person itself anyway) and that doesn't change anything on the fact that we agree on the same things about the nerfing. Originally by: Ryysa Hope you see my point now? Hope you see mine as well! But moving on... ------ ~~Proud member of the !s~~ I take no responsability for your paranoia ! This sig space is Read-only !
n0thing Northern Intelligence Artificial Intelligence.	Posted - 2007.03.10 15:05:00 - [1069] Like alot of people above said, problem would be not the idea of speed setup for BS or any other ship that sacrifices all of its protection for speed. Just the point is, it warps like a shuttle, recently i tryed to fit 2 inertias to my thorax resulting in insta-warp when i was moving it around. I think its ok to keep speed BS setups, just reduce the agility bonus for them, they still fast and can keep orbit, but they wont be able to warp like a shuttle when someone gets too close, providing that they can engage pretty much any fight and run as things get worse, if Im correct thats why warp core stablizers were made purely for traveling? To make people think before they attack. --- tnx.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.10 15:20:00 - [1070] Originally by: Dag'olar Okey dokey. I've flown nanophoons, and i've beek killed by nanophoons, and i don't see a problem. First, it's not nanophoons that are the problem, but nano-domi's. Typhoons you maybe have four torps or something launching away. Point is, AC's don't track fast enough. So you ahve four launchers, that depending on your target may or may not be effective. Sure you can nose things to high heaven, but you might have a hard time killing a few things. ... STOP YOUR WHINING AND LOOK FOR A SOLUTION, RATHER THAN WAITING FOR CCP TO MAKE ONE FOR YOU. You're absolutely right. There was me thinking that a typhoon could fit 4 cruise launchers, 4 nos, and 5 heavy drones. Silly me. I have a solution. It's called 'a corpmate in a faster nanobs'. They're STILL F***ING BROKEN. sgb

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.10 18:22:00 - [1071] Nanophoon dps > nanodomi dps...
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.10 18:32:00 - [1072] Originally by: Aramendel Nanophoon dps > nanodomi dps... Only if you use multiple BCS's +siege and heavy drones on the phoon, most of the time you use 1 bcs, cruise and medium drones. N.F.F. Recruitment
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.10 19:14:00 - [1073] Thats with 1 BCU2, siege and heavies. With cruise and meds it will have less dps than a domi....with heavies. If the domi uses meds, too, the phoon will again have more dps
Foulis Minmatar Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.03.10 21:01:00 - [1074] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Aramendel Nanophoon dps > nanodomi dps... Only if you use multiple BCS's +siege and heavy drones on the phoon, most of the time you use 1 bcs, cruise and medium drones. Most nanophoons use siege launchers, singe BCS. Why wouldn't you use heavies, you have quite a nice drone bay on a typhoon. I really don't want to participate in another whine thread, I just speak as a typhoon pilot(who doesn't use nano/istabs). ---- Originally by: Nikolai Nuvolari NO WORDS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARE SPELLED WITH THE NUMBER "8" IN THEM GODDAMNIT!
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.11 00:16:00 - [1075] Edited by: Ryysa on 11/03/2007 00:13:27 The reason you don't use heavies on a typhoon, is because you can't really scoop them up most of the time if you engage outnumbered, and they just get ganked. Also, you have only 1 flight of 5 heavy drones then. You have no defence besides nos against stuff like inties. Domi can fit nav links in highs, and also if it loses 1 flight of heavies, it has one more, and more meds. That's the reason you use mediums on a typhoon and use heavies and mediums depending on situation on a domi. So in fact, I'd say a nanodomi certainly has it's merits. N.F.F. Recruitment
Basilii Minmatar Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.03.11 15:35:00 - [1076] 11km/s machariels are very very unbalanced .
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.11 16:27:00 - [1077] Originally by: Basilii 11km/s machariels are very very unbalanced . You're made a typo there mate. That should read: Originally by: Basilii 22km/s machariels are very very unbalanced .
Cyberus	Posted - 2007.03.11 18:24:00 - [1078] Can you tell me when this bullsh.. gonna stop? [ 2007.03.11 17:08:23 ] (combat) <color=0xffbbbb00>Your Scourge Heavy Missile hits Skoot [STERE]<PETS>(Dominix), doing 1.1 damage. Where you guys gonna fix this damn game and let us enjoy it? If this gonna be fixed soon then i want see my with blood earned $ back on my walet because i'm sick to pay money for crap like this. And dont tell me about freaking Huginn's and web's and any other modules. This ships goin way to fast and they can be only catch by luck.
n0thing Northern Intelligence Artificial Intelligence.	Posted - 2007.03.11 22:29:00 - [1079] Id rather say not about ship going too fast, its about that all setups agility is not right then. Agility should look like this: Shuttle > Covert/Inty/Frig > Destroyer > Cruiser/HAC/Recon > BC/CS > BS > Capitals. Right now it looks like this: Shuttle > NanoBS/Covert/Inty/Frig > Destroyer > Cruiser/HAC/Recon > BC/CS > BS > Capitals. Today I just seen a Dominix warping out faster then a cruiser with sensor booster could get a lock on it. Fine if it would fly out of range fast, but warping slightly slower then shuttle? ---
Rhamnousia Caldari Pelennor Swarm R i s e	Posted - 2007.03.12 07:48:00 - [1080] i dont really hav a problm with the nano'd ships they're suck anyway ... an averaged t2 tanked BS can tank a nanophoon dps till it ran out of cap easily (even with the 4 heavy nos) a nanophoon most likely is gonna run away from: cruise raven, nosdomi, ac pest, pulse geddon, blaster rokh, gankphoon, ecm scorp, pulse apoc, pulse adaddon, ac maelstorm ... that'd leave out only blaster thron/hyperion being screwed completely since they end up without a setup to counter nanoships when a ship (nano ot not) engages u, it wants u dead, if u aren't then u win .. that's the way i see it. in the case of u defending urself, u dont want the other bastard to die, u want to stay alive! if u want to kill a nano ship, try setup a trap that works ... there's nothing horribly wrong with nano ships, except of course the ones that goin faster than speed of light .. lemme say this one more time, if a nano ship dont wanna fight, it'll live, most of the time. and those nano ships that take 2-3bils to setup, good luck killing them, they aren't gonna let u, not without trying everything within their power to stop u from doin that. im fine with nano ships, as long as they dont log off, or put a cloak on. anything that in space is killable. period. --------------------------------------- - yes, im a noob - yes, im a nut job - no, i dont give a .... about what u think of my noobness - now, tell me sumthing i dont know

smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.12 09:36:00 - [1081] Originally by: Rhamnousia i dont really hav a problm with the nano'd ships they're suck anyway ... an averaged t2 tanked BS can tank a nanophoon dps till it ran out of cap easily (even with the 4 heavy nos) a nanophoon most likely is gonna run away from: cruise raven, nosdomi, ac pest, pulse geddon, blaster rokh, gankphoon, ecm scorp, pulse apoc, pulse adaddon, ac maelstorm ... that'd leave out only blaster thron/hyperion being screwed completely since they end up without a setup to counter nanoships when a ship (nano ot not) engages u, it wants u dead, if u aren't then u win .. that's the way i see it. in the case of u defending urself, u dont want the other bastard to die, u want to stay alive! if u want to kill a nano ship, try setup a trap that works ... there's nothing horribly wrong with nano ships, except of course the ones that goin faster than speed of light .. lemme say this one more time, if a nano ship dont wanna fight, it'll live, most of the time. and those nano ships that take 2-3bils to setup, good luck killing them, they aren't gonna let u, not without trying everything within their power to stop u from doin that. im fine with nano ships, as long as they dont log off, or put a cloak on. anything that in space is killable. period. True, many tank pvp setup bs can take on nanoships solo. But last time i checked having a good t2 tank wasn't 'average' it was 'rare'. And what about all the others? The cruisers and battlecruisers and HACs and even ceptors that can't outrun a ship that was never intended to go anything near their speeds. What about gank / tank bs that have no cap injector? And what about that fact that whatever you do, you can never take out a nanobs solo in any other setup? The problem has been restated many times in this thread and boils down to this: Speed is dependant on the number of low slots you have in your ship, not its base speed. Bs have more low slots ergo they can go faster. Pretty much everybody who doesn't fly a 1 bil nanoship - and several that do - see that it's dumb. sgb
n0thing Northern Intelligence Artificial Intelligence.	Posted - 2007.03.12 11:11:00 - [1082] Problem is that those ships can completly avoid any threat and pick their own fights wherever they want be it chokepoints or deep in the claimed space. ---
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.12 11:14:00 - [1083] Originally by: n0thing Problem is that those ships can completly avoid any threat and pick their own fights wherever they want be it chokepoints or deep in the claimed space. And also have BS HP and good dps. sgb
Tassill Minmatar GREY COUNCIL Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2007.03.12 11:50:00 - [1084] A friend and i were talking today on ts and he had what i thought was a great solution to this issue. It kind of comes back to one of the blogs tux or some one wrote about cranking modules up to 11. Each ship class should be given a maximum safe operation speed and can opperate up to this speed with no issues however if a ship exceeds its operation speed it starts tearing itslef to pieces. Ie you start taking damage so at 110% of your safe operation speed u might take 10 dps at 120% 30 dps etc. In practice this would meen an inty could reach a nice high speed np and so can a bs. However if a bs does, it will have to deal with damage due to excess speed.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.12 17:16:00 - [1085] Originally by: Tassill A friend and i were talking today on ts and he had what i thought was a great solution to this issue. It kind of comes back to one of the blogs tux or some one wrote about cranking modules up to 11. Each ship class should be given a maximum safe operation speed and can opperate up to this speed with no issues however if a ship exceeds its operation speed it starts tearing itslef to pieces. Ie you start taking damage so at 110% of your safe operation speed u might take 10 dps at 120% 30 dps etc. In practice this would meen an inty could reach a nice high speed np and so can a bs. However if a bs does, it will have to deal with damage due to excess speed. Stupid idea imo. Enforcing any kinds of constant type limitations on end-values which are affected by many factors just breaks things more. To reach a balanced environment, you must balance the factors that lead to the product, not the product without balancing the factors. I hope that made some sense. N.F.F. Recruitment
Tassill Minmatar GREY COUNCIL Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2007.03.13 00:26:00 - [1086] One of the stated effects of nannofibers is a reduction in structure. With a high number of nanno fibers fitted to a ship that is undergoing extreeme acceleration, structural damage is the logical outcome. Acceleration due to changes in orbit direction are a real phenomina and it would be expected that small fighters would have higher tollarances to the stress and strains of such manuvers than large battleships. It is logical then that any battleship undertaking such mauvers could have a structural faliure.
DUFFMANX D-Generation X	Posted - 2007.03.13 03:56:00 - [1087] Tbh there is only 1 conclusive way to solve the lame nano setups while allowing these mods to still be used. We have damage control in game but only 1 is allowed to be fitted per ship so i propose that the same rule be applied to speed mods. This rule was imposed to stop dual mwd and mwd\ab ship combos so no reason it cant work for other speed mods. If some1 wants an overdrive\nanofibre\inertia mod fitted then only 1 of each type hould be allowed per ship thus reducing the madness but not stopping complete use of the mods. I would go as far as to add the same restriction to propellant injection vents which boost speed also to make it fair on all mods available. If it can happen to 1 mod of same effect then all should be in the same boat. Something needs to be done to stop this imbalance and fast. Originally by: dimensionZ The biggest threat we ever had was xirtam mining plagioclase in aridia ...
Syntosk Amarr Ticon Enterprises	Posted - 2007.03.13 05:18:00 - [1088] Originally by: DUFFMANX Tbh there is only 1 conclusive way to solve the lame nano setups while allowing these mods to still be used. We have damage control in game but only 1 is allowed to be fitted per ship so i propose that the same rule be applied to speed mods. agreed, i support that... Originally by: Rhamnousia a nanophoon most likely is gonna run away from: cruise raven, nosdomi, ac pest, pulse geddon, blaster rokh, gankphoon, ecm scorp, pulse apoc, pulse adaddon, ac maelstorm ... - Precision cruise missiles have an explosion velocity of 1Kms, they go like 5K at least. - nosdomi, hmmm ok, his drones hits him, and the nosdomi drones cant reach him... - ac pest, pulse geddon, blaster rokh, gankphoon, pulse apoc, pulse adaddon, ac maelstorm ...no weapon tracks that orbiting speed - ecm scorp? -- "Purge the unclean..."
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.13 09:19:00 - [1089] Originally by: Syntosk - nosdomi, hmmm ok, his drones hits him, and the nosdomi drones cant reach him... It's a cap war, the nosdomi can EASILY tank the pathetic dps being done to it, and since it can nos the nanoship back, the nanoship runs out of cap booster charges and is forced to retreat. Quote: - ac pest, pulse geddon, blaster rokh, gankphoon, pulse apoc, pulse adaddon, ac maelstorm ...no weapon tracks that orbiting speed Wrong. AC Pest can easily hit nano bs, pulse geddon can, blokh can, in fact any close range system can. This is due to the fact that nanobs has huge sig radius due to mwd sig penalty. Even 350mm rails II with a tracking mod can track a nanobs. Quote: - ecm scorp? Can't scramble much when you are jammed, can you? Please stop trolling the thread, and actually READ what was written, before posting total bull****. N.F.F. Recruitment
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.13 10:05:00 - [1090] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Syntosk - nosdomi, hmmm ok, his drones hits him, and the nosdomi drones cant reach him... It's a cap war, the nosdomi can EASILY tank the pathetic dps being done to it, and since it can nos the nanoship back, the nanoship runs out of cap booster charges and is forced to retreat. Quote: - ac pest, pulse geddon, blaster rokh, gankphoon, pulse apoc, pulse adaddon, ac maelstorm ...no weapon tracks that orbiting speed Wrong. AC Pest can easily hit nano bs, pulse geddon can, blokh can, in fact any close range system can. This is due to the fact that nanobs has huge sig radius due to mwd sig penalty. Even 350mm rails II with a tracking mod can track a nanobs. Quote: - ecm scorp? Can't scramble much when you are jammed, can you? Please stop trolling the thread, and actually READ what was written, before posting total bull****. In short, you can only lose. Oh and yes you can hit nanobs with 350mm rails if he's stupid enough to fly in straight line, away from you. -------- .....

Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.13 13:35:00 - [1091] Originally by: LUKEC In short, you can only lose. True. Quote: Oh and yes you can hit nanobs with 350mm rails if he's stupid enough to fly in straight line, away from you. Wrong, try it. Slap 1 tracking mod on, voila. N.F.F. Recruitment
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.13 14:13:00 - [1092] Edited by: LUKEC on 13/03/2007 14:12:31 Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: LUKEC Oh and yes you can hit nanobs with 350mm rails if he's stupid enough to fly in straight line, away from you. Wrong, try it. Slap 1 tracking mod on, voila. Cormack's tracking computer perhaps ? 425mm rail + comp + 2x teII+thron don't hit with t1 ammo at ranges < 50km. -------- .....
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.03.13 16:00:00 - [1093] I hear that to hit the average nano-BS more than 50% of the time with large guns you need tracking boosted mega pulses... /me feel only contempt for users of cheesy setups. Dual mwd ravens, ecm nos-dominix, nanophoons, all ships for the gutless wannabe pvpers... ------------------------------------------ A big nuke may be nice in a strategy game, but something like this in a game where every unit is a player, and each death costly, is insane.
spoon2 Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.03.13 17:06:00 - [1094] TBH when you cant lock a BS with a sensor boosted Ceptor prior to it warping away and a BS thats faster than most ceptors there is something wrong, not bringing into account how hard they can be to even hit. I can Use Huginns and Rapiers and its still hard to get nano ships if they dont want to fight, they just run as soon as they see u. I'll be extremly happy when they nerf them, I know a few Alliances who won't though.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.14 01:26:00 - [1095] Originally by: LUKEC Edited by: LUKEC on 13/03/2007 14:12:31 Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: LUKEC Oh and yes you can hit nanobs with 350mm rails if he's stupid enough to fly in straight line, away from you. Wrong, try it. Slap 1 tracking mod on, voila. Cormack's tracking computer perhaps ? 425mm rail + comp + 2x teII+thron don't hit with t1 ammo at ranges < 50km. I was talking about 350mm. Just try it, today mega with 1-2 tracking comps and 350mm rails with antimatter put my nightmare into 95% Armor really fast. I was orbiting at 24km, at over 5km/s. Seriously, just try it, and no you don't need tracking boosted megapulse, megapulse hit without tracking mods. N.F.F. Recruitment
Rhamnousia Caldari Pelennor Swarm R i s e	Posted - 2007.03.14 03:03:00 - [1096] the only actual problm ppl hav against nanoBS is that it cant be killed easily ... but if u try to look it the way i do (which you wont), nanoBS are only NPCers ganker. and if u still in the belt mining/ratting while there's a hostile in system, u deserve to die. --------------------------------------- - yes, im a noob - yes, im a nut job - no, i dont give a .... about what u think of my noobness - now, tell me sumthing i dont know
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.03.14 07:32:00 - [1097] Originally by: Rhamnousia the only actual problm ppl hav against nanoBS is that it cant be killed easily ... but if u try to look it the way i do (which you wont), nanoBS are only NPCers ganker. and if u still in the belt mining/ratting while there's a hostile in system, u deserve to die. You'd have a point if they were easy to catch when you stop npcing and take a pvp ship to fight it. As it stands now, a ship with that speed and agility, simply has way too much dps/nos/hitpoints for things to be even remotely balanced... ------------------------------------------ A big nuke may be nice in a strategy game, but something like this in a game where every unit is a player, and each death costly, is insane.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.14 08:35:00 - [1098] Edited by: Ryysa on 14/03/2007 08:32:59 Tbh, i've killed a bunch of these things now, and I can only say, nanohugin ftw with some kind of bait ship that can ew and do damage. Or just have a hugin in system and gangs of less than 2 nanoed up ships won't go anywhere close to you. However, this whole combination of nos, speed and trackless weapons is completely imba. If just some of those 3 are slightly nerfed (Imo, stacking on nos and agility stacking), nanobs won't be viable anymore :P Tbh, this makes me think of nanobs being mosquitoes and hugin being RAID. Well. I think I have a new signature idea :P N.F.F. Recruitment
Lamic Tarvalla Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.03.14 08:58:00 - [1099] Originally by: Rachel Vend You want to know what it's really about? When people find a setup that the pvp'er's can't beat or have a hard time beating because they have to use their heads, the pvp'ers flood the forums with whines that this setup is too powerful. Look what happened with scan probes, it was the other way around, the carebears whined and whined about getting ganked in low sec in deadspace missions while the pvp'ers just said "tough luck" all of the time. The pvp'ers are now whining that they arent killing 50 people a day, but only 25 people a day. What an outrage! Give us a counter to the bubblecamps which do not include: 1. Trial account alt scout, or alt scout at all. 2. Instantly logging. 3. 500 people in gang with you to crash the system. Nanoships are the ONLY counter to bubble camps, I guess it's not fun losing victims huh. In EVE, there is no pvp. It's PVPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP Huh? The nanobattleships are flown by players that engage in *Player vs Player combat. I don't think lot's of mission runners or miners fit nano'ed battleships to mine or run missions. The issue with Nanobattleships is they seem* to be immuned to any current countermeasure. But you are somewhat correct. NanoBS pilots have the luxury of choosing when they fight and when they run, while tanked Battleships many times don't have that choice and can be forced to fight much more often And no there are other counters to bubble camps
Dano Sarum Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.03.14 10:41:00 - [1100] I know there was a post early on in the thread complaining that nanoships are the only solution to blobs / gatecamps. While thats kinda true you have to bear in mind that once you take the ship OUT of that environment its massively imba. I used to hate vagabonds due to the fact that anything other then a huggin or BS was dogfood in most 1v1's, ceptors couldnt catch it and when they could they'd get toasted... now nano BS are doing that to vagas, ceptors .. everything, except now they have the firepower to actually kill everything non capital class. Nanoships (actually its more Inertia stab ships) are incredibly moronic, its too much of an uncounterable setup, yes theres answers, like tracking boosted AC/Pulse/Blaster ships, however these cant actually KILL it just drive it away. Its broken, really needs to be looked at, its extremely difficult to do anything against nanobs/vagas, let alone when theres groups of them, they can run around unchecked with little or no skill needed. ______ <Insert Sig Here>

smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.14 18:09:00 - [1101] Originally by: Dano Sarum I know there was a post early on in the thread complaining that nanoships are the only solution to blobs / gatecamps. While thats kinda true you have to bear in mind that once you take the ship OUT of that environment its massively imba. I used to hate vagabonds due to the fact that anything other then a huggin or BS was dogfood in most 1v1's, ceptors couldnt catch it and when they could they'd get toasted... now nano BS are doing that to vagas, ceptors .. everything, except now they have the firepower to actually kill everything non capital class. Nanoships (actually its more Inertia stab ships) are incredibly moronic, its too much of an uncounterable setup, yes theres answers, like tracking boosted AC/Pulse/Blaster ships, however these cant actually KILL it just drive it away. Its broken, really needs to be looked at, its extremely difficult to do anything against nanobs/vagas, let alone when theres groups of them, they can run around unchecked with little or no skill needed. Don't bring vagas into it! They are designed for it, and more to the point can't fit heavy nos and heavy drones. sgb
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.03.14 23:22:00 - [1102] On test right now: LH instabs: -20% inertia (agility bonus) (t2 same) LH nanos: -10% mass (t2 -12.5%) LH ODs: +18.9% speed (t2 +20%) No other boni. Negative effects of the mods are still the same. -inertia and +percentual speed and the +MMD effeciency effect of vent rigs have a stacking penality
jamesw Omniscient Order Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2007.03.15 01:19:00 - [1103] Edited by: jamesw on 15/03/2007 01:16:44 Originally by: Aramendel On test right now: LH instabs: -20% inertia (agility bonus) (t2 same) LH nanos: -10% mass (t2 -12.5%) LH ODs: +18.9% speed (t2 +20%) No other boni. Negative effects of the mods are still the same. -inertia and +percentual speed and the +MMD effeciency effect of vent rigs have a stacking penality Works well - you can still go quite fast in a BS, but you cannot get the same sort of agility as before. I like these changes. Bring them to TQ asap! -- Latest Vid: Domination!
Qe'Rasha	Posted - 2007.03.15 05:54:00 - [1104] Originally by: jamesw Edited by: jamesw on 15/03/2007 01:16:44 Originally by: Aramendel On test right now: LH instabs: -20% inertia (agility bonus) (t2 same) LH nanos: -10% mass (t2 -12.5%) LH ODs: +18.9% speed (t2 +20%) No other boni. Negative effects of the mods are still the same. -inertia and +percentual speed and the +MMD effeciency effect of vent rigs have a stacking penality Works well - you can still go quite fast in a BS, but you cannot get the same sort of agility as before. I like these changes. Bring them to TQ asap! too bad this hurts ships that are designed to uses those. (ie vaga)
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.15 07:35:00 - [1105] Originally by: Qe'Rasha Originally by: jamesw Originally by: Aramendel On test right now: LH instabs: -20% inertia (agility bonus) (t2 same) LH nanos: -10% mass (t2 -12.5%) LH ODs: +18.9% speed (t2 +20%) No other boni. Negative effects of the mods are still the same. -inertia and +percentual speed and the +MMD effeciency effect of vent rigs have a stacking penality Works well - you can still go quite fast in a BS, but you cannot get the same sort of agility as before. I like these changes. Bring them to TQ asap! too bad this hurts ships that are designed to uses those. (ie vaga) It doesn't really... Not much anyway. NanoBS is completely pointless on test atm. Vagabond is hm, i fitted 2 nanofibers (the mass reducer things), well... While agility is lower ofcourse, the ship still goes as fast as before, not too much difference. Just the retarded vagabond setups with 2 istabs and 3 nanos in lows which do no dps will be nerfed :) N.F.F. Recruitment
jamesw Omniscient Order Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2007.03.15 07:54:00 - [1106] Originally by: Ryysa Originally by: Qe'Rasha Originally by: jamesw Originally by: Aramendel On test right now: LH instabs: -20% inertia (agility bonus) (t2 same) LH nanos: -10% mass (t2 -12.5%) LH ODs: +18.9% speed (t2 +20%) No other boni. Negative effects of the mods are still the same. -inertia and +percentual speed and the +MMD effeciency effect of vent rigs have a stacking penality Works well - you can still go quite fast in a BS, but you cannot get the same sort of agility as before. I like these changes. Bring them to TQ asap! too bad this hurts ships that are designed to uses those. (ie vaga) It doesn't really... Not much anyway. NanoBS is completely pointless on test atm. Vagabond is hm, i fitted 2 nanofibers (the mass reducer things), well... While agility is lower ofcourse, the ship still goes as fast as before, not too much difference. Just the retarded vagabond setups with 2 istabs and 3 nanos in lows which do no dps will be nerfed :) Also, and I may be wrong on this, but 18.9% velocity overdrives (locals) could sure make them faster..... -- Latest Vid: Domination!
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.15 09:25:00 - [1107] What a fantastic fix. Now, capital ships can sit outside station, assigning fighters, shooting, remote repping, whatever, and never ever run the risk of actually dying. The single best thing (from the users POV) about nanoBS was forcing engagements at gates, at stations, and even once at a POS (keep carrier from approaching it). Obviously the speed and time-to-warp of the BS was a problem. CCP could have avoided such a drastic speed nerf, and given us a still significant but less crippling one, if it actually did the hard thing and fixed nosferatus. Giving nanoBS a hit to speed in conjunction with a nosferatu nerf, while keeping the speed of pimped ceptors very high, would have alleviated every major problem with nanoBS, and still allowed smaller roaming gangs to prevent metagamers from playing undock games. Bumping from nanoBS is currently one of the best engagement-getters there is in the age of the Dooms Day Device and POS warfare, and now it will be pretty severely crippled. Can you at least do something about the undock timer, CCP?
spoon2 Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.03.15 09:59:00 - [1108] Originally by: Kusotarre What a fantastic fix. Now, capital ships can sit outside station, assigning fighters, shooting, remote repping, whatever, and never ever run the risk of actually dying. The single best thing (from the users POV) about nanoBS was forcing engagements at gates, at stations, and even once at a POS (keep carrier from approaching it). Obviously the speed and time-to-warp of the BS was a problem. CCP could have avoided such a drastic speed nerf, and given us a still significant but less crippling one, if it actually did the hard thing and fixed nosferatus. Giving nanoBS a hit to speed in conjunction with a nosferatu nerf, while keeping the speed of pimped ceptors very high, would have alleviated every major problem with nanoBS, and still allowed smaller roaming gangs to prevent metagamers from playing undock games. Bumping from nanoBS is currently one of the best engagement-getters there is in the age of the Dooms Day Device and POS warfare, and now it will be pretty severely crippled. Can you at least do something about the undock timer, CCP? I'm not surprised to see one of your Alliance moaning about the nerf Anyway thats a good fix as things stand not being able to lock a BS with a ceptor prior to it warping is absolutly silly. It wont really affect Vagas much at all, I may actually start flying mine again now I can be guaranteed to outspeed BS.
Misanth	Posted - 2007.03.15 11:16:00 - [1109] Nano-BS is not as bad as nano-recons. Personally I have focused on the recon skills and feel they're quite balanced as it is right now, but we just recently had a demonstration on how silly it is with nano-recons; a pilgrim and a rapier went into our home system. So far np, this happens now and then. Tho, when trying to tackle, bait or bubble them, we realise they are nano-recons, and just stand there with no real means to get rid of them other than copying. Ehhh.. I thought balancing was like rock-scissors-paper. A beats B beats C beats A. But in this case you need A to beat A and B to beat B.. it leaves no choice but to waste alot of skillpoints just to counter something with a ship you won't even use for anything but to.. counter it. As much as I love my pilgrim I don't want to nano-fit it as I prefer to use it for other things as well. Much less prefer to train for the rapier + skills to use it just to counter the potential nano-rapiers. Not to mention the nano-curses which is just plain evil.. while the normal curse is a strong but balanced ship, with nano it just get's silly.
Misanth	Posted - 2007.03.15 11:16:00 - [1110] Nano-BS is not as bad as nano-recons. Personally I have focused on the recon skills and feel they're quite balanced as it is right now, but we just recently had a demonstration on how silly it is with nano-recons; a pilgrim and a rapier went into our home system. So far np, this happens now and then. Tho, when trying to tackle, bait or bubble them, we realise they are nano-recons, and just stand there with no real means to get rid of them other than copying. Ehhh.. I thought balancing was like rock-scissors-paper. A beats B beats C beats A. But in this case you need A to beat A and B to beat B.. it leaves no choice but to waste alot of skillpoints just to counter something with a ship you won't even use for anything but to.. counter it. As much as I love my pilgrim I don't want to nano-fit it as I prefer to use it for other things as well. Much less prefer to train for the rapier + skills to use it just to counter the potential nano-rapiers. Not to mention the nano-curses which is just plain evil.. while the normal curse is a strong but balanced ship, with nano it just get's silly.

LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.15 11:20:00 - [1111] Let's check some facts: Originally by: Kusotarre What a fantastic fix. Now, capital ships can sit outside station, assigning fighters, shooting, remote repping, whatever, and never ever run the risk of actually dying. From my experience, sieged dread can die in less than 60s. Not to nanofad gang ofc. Quote: The single best thing (from the users POV) about nanoBS was forcing engagements at gates, at stations, and even once at a POS (keep carrier from approaching it). Obviously the speed and time-to-warp of the BS was a problem. CCP could have avoided such a drastic speed nerf, and given us a still significant but less crippling one, if it actually did the hard thing and fixed nosferatus. There are other means. Quote: Giving nanoBS a hit to speed in conjunction with a nosferatu nerf, while keeping the speed of pimped ceptors very high, would have alleviated every major problem with nanoBS, and still allowed smaller roaming gangs to prevent metagamers from playing undock games. Say hi to trasher23 & G***(the ex bnc guy) and stop preaching about metagaming while they practice it at it's worst. (ctrl+q 4tw) Quote:** Bumping from nanoBS is currently one of the best gank-getters there is in the age of the Dooms Day Device and POS warfare, and now it will be pretty severely crippled,though i didn't argument any of this. Can you at least do something about the undock timer, CCP, because our ships won't be untouchable anymore? Just little fix... Nanonerf is coming and I'm certain 99% of EVE will be happy about it. I agree about a bit longer aggro times, but personally I'd cut speeds to half because we have warp to 0 anyway. -------- .....
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.15 11:20:00 - [1112] Let's check some facts: Originally by: Kusotarre What a fantastic fix. Now, capital ships can sit outside station, assigning fighters, shooting, remote repping, whatever, and never ever run the risk of actually dying. From my experience, sieged dread can die in less than 60s. Not to nanofad gang ofc. Quote: The single best thing (from the users POV) about nanoBS was forcing engagements at gates, at stations, and even once at a POS (keep carrier from approaching it). Obviously the speed and time-to-warp of the BS was a problem. CCP could have avoided such a drastic speed nerf, and given us a still significant but less crippling one, if it actually did the hard thing and fixed nosferatus. There are other means. Quote: Giving nanoBS a hit to speed in conjunction with a nosferatu nerf, while keeping the speed of pimped ceptors very high, would have alleviated every major problem with nanoBS, and still allowed smaller roaming gangs to prevent metagamers from playing undock games. Say hi to trasher23 & G***(the ex bnc guy) and stop preaching about metagaming while they practice it at it's worst. (ctrl+q 4tw) Quote:** Bumping from nanoBS is currently one of the best gank-getters there is in the age of the Dooms Day Device and POS warfare, and now it will be pretty severely crippled,though i didn't argument any of this. Can you at least do something about the undock timer, CCP, because our ships won't be untouchable anymore? Just little fix... Nanonerf is coming and I'm certain 99% of EVE will be happy about it. I agree about a bit longer aggro times, but personally I'd cut speeds to half because we have warp to 0 anyway. -------- .....
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.15 15:17:00 - [1113] Edited by: Ryysa on 15/03/2007 15:14:55 Originally by: Kusotarre stuff Actually, my nanophoon still went over 5km/s with some tweaks (compared to 8km/s now) which is more than enough to bump people. It just maneuvered like a brick :D Oh well, since this solo pwnmobile is nerfed, it's time to start farming isk for Nyx... N.F.F. Recruitment
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.15 18:10:00 - [1114] Edited by: Kusotarre on 15/03/2007 18:07:23 Originally by: LUKEC Let's check some facts: Originally by: Kusotarre What a fantastic fix. Now, capital ships can sit outside station, assigning fighters, shooting, remote repping, whatever, and never ever run the risk of actually dying. From my experience, sieged dread can die in less than 60s. Not to nanofad gang ofc. Yes, they can die in less than 60 seconds. To a lot of sieged dreads. Which is precisely my point. Having carriers be susceptible to things besides other cap ships is a good thing. Without bumping there is no disincentive to only using carriers outside stations for most of the people in eve (IE, those without the balls to put their carriers on the frontline). Originally by: LUKEC Quote: The single best thing (from the users POV) about nanoBS was forcing engagements at gates, at stations, and even once at a POS (keep carrier from approaching it). Obviously the speed and time-to-warp of the BS was a problem. CCP could have avoided such a drastic speed nerf, and given us a still significant but less crippling one, if it actually did the hard thing and fixed nosferatus. There are other means. No, there aren't. Here's a situation we can see happen on a nearly daily basis in my corporation alone. We kill an NPCer or two, and a carrier undocks. Our phoon pilot(s) warp to station. Carrier aggresses. Carrier gets bumped from station. Suddenly, they have something to lose, rest of our gang is called in, and we start hitting the carrier. Enemies undock in droves from their station in an attempt to save the carrier. Sometimes they're stupid and come piecemeal, and they die. Often, they are smart and they chase us off, but at least we got a fight. There is simply no other mechanism for getting engagements so easily. The only "mechanism" left is our enemies being stupid and NPCing with carriers. That's not a mechanism at all, it's an uncommon possibility. Originally by: LUKEC Quote: Giving nanoBS a hit to speed in conjunction with a nosferatu nerf, while keeping the speed of pimped ceptors very high, would have alleviated every major problem with nanoBS, and still allowed smaller roaming gangs to prevent metagamers from playing undock games. Say hi to trasher23 & G***(the ex bnc guy) and stop preaching about metagaming while they practice it at it's worst. (ctrl+q 4tw) Send a mail to Fred0. Even if that was happening, it still doesn't invalidate my argument, and you know it. Undocking and redocking constantly has been frustrating for years, and nanoBS are the only solution to that outside of a tempest heavy fleet and lag. Originally by:** LUKEC Quote: Bumping from nanoBS is currently one of the best gank-getters there is in the age of the Dooms Day Device and POS warfare, and now it will be pretty severely crippled,though i didn't argument any of this. Can you at least do something about the undock timer, CCP, because our ships won't be untouchable anymore? Just little fix... Again, you really don't understand. Ganking NPCers is not even close to the best thing about nanoBS. Any stupid torp raven will die just the same to a PVP fitted ship of any sorts. My biggest problem about this complete crippling of nanoBS is that it is going to remove a huge amount of our real, sizable, often outnumbered fights. I don't have to be in a 12km/s nanophoon to kill NPCers. (Honestly, I've not ever actually flown a nanoBS anyways, I fly a rather slow, triple speed modded sleipnir.) Originally by: LUKEC Nanonerf is coming and I'm certain 99% of EVE will be happy about it. I agree about a bit longer aggro times, but personally I'd cut speeds to half because we have warp to 0 anyway. You make it sound like I don't think nanoBS are too fast or too agile as they are right now. They are, and I agree totally. However, this isn't a nerf. It's a complete removal.
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.15 18:10:00 - [1115] Edited by: Kusotarre on 15/03/2007 18:16:58 I made a double post, so I'll fill this with something, too. There were three problems with nanoBS, and they are ranked this way in order of descending imbalance. 1) Nosferatu. Since they all use nosferatus, large ones, they are untacklable by anything small. Gist crows have no problems catching up to and putting points/webs on nanoBS, it's just that the point won't last because of nosferatu. How much longer can CCP really avoid nerfing these ridiculous modules? 2) Speed. Obviously too high. Yes, it takes a lot of isk (well over a billion in modules + implants to get over 12km/s with gang bonus) but that's not a defence. Imbalance is imbalance. Speed should have been cut, so 12km/s with gang bonus and HG snakes was topspeed. 7 or 8 km/s with LG snakes would have been a decent speed that still allows bumping, which, as I've said, is the number one, if not the singular, reason I want nanoBS to remain useable. 3) Time to warp. Nerf it a little. NanoBS as they are now really irk people because their small armor repping, plated crapiceptors can't catch them, and, TBH, they never should be able to. Ideally, smartly fitted ceptors with T2 MWDs should be able to catch them before they warp, keep up if chasing, and not be nossed when they get the point on. Crippling the best 'you're now forced to pvp' ship in years isn't a good fix, it's simply unimaginative catering to the masses on CCP's part. Nerf ******* nosferatus.
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.03.15 20:08:00 - [1116] Originally by: Kusotarre 3) Time to warp. Nerf it a little. Nerf ***** nosferatus. Nosfs are fine. Time to warp is not fine and speed is not fine. Quote:** You make it sound like I don't think nanoBS are too fast or too agile as they are right now. They are, and I agree totally. However, this isn't a nerf. It's a complete removal. Oh? How so? I belive you still can fit them, just like you can fit EW on any ship and just as you can fit 8 mag stabs on navy thron. It just doesn't work as it used to. Plated intys should be faster than any bs. Even AFs should be faster than any bs. But hey, maybe you will have to actually fight now, not just run 10j away to "fight" again. -------- .....
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.15 21:38:00 - [1117] Nosferatus are not fine. Large nos versus BS and some BCs is fine. Large nos versus anything else is gamewrecking for anything smaller than a BS that wants to warp disrupt a battleship. Removed as in not worth fitting for anything. You know what I mean. And no, retarded tank fittings on support ships shouldn't catch anything dedicated to moving fast. It's far easier to get a 10k/s crow than a 10k/s phoon, and I'm suggesting making it easier still. That would be balance enough. And, again, you think I want to keep fast BS for ganks? As I said, you don't need a nanoship to gank. Nanophoons do pretty terrible damage, tbh. Command ships and even t2 fitted thoraxes gank better than a damned nanophoon, so get over it. NanoBS are the only way to kill capital ships outside a station without having cap ships of your own on call and in jump range. Bumping off stations is, without a shade of doubt, the primary source of non-gank, mid sized skirmishes for us. If we wanted nothing but ganks, we'd fly around with nothing but interdictors and standard short range gank ships. Your arguments here are pretty awful, LUKEC, you can do better.
Futher Bezluden Minmatar Red Dwarf Mining Corps 5th Column	Posted - 2007.03.16 03:55:00 - [1118] So when the hell is the fix going in? How about just rolling back the changes so battleships don't top 3500m/s. These are battleships ffs, things that are gigantic constructs... not interceptors. WTF should anyone fly a ceptor when they can have a BS that can do 15km/s. YES, 15km/s. It was a Nightmare Class Battleship. This bs is ruining eve. Roll back whatever was changed and end this crap. Why the hell any dev thought EVE should go back to days as stupid as the multi-mwd ships is beyond me and many. 37 pages of complaints, flames by istab/nanoputas calling everyone noobs and screaming "it's fine, get a gang", and CCP hasn't done a damn thing except screw around with inane concepts to remedy the situation. Roll back the changes. CCP, you did it when you screwed with the ammo then realized your mistake. Time to simply roll things back. THUKKER -Be Paranoid
Deva Blackfire Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.03.16 06:05:00 - [1119] Stop crying Kuso. Having one nanomachariel engage 15 man gang, pick out each target one by one and leave unharmed WAS stupid. Maybe now you will actually think a bit abt fitting ships for various ocassions and not use "im fast i kill everything from frig to dread and run whenever i want". Ah - as for "nanoships helped to get me some engagements". For me its: nanoship nerf will give me more fights. They wont run as soon as they see my ship.
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.16 07:21:00 - [1120] Stop being silly, Deva. How many times do I have to say it before people will figure it out. I want nanoBS nerfed. I want them to go slower. I want their universal nosferatu use to be heavily nerfed versus smaller targets. I want them to be catchable at gates. Do you understand that, yet? What I want to remain unchanged is the ability to force people at gates and stations to fight, and that primarily applies to capital ships. I will repeat myself, again: The only way for a non-capital gang to kill capitals outside a station is with a bump from a very fast battleship. Do you get it, yet? Nerf, but don't cripple mechanics that give me things to kill. BTW, this nerf also gimps speedmodded ceptors and dictors, so I wonder why they aren't complaining. A slow tackler is a dead one, and tacklers just got a whole lot slower.

Kassandra Wheldon Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2007.03.16 10:01:00 - [1121] why not give NOS Tracking penalties like every other weapon?
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.16 10:17:00 - [1122] Because then nos + web is still godly versus small ships, and the whole problem of nanophoons is that they are hard/impossible to scramble and web with smaller ships.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE	Posted - 2007.03.16 12:16:00 - [1123] The current nerf will change nothing. We wil stil have nano domini, sicne it does not need cap charges and can fit all high slots with NOS (cause of drones make the damage). Otehr ships cant use overdrives because it cripples cargo for charges. Now this will on;ly emphasyze the pwoer of Dominix and Ishtar. If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
eXtas Kemono. Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.16 12:38:00 - [1124] a nos nerf is all that is needed... most stupid item in game..
Deva Blackfire Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.03.16 12:48:00 - [1125] Originally by: Kusotarre What I want to remain unchanged is the ability to force people at gates and stations to fight, and that primarily applies to capital ships. I will repeat myself, again: The only way for a non-capital gang to kill capitals outside a station is with a bump from a very fast battleship. Um - thats other part of game that should be fixed tbh and nothing to do with nanoships. Aggro timers are screwed up since ages, same for logoff timers, logging on alts and stuff. And they should be fixed seperately. Yes - you DID use nanoships to get fights. And 10 others were using to harass people and run away when problems arise. Problem was same as with WCS vagas - you werent risking too much... Quote: BTW, this nerf also gimps speedmodded ceptors and dictors, so I wonder why they aren't complaining. A slow tackler is a dead one, and tacklers just got a whole lot slower. Actually thats not THAT big problem. Tacklers are pretty agile from the beginning, so they will either lose some agility or some speed (doesnt seem that they will lose more than 20% of max velocity tho). Still fast. And yes - i do use speed rigged Interdictor, but i stay away from "im so fast that its retarded" speeds. Was considering buying snakes but i dont like invulnerability modes in game.
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.16 18:19:00 - [1126] Your average ceptor will hardly lose any speed at all. The only ceptors that will lose some speed are those that depended on mwd/ab speed rigs. Sabres/Crows will still go over 10km/s with LG snakes. This nerf is nearly perfect, the only really big problem that remains in game is NOS being the iwin button. Should probably make a thread about it, using the same arguments as were used against nanobs, because it pretty much all clings into place. However, no point to discuss NOS here. Imo CCP hit the jackpot - nerf nanobs without nerfing cruisers/frigs much - I can't complain personally =) N.F.F. Recruitment
Kusotarre Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.16 19:14:00 - [1127] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Originally by: Kusotarre What I want to remain unchanged is the ability to force people at gates and stations to fight, and that primarily applies to capital ships. I will repeat myself, again: The only way for a non-capital gang to kill capitals outside a station is with a bump from a very fast battleship. Um - thats other part of game that should be fixed tbh and nothing to do with nanoships. Aggro timers are screwed up since ages, same for logoff timers, logging on alts and stuff. And they should be fixed seperately. But it won't be fixed, and you know it. There are ways to heavily nerf nanoBS without nerfing the bumps they can provide, but CCP, as always, takes the easy way out.
Wrayeth Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2007.03.17 01:02:00 - [1128] Originally by: Kagura Nikon The current nerf will change nothing. We wil stil have nano domini, sicne it does not need cap charges and can fit all high slots with NOS (cause of drones make the damage). Otehr ships cant use overdrives because it cripples cargo for charges. Now this will on;ly emphasyze the pwoer of Dominix and Ishtar. Too true. The dominix is just overpowered to begin with due to its slot layout and the fact that it doesn't have to use any highslots to inflict damage. TBH, it needs to lose at least two highslots--if not three--to be balanced. -Wrayeth "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!" Might As well Train Another Race
Ferito Amore The Phoenix Mercenaries The Cartel.	Posted - 2007.03.17 03:48:00 - [1129] well i tried out a nanodomi on singularity tonight, and as far as i'm concerned, for 99.9% of the current nano pilots the setup is dead. may still be viable if you throw a couple of bill at it tho. i certainly consider it more of a removal than a nerf, something which will pacify the majority of blob campers but do nothing to improve the variety of pvp combat in eve. what worries me more is as mentioned in previous posts this setup has been viable for some time (yes without the rigs and t2 inertia stabs). Nobody complained about it until it was popularised, which has led to its demise. we could have done better here, made the playstyle viable without in effect removing content. anyway on to more important matters. anyone want to buy a nanodomi? much cheapness! later all
Chavu The Shadow Order Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.17 09:22:00 - [1130] Excellent fix to NanoBS garbage. Disappointing that there is no change to large NOS vs frigates/cruisers as the NanoBS problem really illustrated this point well. I wish minmatar ships got a bit more speed/agility though, like when CCP took away ECM for everyone but caldari ships I wish minmatars got more of a speed after speed is being nerfed for everyone. Boost some t2 webbers as well. Looking forward to a cheap Vagabond and other HACs due to Invention. Oh please oh please oh please

smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.17 11:06:00 - [1131] Nice nerf ccp, hit the nail on the head. Looking forward to something to do with nos in the near future, but don't hit them too hard :) sgb
Jacqueline Skouris Eth3real	Posted - 2007.03.18 01:11:00 - [1132] Should modify typhoons, they should be able to go fast! - Major Jacqueline Skouris of the Eth3real Navy. Serenity is worth fighting for!
Ryysa North Face Force Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.18 03:15:00 - [1133] Originally by: Ferito Amore well i tried out a nanodomi on singularity tonight, and as far as i'm concerned, for 99.9% of the current nano pilots the setup is dead. may still be viable if you throw a couple of bill at it tho. i certainly consider it more of a removal than a nerf, something which will pacify the majority of blob campers but do nothing to improve the variety of pvp combat in eve. what worries me more is as mentioned in previous posts this setup has been viable for some time (yes without the rigs and t2 inertia stabs). Nobody complained about it until it was popularised, which has led to its demise. we could have done better here, made the playstyle viable without in effect removing content. anyway on to more important matters. anyone want to buy a nanodomi? much cheapness! later all If you want to fight blobs, do this in specialized ships. Meaning, most of the time. a) Train Vagabond. b) Train cloaking recons. =) N.F.F. Recruitment
Scubidubidu Minmatar Ocean Dynamics Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.03.18 14:11:00 - [1134] Dont really see much need for NanoBS anyway. Never flew them. Fix seems to be on the money though.
Crellion Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.03.19 16:08:00 - [1135] Prima facie looks reasonable. However what is more important at the moment: to nerf the anti blob tactics or to nerf the blobs themselves? I guess its democratic measure ... power to the masses etc Dont think however it will change much in the pvp balances... Nanophoon wont be as good but the Raven and blaster ships will pown again so I am happy the only really benefitted party is the Vagabond pilots who again have the single "behind enemy lines" ship in the EvE universe... all in all: "meh" Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim.
icechip Caldari Crazy 88's O X I D E	Posted - 2007.03.20 18:23:00 - [1136] I bounced my raven off a POS shield and went 54,000 m/s thru space only for like 20 seconds " You know why my name is Icechip , if you stab someone with a piece of ice it leaves no evidence!" www.crazy88scorp.info [b]PM me if you would like your Corp to have there own Forums[b]
Arx Sheep Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.03.20 20:12:00 - [1137] Originally by: Chavu Excellent fix to NanoBS garbage. Disappointing that there is no change to large NOS vs frigates/cruisers as the NanoBS problem really illustrated this point well. Agreed, large nos is just completely retarded.
Shachmato DeZubai	Posted - 2007.03.21 08:46:00 - [1138] Edited by: Shachmato DeZubai on 21/03/2007 08:43:38 Nerf to heavy Nosferatu will result in intys holding a BS for as much time as they see fit while maintaining safe distance and the BS pilot can't do anything about it, thought thats the reason nanoBS were nerfed... so yes they will not do the damage like nanoBS did but don't like the idea of a solo inty holding a BS until his friends log on 30 minutes later. NOS is fine the way it is. EDIT: spelling
Hastrabull Caldari Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.03.21 09:58:00 - [1139] single intie should not be able to stop battleship intie = 10m bs = 100m why 10m ship should be able to stop 100m ship and why 100m ship should not be able to fend off 10m ship? heavy nosferatu is to be used as defensive weapon and thats what they do. Basically if you want to stop battleship and do it for long time, use another battleship. If you want to intercept battleship and give him problems escaping then use intie. Hastrabull
Madorthene	Posted - 2007.03.21 12:28:00 - [1140] Originally by: Hastrabull single intie should not be able to stop battleship intie = 10m bs = 100m why 10m ship should be able to stop 100m ship and why 100m ship should not be able to fend off 10m ship? heavy nosferatu is to be used as defensive weapon and thats what they do. Basically if you want to stop battleship and do it for long time, use another battleship. If you want to intercept battleship and give him problems escaping then use intie. Regardless of cost, interceptors are meant to tackle other ships, especially large, slow ships. Something is wrong in EVE when a ship cannot do what it is designed to do. In theory, large, slow ships like BS should be easier for an inty to tackle. With nos as it is, there is very little chance an inty can keep a tackle on a BS for any decent amount of time. Even one heavy nos is enough. Multiple done in series is near impossible. And a BS can fend off an inty. Light drones for one, especially when combined with i-win-no-cap-for-mwd heavy nos.

Shachmato DeZubai	Posted - 2007.03.21 13:18:00 - [1141] Originally by: Madorthene Originally by: Hastrabull single intie should not be able to stop battleship intie = 10m bs = 100m why 10m ship should be able to stop 100m ship and why 100m ship should not be able to fend off 10m ship? heavy nosferatu is to be used as defensive weapon and thats what they do. Basically if you want to stop battleship and do it for long time, use another battleship. If you want to intercept battleship and give him problems escaping then use intie. Regardless of cost, interceptors are meant to tackle other ships, especially large, slow ships. Something is wrong in EVE when a ship cannot do what it is designed to do. In theory, large, slow ships like BS should be easier for an inty to tackle. With nos as it is, there is very little chance an inty can keep a tackle on a BS for any decent amount of time. Even one heavy nos is enough. Multiple done in series is near impossible. And a BS can fend off an inty. Light drones for one, especially when combined with i-win-no-cap-for-mwd heavy nos. It can easily tackle it, but it should not be able to hold it IMO, all it needs to do is hold it until backup arrives, since an inty is not going to engage a BS solo... with the 15+ seconds locking time that task is easily accomplished... inty mwd's to BS puts a point on it, BS Locks Inty, backup arrives, BS NOS inty, backup gets points on BS, BS is damped, jammed and has many other bad effects on it and it just dies... everything has it's counter. and again, an inty should not be a match for a BS, it CAN tackle it for a short time, but it should not be able to hold it for extended amounts of time. Doesn't say much about tackling when an inty can kill most cruisers by orbiting at 18km with missiles outrunning light/medium drones and out of medium nos range... so you want BS's to be the same? the word BATTLEship should say enough. its common sense... inty is a scout/tackler plain and simple it should be good enough that BS weapons can't really hit it unless it's dual-webbed.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE The Foundation.	Posted - 2007.03.21 13:44:00 - [1142] Originally by: Shachmato DeZubai Edited by: Shachmato DeZubai on 21/03/2007 08:43:38 Nerf to heavy Nosferatu will result in intys holding a BS for as much time as they see fit while maintaining safe distance and the BS pilot can't do anything about it, thought thats the reason nanoBS were nerfed... so yes they will not do the damage like nanoBS did but don't like the idea of a solo inty holding a BS until his friends log on 30 minutes later. NOS is fine the way it is. EDIT: spelling Use a single heavy neuterer. The problem are ships with 4 or 6 NOS If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Drachenlord Amarr e X i l e	Posted - 2007.03.21 19:32:00 - [1143] Originally by: Madorthene Originally by: Hastrabull single intie should not be able to stop battleship intie = 10m bs = 100m why 10m ship should be able to stop 100m ship and why 100m ship should not be able to fend off 10m ship? heavy nosferatu is to be used as defensive weapon and thats what they do. Basically if you want to stop battleship and do it for long time, use another battleship. If you want to intercept battleship and give him problems escaping then use intie. Regardless of cost, interceptors are meant to tackle other ships, especially large, slow ships. Something is wrong in EVE when a ship cannot do what it is designed to do. In theory, large, slow ships like BS should be easier for an inty to tackle. With nos as it is, there is very little chance an inty can keep a tackle on a BS for any decent amount of time. Even one heavy nos is enough. Multiple done in series is near impossible. And a BS can fend off an inty. Light drones for one, especially when combined with i-win-no-cap-for-mwd heavy nos. TACKLE yes, keep there indefinitely is not tackling, plain and simple... also, there are ceptor pilots that safely outrun light drones, a nos should be a viable way to fend off a ceptor.... draining their capacitor so they lose their scramble and you can get away is perfectly acceptable... like others have said, its the ships with 6+ heavy nos that are the real problem.... the solution for that would be something along the lines of limiting the number of Nos can fit... but then some sort of provision would need to be made for the Curse and Pilgrim... since they're built around it.. as well as other ships with the energy vampire bonuses (blood raider faction ships) ------------------------------------------------- While the Enemies of the Emperor still draw breath, there can be NO Peace!
Fenderson OLE Mining Corp Miners With Attitude	Posted - 2007.03.23 01:49:00 - [1144] Originally by: Drachenlord Originally by: Madorthene Originally by: Hastrabull single intie should not be able to stop battleship intie = 10m bs = 100m why 10m ship should be able to stop 100m ship and why 100m ship should not be able to fend off 10m ship? heavy nosferatu is to be used as defensive weapon and thats what they do. Basically if you want to stop battleship and do it for long time, use another battleship. If you want to intercept battleship and give him problems escaping then use intie. Regardless of cost, interceptors are meant to tackle other ships, especially large, slow ships. Something is wrong in EVE when a ship cannot do what it is designed to do. In theory, large, slow ships like BS should be easier for an inty to tackle. With nos as it is, there is very little chance an inty can keep a tackle on a BS for any decent amount of time. Even one heavy nos is enough. Multiple done in series is near impossible. And a BS can fend off an inty. Light drones for one, especially when combined with i-win-no-cap-for-mwd heavy nos. TACKLE yes, keep there indefinitely is not tackling, plain and simple... also, there are ceptor pilots that safely outrun light drones, a nos should be a viable way to fend off a ceptor.... draining their capacitor so they lose their scramble and you can get away is perfectly acceptable... like others have said, its the ships with 6+ heavy nos that are the real problem.... the solution for that would be something along the lines of limiting the number of Nos can fit... but then some sort of provision would need to be made for the Curse and Pilgrim... since they're built around it.. as well as other ships with the energy vampire bonuses (blood raider faction ships) an interceptor should be able to hold a solo BS in place indefinitely. BS should not be out solo anyway. they should be forced to have escort to keep off ceptors. it would make pvp more fun because it would move us farther away from the bigger=better mentality and more towards strategy. sigs are for the weak
Jamius	Posted - 2007.03.23 10:53:00 - [1145] Edited by: Jamius on 23/03/2007 10:51:18 "an interceptor should be able to hold a solo BS in place indefinitely. BS should not be out solo anyway. they should be forced to have escort to keep off ceptors. it would make pvp more fun because it would move us farther away from the bigger=better mentality and more towards strategy." Utterly wrong. In fact a ludicrous suggestion. A lot of players play solo at times - are you saying this should not be allowed in a BS?? PvP Solo in a BS is a hairy enough experience as it is. As previously said - limiting the number that can be fitted to all but nos/neut specialist ships is an ideal solution. I care less about the moaning inty pilots and more about the viscious NOS circle where it is so key to fit them against anything you fight until it's just a cap fight (this is over simplifying the issue but you get what I mean). The inty aspect is way down the list of priorities to change NOS, but appears to be the most common moan - please remove thine selfish head from thine a$$
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.23 11:31:00 - [1146] Originally by: Jamius Edited by: Jamius on 23/03/2007 10:51:18 "an interceptor should be able to hold a solo BS in place indefinitely. BS should not be out solo anyway. they should be forced to have escort to keep off ceptors. it would make pvp more fun because it would move us farther away from the bigger=better mentality and more towards strategy." Utterly wrong. In fact a ludicrous suggestion. A lot of players play solo at times - are you saying this should not be allowed in a BS?? PvP Solo in a BS is a hairy enough experience as it is. As previously said - limiting the number that can be fitted to all but nos/neut specialist ships is an ideal solution. I care less about the moaning inty pilots and more about the viscious NOS circle where it is so key to fit them against anything you fight until it's just a cap fight (this is over simplifying the issue but you get what I mean). The inty aspect is way down the list of priorities to change NOS, but appears to be the most common moan - please remove thine selfish head from thine a$$ What this dude said. sgb
Krystyn Caldari Serenity Rising LLC	Posted - 2007.03.24 20:29:00 - [1147] So has anyone really talked about how NOSes have a range much larger then webbers? I've been ganked a few times by a nanophoon with 3 NOSes or so on it and I was flying a inty with a MWD and my own nano and inertial but the NOSes stole all my cap before I could even push the button on any of my modules. I just twitched a bit while his drones ripped me up.
Alcrista Somez Amarr The Phoenix Rising Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.03.26 09:45:00 - [1148] I completely agree that Inties should be able to hold a solo BS in place, unless that solo BS has used his set up to add specific deliberate defense against them. And I would say this DOESNT include large smartbomb or heavy nos / neut because these are BS class weapons. Sig radius / resolution resolves the issue for damage dealing weapons, but there needs to be similar principals in effect for energy disrupting weapons. The bottom line is that in a fleet fight every ship needs a role, and for as long as Battleships have the most to contribute, then you are always better off with your pilots flying battleships than anything else. Which tbh makes for a one dimentional boreing game at anything more than solo PVP. I want to see Eve fleet fights where we have a higher chance of winning a fight with a mixed a fleet rather than everyone being best off in battleships if they can afford them. This nano-nerf is a good start as it means nano-ships are hopefully going to be less good as heavy tacklers and scouts so the role is opened up again for smaller ships, but I still think small ships are too vulnerable to large ships to make them useful. The best and most effective weapon against frigs and inties SHOULD be the destroyer. That is what it was built for. If you want to be able to fly a battleship and have a solid defence against small ships then you should be forced to compromise your BS level effectiveness by fitting mods designed to hit small ships. Having these mods like sbs nos and neut that are good solid BS level weapons but also completely pwn small ships is a get out clause for BS's and makes BS's preferential to almost every other ship at every level. Despite the price, I dont think this should be the case. Correcting the issue would have an interesting effect on solo belt pvp / piracy for sure as solo battleships would have a certain vulnerability, but I think in general the effects on fleet fights, blob warefare, strategy and general game interest would be positive.
hereward rowland Macrocosm Advanced Industries	Posted - 2007.03.26 13:26:00 - [1149] Originally by: Wrayeth Originally by: Kagura Nikon The current nerf will change nothing. We wil stil have nano domini, sicne it does not need cap charges and can fit all high slots with NOS (cause of drones make the damage). Otehr ships cant use overdrives because it cripples cargo for charges. Now this will on;ly emphasyze the pwoer of Dominix and Ishtar. Too true. The dominix is just overpowered to begin with due to its slot layout and the fact that it doesn't have to use any highslots to inflict damage. TBH, it needs to lose at least two highslots--if not three--to be balanced. okay if you think that is overpowerd look at the mega that has such cool slots and loadout.. if i wasnt inlove with the tempest id so fly a mega
Nabi Knue	Posted - 2007.03.27 03:58:00 - [1150] Maybe the problem is that Eve Online tries to circumvent physics. In real space the speed of light is the only limit (ok, maybe not). And inertia is a thing to tackle. If you are accelerating at 10m/s2 you are going to keep accelerating forever, but hitting lightspeed (300000km/s) will take you some time. Also decelerating from something like 60km/s will take you some time. Also; if you hit something, you should be loosing hitpoints. That is what happens in real life. (ok, in real life you don't talk hp) So, sum it up. Somebody flies a nanobs, let him. He's going to fly past you and be gone, because his ship will continue well past you before stopping. And if he say hits you, he'll lose valuable hitpoints. So will you. If he keeps hitting you, you are going to end up doing something like 99.95% of his speed backward because of inertia. The stupid thing about EVE is that it is not a bit realistic. Drive your car at 60m/s against a wall and tell me it didn't hurt. That is what happens in EVE. You drive at a high velocity of say 400m/s and hit something inanimate, nothing happens. Not even your shield looses hitpoints. When flying in realspace you need advanced tracking computers to land you ship on a station. If fly at -600m/s on vector X, 500m/s on vector Y and 1km/s on vector Z and want to stop, you have to stop movement across all vectors to stop. If your station is orbiting a planet at 36000km/h, you will have to catch up with it to land on it, and have a relative speed of something very much smaller than 100m/s to it to land on it. NanoBS is not the problem, problem is EVE.

hereward rowland Macrocosm Advanced Industries	Posted - 2007.03.27 12:00:00 - [1151] Originally by: Nabi Knue Maybe the problem is that Eve Online tries to circumvent physics. In real space the speed of light is the only limit (ok, maybe not). And inertia is a thing to tackle. If you are accelerating at 10m/s2 you are going to keep accelerating forever, but hitting lightspeed (300000km/s) will take you some time. Also decelerating from something like 60km/s will take you some time. Also; if you hit something, you should be loosing hitpoints. That is what happens in real life. (ok, in real life you don't talk hp) So, sum it up. Somebody flies a nanobs, let him. He's going to fly past you and be gone, because his ship will continue well past you before stopping. And if he say hits you, he'll lose valuable hitpoints. So will you. If he keeps hitting you, you are going to end up doing something like 99.95% of his speed backward because of inertia. The stupid thing about EVE is that it is not a bit realistic. Drive your car at 60m/s against a wall and tell me it didn't hurt. That is what happens in EVE. You drive at a high velocity of say 400m/s and hit something inanimate, nothing happens. Not even your shield looses hitpoints. When flying in realspace you need advanced tracking computers to land you ship on a station. If fly at -600m/s on vector X, 500m/s on vector Y and 1km/s on vector Z and want to stop, you have to stop movement across all vectors to stop. If your station is orbiting a planet at 36000km/h, you will have to catch up with it to land on it, and have a relative speed of something very much smaller than 100m/s to it to land on it. NanoBS is not the problem, problem is EVE. the space ships do, do that.. its only when ab's and mwd's are involed, and your ship slows down is were its a wee bit off.. but good point ships should get hp's when they hit something, but then dont you think that you'll get concorded when undocking?
Rhaegor Stormborn	Posted - 2007.03.27 15:08:00 - [1152] Originally by: Alcrista Somez I completely agree that Inties should be able to hold a solo BS in place, unless that solo BS has used his set up to add specific deliberate defense against them. And I would say this DOESNT include large smartbomb or heavy nos / neut because these are BS class weapons. Sig radius / resolution resolves the issue for damage dealing weapons, but there needs to be similar principals in effect for energy disrupting weapons. The bottom line is that in a fleet fight every ship needs a role, and for as long as Battleships have the most to contribute, then you are always better off with your pilots flying battleships than anything else. Which tbh makes for a one dimentional boreing game at anything more than solo PVP. I want to see Eve fleet fights where we have a higher chance of winning a fight with a mixed a fleet rather than everyone being best off in battleships if they can afford them. This nano-nerf is a good start as it means nano-ships are hopefully going to be less good as heavy tacklers and scouts so the role is opened up again for smaller ships, but I still think small ships are too vulnerable to large ships to make them useful. The best and most effective weapon against frigs and inties SHOULD be the destroyer. That is what it was built for. If you want to be able to fly a battleship and have a solid defence against small ships then you should be forced to compromise your BS level effectiveness by fitting mods designed to hit small ships. Having these mods like sbs nos and neut that are good solid BS level weapons but also completely pwn small ships is a get out clause for BS's and makes BS's preferential to almost every other ship at every level. Despite the price, I dont think this should be the case. Correcting the issue would have an interesting effect on solo belt pvp / piracy for sure as solo battleships would have a certain vulnerability, but I think in general the effects on fleet fights, blob warefare, strategy and general game interest would be positive. Agreed!
Nabi Knue	Posted - 2007.03.27 17:19:00 - [1153] Originally by: hereward rowland Originally by: Nabi Knue Maybe the problem is that Eve Online tries to circumvent physics. In real space the speed of light is the only limit (ok, maybe not). And inertia is a thing to tackle. If you are accelerating at 10m/s2 you are going to keep accelerating forever, but hitting lightspeed (300000km/s) will take you some time. Also decelerating from something like 60km/s will take you some time. Also; if you hit something, you should be loosing hitpoints. That is what happens in real life. (ok, in real life you don't talk hp) So, sum it up. Somebody flies a nanobs, let him. He's going to fly past you and be gone, because his ship will continue well past you before stopping. And if he say hits you, he'll lose valuable hitpoints. So will you. If he keeps hitting you, you are going to end up doing something like 99.95% of his speed backward because of inertia. The stupid thing about EVE is that it is not a bit realistic. Drive your car at 60m/s against a wall and tell me it didn't hurt. That is what happens in EVE. You drive at a high velocity of say 400m/s and hit something inanimate, nothing happens. Not even your shield looses hitpoints. When flying in realspace you need advanced tracking computers to land you ship on a station. If fly at -600m/s on vector X, 500m/s on vector Y and 1km/s on vector Z and want to stop, you have to stop movement across all vectors to stop. If your station is orbiting a planet at 36000km/h, you will have to catch up with it to land on it, and have a relative speed of something very much smaller than 100m/s to it to land on it. NanoBS is not the problem, problem is EVE. the space ships do, do that.. its only when ab's and mwd's are involed, and your ship slows down is were its a wee bit off.. but good point ships should get hp's when they hit something, but then dont you think that you'll get concorded when undocking? That could be solved by some kind of limit to the amount of damage you are allowed to inflict before it is considered a hostile action. Or maybe undocking should be done in a different way from now? I really do not think that these kind of changes will ever be applied to eve, but the idea struck me that when reinventing the reality, there has to be problems.
Ziu Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.03.27 19:39:00 - [1154] Gameplay! >! Reality!
Avataris The first genesis Myriad Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.27 23:18:00 - [1155] Originally by: Alcrista Somez I completely agree that Inties should be able to hold a solo BS in place, unless that solo BS has used his set up to add specific deliberate defense against them. And I would say this DOESNT include large smartbomb or heavy nos / neut because these are BS class weapons. Sig radius / resolution resolves the issue for damage dealing weapons, but there needs to be similar principals in effect for energy disrupting weapons. The bottom line is that in a fleet fight every ship needs a role, and for as long as Battleships have the most to contribute, then you are always better off with your pilots flying battleships than anything else. Which tbh makes for a one dimentional boreing game at anything more than solo PVP. I want to see Eve fleet fights where we have a higher chance of winning a fight with a mixed a fleet rather than everyone being best off in battleships if they can afford them. This nano-nerf is a good start as it means nano-ships are hopefully going to be less good as heavy tacklers and scouts so the role is opened up again for smaller ships, but I still think small ships are too vulnerable to large ships to make them useful. The best and most effective weapon against frigs and inties SHOULD be the destroyer. That is what it was built for. If you want to be able to fly a battleship and have a solid defence against small ships then you should be forced to compromise your BS level effectiveness by fitting mods designed to hit small ships. Having these mods like sbs nos and neut that are good solid BS level weapons but also completely pwn small ships is a get out clause for BS's and makes BS's preferential to almost every other ship at every level. Despite the price, I dont think this should be the case. Correcting the issue would have an interesting effect on solo belt pvp / piracy for sure as solo battleships would have a certain vulnerability, but I think in general the effects on fleet fights, blob warefare, strategy and general game interest would be positive. What a load of bollox. You think that it would be a good thing for PVP in EVE for BS to be forced to fit in such a way that one BS cannot break another BS's tank. You're suggesting that BS should fit like a destroyer/cruiser/BS mix in order to defend itself in all possible circumstances and completely negate its main function which is to destroy other BS. Furthermore you ignore the fact that any fleet comprising of nothing more than BS is a useless fleet, as inties, frigates, destroyers, cruisers, and possibly even fast BC will escape you because of BS's inherent EW disadvantages (slower locktime) and gimped weapons systems (poor tracking, signature resolution, rate of fire). A mixed fleet already rules the day. What you are suggesting is the death of BS's in EVE. Why would I ever even bother getting in one if I can disable one in a ship 1/10th of its cost? What is the point of a BS if I cannot use it to break the tank of another BS? Why should even the NONLETHAL BS weapons systems be non-functional against a sole interceptor? You are imagining solutions to a problem that doesn't exist. EVE is a game of many players and many play styles. I can see where you are headed with your suggestions, but guess what, some of us want to be more than a cog in your little fleet machine. There needs to be some room for solo BS players to exist and I do not believe that what you are suggesting leaves that opportunity.
Mayhem Unleashed	Posted - 2007.03.29 19:55:00 - [1156] Originally by: Avataris Originally by: Alcrista Somez I completely agree that Inties should be able to hold a solo BS in place, unless that solo BS has used his set up to add specific deliberate defense against them. And I would say this DOESNT include large smartbomb or heavy nos / neut because these are BS class weapons. Sig radius / resolution resolves the issue for damage dealing weapons, but there needs to be similar principals in effect for energy disrupting weapons. The bottom line is that in a fleet fight every ship needs a role, and for as long as Battleships have the most to contribute, then you are always better off with your pilots flying battleships than anything else. Which tbh makes for a one dimentional boreing game at anything more than solo PVP. I want to see Eve fleet fights where we have a higher chance of winning a fight with a mixed a fleet rather than everyone being best off in battleships if they can afford them. This nano-nerf is a good start as it means nano-ships are hopefully going to be less good as heavy tacklers and scouts so the role is opened up again for smaller ships, but I still think small ships are too vulnerable to large ships to make them useful. The best and most effective weapon against frigs and inties SHOULD be the destroyer. That is what it was built for. If you want to be able to fly a battleship and have a solid defence against small ships then you should be forced to compromise your BS level effectiveness by fitting mods designed to hit small ships. Having these mods like sbs nos and neut that are good solid BS level weapons but also completely pwn small ships is a get out clause for BS's and makes BS's preferential to almost every other ship at every level. Despite the price, I dont think this should be the case. Correcting the issue would have an interesting effect on solo belt pvp / piracy for sure as solo battleships would have a certain vulnerability, but I think in general the effects on fleet fights, blob warefare, strategy and general game interest would be positive. What a load of bollox. You think that it would be a good thing for PVP in EVE for BS to be forced to fit in such a way that one BS cannot break another BS's tank. You're suggesting that BS should fit like a destroyer/cruiser/BS mix in order to defend itself in all possible circumstances and completely negate its main function which is to destroy other BS. Furthermore you ignore the fact that any fleet comprising of nothing more than BS is a useless fleet, as inties, frigates, destroyers, cruisers, and possibly even fast BC will escape you because of BS's inherent EW disadvantages (slower locktime) and gimped weapons systems (poor tracking, signature resolution, rate of fire). A mixed fleet already rules the day. What you are suggesting is the death of BS's in EVE. Why would I ever even bother getting in one if I can disable one in a ship 1/10th of its cost? What is the point of a BS if I cannot use it to break the tank of another BS? Why should even the NONLETHAL BS weapons systems be non-functional against a sole interceptor? You are imagining solutions to a problem that doesn't exist. EVE is a game of many players and many play styles. I can see where you are headed with your suggestions, but guess what, some of us want to be more than a cog in your little fleet machine. There needs to be some room for solo BS players to exist and I do not believe that what you are suggesting leaves that opportunity. solo PvP & EVE =
SomeHardLovin	Posted - 2007.03.30 20:42:00 - [1157] I would agree to the above that it would be better if BS's had more of a weakness to a fleet of smaller ships. Weakness to 1 little frigate? No.. that wouldn't make sense.. but 4 or 5 well armed frigates should ABSOLUTELY be able to give a BS a solid run for its money, no question.
Tarron Sarek Gallente Cadien Cybernetics	Posted - 2007.03.31 02:04:00 - [1158] Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 31/03/2007 02:01:59 Originally by: Avataris What a load of bollox. Stopped reading here. EVE Forum Rules 4. Be respectful of others at all times. To the above poster: yep I agree ___________________________________________ - The sky is the sky wherever you go -
Tas Devil JUDGE DREAD Inc. Forces of Freedom	Posted - 2007.03.31 20:24:00 - [1159] Originally by: SomeHardLovin I would agree to the above that it would be better if BS's had more of a weakness to a fleet of smaller ships. Weakness to 1 little frigate? No.. that wouldn't make sense.. but 4 or 5 well armed frigates should ABSOLUTELY be able to give a BS a solid run for its money, no question. And they don't right now ? Where do you PVP ? Tas The best Laugh ever ... Credit goes to TheKiller8 for this ! This includes bad language... so beware
Ran'xerox	Posted - 2007.04.03 06:36:00 - [1160] Edited by: Ran''xerox on 03/04/2007 06:35:34 so let me summarize this to make sure I have this right: You're calling for a nerf because you're having a hard time forcing someone to stay and fight when they don't want to. You want a nerf because the tactic that works on everything else doesn't work in this instance. You want to force other players to play by your interpretations of the 'rules' that says that everyone has to stay and fight until one side is obliterated. Just so we're clear, the nano-BS isn't killing your ships? It's just running? No wake of death & destruction? If that's the case, then it seems to me that the problem isn't the ISs, it's your tactics. Don't whine at me with the tired "we've tried everything and we just can't stop him." If you wanna swing the nerf-bat every time you encounter a situation that you can't warp-scramble your way out of, go play Galaxies. I seem to have missed the thread where the Industrial and Freighter pilots whine about not being able to run through lowsec with impunity. In fact, I had my ass handed to me just two days ago trying to fly a Hoarder through lowsec. Guess what. It was my own stupid fault - I knew what the chances were, I gambled and lost. When it was over, I didn't go whining through the forums, calling to have warp scramblers nerfed because my 3 Warp Core Stabilizers didn't get me out of a jam. What I DID do was go looking for equipment that would get me out of the situation. If a single (trite and overused) tactic isn't working in one specific combination, then I suggest: 1. That if the tactic works in all other situations, maybe the call for 'nerf' is misplaced? 2. That you try a tactic OTHER than trying to fry the thing with warp scramblers. Heard of guns? (more on this later) 3. That you look for a solution OTHER than something coded into the game. How about a larger force? If a few small ships could stop a single large one on a regular basis IRL, do you think that the sinking of the Bismark by biplanes would be all that significant? In short, my point is this: This game, unlike so many others, was designed to mimic a 'realistic' world. CCP has done an incredible job in designing a game that delivers what no other MMO has done to date. Like the real world, not everything is perfect and often times things do not go the way we want them to. It is at this point that we in Eve have an advantage over all other MMOS: we remedy the problem in game the same way we would IRL - with superior firepower, superior tactics, and overwhelming numbers. Instead of swinging the nerfbat, have you built a nano-bs on paper and analyzed it for weaknesses? Do you think that the nano-ISs are completely without drawbacks? Lets see: Minmatar Typhoon - slightly light for a BS Structure: 6211 Armor: 5469 Shields: 6211 CPU: 600 Power: 12500 High: 8 Medium: 4 Low: 7 You've already managed to get the 'nano' modules nerfed it seems, but here's the next best: Inertial Stabilizers II - seems that there aren't any 'designed' drawbacks such as CPU or power usage, and no penalties to cargo or structure, so lets look ath the incedental drawbacks: If we pack all 7 low slots with these, then we can't use: -Any type of armor plating -Any type of armor repair systems -Any armor hardeners -Any cargo or bulkhead modifiers Now we pack 3 NOSs into the high slots - now it's light three weapons as well. Do you see the pattern here? You have a light BS with no armor tanking, short three weapons, and how do we counter this? With a Typhoon, loaded to the gills with ISs, a high end AB, a high end MWD, a cap booster or two, 4 launchers loaded with EM wardheads and 4 of the biggest projectile weapons you can stuff in it loaded with anti-armor rounds. You chase the bastard down with his own technology, strip his shields, and fill his armor full of holes. Basically, if you can't stop him, then chase him down with the same technology

Citizen X Domination.	Posted - 2007.04.04 13:05:00 - [1161] Isnt time this thread died?
Pesadel0 Ordem dos Templarios	Posted - 2007.04.04 15:56:00 - [1162] Originally by: Citizen X Isnt time this thread died? Indeed... I was sworn to absolute secrecy BY CCP.
Aspiri	Posted - 2007.04.05 03:13:00 - [1163] Originally by: Pesadel0 Originally by: Citizen X Isnt time this thread died? Indeed... STICKIED. Silly. It seems like every time there is a rebalance to address unballance, they unbalance the game, or radically change it such that you find you need to read every single word ever posted in a patch because it can mean your playing style it now totally obsolete. dont get me wrong, change is good, options are good, but somethings need to be immutable - the "your hotrod is now a duck" senario is simply retarded, all it does it make people go on buying and selling sprees while CCP decides how next to rebalance the game to keep people interested. Worse than flip-floping politicians.

Serathu Forum Moderator Interstellar Services Department	Posted - 2007.04.05 16:34:00 - [1164] Since the issues raised originally in this thread have been addressed, it loses its sticky. \| Forum Rules \| CAOD Rules \| CRC Website \| [email protected] \|


ISD Serathu ISD Interstellar Correspondents	Posted - 2007.04.05 16:34:00 - [1165] Since the issues raised originally in this thread have been addressed, it loses its sticky. \| Forum Rules \| CAOD Rules \| CRC Website \| [email protected] \|

Captain Crimson	Posted - 2007.04.05 18:46:00 - [1166] Nooooo..... Originally by: Tuxford I have already expressed my personal opinion on this and it was very positive (something about happy in the pants).
Elrock Storm Tides of Silence Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.25 11:09:00 - [1167] I so fed up of Nano ships... I feel like I am being held to ransom by some dumb arse game mechanics. For instance I am Caldari pilot with 10m skill points and to be frank against a Nano ship I might as well not turn up. They are too fast to lock to fast to hit with missles (<--- which is rediculios) and gank anyone and everyone that trys. They even out run Webbers due to momentium. This has been complained about for months and it seems to be ignored by the Devs. It is not right that people can risk very little and get a I win ship like this. Put 3 or 4 of these in gang and they are pratically invinisble expect for some very high skill point specialist ship set ups. In other words for the vast majority in eve invunrable. Rant over!
FOFOFOF CRAPSTORM	Posted - 2007.11.25 11:12:00 - [1168]
Victor Ivanov Minmatar The Fated Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.11.25 14:14:00 - [1169] Originally by: Elrock Storm I so fed up of Nano ships... I feel like I am being held to ransom by some dumb arse game mechanics. For instance I am Caldari pilot with 10m skill points and to be frank against a Nano ship I might as well not turn up. They are too fast to lock to fast to hit with missles (<--- which is rediculios) and gank anyone and everyone that trys. They even out run Webbers due to momentium. This has been complained about for months and it seems to be ignored by the Devs. It is not right that people can risk very little and get a I win ship like this. Put 3 or 4 of these in gang and they are pratically invinisble expect for some very high skill point specialist ship set ups. In other words for the vast majority in eve invunrable. Rant over! You are right. 10 million skillpoints should indeed mean that no one has the right to beat you. After all, it's well known that once you reach beyond 10 mill SP, you have reached "epic" Eve levels, and become invincible. I remember that I engaged some dude with 50 mill SP in a megathron when I was flying a tempy, back in the day when I only had 15 mill SP. I mean, wtf. He did so much damage to my ship that I could only get a couple of shots off before I died? I ask you CCP, How is that fair? Why should low SP characters have to suffer from the extensive experience, skill and more advanced weaponry of older players? It makes no sense that someone who's better at the game than I am can kill me. I've complained about this for months, and I'm really starting to think it's all because I'm european. I am seriously considering that CCP may in fact be rascist, because they continue to introduce things that make my game time less fun. I mean, srsly. I decided to follow the trend and fit out a kestrel with nano stuff, right? And this ***** just goes and webs me! I mean, wtf is up with that! Where does he get off on trying to stop me from killing him. It's unbalanced game mechanics, that's what it is. It just screams of amateur game development. Another thing right: Missiles. Rocket propelled explosives. I mean sure, some people say it makes sense that they have to traverse space before hitting the target, and are therefore unsuited towards attacking agile, fast ships, but I don't buy it. This is clearly imbalanced and should be remedied post haste. I propose to allow Caldari players Psionic capabilities, so that they may create wormholes at the exit point of their launchers that teleport their weaponry to instantly hit their target. Also, some more damage would be nice. Furthermore, I would like CCP to stop discriminating against the Europeans with their (Stupid, tbqfh) concept of "Skill". I am paying for my subscription, godamnit, and as such I expect you give me a fair chance to take out players who are larger, more skilled, better, richer or flying a ship that is a counter to whatever ship I'm flying at that moment, without risking my own assets. Anything else is just ludicrous, really. If they don't change this soon, I will be forced to tell all my friends to end their subscriptions. In fact, CCP: If you don't address these GAME BREAKING issues, I will ensure that the entire South (And possibly the north) leaves your game!!!11one I've had enough of this stupidity. Who's with me? DISCLAIMER: Yes, I'm being ***** sarcastic. You actually thought anyone could be so stupid? looks at all the millions of other similiar whine posts Oh yeah, good point. Heh... ----------------------
Lrrp Minmatar Gallente Mercantile Exchange Coalition Of Empires	Posted - 2007.11.25 15:27:00 - [1170] Are you by chance....Albanian?

Lazuran Gallente Time And ISK Sink Corporation	Posted - 2007.11.25 15:59:00 - [1171] Originally by: Elrock Storm ... which is rediculios ... come on ... you could at least learn to spell the basic vocabulary of 50 words for forum whiners a bit better than that... even the more common "rediculous" or "rediculus " are better. "...been designed for one purpose and one purpose only. Imagine a handful of repair drones pouring from the carebear's mouth. Now imagine they have um, nothing." -Unknown Hel redesigner (2007)
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.25 18:07:00 - [1172] Originally by: Victor Ivanov DISCLAIMER: Yes, I'm being ******* sarcastic. You actually thought anyone could be so stupid? looks at all the millions of other similiar whine posts Oh yeah, good point. Heh... The great part is that the devs DID address this issue. Nano battleships aren't really viable anymore. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Elrock Storm Tides of Silence Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.25 22:39:00 - [1173] Originally by: Lazuran Originally by: Elrock Storm ... which is rediculios ... come on ... you could at least learn to spell the basic vocabulary of 50 words for forum whiners a bit better than that... even the more common "rediculous" or "rediculus " are better. I am dylexic, so look that up. I see the way you deal with issues that unbalance the game is engage the poster on the forum, to be honest I would expect no less, but this still does not detract from my post. Hope someone rips you a new one. Ta Ta
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.26 11:02:00 - [1174] Stop the bloody whines already, im tired of "nerf this" and "nerf that" just bloody stop! It's great being Amarr isn't it. Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr!
Twilight Moon Minmatar Malicious Intentions The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.26 11:32:00 - [1175] :facepalm: New siggeh required!
Cpt Branko The Bloody Red	Posted - 2007.11.26 11:34:00 - [1176] Bad necro is bad.
WowZilla The Leeroy Jenkins Project	Posted - 2007.11.26 12:54:00 - [1177] Originally by: Elrock Storm I am dylexic, so look that up. I did, and its spelt 'Dyslexic' fyi. Of all available conditions, I doubt dyslexia to be one of yours you whining tw@t. ______________________ I am the worst poster
Elrock Storm Tides of Silence Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.26 14:04:00 - [1178] Originally by: WowZilla Originally by: Elrock Storm I am dylexic, so look that up. I did, and its spelt 'Dyslexic' fyi. Of all available conditions, I doubt dyslexia to be one of yours you whining tw@t. What a nice bunch of people you are in here. Have a nice life.

ISD Valorem Amarr ISD STAR	Posted - 2007.11.26 15:13:00 - [1179] Please refrain from bumping old threads. Click forum rules \| CAOD Rules \| [email protected] \| Our Website



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]

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.