| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Monkey Spankah
coracao ardente
Sani Khal'Vecna
   |
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:07:00 -
[1]
You did a great job with T2 scramblers but why so poor with webs. a 10k named web is better in range and speed decrease. they would of been worthy of T2 if they had 12km range. this is a whine. T2 webs need more range.
|
Fi T'Zeh
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:09:00 -
[2]
stats or stfu plz.
....
Playing EVE on easy mode since May 2003. |
Monkey Spankah
coracao ardente
Sani Khal'Vecna
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:14:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Monkey Spankah on 23/01/2007 14:12:10
they got 10km range and 80% speed decrease.
|
Wizzkidy
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:17:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Monkey Spankah
Edited by: Monkey Spankah on 23/01/2007 14:12:10
they got 10km range and 80% speed decrease.
Hm, that does seem a little poor for a T2 Web when you can get a named one at 90%
but then again how much are they? the 90% one aint cheap you know.
|
Monkey Spankah
coracao ardente
Sani Khal'Vecna
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:18:00 -
[5]
but the 84.45% ones are.
i can get them at 10k easyier to fit and better speed decrease
|
Raste
Shinra
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:27:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Monkey Spankah
Edited by: Monkey Spankah on 23/01/2007 14:12:10
they got 10km range and 80% speed decrease.
Ugh, that's crap...thats like worst named practically.
===This is a sig===
"no matter where you are or what you're doing, you know that down in the southeast, LV and RA are trying to stab each other in the face." -- Cadiz
==============
|
PMolkenthin
Contraband Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:52:00 -
[7]
That does seem a bit poor. The best named webber (fleeting) is 90% @ 10km, so the T2 part should at least be the same, even if with a higher fitting requirement. I would say 80% @ 12km would be more reasonable for a T2 module. (hopefully that would drop the price of the Domi/TS/DB webbers)
|
Monkey Spankah
coracao ardente
Sani Khal'Vecna
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 14:54:00 -
[8]
considering the price of them i think a more reasonable stats would be 85% at 12-15km possiably.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
Queens of the Stone Age
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 15:02:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Aramendel on 23/01/2007 14:58:58
Even 75% at 14k would make them rather useful. But as they are now they are quite useless.
|
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 15:21:00 -
[10]
when did t2 webs get released
|
Zyrtan Keb'Lektar
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 15:22:00 -
[11]
invention
-----------
|
Djerin
Obsidian Exploration Services
The Pentagram
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 15:23:00 -
[12]
Err i think they should be capable of really webbing those insanely fast ships. 80% suck tbh, because 20% of 4000m/s is still like 800m/s which is still almost as fast as a normal ship with an activated mwd. So i'd want them to be like 95% at 10km range. This would slow down those speed fittings far enough to actually hit em within 10k range.
Of course you could argue that this almost freezes normal ships. But therefor you could make them as expensive as a fully fitted interceptor.
just my 2 cents
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
MASS HOMICIDE
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 16:40:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Djerin
Err i think they should be capable of really webbing those insanely fast ships. 80% suck tbh, because 20% of 4000m/s is still like 800m/s which is still almost as fast as a normal ship with an activated mwd. So i'd want them to be like 95% at 10km range. This would slow down those speed fittings far enough to actually hit em within 10k range.
Of course you could argue that this almost freezes normal ships. But therefor you could make them as expensive as a fully fitted interceptor.
just my 2 cents
yahh YOU want .. but how about everyone that flies a ship that cannot tank? like an AF or frig, or fast cruiser? Would completely remove them form game (since their range of guns is already inside web range)
If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!! |
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 16:45:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Djerin
Err i think they should be capable of really webbing those insanely fast ships. 80% suck tbh, because 20% of 4000m/s is still like 800m/s which is still almost as fast as a normal ship with an activated mwd. So i'd want them to be like 95% at 10km range. This would slow down those speed fittings far enough to actually hit em within 10k range.
Of course you could argue that this almost freezes normal ships. But therefor you could make them as expensive as a fully fitted interceptor.
just my 2 cents
this would just degrade the game to only 1 type of play: tank+web and you whine about nano ships ;)
tbh just give em 90%/12km
|
Monkey Spankah
coracao ardente
Sani Khal'Vecna
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 16:46:00 -
[15]
Just me or is this topic too much of a love fest? no one has come in yet called me a ******* or a whiner ***** or anything? or do we all agree T2 webs suck?
|
Xori Ruscuv
SniggWaffe
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 16:59:00 -
[16]
/me detects incoming web nerf.
Seriously though...
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Durethia
Momentum.
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 17:26:00 -
[17]
Originally by: PMolkenthin
That does seem a bit poor. The best named webber (fleeting) is 90% @ 10km, so the T2 part should at least be the same, even if with a higher fitting requirement. I would say 80% @ 12km would be more reasonable for a T2 module. (hopefully that would drop the price of the Domi/TS/DB webbers)
T2 Webber should be 90% at 15KM.
or
95% at 12KM
T2 Webber isn't the only crappy T2 module. T2 Adaptive Nano Plating is crappy too, with two or THREE named T1 adaptive plates that fair far better. The best being the 'Refuge' Adaptive Nano Plating.
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 17:33:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Tsanse Kinske on 23/01/2007 17:31:43
Edited by: Tsanse Kinske on 23/01/2007 17:30:31
Webber II:
1/30 fitting
6 cap
80%
10k
Fleeting:
1/22 fitting
4 cap
90%
10k
Domination 
1/18
6 cap
90%
15k
It really doesn't seem unreasonable to make them 90%/and 12k. That still puts them within medium NOS range by the way. I wouldn't mind seeing the cap and fitting go up somewhat more too though as it stands those look in line with how they usually bump up T2.
A funkier idea would be to add a Web Specialization skill that extends range or power, but only works on the T2 versions--just like the weapon specializations. I actually like that idea a lot, though it's probably not realistic to expect something that unorthodox.
edit: typos
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
The Speaker
The Clue Factory
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 17:56:00 -
[19]
If CCP wants to stay somewhat consistent with the usual T1-T2 divide, the range should be about 12km (T1 +20%). The trouble is the speed decrease, since 90 (top-named T1) is 50% more than base 60 - so you could either go with 90 (justification being it's equal to top-named) or 72 (T1 +20%). 
|
xenorx
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 18:02:00 -
[20]
Got to agree.
They should be the same as a fleeting. 10km/90%. Just a little stiffer fitting requirements.
No one can hear you scream in space, so just shut up and die already. |
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 18:02:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Raste
Originally by: Monkey Spankah
Edited by: Monkey Spankah on 23/01/2007 14:12:10
they got 10km range and 80% speed decrease.
Ugh, that's crap...thats like worst named practically.
Umm duh, what else would they do for a T2 item that fits on a specialized minmatar ship (huginn).
Its all part of suppressing the minmatar race, we need a damn boost!
~~~~~~~~~
Caldari. It's so easy a Minmatar could do it. |
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 18:06:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Durethia
Originally by: PMolkenthin
That does seem a bit poor. The best named webber (fleeting) is 90% @ 10km, so the T2 part should at least be the same, even if with a higher fitting requirement. I would say 80% @ 12km would be more reasonable for a T2 module. (hopefully that would drop the price of the Domi/TS/DB webbers)
T2 Webber should be 90% at 15KM.
or
95% at 12KM
T2 Webber isn't the only crappy T2 module. T2 Adaptive Nano Plating is crappy too, with two or THREE named T1 adaptive plates that fair far better. The best being the 'Refuge' Adaptive Nano Plating.
haha sweet! I agree, my huginn should be able to web at 51km for 90%
~~~~~~~~~
Caldari. It's so easy a Minmatar could do it. |
Adago Vilon
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 18:51:00 -
[23]
Originally by: LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
Originally by: Durethia
Originally by: PMolkenthin
That does seem a bit poor. The best named webber (fleeting) is 90% @ 10km, so the T2 part should at least be the same, even if with a higher fitting requirement. I would say 80% @ 12km would be more reasonable for a T2 module. (hopefully that would drop the price of the Domi/TS/DB webbers)
T2 Webber should be 90% at 15KM.
or
95% at 12KM
T2 Webber isn't the only crappy T2 module. T2 Adaptive Nano Plating is crappy too, with two or THREE named T1 adaptive plates that fair far better. The best being the 'Refuge' Adaptive Nano Plating.
haha sweet! I agree, my huginn should be able to web at 51km for 90% [/quote]
Erm... I think it can. See domi webs...
|
Harlequinn
Caldari
Confederation of Red Moon
Red Moon Federation
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 18:53:00 -
[24]
Boost T2 web bandwagon!
/signed
--Victory needs no explanation, defeat allows none.-- |
Kristie
INTAKI UNION
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 20:58:00 -
[25]
Yes, make the T2 webber work for 80% at 13km or make it 90% at 12km. How it is right now is just aweful, it is hardly in balance with other mods. |
Montero
Kemono.
|
Posted - 2007.01.23 21:05:00 -
[26]
oh shh
---------
Scrapheap Challenge
|
Waut
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.01.26 12:27:00 -
[27]
There is no sane reason to use a T2 web right now
In Soviet EVE, roids pop YOU
|
Kunming
Outcasts
|
Posted - 2007.01.26 14:07:00 -
[28]
WOW bravo Tux, u managed to add yet another useless mod, I bet you are very proud for occupying the empty space in your database..
Quote:
READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.
|
Pussey Spankratchet
|
Posted - 2007.01.26 15:08:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Fi T'Zeh
stats or stfu plz.
|
Kirtan Loor
Chosen Path
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.01.26 15:15:00 -
[30]
Originally by: The Speaker
If CCP wants to stay somewhat consistent with the usual T1-T2 divide, the range should be about 12km (T1 +20%). The trouble is the speed decrease, since 90 (top-named T1) is 50% more than base 60 - so you could either go with 90 (justification being it's equal to top-named) or 72 (T1 +20%).
T1 is %75 and the increase IS actually %20
%75 base => %25 speed
%25*0.8 => %20 speed
%20 speed => %80 reduction
Sucks eh....I would have used it if it had like 15k range......even 12k range. But....
Making t2 webs(which can be produced) 15k range would make t1 ones absolote. In this case t2 webs would be 'must fit' modules. 15k puts you out of NOS, rocket, all short range med and all small weapons range. With 10k web you need to get closer and into enemy range.
Right now it is useless. Making it into Fleeting equivalent with worse fitting and more cap usage would be best fix to this module.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |