| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mianna Foreseer
   |
Posted - 2008.03.13 12:48:00 -
[61]
I dont want to ruin your day but have CCP EVER said they see lol nanoships to be even a problem in their eyes? I dont remember such comment so if CCP see BS that go faster than ceptors to be okay. Nothing will ever happen.
|
Baske
Space-Bar
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 22:01:00 -
[62]
I suggest that the cap cost of MWD's increased by xx(x)%.
Simple idea, wide consequences.
|
Lukeah
Ennui Productions
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 00:49:00 -
[63]
 Originally by: Rekam Evarg
Interceptors were designs to be fast and agile however now days certain Battleships and Battlecruisers can easily out run them. Yes I am talking Nanofiber and Inertial Stabilizers type setups.
I am afraid that your appraisement of the situation is completely incorrect.
The fastest T1 battleship in the game is a Typhoon. Even with 3 polycarbon rigs, 4 overdrives, 3 inertia stabilizers and a full set of high grade snakes, plus gang bonuses with a claymore running skirmish links, plus an x-instinct strong booster and additional speed implants, a fast interceptor will easily outrun it. This setup also costs a few billion and you will almost certainly never see it.
The fastest battleship of all is of course the Machariel. A pure speed fit Machariel will outrun some interceptors, but certainly not any fast inty using snakes. Of course a very fast Machariel setup may cost many billions to accomplish.
Speed may be a problem but the numbers you are using are simply not correct. |
TypoNinja
Caldari
Void Angels
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 07:12:00 -
[64]
Dont bother bringing physics into it because eves movement physics are already broken.
Ships in space don't have a a top speed, they have a top acceleration. Newtons first law.
but we have top speeds anyway, personally I'd rather see the game tweaked to follow the laws of physics, because then tactical manouvering would be possible you could use someones base speed against them. But thats a little off track, point is real life physics will never be a good reason for game changes, I mean look at missiles, they are slower than just about any speed tank by a good margin.
CCP isn't doing anything about nano-tanks because the only thing they really care about, sovereignty warfare, isn't unduly impacted by it. No nano fleet is ever going to take down a deathstar.
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 08:31:00 -
[65]
Hmmm
What if we realise the full potential from the MWD description:
Massive boost to speed for a very short time. The thrust that boosts the ship, and the corresponding maximum velocity bonus, are limited by the mass of the ship that uses this module. The sheer amount of energy needed to power this system means that it must use part of the capacitor output and the shield just to maintain the integrity of its warp containment field.
Penalty: 25% penalty to max capacitor.
We have a capacitor penalty, but the shield penalty from the description is missing. Let's add a shield recharge/hp penalty.
I remember reading somewhere that the MWD was a warp drive that actualy used the warp effect to move the ship small distances. However no warp limitations are active while the MWD is in use. So we could add warp limitations with MWD actice? So the ship cannot target and cannot be targeted and also cannot use modules that shut down while warping and drone control is lost.
I know that this would be a severe limit, but it makes the MWD usable for escaping and unusable for combat. Of course warp disruption effects would disrupt MWD operation as well.
To balance this, afterburners would need a change to maintain some combat speed needs (interceptors and such) and MWDs would need to be moved to low slots.
Waiting for the patch that patches the last patch ... |
Nadoflex
ShockTroopers
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 15:07:00 -
[66]
Hello, I am interested to hear what role you think a non-nano hac fills. They were tanking and ganking ships of doom, but now command ships and even bc are better equipped to do this. So if you take away their speed what do they have? Why would you fly one? I am not against nano-hac's, but neither am I for them; I just feel that if you slow down the hac they will become obsolete. The class needs a role, at the moment I would say they are essentially skirmish warfare ships. What would you do to ensure that they continue to be effective in this role? If you want to change their role, in what way should it be changed?
I think the conversation so far has been focused on simply killing the nano-hac and not life after its death. This is the issue that concerns me and I don't think anybody wants to create a pointless class of ship.
------------------------------------------
ShockTroopers Need You! |
Tequila Fish
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 02:52:00 -
[67]
Firstly, can we please stop talking physics, let alone physics in a science fiction universe. This is after all a game, and a game should be fun, not neccessarily realistic.
Personally I think nanofitting ships above frigate and interceptor class spoils this fun as instead of the construction of fleets to use and balance different possible ship roles the advantage seems to be in nanofitting many ships regardless of intended role. This unbalances the game unfairly, not only do nanofits have what equates to a very strong defence in comparison to conventional tanking but should things not be going well they only need to slip to around 20k away to warp to safety.
I would suggest that MWDs are changed so that they are used as originally intended, for short bursts of speed. I think that a capacitor penalty of 50% (or other amount) should be included when the module is activated and the drain on the cap increased. When the module is turned off this 50% cap penalty could instantly return. With careful balancing and implementation plus a boost to ships designed to use MWDs this could mean that all ships could reach high speeds but unless your ship is an interceptor etc this would only be a temporary boost as you would have to turn the MWD off as your cap dwindled.
I also think the range of warp disruptors and scramblers should be increased (and possibly webs). Firstly because too many encounters between ships leads to all too easy running away. Secondly because it adds balance to combat so that fighting at a variety of ranges is an option rather than simply MWD in and blast away or blob. And thirdly because it would give you an extra chance to track and hit nanoships if and when they ran away.
Well, let me know what you all think, thanks for reading, time for a cuppa tea 
|
Ezekiel Sulastin
Central Research Nexus
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 03:44:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Ezekiel Sulastin on 22/06/2008 03:44:10
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
I remember reading somewhere that the MWD was a warp drive that actualy used the warp effect to move the ship small distances. However no warp limitations are active while the MWD is in use. So we could add warp limitations with MWD actice? So the ship cannot target and cannot be targeted and also cannot use modules that shut down while warping and drone control is lost.
Because certainly no gank pilot of any race would THINK of trying to target an enemy and maybe even scram him while he tried to get in range. And moving MWD to a lowslot?
Blatant anti-Gallentism is blatant, let alone things like HAM drakes.
----
WTB Armor Nerf Hardener II, 10^100 isk OBO |
Duraj
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 06:21:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Duraj on 22/06/2008 06:21:47
Originally by: Angelus Xenotov
Originally by: Rekam Evarg
Thanks for your contributions
Lets look at the pure mechanics.
Get somthing that us designed and engineered to travel at a given speed, and take given loads, stresses etc.
Weaken it by removing all the structure then ask it to do 4 or 5 times the speed, thus taking maybe upto 20 or 30 time the stress strains loading etc.
Now tell me it wouldnt start to break up.
As to take them down with a web... thats fantastic and very well thought out, but you forgot to explain how to catch a ship that is faster than an interceptor!! oh yes use another Nano type ship, back to square one, every one need one, end of game play...
I know there are ways to catch them, I also know that if nano pilot uses good tatics and thinks about things, it is very very hard to catch them without alot of luck.
There is a real problem with game play balance here and I am trying to suggest an altenative to just a pure nerf, one that adds to realism and still allows for choice.
Regards respectfully
Rek
Given that you're not removing ALL of your structure, just replacing it with much lighter material (Which breaks under weapons fire much easier than normal), add in the factor that its Space, so unless you're being effected by a gravitational field, stress is purely engine based and given the fact that most space-faring races would probably realise that and build their vessels specifically to counter any engine stress and you're boned.
Nanophoons and such only work if its attacking one person, if you have two people vs one ship and you still can't take it down, you need to go back to school.
what you were thinking of there is atmosphere. atmosphere doesnt exist in space. gravity exists wherever in space light also reaches.
its merely super strong in solar systems, etc.
but since this game does take place solely in solar systems and never in "deep space", yes you would tear your ship a new one by doing the nano-fying to it that is happening to these giant ships currently.
try again.
also, i find it cute that your solution is 2v1 to kill a nanoship, or bring your own nanoship. that in itself screams broken.
|
Jeckes
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 06:26:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Grey Area
LINK to my idea on this in another thread.
If you can't be bothered to follow it - basically we have frigate, cruiser and BS sized MWD's and AB's - so why not apply the same logic to the inertial mods?
Seems silly to me that a module that reduces the inertia of a 1,000,000kg frigate can have an equal effect on a ship 100 times that size for the SAME power, CPU and CAP output...
I support your logical and reasonable idea.
|
Jeckes
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 06:29:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Jeckes on 22/06/2008 06:30:07
Originally by: Sidewayzracer
Since we are all being realistic here why would speed have any affect on matter in space. There is no atomphere there for no friction = zero speed limit no matter size or mass of a object.
/not signed
law of physics, the closer to lightspeed you get, the more mass you obtain, thereby requiring more force to accelerate you further, thus you acheive a maximum limit of speed for the amount of thrust you can continually produce.
Q.E.D.
for anyone who wants to know, light speed is the speed of light = 299 792 458 m / s
|
Nikita Alterana
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 06:55:00 -
[72]
the laws of physics make perfect sense in eve.
you assume eve is in space.
eve is underwater, apply that to your calculations and eve physics suddenly make perfect sense.
__________________________________________________
|
Sweet Rosella
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2008.09.18 15:34:00 -
[73]
there is nothing wrong with the game the way it is regarding speed
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |