Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
sakana
Purgatorial Janitors Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.19 20:51:00 -
[241]
Edited by: sakana on 19/02/2007 20:49:19 I think the speed problem only becomes a problem when it refers to ships such as nanophoons and nanodomis...ships that basically weren't intended to go 4kms. So if you are going to nerf the speed mods in some way, try and do it so that ships such as interceptors and cruisers like the vagabond remain the same...if thats possible
on the three options:
* Make it require charges * Make its cap consumption dependant on velocity * Not allow people to use cap booster when mwd is active
1. Please don't make it require charges, its v annoying having to carry such things around :) 2. I think i like this. if you made it so the inty could go 6-7km/s for long enough to reach his target, thats all thats really needed. 3. if you cant use a cap booster while mwding, what about blasterboats? i warp into a belt in my megathron and there is a target 50km away, i'm going to need to mwd to him, and thats going to take a lot of cap. so if you do this, your basically nerfing close range ships because they'll never have the cap to get into range.
as for the above post that suggests the speed ship role is highly specialized, i disagree. all you need is the isk for some rigs and with crap navigation skills like mine you can still get a 3-4km+ domi with ease. but as you say i do like the idea of speed ships as well...its just that everyone does it these days :( ------------
|
Revan Ano
Terra Rosa Militia
|
Posted - 2007.02.19 23:13:00 -
[242]
Originally by: Namo Iluvatar no no no no no! nerfing speed is nerfing a whole ship type! cepters live and breath on speed. without thier speed they are as good as a boat anchor! you might as well go into combat in a shuttle as a cepter. I'll grant you seeing the nano domis with the new rigs zipping around like a cepter is a rather bizzar sight... but i welcome it as a new option to the game that is in itself highly specialized. It's like making a new specialty T2 BS :) Don't take the speed away... PLEASE
Has the thought of ship role been considered for the rigs slots. No stacking of Rigs except for ones that a ship is designed for. In the case of the Interceptor then speed rigs could be stacked. Now this is a quick off the cuff suggestion so I am sure there will be plenty of holes shot into it.
|
Baron Serakh
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 01:02:00 -
[243]
Edited by: Baron Serakh on 20/02/2007 00:58:33 Whatever the solutions are, please dont let it nerf inties. These are not a problem currently and have a good niche role that isnt overpowered.
If mwds ARE forced to be impossible to sustain, make damn sure the sig rad increase is dynamic with speed, or only effective when mwd is engaged.
|
Bobo Biggles
Gallente B.Biggles Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 01:13:00 -
[244]
In the Blog is was stated:
"Another reason has to do with game mechanic and can be summed up to pretty much the same arguement as when warp core stabilizers where balanced. 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."
The key here, to me, is "when going into a fight", if I'm jumping from system to system minding my own busness and happen to jump into a camp and I was not planning on "going into a fight" and should be allowed to "warp in on anything and if I cant handle it just warp off", if I have carefully fitted my ship so that I can "just warp off".
What bothers me is the mentality that if something changes the way people have played the game it has to be nerfed. If this was the case in real life those of us who were silly enought to crawl out of the water and try breathing air should have been nerfed. To me one of the big "thrills" of the game is finding new ways to do things and meeting someone that has found a new way to stop me from doing this.
Yes I understand that this is a game and at times some of the items that have been introduced to the game are unbalanced. But have all the "in game" ways of dealing with this speed issue beeen explored. Or is this a case of someone saying "dang that ship is fast, I dont like that, I should whine until someone changes the game so people cant do that anymore."
I guess what I am saying is that I hope that if this "speed" issue get "fixed" it is because the items that allow it are truely unbalanced and that this is not just a case of the "squeeky wheel getting the things they dont like nerfed."
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 02:06:00 -
[245]
Edited by: Deschenus Maximus on 20/02/2007 02:03:48 On the subject of nos (since this does indeed tie in to the nano problem):
Linky
Anyways, IBTL
Originally by: Glenntwo You should be an anti pirate because you enjoy giving a player who is looking for an unfair fight an extremely unfair fight
|
DoctorDeath
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 04:20:00 -
[246]
ATM we have Projectiles = vary able damage - can be RAINBOWED SLOW ROF high alpha low dps no cap usage hybrid = kinetic / thermal - some cap usage HIGH close range damage Lasers = EM / thermal - heavy cap usage 60%em Armor resist 70% for minni mid to high damage output , kills shield tanks,weak on armor , hard to maintain tank without cap injectors or without a nos. ****** geddon - yes could do a little slot aranging apoc - needs a Role large cap for sniping yet abaddon can do better amarr cruiser . Never apealed to me thay all see to share the same bonus nothing SPL about them, ****** MWD battleships, anything over 5km on a battleship is just silly, Battleships are bulky, and stiff, what do you expect something 115million mass. ****** Omni tanks atm after testing and playing with tanks and T2 projectiles, even Rainbow damage a omni tank can hold off 2 or 3 HIGH damage t2 tempests if the tanker knows what hes doing, and know how to fit what can be done about it... not a easy fix ****** CCP has done a great job with this game and will keep doing so so stop wining, thay know what there doing and will make us all happy and warm inside
****** my thoughts lasers should yield the highest posable dps with the posablity of having higher resists on armor tanks. hybrids are right where thay need to be Chunky. X) projectiles almost on the money.
mwd's just do the 20x penilty that will slow the nano phoons and domi's yet not hurt the ceptors from there roles. the Vega seems little fast but what do you expect its a SUPER stabber.
<-- goes to write more and went blank
I See Dead People !
|
Steppa
Gallente Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 15:25:00 -
[247]
Originally by: Max Hardcase I have to LOL @ the supposed tactics and strategy part for EVE combat. There are no benefits to outmanouvring ships on the tactical scale of things ( other than range that is ). If we had weaker rear armor/shields( in effect a damage multiplier based on bearing of target ship), then maybe.
Cruisers are supposed to be able out manouvre BS on both the tactical and strategic scale of things.
While they may be able to go a good 2x as fast on the tactical sense it doesnt matter much given large gun ranges and the drawbacks of engaging MWD @ range.
Strategical movement is also right out given that they both move @ the same warp speed ( the only difference being the faster align speed ).
BC have it worse given that they have similar tactical speeds as BS and the same align and warp speed ( ok they align marginally faster ).
Destroyers are in the same situation vs Cruisers as Cruisers and BC are vs BS. Not enough tactical and strategic speed differences.
lol, strategical?
|
Max Hardcase
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 16:40:00 -
[248]
Edited by: Max Hardcase on 20/02/2007 16:41:47 I define strategical as any movement/ploy that leads up to the battlefield. Once you commence battle its a tactical problem.
With the extra warfare goals coming soonish(tm) the ability to move around quickly will become more important.
The BS > all syndrome has been mentioned b4 in this thread, one of the big reasons for this ( after firepower ) is that there is little difference between moving a BS fleet or a fleet composed of smaller ships. What with jump lag, align speed etc.
|
Chrysalis D'lilth
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 17:17:00 -
[249]
Allow only 1 Istab, nanofibre & overdrive injector per ship - inties with 3 low slots could fit 1 of all 3 and suffer the least penalty, though would suffer some speed reduction - what it does stop is your nano battleship filling its low slots with speed increase modules - a typhoon would be limited to 1 of each of the above, leaving 4 slots that it has to do something else with.
|
DeODokktor
Caldari Dark Templars The Fonz Presidium
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 23:29:00 -
[250]
Some ships in game end up having 5% MORE cap when they fit a mwd (silly bonus's 4tw)....
So if you say the mwd is such a "huge" drain then It think those 3 (I think it's only 3, or is it just 2?) ships in game that lets you get 5+% cap when fitting a mwd should be modified EVER so slightly.
|
|
Tonto Auri
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2007.02.21 03:10:00 -
[251]
Originally by: Shayla Sh'inlux Tuxford, your logic sucks.
MWD is not the problem. At all.
Ever since the changes to propulsion we and you have been quite happy with the combat speeds. Going fast took tons of effort and the Nanophoon, which contrary to popular belief has existed for much longer than 2-3 months was quite vulnerable, plus it went like 3k/sec with pirate implants.
Then you had the bright idea of changing Inertia Stabs to reduce mass by a HUGE amount (and a percentage at that for crying out loud) *as well as* add speed enhancing rigs. And now you're wondering why we're flying so fast???
Are you really THAT stupid?
It's like you did with the Damage Control. First we had a useless module, now we have one that might as well be included with the ship since there's not really an option of not fitting it. Same goes for IStabs. If you want to have some speed, fitting anything but an IStab is, well... nevermind.
Nerfing the MWD will do two things:
1) kill interceptors 2) kill close range combat (ie Gallente and Minmatar AC) which is ALREADY so frigging difficult to achieve.
Fix the bloody IStabs/Pirate Implants/Speed rigs and don't touch the already mutilated MWD. It being sustainable is your own fault - it's called cap rigs and the neccesity for a cap injector in today's Nosfest. Like with drones, it's not the actual thing that's overpowered - it's the support around it. Drones are so good because Nos is too strong (thanks for those hitpoint changes I guess eh?) - speed/MWD is so good because of (mostly) the new IStabs. *And you knew it weeks beforehand*.
Your changes over the last year have slowly been killing PvP and turned it into a blob/lag/press buttons and wait fest. You think to fix one issue and your rather loyal community predicts 5 more problems that will come with your "fix". You wave them away and then lo and behold, a week after patchday 4 of the 5 problems are very real.
What you should do is sit back, check how combat worked a year ago and realize how much it sucks now.
/signed
General problem is a NOS existense in the universe. But once it was present, it cannot be removed. Remember that when You kill a part of game, You kill a part of players. I was joined a half-year ago, playing and planning my career a months... But I cannot imagine how CCP can ruine my plans in a seconds. Now I looking a way to leave untouched. But I cannot see it. This game was touch me so strong. And it is a great pain to look at his death. You change game in a headless way, not checking any results of Your changes. More! You change game to help Yourself to play. You say that is untrue? Who can trust You once that happen? Only newbies after year or two, too lazy to read old blogs. You see a problem of nano-BS runned so fast? You made that problem! You have computers, data and time to check all possible combination of modules. Why You not do that simple task? Too busy playing game? I'm sure You are doing alot of work to make server software stable and fast, but remember: alfa-stage product can run a day, but falls, beta even runs a day, but requires restart, release can run a week or so. Production stable environment can run a while but need maintenance. Why EVE still in beta stage? May be You need a separate command to write completely new client, if Your "need for speed" is not "just words"? What is all that windows floating around, wasting CPU/GPU time to render it? Is a hangar, drone bay, cargo bay and station dock. All floating around until docking finished, then disappeared. Also for many other windows - too many flashes for one action. Is there any problem with items context meny? I think so. (Note that is a SAME Exeq, but called in a different way) Stupid bug? I think so... -- Best mining place here < |
Wizzkidy
|
Posted - 2007.02.21 09:27:00 -
[252]
Originally by: Tonto Auri General problem is a NOS existense in the universe. But once it was present, it cannot be removed. Remember that when You kill a part of game, You kill a part of players. I was joined a half-year ago, playing and planning my career a months... But I cannot imagine how CCP can ruine my plans in a seconds. Now I looking a way to leave untouched. But I cannot see it. This game was touch me so strong. And it is a great pain to look at his death. You change game in a headless way, not checking any results of Your changes. More! You change game to help Yourself to play. You say that is untrue? Who can trust You once that happen? Only newbies after year or two, too lazy to read old blogs. You see a problem of nano-BS runned so fast? You made that problem! You have computers, data and time to check all possible combination of modules. Why You not do that simple task? Too busy playing game? I'm sure You are doing alot of work to make server software stable and fast, but remember: alfa-stage product can run a day, but falls, beta even runs a day, but requires restart, release can run a week or so. Production stable environment can run a while but need maintenance. Why EVE still in beta stage? May be You need a separate command to write completely new client, if Your "need for speed" is not "just words"? What is all that windows floating around, wasting CPU/GPU time to render it? Is a hangar, drone bay, cargo bay and station dock. All floating around until docking finished, then disappeared. Also for many other windows - too many flashes for one action. Is there any problem with items context meny? I think so. (Note that is a SAME Exeq, but called in a different way) Stupid bug? I think so...
Whine Whine Whine. Get over it
|
Maeltstome
|
Posted - 2007.02.21 15:35:00 -
[253]
Originally by: Tuxford One of the biggest reasons is the "feel" of the game. Combat in EVE was always supposed to be more about tactics and strategy rather than twitch movement. I know a lot of the community enjoy that style of gameplay but it just isn't EVE.
I don't believe they actually pay you to think up this tripe.
I also don't believe that you seem to think its CCP who decide what the game is like - eve has developed because of its players, and of the 20-30k people who play every day, ive seen about 30-40 pro 'speed nerf posts' - thats a big minority, the vast majority of PVP'ers use speed tanking because its a viable alternative to the rather samey "tank or gank" gameplay that dictates alot of eve. Only carebears in belts really hate this cause they hate replacing their drakes. I'n pretty much every PVP gang you'll find a fast tackler or force recon capable of dealing with a nano-ship... it's only when caught on your own they pose a real threat, which is more down to people not paying attention to local/scanner.
Dont do to Eve what sony did to SWG, watch how the game evolves, dont just listen ones who take the time to whine on the fourms.
p.s. All of your supposed changes would compeltely kill interceptors - think about snake implants - they are the ones causing the Nano-BS craze to go nuts, not the microwarps.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.21 16:08:00 -
[254]
They develop the game, so, yes, they have the last word how they want to have it.
Also, I kinda doubt that not being able to sustain a MWD at speeds over 8.5k to 9.5k will kill ceptors.
|
Kawasukie Tashi
|
Posted - 2007.02.21 19:00:00 -
[255]
So you dont want people moving too fast, ok i have a idea for you. I feel the way ships move in eve is miss represented. Better physics could be used.
Larger ships should have a slower accelleration and decelleration gradient, and smaller ships a faster one.
Since speed is measured in m/s everything out of warp should be relative to the speed of light, thereby limmiting how fast any ship can move.
The result is that MWD and Boosters change your accelleration and decelleration gradient and not your max speed. So it still applies that faster objects are harder to hit.
Why do i suggest this? Because in space if you thrust in one direction long enough eventually you will be going "fast". It makes no sense why larger ships cant move, eventually, equally as fast as smaller ships in a weightless vacume.
As a result a battle still has merit, the good guys and bad guys just cant hit and run because others can follow just as easily.
|
Griegli Amuatir
|
Posted - 2007.02.22 03:40:00 -
[256]
If you nerf stabs or nanos at all battleships will move slower, but they will still be faster than frigs/ indys. We have ship class specific afterburners and class specific mwds, so what about ship class specific nanos/ I-stabs instead of fooling with the not- broken mwd?
Granted I don't have the experience of others who've posted already, but it seems to me that nerfing the mod itself just makes those characters and ship classes who depend on them even ~less~ able to fill their roles either solo or in a group.
One of the neatest things about Eve in my opinion is the fact that a 2 day old cov-ops pilot can be just as exciting to fly as a year old bs jockey- just for different reasons. Take away the speed (read: only) advantage for frigs and indies for the sake of slowing down battleships and you're left with a game thats boring to play (meaning you're useless in pvp) until you've paid for a subscription for five months. That doesn't sound like a very good way to get new subscribers.
Thanks for letting me put in my two cents, and apologies if this has already been said.
|
Maeltstome
|
Posted - 2007.02.22 05:27:00 -
[257]
Originally by: Aramendel Also, I kinda doubt that not being able to sustain a MWD at speeds over 8.5k to 9.5k will kill ceptors.
a claw (fastest basic ceptor, adn yes tihs setup is faster than teh crusader since the istab changes) with a t2 MWD and 4 best named i-stabs will travel at about 6-7k/s with nav 5 and accell 4 - the problem only arrises when you include rigs, snakes and faction items.
The basic principle itself is sound - a ceptor can hit 7k/s with NOTHING but speed mods on it, it cant tank that MWD for very long or even think about scramming for more than a few cycles... and rep's if you even fit one are compeltely unsuable if you want to try and stay remotely fast.
You can load your lows full of cap relay's, then stick on some speed rigs and some snakes - go faster than this and be able to tank the MWD and Scram. Thats where the problem comes in. Snakes and Rigs.
|
Corey Grim
FinFleet Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.02.22 12:15:00 -
[258]
Okay CCP kick tuxford out now before he damages the game more.
While extreme speed can be a problem there are ppl who have trained whole their eve-life to fly small fast ships like Dictor/Af/IC and really its part of their fighting tactic that they go fast web and nos screw things up for us pretty easily allready so why the hell u need to nerf fast frigates even more ? they arent vulnerable enough allready or what ?
Especially once again this nerf would hit matar first and hardest and it has quickly become the "trash of the universe" race. if u take our speed away whats left ?
I dont like to brag and i dont say this to brag but i have AF & IC & Interdictor lvl 5, and i fly only matar, so I ask you dear Tuxford whats left to me in this game if u take my only ace away ? My Latest Video
|
Ishana
Minmatar The Black Rabbits Fatal Persuasion
|
Posted - 2007.02.22 13:30:00 -
[259]
Originally by: Corey Grim Okay CCP kick tuxford out now before he damages the game more.
/signed QFT
Please fire tuxford and hire someone that actually plays the damn game (PvP not missions) and isn't a pompous ass who thinks he's always right even when he's plainly wrong. An IQ above 60 would help also. _________________________________________________________
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.22 15:43:00 -
[260]
Originally by: Maeltstome interceptor mechanics for dummies
Yes. Thank you. I already know this. You are completely missing the point. Let me quote the important paragraph (admittably a bit hidden in page 5 of this thread):
Originally by: Tuxford I've been toying around with this. The way I did it is that you wouldn't really see increased cap need until you're at something like x times your base velocity. The base velocity of a typhoon is 150m/sec, that means if I want to see increased cap need at 3000m/sec that x is 20. Now if we use that same thing with a ship like the Crow then its base velocity is 425m/sec that means you wouldn't see increased cap until at about something like 8500m/sec which tbh is plenty fast. Special consideration must be taken in the regards of vagabond as its getting a velocity bonus from the ship.
That is the change tux favours currently. In short, until a ship reaches 20 times it's base speed it won't get any (zero. zip. zilch.) additional penalities. Which, for ceptors, would be speeds of over 8.5 - 9.5 km/s. At which speeds they cannot hit anything anyway. So, please, elaborate how such a change would "would compeltely kill interceptors". The only ceptor slightly "nerfed" would be uber-highspeed crows (nerfed as in "becoming a little less invincible", not as in "made useless").
|
|
Dr Cron
|
Posted - 2007.02.22 21:05:00 -
[261]
How about you stop messing with crap and encourage people to use combat strategies like min recons to deal with the issue.
|
Maeltstome
|
Posted - 2007.02.22 23:27:00 -
[262]
Originally by: Dr Cron How about you stop messing with crap and encourage people to use combat strategies like min recons to deal with the issue.
Exactly - how many minmatar ships would you choose over another races for the same job? Finally minnie ships have a use that isn't secondary to another race.
|
Raneru
eXceed Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 00:00:00 -
[263]
hmm, im in 2 minds about the speed nerf. Its a shame to see nanoships get nerfed, they were good fun. I suppose it depends how much they get nerfed. If I can still do 2.5km/sec in a hurricane / typhoon I will still be happy.
On the other hand if it is a big nerf but doesnt affect ceptors maybe we will see the return of ceptor gangs and fleets? That period was the most fun I had in the game.
Are you famous? Check Here! |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 11:15:00 -
[264]
Originally by: Maeltstome
Originally by: Dr Cron How about you stop messing with crap and encourage people to use combat strategies like min recons to deal with the issue.
Exactly - how many minmatar ships would you choose over another races for the same job? Finally minnie ships have a use that isn't secondary to another race.
at least 14, not counting ships that get counted twice due to being best at multipule roles. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Domalais
Equilibrium LLC United Confederation of Corporations
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 11:58:00 -
[265]
Edited by: Domalais on 23/02/2007 12:29:45 Disclaimer: This is not a thread to whinge about nanoships, inertia stabs, etc. This is merely a few ideas I had regarding balance of MWDs suggested by Tuxford. Please do not ruin my thread with whining.
MWD balance:
I think an important factor is being overlooked: mass. Some have mentioned having velocity be a factor in the use of MWD, such that it becomes harder/impossible to go over certain speeds. I think the better solution is for MWD cap usage to be a function of both mass and velocity.
(Cap need = (mass / some constant) * velocity + some constant)
Cycle time would need to be faster (5 seconds or so), and with each cycle your MWD would automatically adjust the cap needed for the next cycle. This would mean a couple things:
- Your first cycle of the MWD would take the least amount of cap, likely less than what it needs now. As you go faster and faster with each cycle, more cap is needed, until at max speed you take max cap. This works and may even benefit close range ships (Gallente) who rely upon the MWD to close range but aren't using the MWD to maintain high speed.
- Ships which naturally have a low mass would have a built-in cap advantage to using MWDs. This eliminates any possible "Minmatar nerf", and depending on balance could become a buff for Minmatar. Also naturally takes care of low cap for interceptors, vagabonds, stabbers, etc.
- On the flip side of the above, ships that aren't designed to be fast and agile due to their mass will naturally discourage MWD use. You can still use it, of course, but you'll pay more cap for it than another ship in your class will less mass.
- Tacklers aren't hit that bad, because while you're orbiting you aren't at/near max speed. Your cap would only be hit hardest in a flat out run. Should be balanced so that cap is easily sustainable for an appropriate tackling frig/cruiser.
- Side benefit - Everyone has had a period of time when they're awaiting the arrival of a target and they're all queued up and ready to go. Holding still w/ your velocity at 0, your MWD would take virtually no cap.
Pros
- Conceivably balances speed by only affecting one module
- Works across all sizes of ships and MWD without ruining any end of the spectrum.
- Doesn't prevent blasterthrons, autotempests, deimoses, etc. from doing what they need to do. Might be used to help them, in fact, if the start cycle MWD cost is lower.
- Doesn't require ship bonuses to be shuffled - speed ships already have low mass.
- Gives ships that are supposed to be fast advantages over those that are not - Minmatar buff?
Cons
- More server traffic? (asking for velocities/cap amounts)
- Amarr/Caldari nerf?
Weird stuff
- Inertia stabs would reduce cap use for MWDs - Seems OK with the right tweaks.
- Plates would increase cap use - Makes sense to me, but will hurt some setups.
- Mass penalties/bonuses on rigs - Needs more research.
- Things like snake implants, etc. would obviously need some tweaking so that they are still useful.
Overall I really do think this would work. I've tried my damnedest to think of a way to exploit it (sit at 0 m/s, go fast, slow back down right away?) but I don't see a way to do it. I also can't think of any conflicts/combos with other mods for strange results. Finally, I think with the right adjustments it wouldn't "nerf" Amarr or Caldari, or buff Gallente or Minmatar. Just encourage use of MWDs on ships designed for the role.
|
Leon 026
Caldari Omerta Syndicate Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 19:13:00 -
[266]
Edited by: Leon 026 on 23/02/2007 19:09:31
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Maeltstome interceptor mechanics for dummies
Yes. Thank you. I already know this. You are completely missing the point. Let me quote the important paragraph (admittably a bit hidden in page 5 of this thread):
Originally by: Tuxford I've been toying around with this. The way I did it is that you wouldn't really see increased cap need until you're at something like x times your base velocity. The base velocity of a typhoon is 150m/sec, that means if I want to see increased cap need at 3000m/sec that x is 20. Now if we use that same thing with a ship like the Crow then its base velocity is 425m/sec that means you wouldn't see increased cap until at about something like 8500m/sec which tbh is plenty fast. Special consideration must be taken in the regards of vagabond as its getting a velocity bonus from the ship.
That is the change tux favours currently. In short, until a ship reaches 20 times it's base speed it won't get any (zero. zip. zilch.) additional penalities. Which, for ceptors, would be speeds of over 8.5 - 9.5 km/s. At which speeds they cannot hit anything anyway. So, please, elaborate how such a change would "would compeltely kill interceptors". The only ceptor slightly "nerfed" would be uber-highspeed crows (nerfed as in "becoming a little less invincible", not as in "made useless").
And that fixes..... absolutely nothing, as ships will still be reaching stupid speeds using burst MWD, and the drawbacks will be countered by cap boosters (or dual cap boosters) mounted on battleships. -------
Leon 026 Once I was fallen, now I have wings |
Tonto Auri
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2007.02.24 01:15:00 -
[267]
Originally by: Leon 026 And that fixes..... absolutely nothing, as ships will still be reaching stupid speeds using burst MWD, and the drawbacks will be countered by cap boosters (or dual cap boosters) mounted on battleships.
Less than nothing... It kills whole MWD use. Noone taking a look at their speed, just command ship to reach object (at any max speed) or to stop completely. That's EVE way to use engines. Unless we see EVE reach the Elite playstyle, we never start use mid-range speeds because it all useless. -- Best mining place here < |
Wolverine PL
Gallente ClanKillers Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.02.24 02:03:00 -
[268]
Those ideas about nerfing MWD are most stupid idea's I heard. Instead nerf nanofibers (increase stacking penelty) or something. but mwd and injector cant work together? WTF? try flying close range ship like megathron, dominix (not nos setup) etc. There's are other ways to nerf nano ships. Leave mwd as they are now.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.02.24 14:57:00 -
[269]
Edited by: Aramendel on 24/02/2007 14:55:43
Originally by: Leon 026 And that fixes..... absolutely nothing, as ships will still be reaching stupid speeds using burst MWD, and the drawbacks will be countered by cap boosters (or dual cap boosters) mounted on battleships.
Burst MWD speeds are no issue. You can fit a 100mn MWD on a zealot and speed it up to > 30 km/s, but it's just a joke setup because it is not useable for PvP
The whole problem of nanoships is the continuous MWD use. And the drawback will only be countered by cap boosters if they do not make the penalities high enough, aka use the wrong numbers. And, guess what: if you use the wrong numbers any single other solution won't work either. Nothing works if you do not use the right parameters.
With the right numbers a nanophoon could use the normal cap at 3 km/s, 5 times the cap at 6 km/s (barely sustainable with 2 cap boosters and heavy nos (aka only useable near a cap charges supply which is limiting the operational range heavily), 20 times at 9 km/s (won't have enough cap for even one cycle),....
Originally by: Tonto Auri Less than nothing... It kills whole MWD use. Noone taking a look at their speed, just command ship to reach object (at any max speed) or to stop completely. That's EVE way to use engines. Unless we see EVE reach the Elite playstyle, we never start use mid-range speeds because it all useless.
Again, wrong. Tell me one ship besides nanoBS which needs more than 20 times it's base speed to work. There is none.
|
Scordite
|
Posted - 2007.02.24 15:43:00 -
[270]
Just quoting myself from another thread because Goumindong asked me to:
".. the more I think of it, the more the laser cap use bonus annoys me. Not because I really think it's useless (if armor omnitanks weren't so common/effective it certainly wouldn't be), but more because it's the root of all amarr ship role problems.
So hard to make several ships of the same class varied compared to each other with only 1 bonus to work with."
----------------------------------------------- The only legitimate use of the BLINK tag: Schr÷dinger's cat is [BLINK] not [/BLINK] dead. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |