EVE Search - Brutal MWD nerf

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Brutal MWD nerf

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Battlecheese Caldari Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:44:00 - [1] Thank goodness. They have been overpowered long before the recent nano-fad.
Jennifer Meek Gallente Planck Bubble Generation Technologies	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:48:00 - [2] Yes, because people escaping from a 50 person gate camp is so wrong. ---
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:49:00 - [3] I quite like the idea of mwd costing more cap the faster you go. It's logical, plus it actually helps out those people that use their brains and adjust mwd speed downwards every so often. sgb
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 11:50:00 - [4] Originally by: Jennifer Meek Yes, because people escaping from a 50 person gate camp is so wrong. omg a flame! How original. MWD being used to escape a gate camp will probably not be affected by the changes. From what I was reading in the dev blog it is prolonged use of excessive speeds both away from and during battle that is up for a hit with the bat Seems fair to me. sgb
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:29:00 - [5] Originally by: Battlecheese Thank goodness. They have been overpowered long before the recent nano-fad. No no no. You're f#cking it all up. MWDs have nothing to do with it. Get a clue. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:34:00 - [6] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Battlecheese Thank goodness. They have been overpowered long before the recent nano-fad. No no no. You're f#cking it all up. MWDs have nothing to do with it. Get a clue. Correct, but if they cost more cap the faster you go, they can be a solution without being part of the problem... sgb
Jadiin Mindstar Technology United Confederation of Corporations	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:34:00 - [7] Someone like to explain to the less informed what this is about.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:35:00 - [8] Read the dev blog. If you have trouble finding this, look about 3 inches to the left of these words. sgb
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:41:00 - [9] Long as they remove the -25% cap penility.
Bellum Eternus Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:43:00 - [10] Originally by: smallgreenblur Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Battlecheese Thank goodness. They have been overpowered long before the recent nano-fad. No no no. You're f#cking it all up. MWDs have nothing to do with it. Get a clue. Correct, but if they cost more cap the faster you go, they can be a solution without being part of the problem... sgb But if that concept (more cap the faster you go) is employed correctly, then MWDs arn't getting any sort of nerf at all, since they'll operate exactly as they do now, unless you're going four billion km/sec. If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer.
Phoenicia Macabre Votum Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:49:00 - [11] And people thought the DEIMOS couldn't get any worse.... Peace is a lie, there is only BOOBIES!
DarkElf Caldari Veto. Academy	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:53:00 - [12] Can everyone stop assuming what's gonna happen. it's all still being discussed atm. they haven't even said they are going to nerf mwd's yet and even if they do it might well not affect ships that use it as they do now just to get to their target wait to hear what's actually happening before jumping to conclusions DE
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 12:57:00 - [13] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: smallgreenblur Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Battlecheese Thank goodness. They have been overpowered long before the recent nano-fad. No no no. You're f#cking it all up. MWDs have nothing to do with it. Get a clue. Correct, but if they cost more cap the faster you go, they can be a solution without being part of the problem... sgb But if that concept (more cap the faster you go) is employed correctly, then MWDs arn't getting any sort of nerf at all, since they'll operate exactly as they do now, unless you're going four billion km/sec. exactly. perfect imo. sgb
Bronson Hughes Caldari Knights of the Wild	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:03:00 - [14] Originally by: DarkElf Can everyone stop assuming what's gonna happen. it's all still being discussed atm. they haven't even said they are going to nerf mwd's yet and even if they do it might well not affect ships that use it as they do now just to get to their target wait to hear what's actually happening before jumping to conclusions DE QFT.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:13:00 - [15] Originally by: Bronson Hughes Originally by: DarkElf Can everyone stop assuming what's gonna happen. it's all still being discussed atm. they haven't even said they are going to nerf mwd's yet and even if they do it might well not affect ships that use it as they do now just to get to their target wait to hear what's actually happening before jumping to conclusions DE QFT. Damn you evil speculating people! Stop it right now! sgb
Ren Tales Null Horizon	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:21:00 - [16] Edited by: Ren Tales on 16/02/2007 13:18:22 Edited by: Ren Tales on 16/02/2007 13:18:09 I don't think MWD is a problem at all. For one thing, nerfing MWD makes the crow suck, and that makes me sad. I know the crow is very very hard to kill, but I always thought that it (and similarly, the vagabond) fit a unique role, and I would hate to see it damaged just because some morons decided that a really speedy battleship would be cool. Its speed mods and speed rigs that are the problem. A MWD nerf would hurt alot more ships than just the nanoships. Pre-rev, MWD was NOT A PROBLEM. What changed with Rev? Better speed mods, MWD rigs. What needs to happen is a speed cap on larger ships of some kind. Some sort of high mass formula that kicks in with the higher tier MWDs. They give the same speed at base, but do far less the higher above their base speed you get. This prevents the MWD nerf from slamming frigates, on which I think MWD works perfectly. What does a sig incread mean to a bs? Next to nothing. What does it mean on a frigate? EVERYTHING! MWD use on a frigate is brilliant and well balanced. On a Battleship? It's slipshod at best. ----
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:25:00 - [17] I posted about this on the nano thread, but if you think about it a mwd change that kills very high speed setups but doesn't really affect the more 'normal' speed setups is exactly what is needed. I'm less inclined to be happy about across the board 'mwd nerfs' since those will hurt every other ship and still leave nano-bs on top in terms of speed. sgb
Atomine Elektrine Gallente Heroes Die	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:28:00 - [18] nerfing mwd that way is GOOD idea actually.
Riho Red Wrath Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:42:00 - [19] if they nerf MWDs.. then they nerf alot of things... my deimos will be close to useless carp then when i cant even use MWD to get close. i dont use nanos on eny of my ships but i do use a MWD... nerf nanos and istabs not MWDs Great being Gallente... aint it ? ----------------- <------ Hijack free space :) -----------------
R'adeh Gallente Gekidoku Koroshiya Buntai	Posted - 2007.02.16 13:51:00 - [20] Originally by: Phoenicia And people thought the DEIMOS couldn't get any worse.... _______________________________________________ My views are my own and I don't represent my corp.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 14:26:00 - [21] Originally by: R'adeh Originally by: Phoenicia And people thought the DEIMOS couldn't get any worse.... deimos will get better with that! Use you head at least ONCE! With a MWD nerf much less ships will use them. So a single MWD pulse will be enough to reach target. So the blaster ships won't usually need to keep MWD online for so much time! So less cap usage. Stop thinking as the only ships taht use MWD were yours! If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Battlecheese Caldari Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires	Posted - 2007.02.16 14:43:00 - [22] Originally by: Kagura Nikon deimos will get better with that! Use you head at least ONCE! With a MWD nerf much less ships will use them. So a single MWD pulse will be enough to reach target. So the blaster ships won't usually need to keep MWD online for so much time! So less cap usage. Tactics and interesting combat ftw.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2007.02.16 15:08:00 - [23] Yes, please nerf guerilla fighting. Its not fiar!! - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Darius Shakor Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.16 15:11:00 - [24] Originally by: smallgreenblur Read the dev blog. If you have trouble finding this, look about 3 inches to the left of these words. sgb I'm reading this on a 5 1/2 inch monitor. 3 inches to the left of your words is my coffee machine... ------ Shakor Clan Information Portal
hydraSlav Synergy Evolved Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2007.02.16 15:18:00 - [25] There is nothing wrong with MWD There is nothing wrong with Nanos The problem is the post-Kali i-stabs Nanos and MWDs were there way before Kali, and so what? Yes, you had several nano-ships, like Nanophoons. Minmatar are supposed to be speed-kings, so there was nothing really wrong with a Nanophoon, especially considering it was flying at "manageable" speeds of 3-5km/s. The current "speed-fad" was caused by the broken i-stabs that were unexpectedly changed in Kali with no proper thoughts behind them, and after that, everyone and his cousin started speed tanking. Remove the i-stabs to pre-Kali role, and MWD with nanos are not a problem anymore. == Above comments are my personal views Oveur >Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat
Feric Jaggar	Posted - 2007.02.16 15:34:00 - [26] I want my MWD. Leave it alone!
Battlecheese Caldari Cheers Restaurant and Bar Coalition Of Empires	Posted - 2007.02.16 15:34:00 - [27] Inertia-stabs were made useful at all in kali. This has highlighted existing MWD use issues, but the correct fix is not to nerf the istabs back down. Please read the blog.
Heikki Gallente Wreckless Abandon The UnAssociated	Posted - 2007.02.16 15:36:00 - [28] Tuxford idea really shines; if implemented correctly, it will both get rid of speedy BSes, while even boosting traditional Blaster MWD setups. So, the idea (or one of the many considered) was to tie MWD's cap usage to the ship's current speed. To me this sounds like MWD's first pulse would use very little of cap, but 2nd and further successive (when already at high speed) pulses would eat enormous amounts of cap. Apparently goal for tweaking would be pre-Rev statistics, so plausible result could be: - Small ships like ceptors won't probably notice any change, unless they have full snakes and rigs -> still viable for tackling etc - Battleships can do very low cost initial MWD pulse towards the target -> boost for AC/blasterships - Travel fitted BSes could still run few cycles in order to escape from a camp Or in other words, the only 'nerf' would be: - Big or really fast ships couldn't maintain high (orbit) speeds and stay invulnerable in combat Of course it would imply that setting up an effective solo-BS will be more difficult. Yet with territorial-control based world, gate camp should be allowed to have some effect for defending your home. -Lasse who thinks his 13.5km/s Mega should be nerfed.
DarkElf Caldari Veto. Academy	Posted - 2007.02.16 16:02:00 - [29] Originally by: Riho if they nerf MWDs.. then they nerf alot of things... my deimos will be close to useless carp then when i cant even use MWD to get close. i dont use nanos on eny of my ships but i do use a MWD... nerf nanos and istabs not MWDs stop whining and read the proposed changes. they do not want to nerf ships like the deimos they want to stop the insane speeds/ they are working on a way to nerf it without affecting ships like mega and deimos etc. my god the forums are full of a bunch of whiney kids that read about something in the pipeline and instantly assume waaaaaa my deimos is gonna be carp now. it's useless anyway, buy a better ship DE
Zeophyte	Posted - 2007.02.16 16:14:00 - [30] I think its a great idea will be sweet for blasterboats if they get it right, the point is u shouldnt be able to run mwd for ever and this seems like a perfect idea + that crow nerf has been long time coming altho i feel sorry for the vaga but it still needed some kind of nerf
hydraSlav Synergy Evolved Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2007.02.16 16:39:00 - [31] Originally by: Heikki To me this sounds like MWD's first pulse would use very little of cap, but 2nd and further successive (when already at high speed) pulses would eat enormous amounts of cap. I like that == Above comments are my personal views Oveur >Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat
Bardi MecAuldnis Amarr Pirates of Destruction Union Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 17:03:00 - [32] What people are failing to see, is that if there is progressive cap use, that means that you can scale your speed and have effectively an AB with greater adjustability. You no longer have to suffer the full cap penalty if you just want to go a little faster. I think that would help ships like the Deimos. But what do I know about speed and cap use, I'm just a silly Amarr --- Hey hey let's go kenka suru! Taisetsuna mono protect my balls! Boku ga warui so lets fighting! LET'S FIGHTING LOVE!!!
Sean Dillon Caldari LEGI0N	Posted - 2007.02.16 17:36:00 - [33] Tuxford is a moron, he wants to nerf nano battleships so what does he do? He nerfs all other ******* ships that use MWD. Instead of making low slots modules more/less effective depending on ship mass he nerfs the MWD itself.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.16 17:41:00 - [34] Originally by: Sean Dillon Tuxford is a moron, he wants to nerf nano battleships so what does he do? He nerfs all other ******* ships that use MWD. Instead of making low slots modules more/less effective depending on ship mass he nerfs the MWD itself. no his is on the right path. Making this and making nano speed bonus be apercentage one will solve completely the problem without affecting ANYGHTING.. ZIP.. NADA the other ships, in fact improving a little bit ... If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Father Weebles	Posted - 2007.02.16 17:47:00 - [35] Originally by: Phoenicia And people thought the DEIMOS couldn't get any worse.... "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."
Father Weebles	Posted - 2007.02.16 17:52:00 - [36] Originally by: smallgreenblur I quite like the idea of mwd costing more cap the faster you go. It's logical, plus it actually helps out those people that use their brains and adjust mwd speed downwards every so often. sgb that means no more 24/7 mwdin crows at 18km ohnoes! "Welcome to EVE, where inflation is out of control."
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2007.02.16 17:56:00 - [37] Originally by: Darius Shakor Originally by: smallgreenblur Read the dev blog. If you have trouble finding this, look about 3 inches to the left of these words. sgb I'm reading this on a 5 1/2 inch monitor. 3 inches to the left of your words is my coffee machine... Well what does it say? Never again are you allowed to whine about not training Combat Skills
Tisanta Amarr Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom	Posted - 2007.02.16 18:02:00 - [38] Originally by: Phoenicia And people thought the DEIMOS couldn't get any worse.... if anything this is a boost to the deimos.. simply because if you travel faster than 1500mps there is something wrong with your setup... therefore meaning it should require less cap to run a mwd compared to other mwd using ships. --- Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
Tisanta Amarr Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom	Posted - 2007.02.16 18:04:00 - [39] although this doesn't solve any issues because a cheap nano-bs can still go 3000mps which in theory isnt fast considering the speeds of intys and dictors.. the problem with nano-bs is the fact they have HP and they fly fast... meaning you can shoot at one and it wont go down in 1 hit unlike intys or dictors. --- Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
ThaMa Gebir Gallente Raddick Explorations	Posted - 2007.02.18 17:35:00 - [40] Originally by: Zeophyte I think its a great idea will be sweet for blasterboats if they get it right, the point is u shouldnt be able to run mwd for ever and this seems like a perfect idea + that crow nerf has been long time coming altho i feel sorry for the vaga but it still needed some kind of nerf Ok and how does that help interceptors? You have to keep the speed up ffs, you cannot just speed up to the person and then try to attack. It will cost too damn much when you have lost XXXXX ships through that stupid idea. Remember, not only the deimos will be affected, but also the Vaga, all interceptors, Thorax, Vigilant, Daredevil, Vindicator. Like it, sniper rails ftw, oh caldari already have that prize, bugger another step to Caldari online. Lets see if my sig can survive this round of *****ing Funny, i'm still here - Petwraith There will be no survivors now that i'm around - Xorus pwnt - Immy!!!11
StarLite Amarr Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.18 18:11:00 - [41] Why not increase web range to 25Km base? :) _______________________________________________________________________ This sig is guarded by SigGuard(c)
Setana Manoro Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2007.02.18 18:27:00 - [42] If they don't do it right they're gonna cure the disease by killing the patient. MWD is not a problem by itself, but MWD and i-stabs are a problem. Now, if not for MWD, what is the purpose of using i-stabbs ? So why do they nerf MWD and not i-stabbs again ? -------------------------------------------------- Always look on the bright side of life. :)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.18 18:32:00 - [43] Originally by: StarLite Why not increase web range to 25Km base? :) Why dont we just crown amarr kings and gods of all ships and men? ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Hllaxiu Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.02.18 18:48:00 - [44] Originally by: StarLite Why not increase web range to 25Km base? :) I for one welcome our 85km web range Huginn overlords. --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:00:00 - [45] Edited by: Goumindong on 18/02/2007 18:57:04 Originally by: Hllaxiu Originally by: StarLite Why not increase web range to 25Km base? :) I for one welcome our 85km web range Huginn overlords. Actauly, we have those already they are just hard to get and expensive. What would be scary would be the 141km huginns with best named webs. What it would really do is increase the closing time of all ships and just ream minmatar and gallente. I mean, unless you want to close against an armageddon, while webbed, in conglag range. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Zelakil	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:01:00 - [46] "I quite like the idea of mwd costing more cap the faster you go. It's logical " No, no it isn't logical. It is only logical in initial aceleration and not straight line trajectory after the ship has accelerated. Remember we're in space. What exactly is supposed to be slowing you down such that you need more fuel? I concede that in a tight orbit you would need to expend fuel, cap , whatever, but for practical purposes, once you gain momentum, you should keep it for a loooooonnng time, especially in a BS or BC.
Neuromandis EPSILON TEAM Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:15:00 - [47] Originally by: StarLite Why not increase web range to 25Km base? :) I find you a little extreme . But I wouldn't mind seeing something like lighter webifier drones and even a module that does about what they do (like 30% speed dec at 20-25 km)
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:19:00 - [48] As long as the ship itself is factored into the speed penalty, ie BSes get hit a lot harder at 2km/s than a cruiser does. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender Got Corp?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:28:00 - [49] Originally by: Zelakil "I quite like the idea of mwd costing more cap the faster you go. It's logical " No, no it isn't logical. It is only logical in initial aceleration and not straight line trajectory after the ship has accelerated. Remember we're in space. What exactly is supposed to be slowing you down such that you need more fuel? I concede that in a tight orbit you would need to expend fuel, cap , whatever, but for practical purposes, once you gain momentum, you should keep it for a loooooonnng time, especially in a BS or BC. MWD make you go faster by warping the space around you. Your ship doesnt travel through space any faster than normal, the space becomes smaller. This is why your sig radius increases.[because a shot in front or behind will be warped towards your ship]. So lower velocity means less space is warped and less cap should be needed to do that. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Xoduse Gallente Beasts of Burden YouWhat	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:42:00 - [50] Edited by: Xoduse on 18/02/2007 19:40:07 how this will affect the already cap hurting Blasterboats if the fight starts from say 25km? These are the ships that HAVE to fit an MWD to work correctly, and if they run out of cap we cant keep on pounding like good ol' Matari. If our MWD kills our cap there is no tank, AND no gank and this sounds like we're just making the cap hungry MWD use even more cap. ---------------------
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:50:00 - [51] Originally by: Xoduse Edited by: Xoduse on 18/02/2007 19:40:07 how this will affect the already cap hurting Blasterboats if the fight starts from say 25km? These are the ships that HAVE to fit an MWD to work correctly, and if they run out of cap we cant keep on pounding like good ol' Matari. If our MWD kills our cap there is no tank, AND no gank and this sounds like we're just making the cap hungry MWD use even more cap. And how fast does your blasterboat actually go? _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Material Defender Got Corp?
Slash Harnet Minmatar Industrial Services INC	Posted - 2007.02.18 19:55:00 - [52] If we're gonna nerf the MWD can we get a reduction of the cap penalty on interceptors? signature removed ... Pirlouit I finally got my sig nerfed once, I feel like a forum warrior!

Pages: 1 2 :: [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.