EVE Search - Paging Tux - coming nanoship nerf

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Paging Tux - coming nanoship 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 - 1 post(s)
Rooker Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.22 18:03:00 - [1] Just read the dev blog concerning speed mods (yeah, I'm slow). All I can say is, WTF?? Quote: So whats the plan? ...so when in doubt nerf the microwarpdrive! Well not really but we have discussed number of modification of it. * Make it require charges * Make its cap consumption dependant on velocity * Not allow people to use cap booster when mwd is active NO! NO!!!! Nothing is wrong with MWD. Please don't break things that work fine. Interceptors are supposed to be speed demons. Thorax/Deimos/Vigilant are specifically designed to make use of MWD. Break MWD and you break all of these ships. The actual problem is hull mods, not speed mods. Fix the problem, don't break something that is unrelated. People stuff a battleship with nanos and inertial stabs because they have so many low slots and there is no stacking penalty. Battleships align and warp off a gate before an interceptor can lock them AND they can outrun them. I watched a Domi moving at nearly 9,000m/s yesterday. :\ The problem is not complicated and doesn't require a complicated fix that breaks other stuff. Simple, simple, simple solution - penalize the hull mods. Stack nerf them so that having a bunch of low slots isn't the I-Win button. There, fixed. Nothing else broken in the process. That's all that's needed. ---
Arcadia1701 Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2007.02.22 18:25:00 - [2] It has come down to * I have more low slots than u so i win* . Tux may be right though, nerf the MWD , and give ships that are ment to use the MWD a special bonus to undo the nerf to the other ships. Also the rigs and nanos etc need a little looking at to, BS going faster than intys is wrong. Post with your main or STFU
Rooker Dark-Rising Fallen Souls	Posted - 2007.02.22 20:04:00 - [3] Nah. I wouldn't want to see MWD become a specialized mod like jammers. They are very useful and the existing penalties are fine - big PG req compared to afterburner, cap size reduction, large cap use, huge sig radius increase. Nerf them any further and they won't be of any use. The abuse these days is related to hull mods that have no stacking penalty. It's the hull mods, not the speed mods. ---
Belial02 Amarr The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.02.23 12:04:00 - [4] hmm that also might be a problem to get our of bubbles fast enough Originally by: Omeega diplomacy is f1, f2, f3, really...
Zenobite The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre	Posted - 2007.02.23 13:39:00 - [5] MWDs should be left alone, you already lose PG, icreased sig radius and high power consumption - why break something that works fine? Like rooker said just put a stacking nerf on hull mods and it will be sorted without ruining the MWD for everyone.
Gaogan Gallente Solar Storm	Posted - 2007.02.23 19:54:00 - [6] Repeat after me: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MWD This only became a problem after istabs were buffed to reduce mass, and they have no stacking penalty so bs can fit several of them. Give them a stacking penalty and change it so that nanos reduce mass and give a bonus to speed as a percentage, and istabs increase agility and speed as a percentage.
prathe Minmatar Omega Enterprises Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.02.25 05:26:00 - [7] yeah tux is brilliant i think that whole blog was typical tuxford to recap were gonna nerf minmatar's only racial strength because well disabling a ship by using all your lows to get nothing but speed out of it - we dont like it were gonna buff amarr's racial strength basically the race whose weapons use the most cap and have by and large cap usage bonuses to cover that extra cap need more
Nylian Amarr	Posted - 2007.02.26 21:24:00 - [8] Nerfing the mwd would seem (to me) like giving the typhoon a speed nerf because everyone puts nano's on it. Maybe he's trying to steer away from 10km/s interceptors, which is a different issue entirely.
InfernalRage The Silent Rage FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.27 22:32:00 - [9] so why not address the PROBLEM itself, instead of constantly nerfing things that work fine tux? I mean seriously explain your thoughts on this. How does nerfing a MWD in any way fix the problem created by istabs and nanos? Now you're going to screw everyone that fits a travel mwd, screw gallente, screw minmatar, screw mission runners and pretty much everyone else that requires to use this already insanely nerfed unit. Increased sig, nerfed cap and huge cap usage already put a huge strain on BS pilots. Especially those ones that need to get in range for... yeah you guessed it, blasters. This fast paced nerfing is screwing this game over. Its not even been 2 months since the well thought out PvP nerf, where it was attempted to slow down pvp. You did it... Well done. Now any solo pvp engagement takes long enough for 40 of his buddies to go have lunch, jump up and save him. shakes head Ready for the Dark Side? Join DKFS!
xOm3gAx Caldari Stain of Mind DAMAGE INC...	Posted - 2007.02.28 03:45:00 - [10] Edited by: xOm3gAx on 28/02/2007 03:49:32 Edited by: xOm3gAx on 28/02/2007 03:43:47 i said it before ill say it again the easiest fix is simple as this... Dont nerf mwd or ab add a negative bonus to istabs and nano's that are cumulative or stack nerfed... Eg: -10%-20% bonus to mwd bonus and -5-10% to ab bonus so... AT 20% 500% speed bnus would be 400% at the first mod 300% at the second if cumulative.... 500% speed bonus would be 400% at the first mod 320% at the second if stacking nerfed... Edit: At 10% 500% speed bonus would be 450%at the first at the second 400% if cumulative If nerfed 450 then 405 /edit If a domi does 10km/s (theoretical with nano/istab/mwd) then using this system u would have one that does (if its base speed with mods is 200m/s at 20% per lvl stacking nerfed and 7 lows full of them) Would be exactly: 524.288m/s Thus making the nano boats useless unless your a frig ;) If needed overdrives could see a similar nerf. ----------- "Mercinaries never die, we just go to hell to regroup." -xOm3gAx '99

Icome4u IronPig Sev3rance	Posted - 2007.02.28 06:26:00 - [11] Penalize stacking of those low slot modules (istab and those nanos)... thats it.. a BS isn't ment to go 9000m/s... f**** ridiculous.
Benglada Infinitus Odium Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:04:00 - [12] and make cap ships un bumpable --------------------------- Originally by: Arkanor 0.0 is the Final Frontier. Bring money and friends. Sig nerfz0r - maximum allowed siz0r is 24000 bytz0r. - Devil ([email protected]) Sig By Ortos
Drachma Golea Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2007.02.28 10:36:00 - [13] Originally by: Icome4u Penalize stacking of those low slot modules (istab and those nanos)... thats it.. a BS isn't ment to go 9000m/s... f**** ridiculous. /me signed And if they still can go 9000m/s make sure there is no friction, just the mass, like it truly is in space, so it would take like 9 hours for that BS to turn around or to stop... and when it really really has to bump somehting, make sure the bumped one has the same effect...
Cheraldo Human Liberty Syndicate Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.28 12:12:00 - [14] How about BS's going so fast that their structural integrity takes damage and their Armor Plates begin to buckle and fall from the hull captain: Ensign, bring those Engines to 120% Ensign: Captain!?! Sir this Ship isn't built to support this kind of speed! captain: Just do it, I know my ship... Ensign: __________________________________ Oops. My brain just hit a bad sector.
reg keeper The JORG Corporation FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.09 17:07:00 - [15] Iev lost yet another good fitted Bs to the nano trend. While I respect the way fast ships are to be played i do not respect a Dommi in my case going faster than a missle. Please nerf the low slot hull fittings with either a stacking penalty or in some other way that would make it pointless to run more than 2 at a time. I know so many that are uttery gutted at this set up. It making people look to other gamse out of pure frustration. Tbh i cant blame them.
Icome4u IronPig Sev3rance	Posted - 2007.03.10 03:59:00 - [16] Nerf low slot speed modules... MWD is fine. Stupid CCP
RedClaws Amarr Dragon's Rage Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2007.03.10 16:25:00 - [17] I'd like to slow down even the interceptors a bit tbh. They don't use the new hullmods but they do use the new rigs. 9000m/s is very easy in an interceptor and imo thats far too fast for this game. By the time i get a lock the inty is far out of range and the limited range of 10km on webbers is 1 second in gametime. Include lag and there is no way a webber can still be used on these things. 5000m/s still seems ok to me but inties going 20km/s : NO!
Drizit Amarr	Posted - 2007.03.11 01:56:00 - [18] What about the transport ship? Its only defence is it's speed and armor since most have no weapon slots. Not that a single small turret can really do much anyway. Nerf MWD or put stacking penalties on nanos etc and it makes transport ships no better than standard Indies. All it needs is an inty with a scram/webber setup and the TS is dead in the water. ATM it can still maintain a respectable speed while webbed and have some chance of survival. --
Tassill Minmatar GREY COUNCIL Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2007.03.11 11:40:00 - [19] I realy hope tux dosent nerf MWD's!!! It is bad enough that now with bigger caps and slower recharges a inty has more trouble running mwd nonstop.
OhMyGodess Caldari Xenobytes Stain Empire	Posted - 2007.03.11 12:30:00 - [20] Edited by: OhMyGodess on 11/03/2007 12:29:08 Originally by: Rooker * Not allow people to use cap booster when mwd is active that's it - best solution - it will hurt nanobattleships but will not touch dedicated ships like vaga & inties OR just add stacking penalty for nanos

Raquaine Minmatar KDM Corp	Posted - 2007.03.11 15:45:00 - [21] It really doesn't make sense that you can have multiple nano's at all - never mind that there's no stacking penalty. Look at their description: Quote: Replaces some of the heavier structure components with lighter, but more fragile material. Improves speed and agility at the expense of hull strength. You wouldn't think that somehow you can indefinitely replace the same structural components... stacking penalties (harder to find replacements for components as you already have replaced the most obvious ones) or capping replacing a ship's heavy components by only allowing one nano, like with damage controls, would make sense from a conceptual point of view as well as helping the game mechanics. Overdrives probably need a stacking penalty too IMO - they don't help agility but could still cause some of the same problems if not dealt with as well, I would think people would switch to them if nanos were capped / penalised.
bathalus	Posted - 2007.03.12 08:23:00 - [22] All i can say here is i fully agree with the OP. Since u nerfed i-stabs and nano with no penalty, all i see nowdays is nano-BS/BC that can't be locked down or caught and can choose when/if to engage. This is ruining the pvp experiance and has just created another WCS-like issue , please leave the Mwd's alone and fix the thing u broke to cause this mess
Pociomundo Gallente World Order The Imperial Order	Posted - 2007.03.12 09:57:00 - [23] Originally by: prathe yeah tux is brilliant i think that whole blog was typical tuxford to recap were gonna nerf minmatar's only racial strength because well disabling a ship by using all your lows to get nothing but speed out of it - we dont like it were gonna buff amarr's racial strength basically the race whose weapons use the most cap and have by and large cap usage bonuses to cover that extra cap need more Theres a slight differance between a race going 50% or 100% faster in equivalent sized ships to the other races, like a BS going 1500 - 2000 m/s and a Nano BS going 10k+ m/s too fast for an Inty to even lock and activate a web on it before it passes by. If you can't grasp the concept of why the current state of nano battleships is a broken game mechanic then there really is no hope for you and you're better off not posting over it. Using all your lows to make it go 5k+ a sec is hardly "disabling it" now is it...
Drachenlord Amarr e X i l e Alektorophobia	Posted - 2007.03.13 01:55:00 - [24] there is absolutely nothing wrong with MWDs!!!! Nano's and istabs definitely need a stacking nerf or a cap on how many you can fit, and just to prevent a new module from being used instead, do the same to any module that increases speed. Dual MWD and Dual AB got nerfed right? just make it so you can only fit 1-2 of the offending modules on your ship, and change overdrives and nanofibers to percentage based modules instead of a hard number.... this leaves ships that were DESIGNED to go fast alone, and cripples the nano battleship trend.... returning pvp back to what it was before the nanobs trend ruined it... you should NOT need 4 Huginns plus support to kill 1-2 Dominixes or Typhoons. -------------------------------------------------
Drizit Amarr	Posted - 2007.03.13 11:00:00 - [25] Why not just have all ships including Inty's flying at 100 m/s max? That solves the whole problem, no MWD, no mods at all that can offer a speed bonus ar any other way to up the speed of your ship That's what it seems people here want What is the point in having ways to customise your ship if everyone else whinges about having them cos someone found a good way to use them? Let's just remove all mods and have standard ships with fixed turrets and no slots at all A nano BS gimps itself because it's turret tracking works against it at high speed. It also sacrifices structure to gain high speed with Nanofibers and agility if using Overdrives. With more agility from Nanofibers, the tracking problem is made worse. Lord knows how much the BS requires more agility and it's funny how an Inty can bounce one all over the galaxy but its own thrusters that have vastly more power than the inty's engines to manouvre can't turn it faster than a snail on tranquilisers. Can you imagine a motorboat being able to knock a cruise liner off course and spin it around like a demented catherine wheel? I have had a gutfull of the nerf brigade. Nerf this, nerf that, I can't win so I want it nerfed. Stuff it, just nerf everything and let's have a really boring and slow moving game that everyone gets tired of and leaves to play something faster like WOW. --

Tuxford	Posted - 2007.03.13 11:01:00 - [26] at this point we're not touching mwd and I doubt we'll do it in the near future _______________

Uuve Savisaalo Umbra Congregatio	Posted - 2007.03.13 13:35:00 - [27] Originally by: Drizit I have had a gutfull of the nerf brigade. Nerf this, nerf that, I can't win so I want it nerfed. Stuff it, just nerf everything and let's have a really boring and slow moving game that everyone gets tired of and leaves to play something faster like WOW. [/quote I believe you, sir, are playing stupid. Surely you must be to suggest that nanobattleships are gimped in tracking by their speed, given that none of the examples seen today use turrets. The whole cheese of this technique is that you use remote weapon systems such as missiles and drones - which in and of themselves don't need additional nerfing to counter for the hideous, obviously disbalancing aspects of this tactic. Nor is there any logic in any of the dramatic overstatements you're making like some impressionable, young woman. The tactic quite simply has no counter given the innertia posessed by nano/instab-combined ships that prevents even domination-web equipped rapiers at maximum skill level from stopping them - the only tactic anyone ever mentions as able to do so is bringing in a vastly larger number of faction-fitted vagabonds or, you've guessed it, just out-blobbing with even more nanoships. fun, isn't it. Do you honestly believe that having this game play out at ridiculous speeds that give a person barely any chance to react is 'fun'? Myself and, if this thread shows anything at all, quite a few others would have it at a pace where larger ship pilots actually have some time to think and react to the changing situation in combat, so I would suggest for you to try and face reality without letting your mascara run.
Ysolde Xen Minmatar Liberal Trading Co Electus Matari	Posted - 2007.03.13 13:43:00 - [28] Originally by: Tuxford at this point we're not touching mwd and I doubt we'll do it in the near future \o/ Stacking penalties for low-slots, rigs and Snakes would be a more sensible move, considering how most everything else operates on a stacking penalty system. ----- Everyone knows Derek.
Siltan	Posted - 2007.03.13 14:38:00 - [29] they could just put a max speed on ships and come up with some kind of reasoning on it in game. So like a max speed of 5km/s for interceptors, 4k for frigates, 3k for cruisers, 1.5k for BS's (just rough example numbers here). and vary the speed limit slightly according to ship and race.
pastafarianist	Posted - 2007.03.13 14:51:00 - [30] Edited by: pastafarianist on 13/03/2007 14:47:11 alts..



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.