EVE Search - reclassification of warp scramblers

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

reclassification of warp scramblers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
TortoiseX Gallente The Diplomats Quantum Star Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.26 20:07:00 - [1] ok iv been thinking and it makes me wonder why are warp scramblers med slot items they are clearly weapons and are offensive in nature they may not do damage but neither do nosferatu or cloaking devices any thoughts? ----------------------------------------------- however fast u run the tortoise is always one step ahead
Jarjar Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.02.26 20:30:00 - [2] Edited by: Jarjar on 26/02/2007 20:27:48 No offence but did you think this through? What about ECM, tracking disruptors, sensor dampeners, stasis webs, and more? Edit: Also... "If it ain't broken, don't fix it" comes to mind. "In Communist China ISK buys YOU!!" - random bio
TortoiseX Gallente The Diplomats Quantum Star Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.26 20:37:00 - [3] of course i thought it through warp scramblers are very unbalenced they currently are used by almost every player under the sun to stop players getting away when they might have never wanted to get into a situation in the first place if they were high slot items or needed more cpu less people would use them (hopefully) ----------------------------------------------- however fast u run the tortoise is always one step ahead
Peacock McNuggets Guns 'N' Hoses	Posted - 2007.02.26 20:38:00 - [4] To be honest when fitted to a combat ship then just about every module can be considered a weapon fitting of some sort Lowslot: Gyros BCU and Heatsinks all improve damage Mid: Sheild boosters and Cap recharges keep you alive longer allowing you to do more damage. Highslot: Salvager can be cosidered a chance to keep the economic balance of the war on your side All depends on your point of view I guess.
TortoiseX Gallente The Diplomats Quantum Star Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.26 20:43:00 - [5] it was ccp that mentioned the offencive state of the scrambler when my corp mate made a petition about it their reson for scramblers not wanting to be changed to high slots was that it was not an offencive weapon i want it changed to an offencive weapon cos i want the cpu requirements to increase ----------------------------------------------- however fast u run the tortoise is always one step ahead
Jarjar Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.02.26 21:00:00 - [6] And why do you want that? Again, don't fix what isn't broken. If you want this to make combat more consentual, well, go find another game, no offence. That, or use warp core stablizers. "In Communist China ISK buys YOU!!" - random bio
Imhothar Xarodit Minmatar Wolverine Solutions Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.02.26 21:28:00 - [7] Well, they nerfed Warp Core Stabilizer because it was far too easy to escape from combat, now they are useless on any serious combat ship. But as it is now, it is far too easy to prevent somebody to escape from combat and can be used on any ship, it is not really a "working system"... Move them to a high slot sounds like a good idea. And yes, they are much more of an offensive entity then normal EW means, because you put your opponent into a situation he cannot change. Other EW modules that have such effects, like Sensor Jammers or ECM Bursts, which cannot be "neutralized" at least have a chance to not work, or fail, depending on the ship size and other attributes. But once a ship without stabs is scrambled, the "victim" is a sitting duck. So, in my opinion, either put scramblers on a high slot and more CPU need, give each ship a "default warp core strength" depending on size, or make them so, thht they may "fail" to scramble and do not work 100% in all cases.
icomeinpiece	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:11:00 - [8] CCP actually hinted many months ago that they were going to change warp scarmblers so that a lone frigate could not overcome the massive warp engines of a BS, it would take several to stop one in it's tracks. Whatever happened to this idea? I thought it was a good one that never came to fruition.
Shiv Ertai Gallente Direct Intent The Makhai	Posted - 2007.02.27 00:26:00 - [9] Edited by: Shiv Ertai on 27/02/2007 00:24:00 Deleted b/c it's stupid
hotgirl933	Posted - 2007.02.27 03:46:00 - [10] Originally by: icomeinpiece CCP actually hinted many months ago that they were going to change warp scarmblers so that a lone frigate could not overcome the massive warp engines of a BS, it would take several to stop one in it's tracks. Whatever happened to this idea? I thought it was a good one that never came to fruition. guess they scrapped it was to hard
Icome4u IronPig Sev3rance	Posted - 2007.02.28 03:17:00 - [11] Originally by: icomeinpiece CCP actually hinted many months ago that they were going to change warp scarmblers so that a lone frigate could not overcome the massive warp engines of a BS, it would take several to stop one in it's tracks. Whatever happened to this idea? I thought it was a good one that never came to fruition. /Sign to that... 'Zomg my Rokh can't warp because that little frigate is scrambling me...'
Cythe Oman	Posted - 2007.02.28 04:17:00 - [12] A quick translation. CCP says "WCS systems are for travleing, ships mount them and can get form place to place in relative safety now." CCP meens "WCS systems are for ships that can't fight any way and will still get ganked with or without them on." CCP says "We want players to commit to a fight that they enter and not just run away at the first sign of troubble" CCP meens "We want players to die. there is no such thing as a fair fight in eve so may the bigger gang win." CCP says "Warp scramblers are not an offencive weapon." CCP meens "We have no frelling idea what we are talking about Warp scramblers are only used to attack other players."
Valandril Caldari Resurrection R i s e	Posted - 2007.02.28 05:21:00 - [13] Edited by: Valandril on 28/02/2007 05:17:44 Whenever i see caldari pilot complaining about moving scramblers/other ewar to highslot so he can solopvp in his raven w/o sacrifcing his tank i wanna wardc caldari faction. Ppl complain that armortank is overpwred coz we can fit ewar and tank at the same time, they don't see that cos of our tank = dmg mods and weaker than shield tank. And thats fine for me, this is drawback of armor tanking. What would happen if u move scrams to highslots ? We will get overpowered ravens who will be able to fit tank, gank, scram w/o any drawback while all armor tanks will still have to choose between gank, tank. Hell even bigger choice - fit gun, nos, or scrambler... In simple words = NO --------
TortoiseX Gallente The Diplomats Quantum Star Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.02 02:15:00 - [14] if you increased the cpu cost even the most skilled of players would find it hard to fit all the modules he needed try fitting a scan probe launcher and running your favorate setup thats what i want it to be like not for pvp and im gallante so i know what armour tanks are like ----------------------------------------------- however fast u run the tortoise is always one step ahead
Jaketh Ivanes Amarr Riggers Incorporated	Posted - 2007.03.02 08:45:00 - [15] In my definition, a weapon is something that apply force on another object. Scramblers don't do damage or apply any knid of force, so hence not a weapon. Therefor, i also think that cloaks, salvagers, nos and neuts should be moved to med slots. Especially cloaks and salvagers. Tractorbeams is ok in high, because they apply force to another object. Just because it can't harm a ship doesn't remove it from the weapon category. Civilian guns can't harm any ship either
MitziKoku	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:34:00 - [16] I get the point... Turret enhancements like SBs and Tracking computers merely enhance existing weapons. It's a reasonable suggestion to make Web/Scrams into high slot weapons beause they act directly on the target.
sycokill Caldari Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.03.05 17:49:00 - [17] Originally by: Imhothar Xarodit Well, they nerfed Warp Core Stabilizer because it was far too easy to escape from combat, now they are useless on any serious combat ship. But as it is now, it is far too easy to prevent somebody to escape from combat and can be used on any ship, it is not really a "working system"... Move them to a high slot sounds like a good idea. And yes, they are much more of an offensive entity then normal EW means, because you put your opponent into a situation he cannot change. Other EW modules that have such effects, like Sensor Jammers or ECM Bursts, which cannot be "neutralized" at least have a chance to not work, or fail, depending on the ship size and other attributes. But once a ship without stabs is scrambled, the "victim" is a sitting duck. So, in my opinion, either put scramblers on a high slot and more CPU need, give each ship a "default warp core strength" depending on size, or make them so, thht they may "fail" to scramble and do not work 100% in all cases. I have to disagree here. Warp scramblers like every other EW module has a set range, so if one gets warp scrambled it doesn't mean he will stay in that state for the duration of the cycle, all you have to do is get out of range and you are free to warp. I can understand if your in a BS and a frigate decides to scramble you, but there are numerous ways to counter it(ECM, NOS, drones etc.) its not even worth debating over.
Lance Hawke New Age Solutions New Age Solutions Amalgamated	Posted - 2007.03.05 18:44:00 - [18] No.

Pages: [1] :: 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.