EVE Search - What is really killing eve fast

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

What is really killing eve fast

» 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)
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.27 22:28:00 - [1] Edited by: sr blackout on 27/02/2007 22:25:36 Modules that ignore the ship size, class, mass, signature etcà as you can see most items have been nerfed so to speak to fit for the class size or the other way around effectiveness should work both waysà small ship vs big shipà the factor is lost in many items, and every time that you see an imbalance in the game is because these mechanics are not properly done. And before anyone says it cant be done, yes it can be done, with simple game mechanics rules that apply to every day eve thus farà advantages and disadvantages to size shape, mass etcà some things in eve ignore such mechanics and thus are quite imbalanced. Simple fixes are to place class sized modulesà example.. there are 1MN 10MN 100MN mwd/abÆs BUT there is only 1 type of WEB and that is bad! It logically does not make sense, as these things have to do with size/mass and all that other great stuff.. simple solution would be make web that corresponds to each class and has its advantages and disadvantages. Let me explain. Frigs can fit 1mn or 10mn by sacrificing there fità before you scream, what will happen to tacklers!! Well let me explain 1mn should work on 10mn or 100mn the problem IS that it would have a very slow effect or curve of effect, its accuracy or efficiency/precision or whatever would be 100% vs the bigger target, but ITS STRENGTH would NOT, thus it would take a lot longer for a 1mn web to stop a 10mn or 100mn Now lets look at it the other way aroundà 100mn web would work fine for bs and would have the range and fit/cap usage of comparable to some what bs sized or something along those linesà Before you scream, the 10mn or 100mn web will pwn 1mn fitted shipsà let me explain to you the same concept that has been between turretsà in effect the 100mn is designed for bigger stuffà its efficiency or accuracy is horrible for small targetsà it can not stop at its 100% efficiency the 1mn mwd so though the 100mn web has the range and eats lots of cap, it would be some what as effective on the 1mn frig as the 1mn is on 100mn ship This is fine IMO as you have plenty of mixed classes that can fit different items and work in the middle of the rollsà a cruiser tackler will suddenly be more valuable as its in the middle of the frig bsà these modules should be ridiculously fitting intensive but just to give them there proper class sized just like you could fit a 100mn ab on a cruiser or a 10mn ab on a frig.. same you should do with something as this webber if say the ship is dedicated it can do it. This example is of course one way that could fix the nano/istab situationà as a proper fitted bs with 2-3 100mn webs would stop the nano bs in its tracksà as far as recon ships goà I donÆt know how it should balance ità give it a strength bonus? So its more accurate or efficient? And the recon ship would then fit the 10mn which would work well still vs frig or bs and keep its roll. I am more then sure everyone can name were the proper size, class ship modules should exist and do notà and to some extent are screwing up eve in one manner or another, some times they are not as effective because its much easier to fit a tank item or a gank modules or they have some stacking penalty. But those that do notà this is were I would say 75% of the issues are at.
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.27 22:36:00 - [2] Another example is the warp scrambler/disruptor From the start, there could have been warp strengthà from class to size.. and there equivalent itemsà this would not harm tacklers as it is today.. because all it would simply mean is that you put enough pointsà but im quite disappointed that every ship can be taken down with just 1 pointà I think that is ridiculous, all with the exception with the dictor bubble. Frigs should have +1 cruiser 2-3, bs 4-5 and capital 5-10+ just exampleà each class would have different strengths just like in the previous example of the web/mwd-ab Some of these modules should not be that hard to create or balance, they simply take more cap, pg/cpu have more range and have some kind of ôtrackingö or efficiency to them regarding other classes
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.02.27 22:38:00 - [3] ANOTHER reason for something that kills EVE? You mean the 100 OTHER threads about stuff that kills EVE during the past 7 days were incorrect?????
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.27 22:46:00 - [4] Originally by: Death Kill ANOTHER reason for something that kills EVE? You mean the 100 OTHER threads about stuff that kills EVE during the past 7 days were incorrect????? no they just point to specifics most of the time, and dealing with issue that is at present... this was from the time eve started... i personally played it since beta so i have seen all the changes, a lot of stuff got nerfed or balanced and things got stacking penalties but a lot of other modules were just left behind, this is a statement of why a lot of modules and setups get overpowered, is because of the basic principles.. and that is it doesnÆt fit what was stated in the threadà take ANY example in the pastà and tell me that the class, size, mass, signature was not a factor of it? Even ecm, was an issue, even though there was a factorà the strength per ship and typeà but because of its randomness and other ways that it worked it just simply bypassed it and ignored that simple game mechanic that dictated how much and when someone should be target jammed, and the chance of it.
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.28 05:52:00 - [5] lol so it was a bad title but still
Toros Revoke STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.28 06:22:00 - [6] So then battleships become tacklers, utilising their 50km range tri webbers... I think it's fine as is
Evelgrivion Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.02.28 06:24:00 - [7] I think CCP has talked about it before; the problem becomes keeping the frigate relevant, because it would start to take a minimum of a cruiser to lock a ship down. Its a rather nasty can of worms that gets opened ---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|---\|--- This isn't the signature you're looking for.
Unknown Subject Sound of Silence	Posted - 2007.02.28 06:51:00 - [8] along with an IQ test, there should be a "how much do you whine?" test before people are allowed to subscribe. this may then actually save gigs of server space caused by stupid threads like this. the game isnt wikipedia! you cant edit it so it is better for your needs! either deal with it or leave your items to some empire noob when you leave.
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:02:00 - [9] frig is always relevant, the point was that they would have different strengths and level of efficiency... so frig web on bs or cruiser still works just fine, just that its slower and as not effective... and bs web on frig is the same not as effective the web/mwd was an example... how about nosf/neutralizers? how about dampners? they have no level at all... they are 1 item for every type of ship... be it a frig/cruiser or bs or capital ship... its quite pathetic is it not? at least ecm/eccm is based on ships size and race and strength level.. but damps? there is really nothing same as with nosf... they work 100% regardless of the ship.. the only difference they have is fitting range and amount that they use. why shouldnÆt those items have some kind of efficiency and fallow as the other ones do based on ship size, class, mass, signature etc.. and since when did bs not scram/web stuff? depending on the setup its been around always... so the point that bs will become tacklers is not true at all
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:05:00 - [10] Originally by: Evelgrivion I think CCP has talked about it before; the problem becomes keeping the frigate relevant, because it would start to take a minimum of a cruiser to lock a ship down. Its a rather nasty can of worms that gets opened IQ test? LoL should be applied to your constructive response.. the thread gives an example not a whine, it talks about the general issues that strike eve, and every past nerf/fix has been because of this, maybe you havenÆt been long enough in the game to see it or donÆt remember but I do
Toros Revoke STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:05:00 - [11] Edited by: Toros Revoke on 28/02/2007 07:02:23 Nos do have levels, small, medium and heavy. Try fitting an E500 to your frigate and I assure you'll be dissapointed.
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:08:00 - [12] Originally by: Toros Revoke Edited by: Toros Revoke on 28/02/2007 07:02:23 Nos do have levels, small, medium and heavy. Try fitting an E500 to your frigate and I assure you'll be dissapointed. it has no efficiency.. it works 100% on frig cruiser and bs... it should not be the same... thats why the issues with nano ships today it just compounds the problem... if nosf would not work that way then small ships could have a chance to tackle assuming they could go that speed in the first place... ya look at turrets and missiles... if your missing the point
Toros Revoke STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:23:00 - [13] Edited by: Toros Revoke on 28/02/2007 07:19:37 I get what you're talking about with webs, that a frig sized web, shouldn't be 100% effective against a battleship (though I confess I don't know why, unless you claim to know "how" a webifier works), I don't see that it applies to Nos and the like, a small nos doesn't really dent a bs's cap, but will keep the smaller ship running, a bs Nos on the other hand will empty the smaller ship - because it's bigger... So whats the problem? Use small words if you have to, diagrams or parables.
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:36:00 - [14] you are right that small nos has no problem on bs... the issue is the other way more so in this example of nosf/neut, and that is that nosf/neut are directional modules just like turrets and missiles... thus it makes sense they use also a form of tracking does it not? they are not omi module like say a smartbomb... although i would love to see a smart bomb neutralizer that just sends some kind of pulse or drain field that sucks a good % of cap and has a cool down timer... sounds like a doomsday weapon ;) but back on track a large nos should have a form of tracking... and it cant really miss or do poor hits like turrets but what it can do is maybe have a variation of % or falloff based on something like signature and speed of the ship? these are just ideas/examples... the point is that it can be done and SHOULD be done just as our turret missile friend modules work :)
Toros Revoke STK Scientific INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.02.28 07:42:00 - [15] Myself, I always assumed that Nos opperated using a field of sorts and that the graphic was merely the visible effect of said field, explaining why, unlike a turret there isn't a fixed point of origin for the beam, it just joins the two ships together like an umbilical. anyway I'm going to bed
DarkFenix Caldari Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.02.28 08:56:00 - [16] No. Webs and other assorted tackling gear are fine as they are. The only module that needs varying effectiveness against various ship sizes is Nosferatu, currently they're a bit much of an "I win" button against smaller ships.
sr blackout Minmatar	Posted - 2007.02.28 17:58:00 - [17] Originally by: DarkFenix No. Webs and other assorted tackling gear are fine as they are. The only module that needs varying effectiveness against various ship sizes is Nosferatu, currently they're a bit much of an "I win" button against smaller ships. please read the whole thread next time, and something more constructive then just a no, and if you noticed it was an example which a few were given

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.