EVE Search -

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Aleranie	Posted - 2007.06.17 10:58:00 - [1] Edited by: Aleranie on 17/06/2007 10:58:19 Edited by: Aleranie on 17/06/2007 10:58:07 "How? The Undead prefer to keep their secrets." You have no idea how much this ****es me off. How is this anything less than contemptible? It is either a joke in poor taste, or it is implementing a nerf, but refusing to discuss it.. because they do not want to deal with a controversy. Edit: in case that was not clear, I would very much like to test whatever "change" has been made. However, since no notion of whats changed is available it is impossible to even test that it was coded correctly. And the patch is supposed to go live tuesday.
n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.06.17 12:21:00 - [2] I certainly hope changes will go live on SiSi at least 24h before patch. I think thats right thing to do, since whole nosf debating recently been very hot, so releasing changes for testing would cause even bigger bomb then EANM change. But releasing changes for testing at least day before TQ live change, would be certainly great idea. ---
Aleranie	Posted - 2007.06.17 12:29:00 - [3] "I think thats right thing to do, " You seriously think refusing to disclose game mechanics changes to prevent public discussion of them is a good thing?
Kodiak31415 An Eye For An Eye Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.06.17 12:51:00 - [4] Originally by: n0thing I certainly hope changes will go live on SiSi at least 24h before patch. I think thats right thing to do, since whole nosf debating recently been very hot, so releasing changes for testing would cause even bigger bomb then EANM change. But releasing changes for testing at least day before TQ live change, would be certainly great idea. Yeah. It dosen't matter if you think a nos nerf is good or bad thing, it should be put up on the test server. P.S. Nice sig.../me sing's "Only in kenya....." _______________________________ Pleese exucse any seplling erorr's in tihs psot
James Duar Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.06.17 13:55:00 - [5] It's probably better this way. I mean EANM nerf, CCP don't care if it makes sense. Probably best if they just don't tell us what they've done to nosferatu because they certainly don't plan on listening on that one.
n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.06.17 15:01:00 - [6] Originally by: Aleranie "I think thats right thing to do, " You seriously think refusing to disclose game mechanics changes to prevent public discussion of them is a good thing? Yeah, its right thing to put it out closer to release, because till they test it out and maybe make tons of alterings the forums will lag down from the 20 page threads that will be created separately in all forum sections. Moreover, a nosf change is something that doesnt need to be really tested. EANM change is...it effects CPU. Thus fittings have to be reworked. Alot. But if they take and put sig radius limit on nosfs, well, you wont slap Small nosfs on BS, will you? and btw, next time, quote the whole post, I explained it above. ---
Valandril Caldari Resurrection R i s e	Posted - 2007.06.17 15:22:00 - [7] Edited by: Valandril on 17/06/2007 15:20:46 Originally by: n0thing Originally by: Aleranie "I think thats right thing to do, " You seriously think refusing to disclose game mechanics changes to prevent public discussion of them is a good thing? Yeah, its right thing to put it out closer to release, because till they test it out and maybe make tons of alterings the forums will lag down from the 20 page threads that will be created separately in all forum sections. Moreover, a nosf change is something that doesnt need to be really tested. EANM change is...it effects CPU. Thus fittings have to be reworked. Alot. But if they take and put sig radius limit on nosfs, well, you wont slap Small nosfs on BS, will you? and btw, next time, quote the whole post, I explained it above. U wont fit small nos because it won't work versus interceptor orbiting u at 20k and slowly pouding when ur totaly defenseless. /me polish his crow ---
n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.06.17 15:32:00 - [8] Edited by: n0thing on 17/06/2007 15:31:39 Originally by: Valandril Edited by: Valandril on 17/06/2007 15:20:46 Originally by: n0thing Originally by: Aleranie "I think thats right thing to do, " You seriously think refusing to disclose game mechanics changes to prevent public discussion of them is a good thing? Yeah, its right thing to put it out closer to release, because till they test it out and maybe make tons of alterings the forums will lag down from the 20 page threads that will be created separately in all forum sections. Moreover, a nosf change is something that doesnt need to be really tested. EANM change is...it effects CPU. Thus fittings have to be reworked. Alot. But if they take and put sig radius limit on nosfs, well, you wont slap Small nosfs on BS, will you? and btw, next time, quote the whole post, I explained it above. U wont fit small nos because it won't work versus interceptor orbiting u at 20k and slowly pouding when ur totaly defenseless. /me polish his crow Well, I certainly hope the proposed change wont make it so Crow can solo BSes. Nosf imo should take cap and shut down only offensive modules. While defence mods have the cap-protection of some sort. If you gank, you dont get affected since you kick nosf in for maybe few cycles. If you tank, your nosf wont dry up the ships defence mods so it can still try and take you down. ---
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.17 16:17:00 - [9] No matter what happens to NOS crow won't be able to solo a BS unless he's asleep or mentally deficient. 3 Standard launchers = weak DPS.
n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.06.17 16:23:00 - [10] Originally by: Incantare No matter what happens to NOS crow won't be able to solo a BS unless he's asleep or mentally deficient. 3 Standard launchers = weak DPS. It can still hold it down for hour while waiting for other Crows to come, and then shaaare ---

Kianwan Caldari The Patriot Society Giant Space Amoeba	Posted - 2007.06.17 18:37:00 - [11] Since when would a single small nos be able to bleed a BS cap dry?
SauronTheMage Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.17 18:54:00 - [12] Edited by: SauronTheMage on 17/06/2007 18:54:04 Gees. Nos does not need a nerf. People just need to figure out how to deal with it (counter it). Everyone needs to stop thinking about solo pwnage for once and look at it from a gang standpoint. Eve is not about 1-on-1 solopwnmobiles. If your target is running large nos and you are not able to keep far enough out to avoid it & warp jam, then either mount a damp or get a buddy to bring in a damp ship. Hell maybe get a damp ship and an ecm ship to be on the safe side. Don't have someone who wants to run a damp ship or ecm ship, then what about someone who is able to run the propulsion gandmods to boost your warp jamming range from like 20km to 27km+ for T1, and 24km to 32km for T2. There are options, learn to use them.
Drazin DawnTreader The Elear	Posted - 2007.06.17 19:27:00 - [13] Originally by: SauronTheMage Edited by: SauronTheMage on 17/06/2007 18:54:04 Gees. Nos does not need a nerf. People just need to figure out how to deal with it (counter it). Everyone needs to stop thinking about solo pwnage for once and look at it from a gang standpoint. Eve is not about 1-on-1 solopwnmobiles. If your target is running large nos and you are not able to keep far enough out to avoid it & warp jam, then either mount a damp or get a buddy to bring in a damp ship. Hell maybe get a damp ship and an ecm ship to be on the safe side. Don't have someone who wants to run a damp ship or ecm ship, then what about someone who is able to run the propulsion gandmods to boost your warp jamming range from like 20km to 27km+ for T1, and 24km to 32km for T2. There are options, learn to use them. Well, there is a much better option... Passive shield tanking. But CCP looks keen on 'fixing' that too.
annab Amarr FireStar Inc FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.17 19:48:00 - [14] Edited by: annab on 17/06/2007 19:51:23 Originally by: Aleranie Edited by: Aleranie on 17/06/2007 11:39:59 Edited by: Aleranie on 17/06/2007 10:58:19 Edited by: Aleranie on 17/06/2007 10:58:07 "How? The Undead prefer to keep their secrets." You have no idea how much this **es me off. How is this anything less than contemptible? It is either a joke in poor taste, or it is implementing a nerf, but refusing to discuss it.. because they do not want to deal with a controversy. Edit: in case that was not clear, I would very much like to test whatever "change" has been made. However, since no notion of whats changed is available it is impossible to even test that it was coded correctly. And the patch is supposed to go live tuesday. edit: not sure why it had null title. The notes are in the ships section of the patch notes. They just didn't want to repeat what was down already. From the patch notes. Quote:** Small Energy Neutralizer II range changed to 6000m. Medium Energy neutralizer cap need and energy destabilization amount increased to 180. Range increased to 12600m. Heavy Energy Neutralizer II range decreased to 25200 meters. Small Nosferatu II drain amount decreased to 9.6 and range decreased to 5500 meters. Small meta and t2 nosferatu's also get a range bonus now, like the medium and heavy ones
SauronTheMage Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:15:00 - [15] Originally by: Drazin DawnTreader Originally by: SauronTheMage Edited by: SauronTheMage on 17/06/2007 18:54:04 Gees. Nos does not need a nerf. People just need to figure out how to deal with it (counter it). Everyone needs to stop thinking about solo pwnage for once and look at it from a gang standpoint. Eve is not about 1-on-1 solopwnmobiles. If your target is running large nos and you are not able to keep far enough out to avoid it & warp jam, then either mount a damp or get a buddy to bring in a damp ship. Hell maybe get a damp ship and an ecm ship to be on the safe side. Don't have someone who wants to run a damp ship or ecm ship, then what about someone who is able to run the propulsion gandmods to boost your warp jamming range from like 20km to 27km+ for T1, and 24km to 32km for T2. There are options, learn to use them. Well, there is a much better option... Passive shield tanking. But CCP looks keen on 'fixing' that too. Only problem with that is you can't effectively passive tank an interceptor. If you ran a drake or something yeah, but who wants to waste a tank slot for warp jamming. Another thing is setting up a passive tank means extremely slow cap regen. Once the nos kills your cap, you no longer can warp jam someone. So, again my points are most valid :)
Drazin DawnTreader The Elear	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:28:00 - [16] yes, your points are valid. Though you do understand you are talking about bringing in additional ships just to counter 1 module? Atleast Drakes used 12-13 modules in order to force someone to bring a friend. And as for Interceptors which I have been known to fly here and there, Just your own small NoS and strong passive cap regen is enough to keep your jammer running while under heavy NoS fire. Of course you wont be able to run your ab/mwd or repair any damage since you are living on 8-12 cap every few seconds. Heavy NoS really does screw over frigates no matter how you paint it. It needs adjusting. I hope it doesn't get over-adjusted, but it does need to be brought more inline with other modules characteristics. Like what been mentioned a hundred times, treat them like Turrets with tracking penalties / Stacking nerf / Sig radius effectivness... Lots of ideas out there. I think the sig radius one will work best though.
SauronTheMage Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.17 21:08:00 - [17] Edited by: SauronTheMage on 17/06/2007 21:07:25 Originally by: Drazin DawnTreader yes, your points are valid. Though you do understand you are talking about bringing in additional ships just to counter 1 module? Atleast Drakes used 12-13 modules in order to force someone to bring a friend. And as for Interceptors which I have been known to fly here and there, Just your own small NoS and strong passive cap regen is enough to keep your jammer running while under heavy NoS fire. Of course you wont be able to run your ab/mwd or repair any damage since you are living on 8-12 cap every few seconds. Heavy NoS really does screw over frigates no matter how you paint it. It needs adjusting. I hope it doesn't get over-adjusted, but it does need to be brought more inline with other modules characteristics. Like what been mentioned a hundred times, treat them like Turrets with tracking penalties / Stacking nerf / Sig radius effectivness... Lots of ideas out there. I think the sig radius one will work best though. That's just it though, they are not turrets. Also I mentioned this isn't about 1-on-1 pwnmobiles. I haven't bothered reading the threads on this, but I will guess that the sig radius has to deal with sucking less cap per sec on smaller ships (thus making a large suck cap like a small nos when used on a frig etc). Logically this doesn't work, if ccp plans on keeping some form of logic / physics in this game in regards to these modules. If you get a large energy beam on an object, it will suck the same amount of cap no matter how big the actual signature radius is. The only thing that you can really look at would be tracking. Again though, with an energy weapon either it has a lock or it does not have a lock. A way the tracking feature could be played is that if the target is moving at X transversal, then the nos module won't activate because it is not able to track the ship fast enough. If the ship is moving below X transversal then the nosf activates pulling it's standard cap rate. Once the target ship is able to speed up past X speed again, then the nosf module would deactivate after its current cycle as it is not able to properly track the target anymore. This way if someone is running tracking disrupters on the nos ship, the X transversal needed to avoid nosf would drop accordingly. Of course if the nos ship runs a web on you to bring you under that trasversal rate the nosf will be able to activate. This would seem to be the most logical way to adjust nosf / neut modules.
n0thing omen.	Posted - 2007.06.17 21:32:00 - [18] Problem is simple, a nosf ship automatically needs 2 ships to take it down, unless your in perma-jam Scorp. Moreover, a nosf on bigger ships vs smaller ganks ships makes the latter ones obsolete. Example? Deimos. ---
SauronTheMage Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.17 21:41:00 - [19] Originally by: n0thing Problem is simple, a nosf ship automatically needs 2 ships to take it down, unless your in perma-jam Scorp. People are not supposed to be able to wtfpwn every ship 1-on-1 though. Sure a nos ship can take out most other ships if they allow their cap to get brought to 0%, but then you have the passive tankers / cap injector ships that can last longer. Ideally you should have at least 1 person with you to help attack / hunt targets. If you want to chance picking fights without someone to assist you then you have to deal with the consequences. Quote: Moreover, a nosf on bigger ships vs smaller ganks ships makes the latter ones obsolete. Example? Deimos. It all comes to the setups you use and the gang support you have with you. Bring in some Ewar / logistic support and there you go. Ewar to penalize the target, and logistic support to provide extra cap. Again, it's all about the setups, the support, and how effective you are at utilizing it.
MotherMoon	Posted - 2007.06.18 00:52:00 - [20] Originally by: Drazin DawnTreader Originally by: SauronTheMage Edited by: SauronTheMage on 17/06/2007 18:54:04 Gees. Nos does not need a nerf. People just need to figure out how to deal with it (counter it). Everyone needs to stop thinking about solo pwnage for once and look at it from a gang standpoint. Eve is not about 1-on-1 solopwnmobiles. If your target is running large nos and you are not able to keep far enough out to avoid it & warp jam, then either mount a damp or get a buddy to bring in a damp ship. Hell maybe get a damp ship and an ecm ship to be on the safe side. Don't have someone who wants to run a damp ship or ecm ship, then what about someone who is able to run the propulsion gandmods to boost your warp jamming range from like 20km to 27km+ for T1, and 24km to 32km for T2. There are options, learn to use them. Well, there is a much better option... Passive shield tanking. But CCP looks keen on 'fixing' that too. will you shut up allready?? they have the same recharge rate as cruisers this was never suppose to be I did some numbers BC's not just the drake allready had 3 free power shield relays on which is wrong lol and they are not nerfed I do fine and a battleship passive tanks kicks a BC's passive pernerf anyways

MotherMoon	Posted - 2007.06.18 00:55:00 - [21] Originally by: SauronTheMage Originally by: n0thing Problem is simple, a nosf ship automatically needs 2 ships to take it down, unless your in perma-jam Scorp. People are not supposed to be able to wtfpwn every ship 1-on-1 though. Sure a nos ship can take out most other ships if they allow their cap to get brought to 0%, but then you have the passive tankers / cap injector ships that can last longer. Ideally you should have at least 1 person with you to help attack / hunt targets. If you want to chance picking fights without someone to assist you then you have to deal with the consequences. Quote: Moreover, a nosf on bigger ships vs smaller ganks ships makes the latter ones obsolete. Example? Deimos. It all comes to the setups you use and the gang support you have with you. Bring in some Ewar / logistic support and there you go. Ewar to penalize the target, and logistic support to provide extra cap. Again, it's all about the setups, the support, and how effective you are at utilizing it.[/quote} very tyrue but ersoanlly I don't think nos or not a small ship couldn't solo a big ship I think nos is/ was the answer to BS small ship problems I believe closers lvls it should be possible but it is BC's and kill BS Frigs can kill Destoryes it all depends on your set ups :)
Drazin DawnTreader The Elear	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:12:00 - [22] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Drazin DawnTreader Originally by: SauronTheMage Edited by: SauronTheMage on 17/06/2007 18:54:04 Gees. Nos does not need a nerf. People just need to figure out how to deal with it (counter it). Everyone needs to stop thinking about solo pwnage for once and look at it from a gang standpoint. Eve is not about 1-on-1 solopwnmobiles. If your target is running large nos and you are not able to keep far enough out to avoid it & warp jam, then either mount a damp or get a buddy to bring in a damp ship. Hell maybe get a damp ship and an ecm ship to be on the safe side. Don't have someone who wants to run a damp ship or ecm ship, then what about someone who is able to run the propulsion gandmods to boost your warp jamming range from like 20km to 27km+ for T1, and 24km to 32km for T2. There are options, learn to use them. Well, there is a much better option... Passive shield tanking. But CCP looks keen on 'fixing' that too. will you shut up allready?? they have the same recharge rate as cruisers this was never suppose to be I did some numbers BC's not just the drake allready had 3 free power shield relays on which is wrong lol and they are not nerfed I do fine and a battleship passive tanks kicks a BC's passive pernerf anyways Who is talking about the Drake? It is relatively untouched in the upcoming changes. Just because someone says "Passive Tank" Doesn't mean they are talking about the Drake. Just so happens there are alot of ships that make very good Passive shield tankers and happen to be smaller than a Drake. And your math is off. The increase to BC's shield recharge was roughly 11% which is less than half of one SPR II. Like it matters, but if you are going to spout off like that, atleast do it with the proper intel. 11% of 1400 = 1246 (Recharge increase) 24% of 1400 = 1064 (1x T2 SPR) The ships that got hosed are ships that can no longer fit SPR's at all. Like any Frigate sized ship. Which I think is very important, since Frigates are much more vulnerable to the NoS of larger ships. Being Cap-free was one way to keep a frigate in the fight.
MotherMoon	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:27:00 - [23] sry I didn't do the numbers I lied :P oh your not talking about the drake your talking about passive armor tanking?
James Duar Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:29:00 - [24] The problem with any nosferatu "fix" which essentially gimps the heavy nos against smaller ships is that the first thing that happens is HACs start being able to solo every battleship out there unless it's completely undergunned and fitting tracking mods.
Drazin DawnTreader The Elear	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:37:00 - [25] Originally by: MotherMoon sry I didn't do the numbers I lied :P oh your not talking about the drake your talking about passive armor tanking? No, Passive SHield tanking is what I was talking about. Just not specifically the Drake or Myrm. Though I can fly those ships quite well, I much prefer Frigates like the Jaguar and Ishkur, or Interceptors. The changes to SPR CPU needs are pretty harsh on frigate sized ships. Even though I don't recall anyone ever whining about Frigate passive tanks being Overpowered. Drakes and Myrms got the Dev's Attention, Frigates got the nerf.
Draahk Chimera Interstellar eXodus R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:41:00 - [26] Originally by: James Duar The problem with any nosferatu "fix" which essentially gimps the heavy nos against smaller ships is that the first thing that happens is HACs start being able to solo every battleship out there unless it's completely undergunned and fitting tracking mods. Agreed, but how do you fix the other end of the problem? 5-man gate camp with 2 ceptors, nosdomi jump in, "slurp" no cap to scram, nosdomi warps off laughing. The absolute minimum you need to kill a certain gallante tier 1 bs is 2 short range bs with a point each.
William Hamilton Caldari THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:46:00 - [27] Originally by: James Duar The problem with any nosferatu "fix" which essentially gimps the heavy nos against smaller ships is that the first thing that happens is HACs start being able to solo every battleship out there unless it's completely undergunned and fitting tracking mods. Use neutralisers.
Drazin DawnTreader The Elear	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:48:00 - [28] Originally by: Draahk Chimera Originally by: James Duar The problem with any nosferatu "fix" which essentially gimps the heavy nos against smaller ships is that the first thing that happens is HACs start being able to solo every battleship out there unless it's completely undergunned and fitting tracking mods. Agreed, but how do you fix the other end of the problem? 5-man gate camp with 2 ceptors, nosdomi jump in, "slurp" no cap to scram, nosdomi warps off laughing. The absolute minimum you need to kill a certain gallante tier 1 bs is 2 short range bs with a point each. Honestly, I think the Sig-radius NoS fix is the most fair. It still allows big ships to NoS each other into oblivion, and gives smaller ships a longer life expectancy. Depending on how they do any changes, I think a Heavy NoS will drain a Cruiser sized ship for more energy than a Medium NoS would, And some Shield tanked ships with very large signatures (like a drake at 400+) would get hammered by a heavy NoS just like before. However they do go about adjusting Nosferatu's its going to be tricky and something will come out on top and need to be looked at later.
Aleranie	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:53:00 - [29] I don't particularly care how they fix it. Its a little overpowered, and I dont have any problem with them fixing it. If "undead keep their secrets" is just a joke they posted before they got around to posting the changes to nos below, thats one thing. They should be a little more clear on that when they got around to putting the changes in the notes. If it refers to some still secret mechanics change, its only a very short step away from an outright stealth-nerf.
SauronTheMage Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.18 02:03:00 - [30] Originally by: Draahk Chimera Originally by: James Duar The problem with any nosferatu "fix" which essentially gimps the heavy nos against smaller ships is that the first thing that happens is HACs start being able to solo every battleship out there unless it's completely undergunned and fitting tracking mods. Agreed, but how do you fix the other end of the problem? 5-man gate camp with 2 ceptors, nosdomi jump in, "slurp" no cap to scram, nosdomi warps off laughing. The absolute minimum you need to kill a certain gallante tier 1 bs is 2 short range bs with a point each. My idea that I posted earlier about transversal in this thread would seem to be the most logical solution, while keep some form of reality to the game.



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

An Error Occured

Invalid use of Null

The Error has been logged and will be further investigated shortly.

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.