| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
   |
Posted - 2007.08.04 15:54:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/08/2007 15:57:32
 Originally by: Aramendel
Edited by: Aramendel on 04/08/2007 13:59:15
Originally by: Shadowsword
The Nano-Curse won't be a solopwn machine anymore, but a standard Curse will remain a superb EW/general support platform, to have around in small gangs or fleets
Small (like less than 5 people total small), yes. And it won't be more useful than the other recons there.
Ding!
Correct, the curse is now balanced with the other recons. Change ++. In larger actions, wow, you might need to use it in a different role to that which is is currently employed.
//Maya |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2007.08.04 16:04:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/08/2007 16:05:13
"Higher solo performance balanced worse group performance."
That's not balance, it's a specalisation. Big difference. Anyway, the Curse is deverstating in groups when properly combined with other ships, and it's going to remain so.
You have BOTH midslots and highslots. You may wish to consider this. That before your highslots and drones did everything..yea.
//Maya |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2007.08.04 16:33:00 -
[3]
You're arguing that a ship can destroy any frigate in 1 second but cannot harm cruisers and battleships is balanced? Again, that's specalisation and not balance.
"targets die before they run out of cap"
Heh. And here we start to hit the issue. This is somewhat true. So in that situation, why are you killing the cap of the fire target? Kill the cap of the enemy frigates, swipe the cap of that supporting HAC. You can lock multiple ships, ffs.
You're saying "I can only think of one tactic". Well, tough. Just becsuse you can't be creative dosn't mean I have your limits.
//Maya |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2007.08.04 19:50:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Aramendel
Edited by: Aramendel on 04/08/2007 17:33:17
Originally by: Maya Rkell
You're arguing that a ship can destroy any frigate in 1 second but cannot harm cruisers and battleships is balanced? Again, that's specalisation and not balance.
A hugin can get nearly the same tank and dps as a vagabond. If you think it can only really kill frigates you either have no experience with that ship or are flat out lying.
Did I say Hugin? No, I did not. I was talking about a hypothetical ship. Try again.
Quote:
The point you miss is that other recons can do that *better*. A huginn will disable frigs faster. A rook can permajam HACs and frigs with one module.
But the rook won't make them vulnrable to fire when they're next on the target list. The Rook won't also damp another enemy, the Rook is vulnrable to failure on its jammers, the Rook dosn't have the same drone ability, etc.
Quote:
No. I am saying that I can think of NO use for the curse in something in med and bigger gangs
Your loss then, I can.
Quote:
What previously made up for this disadvantage was its advantage for soloing.
Repeating over and specalist==balance won't help. It's not.
//Maya |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2007.08.04 20:22:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Fager
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Quote:
No. I am saying that I can think of NO use for the curse in something in med and bigger gangs
Your loss then, I can.
please tell us more about this statement, im sure many of use reading from both those who hate the new curse and those who like would want the hear what pros you are talkinga about here.
Im sure thats the kind of stuff CCP want to read to, to decide weather the Curse needs to be adjusted.
I allready have. Nos the next target in line. For many ships that'll affect their firing ability, and when the primary target is dead the secondary will go quickly too. In the meantime the Curse has moved on again... (oh, and use a single neut to swat those pesky frig's cap...)
//Maya |
Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
|
Posted - 2007.08.04 20:27:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Did I say Hugin? No, I did not. I was talking about a hypothetical ship. Try again.
Exept we are not talking about "hypothetical ships" we are talking about existing ships.
Right. Dodge, twist, turn, don't answer my question. Amusing.
Quote:
But the rook won't make them vulnrable to fire when they're next on the target list. The Rook won't also damp another enemy, the Rook is vulnrable to failure on its jammers, the Rook dosn't have the same drone ability, etc.
Your first sentence makes no sense.
Makes perfect sense. A jammed target loses no ability to use modules. A cap-drained target does.
You're still trying to brush off a question which you fundermentally cannot answer in terms favourable to you. There is a difference between balance issues in a fight and specalised ships. For example, the covert ops ship is specalised. It also happens not to be able to fight more generally. The curse was specalised as a solo killer, and it could fight more generally. It's now been placed on the same level as other ships, that a ship with general fighting abilities does not also have a specalisation in which it cannot ever be matched.
//Maya |
| |
|