| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Gabriel Karade
Quam Singulari
M. PIRE
   |
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:32:00 -
[541]
 Originally by: gogeta23
ccp what are you doing. STOP THE NERFING the nos is fine the way it is, it's not too powerful just because everyone can use this mod. You are effectively ruining any ship that requires cap to repair, this is a sad day for all armor tanks, please do not nerf the nos, I fly a Myrmidon, I love my Myrmidon, I get killed lot in my Myrmidon, but I might as well stop playing if I do not have nos the way it is now. Maybe I should have been Caldari 
Maybe you should try fitting some guns to your Myrmidon
----------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Almarez
Setenta Corp
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:32:00 -
[542]
So what is to keep the non-cap dependent ships (i.e. Minmitar) from fitting a neut or two and bringing the Amarr ship down and the Amarr ship can not NOS because the Minmitar ship has a lower cap and the Amarr ship still dies because the Minmitar ship can get cap all the way down and still shoot and now the Amarr cap is down and the cap runs out completely because lasers suck up the rest.
New outpost-30 bil isk, Items to save up for cap ships-700 mil isk, Going to bed early now that you don't have to work for that and realizing how much poontang you were missing-PRICELESS |
egal069
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:32:00 -
[543]
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: egal069
(that's my reply) now anyone know what's up with sisi, they redoing the patchs now or something, i thought it was supposed to be
This may be a stupid proposal but: you did remember to install a fresh client for Sisi didn't you?
I'm at work so I have no way to check if it actually working right now or not.
Oh, i'll have to go find that link again, i could of sworn it said to patch off the current live version, and than download a second patch and update both manually, as the automatic one was not working right.
|
Gabriel Karade
Quam Singulari
M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:34:00 -
[544]
Originally by: Rennard
It is also unlogical for the fictional science of the game. How will you explain it by physics means? How come you come up with a good science description for NOS module?
Don't even try bringing physics into this, especially with the 'explosive damage' 'thermal damage' 'kinetic damage' and 'EM damage' nonsense...
----------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Hamcraft
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:34:00 -
[545]
Edited by: Hamcraft on 31/07/2007 15:41:29
Edited by: Hamcraft on 31/07/2007 15:37:42
Okay, no comment on the nos stuff. but for all of you Amarrians who are complaining about heavy assaults, I am here to try and brighten your day, well more specifically for the Sacrilege.
I fly Drakes with HAMs all the time, and I get oodles of kills. When Caldari get damage bonuses it is usually only to kinetic damage. Half the time, kinetic is not the damage type to use. In missile combat, you compensate for the lower overall DPS of missiles with the flexibility of choosing your own damage types. With my HAM Drake setup, I can and have done nothing but MURDER to all longer range Drake setups, because I am able to get in close and out-damage them using the correct damage type.
I have to sacrifice my tank down to three midslots because of tackling. Powergrid is also a big problem for passive tank HAM Caldari pilots (2/4 of my lows have to be RCU's). Finally, the fact that I get 25% extra damage to only my Terror missiles screws with the split-second decision-making I have to make as to which missiles I am going to use before I engage. If I choose the wrong damage type, I die, and often times I have chosen fulmination when it turned out that just keeping the Terrors would've brought more damage, or vice-versa.
With the new Sacrilege, you are looking at a ship that does slightly more damage than the Cerberus in kinetic (becuase you have a drone bay), and oodles more damage in every other damage type. A ship built with the powergrid for HAMs. And a heavy armor tank with 4 free midslots, where you have ample fitting for tackling, ewar and perhaps a cap injector. You have the agility and speed of a cruiser. You don't need range, you can go in and out-tank the enemy while taking full advantage of their resistance gap, whatever it may be.
What I am trying to do here is show you the beauty of the new Sacrilege. Yes, you have to get in close, that means no pansy nano plus ewar setups. Who cares? It's easy to get in close. Yes, here I am solo PVPing in a Caldari battlecruiser with no cap injector and I am saying it is easy to get in close for the HAMS. Just remember to fit a 90% webber. You have the ability with this new sacrilege to out tank the enemy and use heavy assault missiles to their complete and full advantage.
I am seriously considering training for a Sacrilege for when these changes come out. Missile combat is all about damage types--I would rather have a bonus to just heavy assaults in general than restricting to a single damage type for all missiles. Heavy Assault Missiles are the bomb, you just have to fly smart and give them a chance. Besides, getting down and dirty, up-close and personal is, imho, the most intense and thus genuinely fun way to PVP.
|
Mr Breakfast
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:35:00 -
[546]
Originally by: Haradgrim
I still don't see how people are thinking this is that huge of a nerf to Nos, any ship that used it before to sustain cap is still going to be able to Nos the other ship to zero, you just won't be able to outpace it (which you should be using neuts for anyhow.
Anyone? Am I missing somehting?
If your cap is going up from NOS and the target's cap is going down, you would reach a point of equilibrium where the two caps are equal and NOS stops working. At that point you can shut off NOS and kill them while their guns/tank drain the rest of their cap.
This doesn't apply in close fights where both players are using NOS and their cap is neck-and-neck. I'm not sure how that kind of battle would work out, but we'll see after the patch is released.
|
RossP Zoyka
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:36:00 -
[547]
Nos was like the flipping perfect storm or something and now is strictly defensive and not "a perfect module". That's good.
Neuts are offensive and have a pretty cool role. Also Good.
Khanid ships are very clearly defined and the Sacrilage is one insane murderous HAC now. Also Good.
I am happy. A lot of people are whining that their stuff is broken, my stuff however has been boosted. Excellent 
|
Ace Frehley
Minmatar
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:38:00 -
[548]
Edited by: Ace Frehley on 31/07/2007 15:38:38
IF WE WHO FLIES AMARR GETS ROCKET BONUS I DEMAND THAT GALLENTE ONLY GETS BLASTERBONUS, CALDARI RAILBONUS AND US MINMATAR AC OR HOWIZTER BONUSES ON SOME OF THEIR SHIPS!! CanŠt just make some ships fitting to obvius... Drop the crap you smokin,
Fix the damnation bonus to some usefull all launcherbonuses, the other ships i dont care about, keepin anyway out of webrange and just tackle, the shortrange weapons wont reach anyway so =P
Btw, how will the damntaion dronebay be? We need some sort of longrange defence like the gallente shortranged blaster/nos droneships who just spit out drones to get longer range...
|
Mr Breakfast
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:38:00 -
[549]
Originally by: RossP Zoyka
Nos was like the flipping perfect storm or something and now is strictly defensive and not "a perfect module". That's good.
Neuts are offensive and have a pretty cool role. Also Good.
Khanid ships are very clearly defined and the Sacrilage is one insane murderous HAC now. Also Good.
I am happy. A lot of people are whining that their stuff is broken, my stuff however has been boosted. Excellent
Everyone's stuff has been boosted except cookie cutter NOSdomi pilots. Even if you're a Khanid or Curse pilot who disagrees with the changes, presumably you can fly other Amarr ships that are de facto boosted by the NOS nerf.
|
RossP Zoyka
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:40:00 -
[550]
Originally by: Almarez
So what is to keep the non-cap dependent ships (i.e. Minmitar) from fitting a neut or two and bringing the Amarr ship down and the Amarr ship can not NOS because the Minmitar ship has a lower cap and the Amarr ship still dies because the Minmitar ship can get cap all the way down and still shoot and now the Amarr cap is down and the cap runs out completely because lasers suck up the rest.
Fly a Sacrilage
|
|
|
Santa Anna
Caldari
Blackguard Brigade
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:40:00 -
[551]
Quote:
TDs are only half of it's bonus. Has a rapier only a painter bonus? Has the arazu only a dampener bonus?
No, though IMO the Arazu's damp bonus is more important in gangs than its scram bonus. Both are useful, but if I had to pick I'd choose the damp bonus.
TP's are nearly useless without web as almost anything small enough to not get full damage from size for a missile goes fast enough to not get full damage when unwebbed. Without the web bonus there'd be little reason to fly the Rapier.
Quote:
And I think you are wildely *over*estimating the efficiency of TDs. Have you hever used them? I did. They work okayish vs large guns, but if you think they will stop a medium AC or blaster ships from hitting you you are in for a rude awakening.
You can run the numbers yourself. 1 well-skilled TD will give 220 or 425 AC's big trouble with tracking and Barrage and make Hail even more useless. Very few pilots adapt to TD's so they just stop hitting. Those that do are adapt are much easier targets and you can generally beat their tracking by moving yourself. TD'd blasters with Null or Void have similar problems.
If you have only 1 extra mid slot, TD is always the best thing to pack. 2 or more mid + rig is damp. 3 or more mid, 2 low then ECM. I cheat a bit and use racial ecm with only 1 distortion amp on some setups when I know my opponent before I undock.
_____
CPU Love |
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:42:00 -
[552]
Originally by: Almarez
So what is to keep the non-cap dependent ships (i.e. Minmitar) from fitting a neut or two and bringing the Amarr ship down and the Amarr ship can not NOS because the Minmitar ship has a lower cap and the Amarr ship still dies because the Minmitar ship can get cap all the way down and still shoot and now the Amarr cap is down and the cap runs out completely because lasers suck up the rest.
There are several ways around this, but I'm not going to tell you what they are. 
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori. |
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:42:00 -
[553]
Originally by: Almarez
So what is to keep the non-cap dependent ships (i.e. Minmitar) from fitting a neut or two and bringing the Amarr ship down and the Amarr ship can not NOS because the Minmitar ship has a lower cap and the Amarr ship still dies because the Minmitar ship can get cap all the way down and still shoot and now the Amarr cap is down and the cap runs out completely because lasers suck up the rest.
So how exactly does a non-cap dependant ship using only neuts have a lower cap percentage than an Amarr ship that is beeing neuted and using cap for its lasers as well?!??!
In that kind of situation the nos on the Amarr ship would help it keep its cap long enough for its weapons to finish of the Minnie ship (hoppefully).
But since this is all baselless speculation, neither of us will ever trully know... 
|
Almarez
Setenta Corp
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:49:00 -
[554]
Originally by: Mr Breakfast
Originally by: Haradgrim
I still don't see how people are thinking this is that huge of a nerf to Nos, any ship that used it before to sustain cap is still going to be able to Nos the other ship to zero, you just won't be able to outpace it (which you should be using neuts for anyhow.
Anyone? Am I missing somehting?
If your cap is going up from NOS and the target's cap is going down, you would reach a point of equilibrium where the two caps are equal and NOS stops working. At that point you can shut off NOS and kill them while their guns/tank drain the rest of their cap.
This doesn't apply in close fights where both players are using NOS and their cap is neck-and-neck. I'm not sure how that kind of battle would work out, but we'll see after the patch is released.
Also doesn' apply to Amarr ships fighting non-cap depedent ships as the Amarr ship will now lose every time.
New outpost-30 bil isk, Items to save up for cap ships-700 mil isk, Going to bed early now that you don't have to work for that and realizing how much poontang you were missing-PRICELESS |
Almarez
Setenta Corp
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:50:00 -
[555]
Originally by: RossP Zoyka
Originally by: Almarez
So what is to keep the non-cap dependent ships (i.e. Minmitar) from fitting a neut or two and bringing the Amarr ship down and the Amarr ship can not NOS because the Minmitar ship has a lower cap and the Amarr ship still dies because the Minmitar ship can get cap all the way down and still shoot and now the Amarr cap is down and the cap runs out completely because lasers suck up the rest.
Fly a Sacrilage
Some of us like having more than one option.
New outpost-30 bil isk, Items to save up for cap ships-700 mil isk, Going to bed early now that you don't have to work for that and realizing how much poontang you were missing-PRICELESS |
Almarez
Setenta Corp
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:52:00 -
[556]
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Almarez
So what is to keep the non-cap dependent ships (i.e. Minmitar) from fitting a neut or two and bringing the Amarr ship down and the Amarr ship can not NOS because the Minmitar ship has a lower cap and the Amarr ship still dies because the Minmitar ship can get cap all the way down and still shoot and now the Amarr cap is down and the cap runs out completely because lasers suck up the rest.
So how exactly does a non-cap dependant ship using only neuts have a lower cap percentage than an Amarr ship that is beeing neuted and using cap for its lasers as well?!??!
In that kind of situation the nos on the Amarr ship would help it keep its cap long enough for its weapons to finish of the Minnie ship (hoppefully).
But since this is all baselless speculation, neither of us will ever trully know...
Lasers my friend, lasers.
New outpost-30 bil isk, Items to save up for cap ships-700 mil isk, Going to bed early now that you don't have to work for that and realizing how much poontang you were missing-PRICELESS |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
New Eve Order
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:53:00 -
[557]
still no comment from the dev department i see.
The Beginning <-- crap quality, need to redo, sorry :( |
egal069
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:53:00 -
[558]
I followed the directions, applied the patch 35183-35248 and than applied the patch 35248-35366 and have been receving the message "unable to connect to 87.237.38.200 on port 2600" for around three hours now, can anyone help me out here, point me in the right direction at least, even just simply tell me if the test server is actually up and what the current version may be.
Cheers
|
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:54:00 -
[559]
Originally by: Almarez
Originally by: Mr Breakfast
Originally by: Haradgrim
I still don't see how people are thinking this is that huge of a nerf to Nos, any ship that used it before to sustain cap is still going to be able to Nos the other ship to zero, you just won't be able to outpace it (which you should be using neuts for anyhow.
Anyone? Am I missing somehting?
If your cap is going up from NOS and the target's cap is going down, you would reach a point of equilibrium where the two caps are equal and NOS stops working. At that point you can shut off NOS and kill them while their guns/tank drain the rest of their cap.
This doesn't apply in close fights where both players are using NOS and their cap is neck-and-neck. I'm not sure how that kind of battle would work out, but we'll see after the patch is released.
Also doesn' apply to Amarr ships fighting non-cap depedent ships as the Amarr ship will now lose every time.
O'RLY?!? Give me a specific ship with a specific non-cap dependant fit to corroborate your assumptions and we can take it from there...
|
Mr Breakfast
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:58:00 -
[560]
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Almarez
Originally by: Mr Breakfast
Originally by: Haradgrim
I still don't see how people are thinking this is that huge of a nerf to Nos, any ship that used it before to sustain cap is still going to be able to Nos the other ship to zero, you just won't be able to outpace it (which you should be using neuts for anyhow.
Anyone? Am I missing somehting?
If your cap is going up from NOS and the target's cap is going down, you would reach a point of equilibrium where the two caps are equal and NOS stops working. At that point you can shut off NOS and kill them while their guns/tank drain the rest of their cap.
This doesn't apply in close fights where both players are using NOS and their cap is neck-and-neck. I'm not sure how that kind of battle would work out, but we'll see after the patch is released.
Also doesn' apply to Amarr ships fighting non-cap depedent ships as the Amarr ship will now lose every time.
O'RLY?!? Give me a specific ship with a specific non-cap dependant fit to corroborate your assumptions and we can take it from there...
The only real non cap dependent ships are passive tanked shielders, which weren't affected by NOS anyway.
|
|
|
RossP Zoyka
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 15:58:00 -
[561]
Originally by: PhantomVyper
Originally by: Almarez
Originally by: Mr Breakfast
Originally by: Haradgrim
I still don't see how people are thinking this is that huge of a nerf to Nos, any ship that used it before to sustain cap is still going to be able to Nos the other ship to zero, you just won't be able to outpace it (which you should be using neuts for anyhow.
Anyone? Am I missing somehting?
If your cap is going up from NOS and the target's cap is going down, you would reach a point of equilibrium where the two caps are equal and NOS stops working. At that point you can shut off NOS and kill them while their guns/tank drain the rest of their cap.
This doesn't apply in close fights where both players are using NOS and their cap is neck-and-neck. I'm not sure how that kind of battle would work out, but we'll see after the patch is released.
Also doesn' apply to Amarr ships fighting non-cap depedent ships as the Amarr ship will now lose every time.
How is that different from how Nos was in the past?
|
Shiken Kan
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:00:00 -
[562]
Originally by: Rennard
It is also unlogical for the fictional science of the game. How will you explain it by physics means? How come you come up with a good science description for NOS module?
actually now it would be pretty easy to explain as opposed to before where nos was a freakin perpetuum mobile.
as to the op, i like the new nos, have to see how it works out ig ofc, about the khanid ships i'm a bit unsure. imho the heretic is way too close to the flycatcher with it's rockets boni. malediction and crow are virtually the same ship (actually i think the resist bonus for an interceptor is maybe a bit too much).
the new vengeance could be nice i think, as well as the sacrilege (though i'm not sure if the lowered pg is a good idea considering the fitting requirements of hams). these 2 give amarr a nice possibility to rat in gurrista space for example.
i like the new damnation but am a bit unsure on what the reduced pg will do to it's tank and have absolutely no opinion on the weapon hardpoints or boni of the anathema (or any other covops  )
would have hoped for the black khanid omen tho 
|
egal069
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:03:00 -
[563]
Originally by: egal069
I followed the directions, applied the patch 35183-35248 and than applied the patch 35248-35366 and have been receving the message "unable to connect to 87.237.38.200 on port 2600" for around three hours now, can anyone help me out here, point me in the right direction at least, even just simply tell me if the test server is actually up and what the current version may be.
Cheers
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=566657&page=1
|
Haradgrim
Caldari
The Wild Bunch
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:12:00 -
[564]
Originally by: Mr Breakfast
Originally by: Haradgrim
I still don't see how people are thinking this is that huge of a nerf to Nos, any ship that used it before to sustain cap is still going to be able to Nos the other ship to zero, you just won't be able to outpace it (which you should be using neuts for anyhow.
Anyone? Am I missing somehting?
If your cap is going up from NOS and the target's cap is going down, you would reach a point of equilibrium where the two caps are equal and NOS stops working. At that point you can shut off NOS and kill them while their guns/tank drain the rest of their cap.
This doesn't apply in close fights where both players are using NOS and their cap is neck-and-neck. I'm not sure how that kind of battle would work out, but we'll see after the patch is released.
Since you would still be using cap for guns/tank you would constantly be going below that equilibrium point, dragging your opponents cap down with it.....
The only part of this change that is a nerf that I can see, is that Amarr will have a harder time with passive tank, no-cap guns, ships, although they get a boost to fighting NOS dependant ships.....
-
Haradgrim
[-WB-]
That.which.does.not.bend.breaks |
Alkier
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:13:00 -
[565]
Hi guys
With this nos nerf will this will make the curse and pilgrim a pretty useless ship the curse and pilgrim rely on the target ship having no cap to be used in any PVP but if both ships have 50 % cap and the curse/pilgrim cant drain any more and having to use neutralizers but this will make the curse/pilgrim very vulnerable
|
Tao Han
Caldari
Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:16:00 -
[566]
Dont forget to update the descriptions on the Khanid ships, bragging about strong shields on armor tankers doesnt look good
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Guardians of the Dawn
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:21:00 -
[567]
I will give both thumbs up for the new changes. Congratulations CCP. This time you hit the nail
If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough |
PhantomVyper
Darkness Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:25:00 -
[568]
Originally by: Almarez
Abaddon/Apocalyse/Armageddon vs. Tempest/Typhoon/possibly Raven
I remember asking for a "specific" fit. Just throwing out ship names doesn't prove anything.
But just so you don't acuse me of trolling, I believe that a Raven with a complete passive shield tank would have a hard time fitting heavy neuts and decent missiles to really be a threat to a Geddon / Abaddon.
|
Kadesh Priestess
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:31:00 -
[569]
Personally, i like this idea. Like RL-capacitors :P But ofc with diminishing retirns formula.
However, it may change gameplay alot from the one suggested by devs...
1) For example, this may help swarm of smaller ships to drain capitals.
2) Or, in other words, make small ships with naturally nosf-immune.
3) Balance skills affecting capacitor capacity and cap recharge rate. Currently it's always better to increase max cap 5% more than reduce recharge rate by the same amount (since cap recharge time doesn't change) and all corresponding modules.
Etc...
This won't affect curse so much (when sucking energy from the large ships) while killing in some way nosf-drone ships...
|
eeski
Amarr
kleptomaniacs
|
Posted - 2007.07.31 16:32:00 -
[570]
Amarr race nerfed for a few months now on these's ships till ppl get there skills up
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |