EVE Search - Pilgrim: After Nos Nerf

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Pilgrim: After Nos Nerf

» 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)
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.08.28 15:20:00 - [1] Well Nos nerf went ahead so any ideas on fittings and strategies to make this ship good again?
TheEndofTheWorld	Posted - 2007.08.28 15:23:00 - [2] Autocannos t1 + train minmatar cruiser 5 sorry...
Torothin Amarr Slacker Industries Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.08.28 15:25:00 - [3] Burn your cap as much as possible by running every single active mod you have: mwd, repper etc. Do this all while you have the guy locked down and nosf him to hell and hope for the best. I personally am infuriated with this nerf there are way too many panzies in the eve universe. [url=http://kb.pure-alliance.com/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=37920][/url]
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.08.28 15:30:00 - [4] The smart people out there were already using neutralisers in addition to vampires. Neutralisers are actually quite effective on the Pilgrim. Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
Depp Knight Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.08.28 15:45:00 - [5] Originally by: Rodj Blake The smart people out there were already using neutralisers in addition to vampires. Neutralisers are actually quite effective on the Pilgrim. Yeh they are if you use 1 neut, your two nos would pay for it. This is not the case anymore
TheGoD SaysThaT	Posted - 2007.08.28 15:58:00 - [6] i think pilgrim had been die... my pilgrim cost 150M isk to buy it and fit it , now ,i don't know what it can be...
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.08.28 15:58:00 - [7] Originally by: Depp Knight Originally by: Rodj Blake The smart people out there were already using neutralisers in addition to vampires. Neutralisers are actually quite effective on the Pilgrim. Yeh they are if you use 1 neut, your two nos would pay for it. This is not the case anymore The solution is quite elegant. I'm sure that you or someone in your alliance be able to work out how to do it Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
CreoNeo	Posted - 2007.08.28 18:34:00 - [8] Use neutralizers to get their capacitor down, then use capacitor injectors to get your own cap back up again quickly. Would that work on the pilgrim ?
Dreadpilot Roberts New Balkan Mafia Circle 0f Two	Posted - 2007.08.28 18:48:00 - [9] get a curse and wtfpwn ppl
Blind Man Kemono.	Posted - 2007.08.28 18:52:00 - [10] Originally by: Dreadpilot Roberts get a curse and wtfpwn ppl yeah
Swamp Ziro GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.08.28 19:33:00 - [11] Originally by: Rodj Blake Originally by: Depp Knight Originally by: Rodj Blake The smart people out there were already using neutralisers in addition to vampires. Neutralisers are actually quite effective on the Pilgrim. Yeh they are if you use 1 neut, your two nos would pay for it. This is not the case anymore The solution is quite elegant. I'm sure that you or someone in your alliance be able to work out how to do it If you're referring to Neuts killing your cap and then refilling it with NOS, you make it extremely more simple than it really is. Neuts take away ~roughly the same chunk out of both ships. So given that you both run a tank and there are neuts in play, any ship with less total cap than you will always be at a lower cap% than you, preventing your NOS activation. Of course, when cap boosters for both parties come into play, things DO get a lot simpler indeed. Start your neuts, hold on the cap boosts, activate the NOS, and start the cap boosting only after the other guy starts to go permanently cap dry. I don't fly amarr, but I think this is probably feasible.
Vandalias	Posted - 2007.08.28 19:41:00 - [12] Right click -> Sell 2 Months Ago
Crash Sagramo	Posted - 2007.08.28 19:46:00 - [13] it's an expencive scout now. No way to kill anyshing stronger, than t1 cruiser. It was said a couple of weaks ago, when test was open. Curse is useless to.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.08.28 19:50:00 - [14] Edited by: Aramendel on 28/08/2007 19:53:34 Originally by: CreoNeo Use neutralizers to get their capacitor down, then use capacitor injectors to get your own cap back up again quickly. Would that work on the pilgrim ? Technically, yes. However there are 2 problems with that. - Ew? Which EW? If you fit no MWD you have 2 med slots free then (1 injector, 1 web, 1 scram; and will likely die to a halfway competent bubblecamp). If you fit one thats 1 free med for EW. That is not terribly efficient to avoid damage. - heeeello webrange. As a pilgrim you have to tank some dps (likely quite some more postpatch since you'll have less EW) since you cannot use range as "tank". You will have problems fueling your reps and neuts with a single capinjector. And even if you will burn cap charges fast. Very fast. With a curse this is far more feasible since it has 1 more med for EW and has a higher range. 2 damps will for example get most BSs without sensorbooster to below 20k, which is just fine. Or you can loose the LSE2 and fit 3 damps. The pilgrim however does not have these options.
Riho Magnificent Beavers Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:06:00 - [15] atm trying to get 2x neut 1x nos to work... i have a inj allso fitted so need to learn to play it so i dont nuke my cap dead... this needs some skill to know when to stup neuting and when to nos and inj. not so easy mode anymore but i think i can get it to work ok :) --------------------------------------- Sig killed by MODs.... reworking it Great being Gallente... aint it ? ----------------- YARRRR, sig hijack! -HornFrog -----------------
Madla Mafia	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:06:00 - [16] I just think it is dumb that the amarr recons are the only race who has this penalty on their recon ship bonuses. I'd like to see the Huginn for example only being able to web people down to its own current speed, and the Rook lose its own target when jamming and the Arazu only being able of dampening an enemy's locking range down to its own locking range. Now THEN we could talk about a balanced and fair game. This is pure racism. ugh
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:07:00 - [17] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 28/08/2007 19:53:34 Originally by: CreoNeo Use neutralizers to get their capacitor down, then use capacitor injectors to get your own cap back up again quickly. Would that work on the pilgrim ? Technically, yes. However there are 2 problems with that. - Ew? Which EW? If you fit no MWD you have 2 med slots free then (1 injector, 1 web, 1 scram; and will likely die to a halfway competent bubblecamp). If you fit one thats 1 free med for EW. That is not terribly efficient to avoid damage. - heeeello webrange. As a pilgrim you have to tank some dps (likely quite some more postpatch since you'll have less EW) since you cannot use range as "tank". You will have problems fueling your reps and neuts with a single capinjector. And even if you will burn cap charges fast. Very fast. With a curse this is far more feasible since it has 1 more med for EW and has a higher range. 2 damps will for example get most BSs without sensorbooster to below 20k, which is just fine. Or you can loose the LSE2 and fit 3 damps. The pilgrim however does not have these options. The thing I find most amusing is your weird concept that you MUST fit Web and Scram in all ships... ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:21:00 - [18] Originally by: Etho Demerzel The thing I find most amusing is your weird concept that you MUST fit Web and Scram in all ships... Because maybe, just maybe the pilgrim is a horrible gang ship? Its main focus is 1v1. No scram should be obvious, no web and you invite ships to web you and kite you outside your nos/neut range. No, you cannot leech them quickly enough unless you hunt only cruisers. If you do a recon tagteam an arazu + rapier will be a LOT better. They have together 400-500 dps which is enough to break the vaste majority of all tanks.
Shevar Minmatar A.W.M Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:24:00 - [19] Fit lows with expander 2's, cargo rigs and you got yourself the biggest cargo carrying ship (around 1400) warping13.5 AU/s and can use cov ops cloak! But meh, buy a curse and see if you can get that ship to work. It's a lot better then the pilgrim to start with. --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:46:00 - [20] 3.7 AU/sec actually. Only cov ops frigs and half of the inties warp 13.5
king jks Exanimo Inc Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:48:00 - [21] 2x med unstable med nos II cloak 10mn AB II 20k web electrochem medium balmers TD 2x MAR II TS thermal TS kinetic DC II 2x aux nano »\(¦_o)/» ...but will it blend?
Shevar Minmatar A.W.M Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.08.28 20:50:00 - [22] Originally by: Aramendel 3.7 AU/sec actually. Only cov ops frigs and half of the inties warp 13.5 Oh well it will still serve nice as a .0 blockade runner then :>. But still no matter how much I toy around with the pilgrim's fitting I can't find anything that would even remotely work. --- -The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.08.28 21:07:00 - [23] Edited by: Aramendel on 28/08/2007 21:07:44 Or, better, something which will work efficiently for BCs and BSs. VS cruisers I see workable setups, but I'd rather use a rapier there (which is also better vs smaller stuff and has a far superior gang performance). Oh, well, I sold my pilgrim 1 week ago. Will prolly reuse most mods on a sacriledge. The pilgrims price devlopement in the next 1-2 months will be ...interesting.
Swamp Ziro GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.08.28 21:23:00 - [24] Edited by: Swamp Ziro on 28/08/2007 21:24:06 Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 28/08/2007 21:07:44 Or, better, something which will work efficiently for BCs and BSs. VS cruisers I see workable setups, but I'd rather use a rapier there (which is also better vs smaller stuff and has a far superior gang performance). Oh, well, I sold my pilgrim 1 week ago. Will prolly reuse most mods on a sacriledge. The pilgrims price devlopement in the next 1-2 months will be ...interesting. vs BC and BS? A pilgrim/curse had trouble* vs a competent BC pilot even before the nos nerf. Trying to get a setup that consistently wins against those types post-patch is a bit too far-fetched, don't you think? *By trouble, I mean couldn't win consisntently.
Kali Ananda Minmatar Prophets Of a Damned Universe	Posted - 2007.08.28 21:24:00 - [25] I have been playing around with setups post patch now for an hour. And I am deeply saddened by the Nerf on this ship. Since cap boosting is now basically a requirement, you loose a midslot, which means less EW, and a huge increase in PG requirements. And now that you NEED cap boosters, long deep forays into enemy 0.0 space is no longer an option. That was a real beauty of the Pilgrim, solo incursions into hostile systems. But once those 9 cap boosters are gone, you are screwed. I thought about the possibility of having the Curses range bonus, which would be interesting, but really I think this ship now needs one more mid or low slot, and an additional 50 PG. A new mid slot (like curse) would increase the EW options, which would equal less repping and reliance on tank. Or instead, a new low slot would equal more tanking options, including another EANM. So thats my petition. I have put in many, many months perfecting every skill related to the pre patch Pilgrim. And I am very sad that this ship has been severely nerfed. This was one of the Top Amarr ships, and I was proud to be flying the best recon. Now, its a shell of its former glory. Please, this ship needs some love back. Kali Ananda POD-U
Bodhisattvas mUfFiN fAcToRy	Posted - 2007.08.28 21:31:00 - [26] Originally by: Rodj Blake The smart people out there were already using neutralisers in addition to vampires. Neutralisers are actually quite effective on the Pilgrim. You sir, Are a moron.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.08.28 21:34:00 - [27] Originally by: Swamp Ziro vs BC and BS? A pilgrim/curse had trouble* vs a competent BC pilot even before the nos nerf. Trying to get a setup that consistently wins against those types post-patch is a bit too far-fetched, don't you think? By trouble, I mean couldn't win consisntently. Depends, the 2 damp, 1 ECM burst setup wasn't too bad. Or 2 TDs vs a turret battleship. But, yes, it wasn't that* hot before patch. It wasn't that bad so I would call it underpowered, though, either. The problem is in the end that by its basic design the pilgrim is really only a 1v1 ship. In gangs its just a slightly glorified arbitrator - the other force recons can do so much more there. And vs cruisers a rapier with 2 damps will be at the very least equally efficient as the pilgrim. 200 dps are not the world, but enough to break cruiser tanks. I just do not see any area where I would rather use a pilgrim than another ship, nor is the pilgrim a jack of all trades which would justify it being master in none.
Swamp Ziro GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.08.28 21:52:00 - [28] Edited by: Swamp Ziro on 28/08/2007 21:54:24 Edited by: Swamp Ziro on 28/08/2007 21:53:17 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Swamp Ziro vs BC and BS? A pilgrim/curse had trouble* vs a competent BC pilot even before the nos nerf. Trying to get a setup that consistently wins against those types post-patch is a bit too far-fetched, don't you think? By trouble, I mean couldn't win consisntently. Depends, the 2 damp, 1 ECM burst setup wasn't too bad. Or 2 TDs vs a turret battleship. But, yes, it wasn't that* hot before patch. It wasn't that bad so I would call it underpowered, though, either. The problem is in the end that by its basic design the pilgrim is really only a 1v1 ship. In gangs its just a slightly glorified arbitrator - the other force recons can do so much more there. And vs cruisers a rapier with 2 damps will be at the very least equally efficient as the pilgrim. 200 dps are not the world, but enough to break cruiser tanks. I just do not see any area where I would rather use a pilgrim than another ship, nor is the pilgrim a jack of all trades which would justify it being master in none. You are probably an older player, and as such, don't even consider the implications of some of the things you say. You think like you have every single ship in the game available to you with a t2 fitting, when in reality, the majority of people (not your age heh) can fly decently only 1 race's ships with a solid t2 fit. So, yeah, maybe some other ship does what the arbi can do better, but what you really need to compare is how good that role is being done inter-racially. Does the pilgrim bring something useful to the Amarr lineup? If yes, so yeah, It's a useful ship, and the other races be damned. To give you an example of my way of thinking. Hurricane (Non-nano) is weak compared to a myrmi or even a drake. Do I think it's bad ship? Not at all. Minmatar certainly needed what hurricane brings to the table, even if you can do it better if you crosstrain another race. EDIT: CLARIFICATION: I am not saying that the pilgrim didn't get nerfed too much. I don't fly Amarr, I don't have an opinion on this. I'm just saying to look at the ship on its race's merit, not globally.
Aramendel Amarr Coreli Corporation Exuro Mortis	Posted - 2007.08.28 22:02:00 - [29] Originally by: Swamp Ziro So, yeah, maybe some other ship does what the arbi can do better, but what you really need to compare is how good that role is being done inter-racially. Does the pilgrim bring something useful to the Amarr lineup? If yes, so yeah, It's a useful ship, and the other races be damned. To give you an example of my way of thinking. Hurricane (Non-nano) is weak compared to a myrmi or even a drake. Do I think it's bad ship? Not at all. Minmatar certainly needed what hurricane brings to the table, even if you can do it better if you crosstrain another race. EDIT: CLARIFICATION: I am not saying that the pilgrim didn't get nerfed too much. I don't fly Amarr, I don't have an opinion on this. I'm just saying to look at the ship on its race's merit, not globally. Globally is the only sensible way to look at ships. For example. A good while ago there was little-no stacking on damagemods. And pulse lasers had a good deal better range. What did we got there? The gankgeddon. 7 pulses. 8 damagemods. Time to vaporize other ships: short. Veeery short. Did it "bring something useful to the Amarr lineup"? Yes. Oh so very much yes. However it essentially made all other BSs obsolete. It was just so much better that there was no point in flying anything else. That is the "balance" you get when you do not look at ships globally. Any ship should definately bring something useful in its races inventory and not be another ship which does the same thing. However this is only secondary. First and foremost it HAS to be balanced with all ships of the same class. Otherwise you can get very undesireable results.
Swamp Ziro GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.08.28 22:12:00 - [30] Edited by: Swamp Ziro on 28/08/2007 22:14:09 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Swamp Ziro So, yeah, maybe some other ship does what the arbi can do better, but what you really need to compare is how good that role is being done inter-racially. Does the pilgrim bring something useful to the Amarr lineup? If yes, so yeah, It's a useful ship, and the other races be damned. To give you an example of my way of thinking. Hurricane (Non-nano) is weak compared to a myrmi or even a drake. Do I think it's bad ship? Not at all. Minmatar certainly needed what hurricane brings to the table, even if you can do it better if you crosstrain another race. EDIT: CLARIFICATION: I am not saying that the pilgrim didn't get nerfed too much. I don't fly Amarr, I don't have an opinion on this. I'm just saying to look at the ship on its race's merit, not globally. Globally is the only sensible way to look at ships. For example. A good while ago there was little-no stacking on damagemods. And pulse lasers had a good deal better range. What did we got there? The gankgeddon. 7 pulses. 8 damagemods. Time to vaporize other ships: short. Veeery short. Did it "bring something useful to the Amarr lineup"? Yes. Oh so very much yes. However it essentially made all other BSs obsolete. It was just so much better that there was no point in flying anything else. That is the "balance" you get when you do not look at ships globally. Any ship should definately bring something useful in its races inventory and not be another ship which does the same thing. However this is only secondary. First and foremost it HAS to be balanced with all ships of the same class. Otherwise you can get very undesireable results. I think we don't really agree on this basic point. I don't think every race's ship on a certain ship class has to be balanced. I think it's ok for 1 race to have say, clearly the better tier3 cruiser, or another race having the vastly better tier2 bc, or another race have the hands down best ratting BS. I feel that this is actually ok, and I agree with it to a certain extenct, but only as long as each race has the best ship in as many categories as it has bad ships. Therefore, I see this patch like this : Amarr recons went down a few notches in the recon rankings. Amarr gang-CS went up in the gang-CS rankings, Amarr tier 1 HAC also took a better ranking in the tier-1 HAC category. So all in all, I wouldn't mind the recon nerf, if I was amarr.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.