EVE Search - The Need for Brakes Initiative

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The Need for Brakes Initiative

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Marcathonas Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:18:00 - [181] Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby It isn't a bug, true. It is a design decision. But it is still "wrong" which is what he was getting at. Let's try this visual: Oh, I know that. It used to irritate me quite a lot that the physics is wrong. But it's not a bug is my point, because if Eve physics = RL physics nanoships would be just so awesome, and we could have mailmen vagabonds/inties! Yay!
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:21:00 - [182] Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby Originally by: Marcathonas Fair enough. I assume since it'd be making the calculations based on actual transversal, it'd be pretty much a PITA for the server. Oh, and it's fact. It's point to point. Direction of facing doesn't make jack difference, angle of travel towards the other ship does. It is NOT a bug. It isn't a bug, true. It is a design decision. But it is still "wrong" which is what he was getting at. Let's try this visual: Take a model ship. Tie strings to both front and back that are the same length. Train its guns pointed at the joint of the strings. Now take that ship and spin it around in a circle on the strings. Take high-speed pictures of it at various points in the arc and compare the facing of the turrets. Behold: Even with an effective tracking of .00000000000000 the guns still face their target Even try walking around doing it (simulating a webbed BS traveling at 10 m/sec), the guns still face the their target. It is better for game balance the way CCP implemented it though. I understand what you guys are saying, and that's messed up. I understand it's a game design decision, and quite frankly it surprises me, as it goes against basic intuition - that's bad. I'm shocked, but I accept it.
Marcathonas Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:22:00 - [183] Originally by: Christari Zuborov I understand what you guys are saying, and that's messed up. I understand it's a game design decision, and quite frankly it surprises me, as it goes against basic intuition - that's bad. I'm shocked, but I accept it. Don't rely on any knowledge of physics in EVE tbh, it just doesn't work. And would you honestly be happy if a vagabond/zealot could track fully while orbiting at 4k/s?
Sm0kE Ganja Labs Pure.	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:23:00 - [184] Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby Originally by: Marcathonas Fair enough. I assume since it'd be making the calculations based on actual transversal, it'd be pretty much a PITA for the server. Oh, and it's fact. It's point to point. Direction of facing doesn't make jack difference, angle of travel towards the other ship does. It is NOT a bug. It isn't a bug, true. It is a design decision. But it is still "wrong" which is what he was getting at. Let's try this visual: Take a model ship. Tie strings to both front and back that are the same length. Train its guns pointed at the joint of the strings. Now take that ship and spin it around in a circle on the strings. Take high-speed pictures of it at various points in the arc and compare the facing of the turrets. Behold: Even with an effective tracking of .00000000000000 the guns still face their target Even try walking around doing it (simulating a webbed BS traveling at 10 m/sec), the guns still face the their target. It is better for game balance the way CCP implemented it though. But transversal does not calculate what the turrets are doing. All it is saying is that the transversal between ship A and ship B is X. Not that the turrets don't have to move to stay trained on the target ship. And... because turret tracking uses the transversal velocity between two ships to do its calculations, you have the way EVE works. ------------------------------------------------ Anyone got a good compression tool for EVE sigs?
Amateratsu Caldari Terra Incognita Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:24:00 - [185] Personally i think ships in eve are too slow... The fastest jet plane we have today (according to google) is the SR-71 which is capable of speeds in excess of Mach 3 (2,250 MPH / 3600 KPH), thats 1 km/s. The space shuttle orbits the earth in 90 minutes, thats 7.4 Km/s. Spaceships as advanced as those in eve should be flying at least 10 x faster (unboosted base speed) My suggestion... Remove Microwarp Drives from the game boost base speed of all ships in game 10x. Boost missile speeds significantly (no ship should be out running missiles) Boost range/effectiveness of webbers/warp scramblers ect... Boost tracking/speed of guns ect.... Basicly speed everything up... would make pvp faster, more exciting (have to think and react faster), and more realistic. Of course the above is just pure fantasy and never going to happen what probably will happen is another nano/speed nerf slowing everything down and making it more.... target ship, press f1 - f8, sit back in your comfy chair and watch the action unfold in slow motion
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:27:00 - [186] Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 28/09/2007 20:28:09 Originally by: Marcathonas Originally by: Christari Zuborov I understand what you guys are saying, and that's messed up. I understand it's a game design decision, and quite frankly it surprises me, as it goes against basic intuition - that's bad. I'm shocked, but I accept it. Don't rely on any knowledge of physics in EVE tbh, it just doesn't work. And would you honestly be happy if a vagabond/zealot could track fully while orbiting at 4k/s? Hell yes I would have been, it would make sense and I'd try to do something to counter that. As it is with this model, gun tracking makes no difference, but 180 flips DO even though it's counter intuitive.
Marcathonas Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:30:00 - [187] Originally by: Christari Zuborov Hell yes I would have been, it would make sense and I'd try to do something to counter that. As it is with this model, gun tracking makes no difference, but 180 flips DO even though it's counter intuitive. Once again. EVE. Nothing to do with real life. Game balance is more important than physics. I'd find it hilariously unbalanced if I could actually run my MWD while shooting, and I'm a nanofag.
Sm0kE Ganja Labs Pure.	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:31:00 - [188] Edited by: Sm0kE on 28/09/2007 20:31:08 Originally by: Amateratsu what probably will happen is another nano/speed nerf slowing everything down and making it more.... target ship, press f1 - f8, sit back in your comfy chair and watch the action unfold in slow motion Ya, see.. That's what we don't want to happen. Nano-ships make PVP change quickly, make battles fun and intense. If everyone flew tanked ships it would be just that. F1-F8 and see who has the better tank or more people / concentrated fire. Essentially you'd turn gang pvp into fleet F1-F8 boredom. ------------------------------------------------ Anyone got a good compression tool for EVE sigs?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.28 20:40:00 - [189] Originally by: Sm0kE Dude I'm sorry but that's how it works. It's in the player guide. Again, see Page 4 Maybe this will help explain. The transversal velocity between 2 ships will always be the same. Maybe you're thinking of angular velocity??? Angular velocity will also always be the same.
SirMoric	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:08:00 - [190] I'm a quite new player in the EVE universe, so new I haven't had the chance to fit a ship for "insane speed" yet. But after looking at the stats on the hardware/ship equipment regarding speeds on ships, I must say, it looks like it's too much. It doesn't seem right that nothing will hit a ship flying that fast, and I'm not only referring to missiles. I do understand you can't catch a fast figther with heavy guns or missiles for that matter, but that it should be that fast you can't catch it with anything seems odd, at least light missiles and light guns should be able to aim properly. On the other hand, if you're not able to turn your guns fast enough to hit a fast flying ship, how is the fast ship able to turn hit guns then? But I don't care, I want to fly one of those things, just for the fun of it. But I won't cry if they counter it, reducing speed or increasing turning-rate for guns. I'll just find something else to fly. rgds
DoctorBautz	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:10:00 - [191] lets say 20 vagas is paper. which gang would be rocks and which would be scissors?
Adaris D-L	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:12:00 - [192] Quote: How many times has your fleet been completly neutered or found to be totally ineffective against nano gangs? 10 mins ago for the seventh time this week. *******
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:13:00 - [193] "Normal" gang of random assortments of ships is the rock and a properly setup gang with huginns and logistics ships is scissors.
Nicocat Caldari Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:14:00 - [194] Waaaaaaaaaah! Nano ships killed me! Nerf them! They already got nerfed, this is the result. People adapt. Your turn. ---------------- Originally by: Splagada SEED ME DADDY Down with alts! One character per account per IP!
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:16:00 - [195] Originally by: DoctorBautz lets say 20 vagas is paper. which gang would be rocks and which would be scissors? I'd rather this game not be equated to rock, paper, scissors or paladin, beastmaster, shaman... k? It's why I never played that game, and never intend to.
Sm0kE Ganja Labs Pure.	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:16:00 - [196] Originally by: SirMoric On the other hand, if you're not able to turn your guns fast enough to hit a fast flying ship, how is the fast ship able to turn hit guns then? He can't, that's why he usually brings friends. The only nano-ships that really can hit and orbit at a decent speed are the nano-ishtar and my favorite... the nano-sac. Drones don't need to track at the host ships speed like guns do. And missiles, well.. they don't have to track at all. And it's not like these guys hit MWD, scram, F1-F8 and kill anything. They can't sustain cap that way. Some of them use rigs, some injectors, but the fact of the matter is.. I don't know a nano-ship that can scram and MWD around a target without losing their cap (eventually). Also, there are counters.. Try fitting a heavy neutralizer on your ratting ship which will kill a vagabond's cap every 25 seconds, giving you enough time to get out. ------------------------------------------------ Anyone got a good compression tool for EVE sigs?
Druadan Gallente Aristotle Enterprises Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:19:00 - [197] Nanos are broken. We all know it. Ceptors, webs, huginns. None are effective. Either reduce the effectiveness of speed mods on larger ships, make them more-harshly stacking penalised, or make ceptors really ******* fast. ### I nearly finish carriers, and they nerf it. I nearly finish Amarr recons, and they make them useless. Vagabond pilots beware... I have bought Minmatar Cruiser.
DoctorBautz	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:29:00 - [198] "...and a properly setup gang with huginns and logistics ships is scissors" guess which ship will be primary for the vagas.....
Thanos Draicon	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:31:00 - [199] Originally by: DoctorBautz "...and a properly setup gang with huginns and logistics ships is scissors" guess which ship will be primary for the vagas..... Logistics ships will outtank the DPS of the vagabonds easily. --------------- Originally by: CCP Prism X Hey I have an idea: "Let's not endure any more of your spam for the weekend!" Enjoy your time away from our forums.
Sm0kE Ganja Labs Pure.	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:34:00 - [200] Originally by: Druadan Nanos are broken. We all know it. Ceptors, webs, huginns. None are effective. Either reduce the effectiveness of speed mods on larger ships, make them more-harshly stacking penalised, or make ceptors really ******* fast. Nano's work fine IMHO. I do agree that there should be a 'couple' more ways to counter them though. Don't slow the whole game down, just make it more possible to slow the nano-ships down. I heard a decent suggestion. Change the bellicose's bonus to a web bonus instead of paint bonus. 30% range or something. But I've seen plenty of dual-web stiletto's tackle nano-ships long enough for the gang to arrive. ------------------------------------------------ Anyone got a good compression tool for EVE sigs?
Elmicker Black Sea Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:36:00 - [201] Originally by: Sm0kE But I've seen plenty of dual-web stiletto's tackle nano-ships long enough for the gang to arrive. Must have been pretty silly nanoships to not have a neut fitted.
SirMoric	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:38:00 - [202] Interceptor? The name rings a bell.... Ah, it's supposed to be used for interception.... F-104 Starfigther... A helluva fast interceptor... But with speed comes, for one thing, bad, bad and even worse turningradius. Lots of pilots actually lost conciousness flying this thing (and others by the way). rgds
Sm0kE Ganja Labs Pure.	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:40:00 - [203] Originally by: Elmicker Originally by: Sm0kE But I've seen plenty of dual-web stiletto's tackle nano-ships long enough for the gang to arrive. Must have been pretty silly nanoships to not have a neut fitted. Neutralizer is a save-ass module, but does every nano-ship fit one? No. Could easily say... "Must have been a pretty silly ratting battleship to not have a neut fitted" (As that would be the 'save-ass' module as well). ------------------------------------------------ Anyone got a good compression tool for EVE sigs?
Elmicker Black Sea Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:41:00 - [204] Originally by: Sm0kE Could easily say... "Must have been a pretty silly ratting battleship to not have a neut fitted" (As that would be the 'save-ass' module as well). And yes, i would say that. I've seen too many ratting battleships die who could have easily gotten away by neutralising the tackler.
Riddick Valer	Posted - 2007.09.28 21:49:00 - [205] Edited by: Rid*** Valer on 28/09/2007 21:49:46* Add a new t2 missile type. MWD Precision Missile. Pros Extremely fast velocity and explosion speed. (faster than current precisions) Cons Make them large enough that 1 fits in each launcher. Must reload after each shot. Additionally, a -rof penalty per missile. If someone loads 6 launchers, it could be 30-60 seconds before they get another shot off. Flight time is absurdly low. Balanced for Standards to go 15km, Lights 20km, Heavies 25, and Cruises 30. EDIT: a single ship with these couldn't kill a nano, but it would give missile ships a better role in gang warfare. A few missile ships could fend off a nano-ship.
Gort Storm Guard Elite	Posted - 2007.09.28 22:16:00 - [206] Originally by: Tarron Sarek There is but one universal problem: Excessively Stacked Bonuses One speed mod isn't a problem. In fact reducing the bonuses would make single mods hardly useful. It's always extremes that cause problems. /signed. G -- When in doubt, empty the magazine.
Eval B'Stard	Posted - 2007.09.28 22:56:00 - [207] Originally by: Illyria Ambri I'd use a real world example but noone seems to want to acknowledge that the real world does have some bearings on things. Real life has absolutely no bearing on anything in EvE, the only thing that has any bearing is the imagination of the Developers. Thats why EVE is a GAME with, by definition, no ties to Real Life at all, which is what YOU seem to have trouble acknowledging. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- When we gonna see the 40km and 80km tractor beams ?
Stellar Vix State War Academy	Posted - 2007.09.29 04:23:00 - [208] IMO keep the speeds the same. Missile need a buff anyways, Lighter missiles and rockets should outfly anything but thier explosion speed would be just fast enough to do reduced damage. Unguided needs faster missile speeds but have larger explosion radius because of it, while guided munitions should be slower but more accurate with damage. SWA PVP
Daelin Blackleaf No Joy Corp Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.29 12:56:00 - [209] Originally by: Sm0kE Edited by: Sm0kE on 28/09/2007 20:31:08 Originally by: Amateratsu what probably will happen is another nano/speed nerf slowing everything down and making it more.... target ship, press f1 - f8, sit back in your comfy chair and watch the action unfold in slow motion Ya, see.. That's what we don't want to happen. Nano-ships make PVP change quickly, make battles fun and intense. If everyone flew tanked ships it would be just that. F1-F8 and see who has the better tank or more people / concentrated fire. Essentially you'd turn gang pvp into fleet F1-F8 boredom. Flip a coin: Heads: You didn't bring a huginn: You lose Tails: The nano ship pilot messes up and strays into web range, his momentum fails to carry him back out: You win Yup... fun and intense. A speed tank should reduce damage, but in the same way that you can never get your resists to 100% should not make you completely immune to damage against weapons designed to counter your ships size class. Sure you can scare the pilot off with neuts or a Minmatar recon... but it's about as balanced as a hardener that offers 100% resists until the cap runs out and allows you to escape at will.
oDDiTy V2 Epic.	Posted - 2007.09.30 23:36:00 - [210] Nano ship: Massive, full of advanced technology. Huge engines attached all over the back of it to make it move really fast. Cost? Let's take a rough guess and say, uh, 100,000,000 (I'm just rollin with the same amount of ridiculously irrelevant comparison as a lot of the stuff in this thread) Cruise Missile: Tiny, carries something that blows up. Tiny propulsion unit. Cost? 120 ISK. That means, that the nano ship at a cost of 100m ISK has a super-sweet factor 833,333 times larger than the missile. My point? I don't really have one.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: 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.