EVE Search - MWD jamming? Why not?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

MWD jamming? Why not?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.13 20:19:00 - [1] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 13/11/2007 20:20:51 Originally by: Nian Banks In all fairness, why is it that warp disruptors and bubbles have no effect on MWD's I mean they use Warp to accelerate themselves, hence micro "warp" drive. So having a point on a ship using a MWD would (logic dictates) stop the MWD from working at all. I would support this as MWD's should not be used as often as they are. Considering some people are often quoted saying that without a MWD on your ship in pvp you will die. If its that crucial to have a MWD fitted then it needs a nerf and a heavy one. Obviously the signature and capacitor negatives aren't enough. WTF is up with you man. First you say you want certain minnie ships boosted, and then you say you want to nerf the whole race. Make up your freaking mind. Liang Ed: BTW, nerfing my sabre, and then all interceptors (by virtue of your change), and then the stabber and other Minnie cruisers.... the only ships worth a damn would be the Cyclone and Maelstrom with tanking bonuses. Why do you people insist on opening your traps without thinking? The Minmatar race was designed to stay out of range. -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.13 20:40:00 - [2] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer WTB a picture of a battleship that uses a neut, WTB cruiser sized neut that can touch a vaga or nano ishtar. WTB web that reaches out into nano ship ranges and or WTB the gistii mwd to be able to get into web range against stuff that is inherently much faster then my ships. So, pretty much every battleship I've encountered in any of my nano setups have had a neut handy - seriously. Also, Vagabonds have to slow down to deal damage, and Ishtars are getting the bejeezus nerfed out of them anyway (see drone nerfs). WTB web that reaches out into nanoship ranges? TS webs can be pushed to 24km on a completely standard - that good enough for you? WTB gist MWD? Ok, then go buy one... nothing is stopping you at all. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.13 20:47:00 - [3] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Read above, all these so called counters destroy every other ship in the game aswell pretty much. How is this an argument? But there are several ways nano ships escape or are untouchable where other ships arent. THATS the point people are missing constantly. We're not missing it - you're missing the fact that its a specific style of tanking. People whine about the Drake because it takes more than 30 seconds to gank them - and they whine about the Vaga for the same reason. And that's what you're doing - whining. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.13 20:59:00 - [4] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Yes its a type of tanking that can get you possible kills as long as you give it a shot, if you fail you live for another day to try more. All other ways of tanking die if they fail. So what happens? These "safer" nano ships are pimped out with faction mods because they have less chance of dying wich makes them even more powerful. How many non-nano ships do you see flying around with faction tanks etc? Not many in comparison to nano faction ships. So what you'd like is that everytime someone gets into combat, all parties get whisked away so that nobody escapes and someone always dies? What you're not understanding is that you will be nerfing an entire race into nonexistence. Which is fine to you because you're Amarr and they're Minmatar (your direct counter). You want to be able to OMGISTANMELELTT them before they have the chance to run away at all - and that is also imbalanced. Quote: How eve works? 1. Speed - it tanks you, they cant tackle you, you pick your fights and survive . . . . . . ??. Dps - just quickens up the pace for stuff dying to your guns ??. Tank - when everything else fails Sounds a bit boring to me Nah, you don't know what you're talking about. Eve works this way: DPS . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................................ SPEED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tank This is how Eve works. DPS > all. Speed is off to the right and completely separate, and Tank just sucks. Since speed is not on the same plane as Gank'n'Tank (which is, tbh, what Amarr are good at), everyone whines about it. In fact, everyone whines when someone comes up with a tank that can tank your "omgubar" gank cruiser for more than 30 seconds too. Meh - gank'n'tank sounds pretty boring to me too. Maybe you need to understand that there's more than just "omg my dps > ur tank so u bring friends and ur dps > my tank so i bring friends so..." Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.13 21:25:00 - [5] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Wait until that 100mill malediction of yours get caught up by a vagabond that has 4-5 times the amount of dps. Wait, so now you're complaining that HAC does 4x the DPS of an interceptor??! Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.13 21:44:00 - [6] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Because its just as fast as an inty. Why did people complain about nano domis going 4-5km/s? Why did people complain about it when it did more dps then the average cruiser only? There is a speed vs dps/hull balance to be considered. My Vigil is faster than most inties... and my firetail is definitely faster than most inties. omg, nerrrrrf. Stabbers can be faster than most inties, and do much more DPS too (of course, you have to not consider that it has to slow down to deal that damage... which you don't). TBH, I think we should nerf the Sacrilege - for two reasons. 1. It's near and dear to your heart, Ms Amarr 2. It doesn't have to slow down to do damage .. NEEEEEERRRRRFF OMGO OMGO MOG MGOMGOMGO Or you could look at all of the limitations it has. You pick. Liang Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.13 22:01:00 - [7] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Then lets give all races atleast one nano ship that is comparable in that class. So minni got vaga, why not give all the other 3 races one "vaga" each with comparable speed? Everyone happy. Because in 2 months you'd be in here complaining that 3 "racial-vagas" came in and bbq'd your Raven and then got away from the 4000000 man blob you got after them. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.14 18:10:00 - [8] Originally by: William DeMeo What? Does the drone nerf affect the ishtar? If you mean the shields not regenerating thats not too bad, not much hp in the shields anyway, but will they take a nerf from the bandwidth too? You don't understand the nature of the shield recharge nerf, actually. There are several good threads on it in Game Dev, but the long and short of it is that flying a Drone boat on test would cost people 10-15 million/fight on TQ - and that's for fights you win. Even CCP agrees that this nerf will make it financially unfeasible to fly a drone boat. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.14 18:52:00 - [9] Originally by: Nian Banks Hence they are looking at changing and adding things to make them work, one hopes anyway. One thing I would like to see is for drones to get a larger shield capacitor and a faster recharge rate. Yeah, it remains to be seen how they'll address that problem. I'm hoping they don't decide to take that live before that particular situation is well resolved. The dev responses have been positive so far though, and they definitely know about/acknowledge the issue. And that's always half the battle! Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.14 18:59:00 - [10] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Vanessa Vale Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Ok so you say minni should have ships with superior speed. Ok, but then you shouldnt have a tanking commandship either or battleship. Because thats not your thing then. They don't. Minmatar ships have subpar tank and subpar gank. Maelstrom and Sleip dont have sub par tanks. They are up there with the best tankers in their classes. All of the tier 3 battleships are tankers. Maybe you missed that. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?

Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.14 19:24:00 - [11] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Yes but why should sleip and mael tank just as good as the real tank races? I mean that was the argument for vaga being so much faster then the other fast hacs of the other races wasnt it? Do you have any idea how stupid your question is? It's like asking why Amarr has an ewar cruiser at all - they're just tank and gank anyway. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.14 19:30:00 - [12] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer No but how about we make sleip and mael go around 2km/s and lower both tanks a little bit? How about we remove the Arbitrator, Curse, Pilgrim, Guardian, Sentinel, and all Khanid ships from the game entirely. They're obviously completely out of line with the gank and tank philosophy of the Amarr. Also the Zealot needs to go - Amarr is about ganking or tanking, not sniping. Oh, and we need to across the board reduce all Amarr speeds by 50%, because they aren't meant to run. Do you even think these things through before suggesting them? Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.14 19:35:00 - [13] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Sure if they fix amarr gank and tank to be TRUE tank and gank compared to others why not. Arbi, curse, pilgrim suck anyway with nos changes and upcoming TD nerf. Zealot is a lol gank ship, so please take it Khanid, yep they are ALL very good ships. Why? Because amarr tank and gank ships FAIL. If they fix that i wont miss khanid. I like turrets better then missiles. Oh but you're not allowed to gank and tank - the same as everyone wants nano nerfed. No, no buffs for you. No, you simply lose all versatility and suck. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.14 19:45:00 - [14] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer LoL Dont you see the problem? Khanid ships are like gallente ships when you look at slot layout. They have perfect amount of mids and enough lows to tank. Difference is they use missiles instead. Notice how all the "normal" amarr ships fail. (atleast the old non adjusted ones, the new ones like harbi and abadd are juicy because they were adjusted before put into the game and geddon has a overpowered rof bonus that makes this old ship normal today after years of nerfs.) All the normal old amarr ships have 1 too many lows and 1 too few mids. Why dont they decide. Either let amarr keep the crappy slot layout BUT give something in return, tank and gank, OR make it a bit more versitile and give them khanid slot layouts. Khanid ships arent better then the normal ones because they use missiles. Its that extra mid that makes all the difference. I actually DO see the problem. I am one of the more ardent Amarrian supporters, tbh. The problem is that you think everyone else should be nerfed, and I think traditional Amarrian gank ships should be buffed some. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?

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.