EVE Search - Radical idea: remove i-stabs, nanos and polycarb rigs

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Radical idea: remove i-stabs, nanos and polycarb rigs

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:32:00 - [1] It's not that MWDs are overpowered, or implants, or the ships themselves. It's the massive knock-on effect gained by the use of low slot speed/agility mods and rigs that pushes the game out of balance. If cruisers wern't able to catch the inties and dictors so easily (directly attributed to nanoed out cruisers with lots of low slots), they wouldn't need to achieve the insane speeds they currently do to survive. 0.0 combat has become the sole domain of nano gangs other than large fleets of BS put together for POS sieging etc. If your scout sees a nano gang, and you're not using a nano gang yourself, you turn around and go the other way, looking for a fight that isn't a waste of time. Nanogangs harassing you? Dock and log. Not much else to do about it unless you have some of your own nano ships to combat them. Huginn you say? Sure, but guess what? It's going to be set up with a speed fit and whats this? Nanos? Polycarb rigs? Just to be able to web the nanoships it's targeting anyway. By removing i-stabs and nanofibers (and their associated rigs), you're removing the ability of large ships to push into the domain of the smaller ships speeds. This is what is breaking game balance. Vagabonds would still be really fast, even with the removal of speed mods. Dictors and inties and frigs will still be really fast, compared to all the rest of the ships, as no one will be able to fit their entire low slots with speed mods. If you want to go stupid fast, get snakes (like people don't already), or get gang bonuses, or get both. The game was designed around certian speed parameters, which have long since been broken. Missile velocities, explosion velocities and gun tracking and range have all been designed around speeds that are about half of what is currently in use by a large number of players. One of the main reasons the Minmatar speed advantage isn't an advantage any more is that the majority of ships out there can be nanoed up to come within 10-15% of their top speed. It's ridiculous when battlecruisers can outrun missiles, guns, light drones, just about anything except another nano ship. Clearly CCP never anticipated ships reaching the speeds that they currenly do. They nerfed multiple MWDs in the past, they need to do something about the low slot speed mods and rigs now. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
Joie Mains Vindicator A Team	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:37:00 - [2] u know i agree with that nano is ghey but maybe it should be changed some other way
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:38:00 - [3] No, because you'd be nerfing minmatar. Their ships are balanced around having these modules available. Maybe if you gave Minnie ships an extra 40-60% base speed and 40% lighter mass just off the top it might be worth considering. -Liang Yes, the idea I presented is just as silly as yours. -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:40:00 - [4] Also, just what do you think is an appropriate speed for ships to go? By class/race please. -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Joie Mains Vindicator A Team	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:40:00 - [5] Originally by: Liang Nuren No, because you'd be nerfing minmatar. Their ships are balanced around having these modules available. Maybe if you gave Minnie ships an extra 40-60% base speed and 40% lighter mass just off the top it might be worth considering. -Liang Yes, the idea I presented is just as silly as yours. ehh u have no clue what game u are playing ?
Ione Hunt 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:46:00 - [6] Less variety ftl!! There's plenty of counters against nanoships, learn to use them. _______________
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:48:00 - [7] Originally by: Joie Mains ehh u have no clue what game u are playing ? I'm playing the game where Minnie tanks that aren't the Maelstrom or Cyclone suck balls. Maybe you haven't noticed because they manage to kite the other races. They would need this boost to continue to kite because kiting and mitigating damage through speed is part of their tank. -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Joie Mains Vindicator A Team	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:49:00 - [8] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Joie Mains ehh u have no clue what game u are playing ? I'm playing the game where Minnie tanks that aren't the Maelstrom or Cyclone suck balls. Maybe you haven't noticed because they manage to kite the other races. They would need this boost to continue to kite because kiting and mitigating damage through speed is part of their tank. -Liang if u just had read op and then your reply ...
max scrotes Gallente The Fated Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:50:00 - [9] webber launcher would be interesting. creates a 20k webber bubble for 10 secs. with a 90% velocity decrease.
Joie Mains Vindicator A Team	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:57:00 - [10] Originally by: max scrotes webber launcher would be interesting. creates a 20k webber bubble for 10 secs. with a 90% velocity decrease. triing to solve problem my introducing something new most of time makes 2 problems out of one
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 03:57:00 - [11] Originally by: Joie Mains if u just had read op and then your reply ... I did read the OP. The OP just said to simply remove Nanos and Istabs (but oddly left OD's? I presume this is an oversight). Removing them will remove the ability of Minmatar ships (especially minie ships, since this is how their tank is designed) to avoid damage. -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:25:00 - [12] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Joie Mains if u just had read op and then your reply ... I did read the OP. The OP just said to simply remove Nanos and Istabs (but oddly left OD's? I presume this is an oversight). Removing them will remove the ability of Minmatar ships (especially minie ships, since this is how their tank is designed) to avoid damage. -Liang What ships are these, besides the Vagabond, that are designed specifically around going ultra fast to avoid damage? I mean other than all the normal ship classes that the other three races have as well that depend on this play style? Without speed mods the Vagabond is still plenty fast enough to avoid damage and speed tank. The rest of the Minmatar ships are not designed to be speed tanked from the outset. That's why they have tanking bonuses instead of speed bonuses. Mael and Cyclone? The only good tanks? Sleip and Claymore have great tanks. Hurricane tanks just fine (for a tier2 bc). As far as I know, the Rupture doesn't speed tank. The Stabber is plenty fast with an MWD, Rifters don't speed tank, the Phoon and Tempest are great with armor tanks. Haven't seen a speed tanked Temp um, ever. So I don't really get where 'all' the Minmatar ships are 'designed' to be speed tanked. Additionally, I wouldn't mind the base speed of each Minmatars ship being increased slightly, to give them a clear speed advantage over the other three races, if speed mods were removed. Right now the other three races can be speed tanked with very comparable results to Minmatar ships, thereby reducing the whole idea of speed being a Minmatar trait and it's focus of play. The only defence against speed ships are other speed ships. If you're using a Huginn or Rapier, of course they're going to be SPEED FIT in order to catch the speed fit targets anyway. polycarb rigs and i-stabs are the order of the day. The main issue as I see it is that we have BCs and cruisers (again, I'm not referring to the Vagabond here, I agree it should be fast) that walk all over interceptors and dictors from a speed perspective. This is silly. Why use an inty when a Vaga will tackle just as well? Or a Sleipnir? Or a nano Ishtar? Speed fit ships are 100% immune to damage from any sort of normal ship (by normal I mean anything other than another nano ship or a Rapier/Huginn). If there was another form of tank in the game that gave it's user 100% immunity, it would be nerfed to hell and back. So why is speed tanking any different? Speed (extreme speed, speeds over 2k/sec) should be the realm of frigs, interceptors and dictors (and the Vagabond/Stabber, which have specific speed bonuses for those ships). Everything else- Cruisers, BCs, BS- I don't see how it's game breaking to limit them to a T2 MWD. 1200-1300m/sec for a BC isn't too slow. Around 2km/sec for Cruisers isn't too slow. I think that a typical cruiser with a T2 MWD and a HG snake implant set and gang bonuses is plenty fast. That is what I think is reasonable. You can still get way over 4-5k/sec just with that. With a regular cruiser. 40km/sec w/ an inty with rigs and speed mods is just silly. As are 10km/sec command ships. You actually think that's ok? Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
Jones Maloy Minmatar Unified Naval Command	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:30:00 - [13] Edited by: Jones Maloy on 15/12/2007 04:32:12 i'm shocked i'm saying this but the op has a great point. cruisers with lots of lows and speed rigs outrun frigs with few low slots and speed rigs. smaller ships speed advantage is outweighed by cruisers amount of low slots and fitted speed mods. give it a whirl on sing for a week and see how fast nano fits die and how fast intys and frigs become the kings of speed again. downside is speed will become less of a variable and ship speed will be determined by what ship it is. also it will be the final nail in the coffin of the nanophoon (i always wanted to fly one of those) edit: right, forgot about minmatar base speed boost (10-20% ?) --- Originally by: Kagura Nikon .......That is why I started an alt to be completely specced in ammar. Because eventually CCP will buff it...... rofl
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:39:00 - [14] Originally by: Bellum Eternus What ships are these, besides the Vagabond, that are designed specifically around going ultra fast to avoid damage? I mean other than all the normal ship classes that the other three races have as well that depend on this play style? Let's start at the top, and stick to the 'popular' ships. 1. Rifter 2. Vigil 3. Stabber 4. Vagabond 5. Muninn Additionally: 6. Cyclone (Tracking) 7. Some Hurricane fits (Tracking) 8. Typhoon (Tracking) Quote: Without speed mods the Vagabond is still plenty fast enough to avoid damage and speed tank. The rest of the Minmatar ships are not designed to be speed tanked from the outset. That's why they have tanking bonuses instead of speed bonuses. 2978 m/sec is "fast enough" for a Vagabond to speed tank? ... Did you bother running any numbers on this before you just randomly spouted off an "idea" or did you intentionally mean to nerf the only play style that can stand up to your 2 km optimal blaster boats? Quote: Mael and Cyclone? The only good tanks? Sleip and Claymore have great tanks. Hurricane tanks just fine (for a tier2 bc). As far as I know, the Rupture doesn't speed tank. The Stabber is plenty fast with an MWD, Rifters don't speed tank, the Phoon and Tempest are great with armor tanks. Haven't seen a speed tanked Temp um, ever. The Cyclone and Mael are the only tank bonused Minmatar T1 ships. Sure, the Sleip and Claymore have good tanks... so does the Eos, and the Astarte (much better gank than tank tbh), the Vulture, the Nighthawk, the Damnation, and the Absolution. Your point? Quote: Additionally, I wouldn't mind the base speed of each Minmatars ship being increased slightly, to give them a clear speed advantage over the other three races, if speed mods were removed. Right now the other three races can be speed tanked with very comparable results to Minmatar ships, thereby reducing the whole idea of speed being a Minmatar trait and it's focus of play. Their speed would have to be increased substantially. Quote: ... The main issue as I see it is that we have BCs and cruisers (again, I'm not referring to the Vagabond here, I agree it should be fast) that walk all over interceptors and dictors from a speed perspective. This is silly. Why use an inty when a Vaga will tackle just as well? Or a Sleipnir? Or a nano Ishtar? Speed fit ships are 100% immune to damage from any sort of normal ship (by normal I mean anything other than another nano ship or a Rapier/Huginn). If there was another form of tank in the game that gave it's user 100% immunity, it would be nerfed to hell and back. Snaked Out Nano Ishtar: 6500 m/sec T2 Cap Stable Stiletto: 6408 m/sec, 30k disruptor by default Get the drift? Quote: Speed (extreme speed, speeds over 2k/sec) should be the realm of frigs, interceptors and dictors (and the Vagabond/Stabber, which have specific speed bonuses for those ships). 2km/sec is rather slow for any kind of EFFECTIVE "speed tank". WTF? Quote: I think that a typical cruiser with a T2 MWD and a HG snake implant set and gang bonuses is plenty fast. That is what I think is reasonable. You can still get way over 4-5k/sec just with that. With a regular cruiser. 40km/sec w/ an inty with rigs and speed mods is just silly. As are 10km/sec command ships. You actually think that's ok? Then nerf the offending modules/implants... wholesale removal of them is not optimal. -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Jones Maloy Minmatar Unified Naval Command	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:43:00 - [15] yes, major balancing would be required but how many times have they already done that while attempting to "fix" the "problem". what "fix" and "problem" are depend on your point of view. --- Originally by: Kagura Nikon .......That is why I started an alt to be completely specced in ammar. Because eventually CCP will buff it...... rofl p.s. I fly Amarr and they blow.
L70Rogue	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:43:00 - [16] /signed Awesome idea. No more nano-gheyness...
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:45:00 - [17] Originally by: Jones Maloy i'm shocked i'm saying this but the op has a great point. cruisers with lots of lows and speed rigs outrun frigs with few low slots and speed rigs. Navitas: 3000/4200 (Unrigged/Rigged) Vexor: 2500/3500 The Navitas is a mining frigate. Quote: smaller ships speed advantage is outweighed by cruisers amount of low slots and fitted speed mods. Those same ships are usually turret ships, and have to slow down to deal damage. They have lower tracking, larger sig radiuses, more mass, slower turn ratios, etc. Not to mention that a cruiser typically cannot sustain a MWD. Frigates regularly can. Quote: give it a whirl on sing for a week and see how fast nano fits die and how fast intys and frigs become the kings of speed again. Inties are ALREADY the kings of speed. WTF are you smoking. Quote: downside is speed will become less of a variable and ship speed will be determined by what ship it is. also it will be the final nail in the coffin of the nanophoon (i always wanted to fly one of those) The nano phoon is already dead... at best it uses speed and sig radius to mitigate some damage (which is what ALL minmatar ships do). Quote: edit: right, forgot about minmatar base speed boost (10-20% ?) It would probably need to be 20% base speed, 20% lower mass, and 20% lower sig radius, tbh. -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:46:00 - [18] Originally by: Jones Maloy yes, major balancing would be required but how many times have they already done that while attempting to "fix" the "problem". what "fix" and "problem" are depend on your point of view. I'd like to further put forward that Blasters need to be removed from the game, because they're pushing DPS further than it was ever intended to go. Consider that a passive tanked Drake cannot by default tank a gank megathron. Gank megathron coming your way? Nothing to do but dock and log and wait for it to go away, or get a huge blob of your own to defend you. /parody -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 04:53:00 - [19] By the way, I have to ask... why I-stabs? -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Anon Forumalt	Posted - 2007.12.15 05:17:00 - [20] I agree, no reason to get rid of the inertial stabilizers. But the OP also has a point: the speed tanking needs to be cut back. I would argue that among ships smaller than battleships (most of 0.0 pvp, anyway), more ships are speed tanked than not speed tanked. Which seems really, really wrong. Speed tanking should reduce damage, not completely mitigate it. Maybe speed tanks should cap out at 90% mitigation? 95? I have no problems with a ship that can run outside of turret range in a hurry to avoid damage, or actually outrun the fastest missile in the game. These things are (as Liang put it,) kiting. But flying THROUGH enemy fleets so fast that absolutely nothing can damage you at all is flat out ********. I'd say just add (or increase) a stacking penalty on all speed/mass mods, and see where that takes us.
goodby4u Logistic Technologies Incorporated	Posted - 2007.12.15 05:18:00 - [21] Nano gangs are being used because they are effective,but if they are nerfed guess what?People will just come out with a more affective way to form a small gang and people will whine to nerf that. Nano ships arent invincible,fit to kill them and they will die very fast and the rest of the gang will run...And if you feel like nano gangs are overpowered heres an idea,come out with a different idea that wont nerf an entire race.
Ecky X X Bane X	Posted - 2007.12.15 05:35:00 - [22] Nanoships lack: 1. Tank - if they come near you, they're food. 2. Dps - if they don't come near you, they don't do any damage Now, what weapon systems can hit out of web range? Lets see.. lasers.. but they can't track, unless you count small lasers. Missiles? Name one missile boat that can be nano'd, other than the Crow. Drones? Launch 5 heavy drones on a nano-ship, and kiss 5mil goodbye. Yea, yea, you can't catch them, but they can't stop you from jumping throw a gate, or put-putting back to a station and docking. They give up a LOT of DPS by filling their lows with speed mods. I would much rather have a nice gank-mega in my gang, or a gank-phoon, or a gank-geddon, or a gank-raven, or even a gank-thorax/rupture (you see where I'm going with this) than a more expensive nano ishtar or vagabond that put out 200dps, and can't hold an enemy in one place. Nerf gank.
UGLYUGLY	Posted - 2007.12.15 05:37:00 - [23] Light web drones? 5-10% web strength each, the speed of a warrior drone (modeled after it as well) possibly a t2 version with faster speed but maybe only a small bump to web strength. Drones need to get within 2-3km to web. Just an idea. Leaves minmatar ships alone, only pilots not keeping a watchful eye out will be caught, plus the drones are not a mod, they can be blown to space dust.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.15 05:43:00 - [24] Originally by: UGLYUGLY Light web drones? 5-10% web strength each, the speed of a warrior drone (modeled after it as well) possibly a t2 version with faster speed but maybe only a small bump to web strength. Drones need to get within 2-3km to web. Just an idea. Leaves minmatar ships alone, only pilots not keeping a watchful eye out will be caught, plus the drones are not a mod, they can be blown to space dust. I've thought about web drones. I'd like to see medium web drones, but I think light web drones would be going a step too far. Additionally, I'd like to see all web drones with a bit higher speed and a tiny (tiny) bit more web amount. Don't forget that webs are stacking nerfed, so 5x web drones isn't much better than 3. (BTW, boosting web drones was/is my favorite nerf to nano gangs). -Liang -- I give up (Make me say whatever you want!): Price Check: Liang Nuren
Ulstan	Posted - 2007.12.15 06:09:00 - [25] I have no idea what the best fix is, but the OP quite correctly identifies the problems of invulnerable nano gangs that can only be killed by other nano gangs, as well as hinting at the problem of almost universal MWD use.
UGLYUGLY	Posted - 2007.12.15 06:10:00 - [26] why not add light and mediums. Mediums have same speed as valks, with 15-20% strength. So we now have light, mediums and heavy web drones.
Phelan Lore Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.12.15 06:11:00 - [27] It doesn't matter if they nerf it or not. People will fly something else, whiners will whine about that too. Que sura, sura. -
Anon Forumalt	Posted - 2007.12.15 06:16:00 - [28] Originally by: Phelan Lore It doesn't matter if they nerf it or not. People will fly something else, whiners will whine about that too. Que sura, sura. What an obscenely stupid statement to make. Why shower, ever? You'll just get dirty again.
Ione Hunt 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.12.15 06:38:00 - [29] Originally by: Jones Maloy Edited by: Jones Maloy on 15/12/2007 04:32:12 i'm shocked i'm saying this but the op has a great point. cruisers with lots of lows and speed rigs outrun frigs with few low slots and speed rigs. smaller ships speed advantage is outweighed by cruisers amount of low slots and fitted speed mods. This is simply not true. A Claw with speed fit will outrun a Vagabond, so will other ceptors. _______________
Grapez Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2007.12.15 06:49:00 - [30] Originally by: Anon Forumalt Originally by: Phelan Lore It doesn't matter if they nerf it or not. People will fly something else, whiners will whine about that too. Que sura, sura. What an obscenely stupid statement to make. Why shower, ever? You'll just get dirty again. Quoting truth.

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