EVE Search - Stack nerf remote reps/transporters?

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Stack nerf remote reps/transporters?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pinpisa Jormao	Posted - 2007.12.16 10:15:00 - [1] As the number of capitals in capital blobs grow the amount of force to kill one being remote repaired grows too. Either the remote repairs need to get less effective when aimed at the same ship in large numbers or the NOS needs to be unnerfed for Amarr ships.
Lothros Andastar Gallente Divine Assembly of Forgotten Travelers Clown Punchers Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.16 10:58:00 - [2] Yes and while were at it can we stacking nerf Shield Boosters? They like stop me killing Ravens and stuff :( </sarcasm>
Stakhanov Metafarmers	Posted - 2007.12.16 11:13:00 - [3] Nerf teamplay , I want to solopwn people with my pimp ship.
Ezekiel Sulastin Gallente Brute Strength	Posted - 2007.12.16 17:56:00 - [4] Isn't that the point of bringing a whole bunch of logistics to a fight, to make their target harder to kill?
Lord Matrix Department of War	Posted - 2007.12.16 18:04:00 - [5] If one gang can do 50.000 DPS to your ship, your gang should also be able to remote repair/boost you with 50.000 HP/s. Think about the problem and devise a plan on how to brake the remote tank. Contrary to the whining, it will do you good. ------------------------------------------------------------------ What good have you done for the EVE community today?
Xenomorphea Gallente	Posted - 2007.12.17 01:47:00 - [6] Edited by: Xenomorphea on 17/12/2007 01:48:05 I disagree with the OP. Damage from multiple turrets is not stacking nerfed, damage modifiers are. Damage from multiple ships (concentrated fire) is not stacking nerfed. Repair aomount from multiple armor (and shield) repair systems is not (and should not) be stacking nerfed, armor (and shield) resistances are. Ergo, remote reppers should not be stacking nerfed. Also you would break one of the most exciting aspects of "intelligent PvPing", the "spider tanking BS gang" :-) Cheers, Xeno
Pinpisa Jormao	Posted - 2007.12.17 02:18:00 - [7] Edited by: Pinpisa Jormao on 17/12/2007 02:20:03 Originally by: Xenomorphea Edited by: Xenomorphea on 17/12/2007 01:48:05 I disagree with the OP. ... Cheers, Xeno Damaging and blowing up things is generally accomplished easier and faster. In the converse building and repairing things can't be done at same speed otherwise you risk doing the repairs wrong or miss something. Throwing more money or people into solving a problem or repairing something is quite similar. It works well up to a point. This suggestion is more about nerfing a blob of 50 or more capital ships doing circle repairs. The repairing should become much less efficient after say 100 remote repair modules are active on the same ship.
Angor The JORG Corporation Terra Incognita.	Posted - 2007.12.17 03:37:00 - [8] Edited by: Angor on 17/12/2007 03:37:20 Totally dissagree... next time use jammers. _______________________________ [ 2007.06.07 21:07:22 ] FrankyWave > ransom me guys I am joining XElas !!!
QwaarJet Gallente hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.12.17 03:53:00 - [9] Originally by: Pinpisa Jormao As the number of capitals in capital blobs grow the amount of force to kill one being remote repaired grows too. Either the remote repairs need to get less effective when aimed at the same ship in large numbers or the NOS needs to be unnerfed for Amarr ships. We've had enough nerfing of things lately. Leave Remote repping alone. says the sweating Guardian pilot
Jennifer Meek Gallente Planck Bubble Generation Technologies	Posted - 2007.12.17 07:00:00 - [10] Jam the logistic ships? OH NOES THAT REQUIRES USING OUR HEAD NOOOOO WEEE CAAAANNNNTTTT DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONEONE ---
Bein Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.17 14:39:00 - [11] How do you go about jamming a mothership? Not that I'm saying that stacking nerfing remote reps is the answer, because it really isn't.
Angelik'a Gallente Ahaha I made this corp so I could post in COAD	Posted - 2007.12.17 17:32:00 - [12] Originally by: Bein Glorious How do you go about jamming a mothership? You blow it up.
Bein Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.17 18:57:00 - [13] Originally by: Angelik'a Originally by: Bein Glorious How do you go about jamming a mothership? You blow it up. How do you blow it up if it is being remote repped by two dozen other motherships?
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.12.18 01:37:00 - [14] Originally by: Bein Glorious Originally by: Angelik'a Originally by: Bein Glorious How do you go about jamming a mothership? You blow it up. How do you blow it up if it is being remote repped by two dozen other motherships? With 30 dreads.
Tomic The Illuminati. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.12.18 04:00:00 - [15] Can we also get stacking nerf on account subscriptions while we're at it :)
Bein Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.18 05:14:00 - [16] Originally by: Gamesguy Originally by: Bein Glorious Originally by: Angelik'a Originally by: Bein Glorious How do you go about jamming a mothership? You blow it up. How do you blow it up if it is being remote repped by two dozen other motherships? With 30 dreads. Ah, but you are forgetting something. Dreadnoughts in siege mode cannot be remote repped. All a group of motherships or carriers has to do is send out their fighters on the dreads and they'll melt, since they only have at best the effect of a dual caprep sieged tank (let's say around 15,000 DPS as a benchmark) while the motherships will be able to tank more than any individual dreadnought with their own reps along with remote reps from others. That, and chances are good that your average carrier or mothership is going to have a couple spare highslots with heavy neuts fitted, while obviously no dread is going to give up a turret for a neut. You would think that ten dreads would beat ten carriers, not even ten motherships, but it's just not in the cards. Do you see any sort of problem?
Zeph Solaris NYIT Gangstaz SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.18 05:27:00 - [17] Originally by: Bein Glorious Originally by: Gamesguy Originally by: Bein Glorious Originally by: Angelik'a Originally by: Bein Glorious How do you go about jamming a mothership? You blow it up. How do you blow it up if it is being remote repped by two dozen other motherships? With 30 dreads. Ah, but you are forgetting something. Dreadnoughts in siege mode cannot be remote repped. All a group of motherships or carriers has to do is send out their fighters on the dreads and they'll melt, since they only have at best the effect of a dual caprep sieged tank (let's say around 15,000 DPS as a benchmark) while the motherships will be able to tank more than any individual dreadnought with their own reps along with remote reps from others. That, and chances are good that your average carrier or mothership is going to have a couple spare highslots with heavy neuts fitted, while obviously no dread is going to give up a turret for a neut. You would think that ten dreads would beat ten carriers, not even ten motherships, but it's just not in the cards. Do you see any sort of problem? Why do you have 30 dreads out without a support fleet?

Pages: [1] :: 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.