EVE Search - Dealing with Nano HACs...

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Dealing with Nano HACs...

» 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)
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.14 11:17:00 - [1] Edited by: Gamesguy on 14/01/2008 11:22:41 Edited by: Gamesguy on 14/01/2008 11:18:39 Originally by: Hephaesteus So where is this mega gonna find the grid for a heavy neut? [IMAGE REMOVED] In jita, where you can buy this gun called an Electron Blaster Cannon II, ion works as well. Quote: I think Nano ships are the most overpowered ships in the game. They can pvp with virtually no risk, where is the balance in that? I guess thats why nano-ships die all the time. Battelships are the most overpowered ships in the game. They can kill all smaller ships with no risk, where is the balance in that? [IMAGE REMOVED] Quote: so no, dont come with the argument fit a faction webber, because that shouldnt be mandatory). Just like how polys arent mandatory on nanoships? A db web costs the same as 2 polys. Quote: If you fight a nanoship, in alot of cases you dont have ANY chance of destroying him at all (or before his buddies arive). Vagas can effectively 'bleed' setups and alot of nanoishtarsetups are 'pretty easy to make them go away' by killing the drones, but that doesnt take away they can hold you there and wait for his friends to arrive. The same can be said of a battleship. With a ts/db neut(relatively cheap at 50m), a battleship can make any solo tackler go away. You cannot hold such a ship for friends to arrive. Plus the said battleship can either kill or chase away anything smaller than itself. Quote: Face it guys, speed STILL is overpowered on alot of non-minmatar ships, and tbh minmatar ships are PRETTY BALANCED with it because speed is there thing. Actually nanoed non-minmatar ships are the most balanced ones. They dont go that quickly and dont do too well vs inties(bar curse). And everybody says speed is minmatar's "thing". Minmatar can tank, gank, alpha, snipe, do ew(web), nano. What isnt "minmatar's thing"?
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.16 06:31:00 - [2] Originally by: Beth Heke These threads are always good for a laugh, as all the imbalance abusing 'PVPers' (gankers) come out of the woodwork and cry that they can't play without being able to avoid nearly all damage by flying at 5600km+. I like how some guy flying (at best) a T2 fitted Drake is going to have to spend 160m alone on a pair of faction webbers that cost more than a fully fitted Ishtar in order to have a chance of hitting it, especially as he needs two because a webbed nano HAC can still outrun him! I like how the nano abusers basically admit it's impossible to kill a speed-tanked HAC without either using one yourself or flying the Recon Ships of one particular race(interceptors are completely incapable of performing their role against a HAC). That's BALANCE. There are going to be a lot of tears come the next patch. Learn to read. The drake can fit a skirmish warfare mod and mindlink(costing less than 10m), now he has 18km overheated t2 webs. Just because you're too stupid to do it doesnt mean everyone is.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.16 09:42:00 - [3] Originally by: Beth Heke Originally by: Gamesguy Learn to read. The drake can hurt it's tanking ability by fitting a skirmish warfare mod and mindlink(taking months of training time in a highly specialised line), now he has 18km overheated t2 webs that still don't guarentee the web sticking. Just because I'm a typical lamer douchebag doesnt mean everyone is. Fixed! Ah so thats what it comes down to. You want to be able to pwn nanoships without changing your setup one bit, or do any training. I guess the nanohac didnt need to train any skills either, nope.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.17 11:53:00 - [4] Originally by: Beth Heke Originally by: Diomidis And when we are talking "cheaply fitted T1 ships" vs. "really expensive, rigged and pimped T2 ships", again its "playing safe" for the "visitor"... It only takes around 130m max to pimp out an Ishtar (not using Poly rigs) Looking at the killmail(s) from the original poster, the Drake was in nearly fully tech2 and worth 80m while the Ishtar was worth 120m. Except the ishtar most likely had polys, so it would be ******** to discount them. Not to mention all the speed figures so far cited by you and others...included poly rigs. Also drake gets insurance, while the ishtar does not(in significant amounts). The drake if lost would cost the pilot maybe 30-40m to replace, the ishtar would cost around 230.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.17 12:28:00 - [5] Originally by: Beth Heke Originally by: Gamesguy Except the ishtar most likely had polys, so it would be ******** to discount them. Not to mention all the speed figures so far cited by you and others...included poly rigs. Also drake gets insurance, while the ishtar does not(in significant amounts). The drake if lost would cost the pilot maybe 30-40m to replace, the ishtar would cost around 230. The rigs are listed in the killmail and it gave an estimated value of 120m for the Ishtar and 82m for the Drake. The quote you gave is almost double the estimated value of the Ishtar. Wow, you're actually going on kb figures. Did you happen to notice that the rigs had 0 isk value on the kb? Or that t2 ogres were listed as 300k? Not to mention kb values dont take into account insurance, and are notoriously inaccurate, for a while all the kbs had t2 ammo listed as costing billions/round. That ishtar probably costed 160m or so to replace, the drake costed maybe 20m at the very most.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.18 06:04:00 - [6] Originally by: Beth Heke Buy a 80m faction webber to counter a 130m ship, yet still not be able to kill it because it can outrun you while webbed? 130mil hac my ass. Most nano-hacs have polys and cost 200mil+. The ones that dont die(like the ishtar you seem to love to quote). Quote: 13km range with Webber II. Fail. 18km range with skirmish warfare mod, fail. Quote: This may force him to disengage, but any nano pilot who isn't a gibbering idiot will have Cap Boosters and run if their cap gets dangerously low. You have no clue wtf you're talking about. Most nano-hacs DONT fit a cap booster. The ubiquitous vaga certainly does not. You have such tiny cargohold after overdrives that you can only hold like 3-4 charges. Quote: Tracking mods mean you might actually be able to hit the nano-ship, but not enough to do any effective damage. If they start to take appreciable damage, they'll warp out. Wrong. Medium pulse/AC will track nano-hacs very well. Something like an absolution or a sleip is murder on nanos. Quote: Ugh. Also, I love how Interceptors can't perform their role against HACs Interceptors work fine vs hacs. Especially the vaga which usually do not have a web. Quote: I was about to say the same thing. "I can't play without whining like an idiot imbalances...WAHHHH...WAHHHHHH...WAHHHHHHHHH!!!!" Fixed Quote: How would your Crow fair against a nano-HAC? That's what I thought... Crow would be able to web vagas, and maintain a point of ishtars/sac/zealot. Hey look, a tackler doing a tackler's job, who wouldve thought.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.18 08:08:00 - [7] Originally by: xxxak The problem is not so much killing HAC pilots who actually fight. The problem is that a LOT of nano-HAC pilots never even engage their enemies. They are so afraid of losing their ships that they cruise through a 0.0 system in gangs of 2-5, but they know that a fleet of 5-10 BC and BS will ruin them, so they don't even attack. The result is a very boring night for everyone and lost productivity for ratters/haulers/etc. The boredom is the real problem with nano-HACs. I have more fun losing a Drake in a "normal" brawl than I do playing chicken with HACs. This is different from recons how? So you want nano-hacs to suicidally attack a blob 5 times their number? Thats your idea of "fun"? Maybe its fun for you, but certainly not for the nano-pilots.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.18 08:17:00 - [8] Originally by: Everyone Dies Edited by: Everyone Dies on 18/01/2008 08:13:43 maybe CCP should cap all speeds to 3000m/sec except for interceptors which would cap out at 5000m/sec that would fix everyone's problems. then a drake or raven has a fighting chance against this abuse of game mechanics Maybe CCP should cap all hitpoints to 20k except for battleships and capitals that would fix everyone's problems. Then a vaga or a zealot has a fighting chance against this abuse of game mechanics. Passive tanking drakes are ruining the game! I cant break their tank with a hac.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.18 09:00:00 - [9] Edited by: Gamesguy on 18/01/2008 09:00:47 Originally by: xxxak Edited by: xxxak on 18/01/2008 08:47:05 Originally by: Gamesguy Originally by: xxxak The problem is not so much killing HAC pilots who actually fight. The problem is that a LOT of nano-HAC pilots never even engage their enemies. They are so afraid of losing their ships that they cruise through a 0.0 system in gangs of 2-5, but they know that a fleet of 5-10 BC and BS will ruin them, so they don't even attack. The result is a very boring night for everyone and lost productivity for ratters/haulers/etc. The boredom is the real problem with nano-HACs. I have more fun losing a Drake in a "normal" brawl than I do playing chicken with HACs. This is different from recons how? So you want nano-hacs to suicidally attack a blob 5 times their number? Thats your idea of "fun"? Maybe its fun for you, but certainly not for the nano-pilots. No. Certainly not. But there is something I find stupid about 3 ships sitting 350km off a station for 30 minutes and in the end no one dies and no one gets a kill. I don't have easy answers, but that is boring for everyone honestly. Let's put it this way: 5 Vaga Pilots often wont engage 5 BS pilots because the Vaga's pop against things that can tank and do real damage. So I would rather have those 5 Vaga pilots bring 5 BS and then we can have a party. That's what I'm trying to say. This is 0.0. If those 5 vagas brought 5 BS, the 5 bs they were looking to fight would dock up and bring 50 bs+carrier support. People use nanoships because you can roam a long distance relatively quickly and run from blobs.
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.01.18 09:05:00 - [10] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: xxxak So I would rather have those 5 Vaga pilots bring 5 BS and then we can have a party. That's what I'm trying to say. What you're really saying is that you'd rather they bring 5 BS and start the party. Then they cyno in 2 motherships and 5 carriers. And yes, I've seen that. From a 3v3 BC fight, no less. -Liang Actually I've been guilty of the hotdropping part as well. Think we cynoed 2 MS and a couple of carriers on like 4 pirates gatecamping once.

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.