| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Beth Heke
   |
Posted - 2008.01.18 05:47:00 -
[151]
 Originally by: Kruel
Whiners, this is what you do:
1: Buy and fit a faction web
2: When encountering nanoship, overheat web, approach with mwd and shoost
3: Scoop loot
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?
Originally by: Haradgrim
1) Learn how to use heat
2) fit a webber
13km range with Webber II.
Fail.
Originally by: Haradgrim
3) fit a heavy neut
4) fit tracking mods
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.
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.
Originally by: Haradgrim
6) fly a nano
7) have a friend fly a nano
Ugh.
Also, I love how Interceptors can't perform their role against HACs
Originally by: Haradgrim
8) shut up and don't ***** on the forums
9) forget the forums exist and don't post anything about nanos there
10) quite eve, contract me your stuff
I was about to say the same thing.
"I can't play without abusing game imbalances...WAHHHH...WAHHHHHH...WAHHHHHHHHH!!!!"
Originally by: Haradgrim
and btw, I don't fly nano ships except for my Crow which if someone tells me tells me its unfair to hit 7km/s plus in I will scream.  
How would your Crow fair against a nano-HAC? That's what I thought... |
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 06:04:00 -
[152]
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.
|
stormyfs911
Minmatar
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation
space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 06:19:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Beth Heke
Wah Wah Wah
SHUT
UP
thanks.
Thank you Ursula LaGuinn |
xxxak
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 08:01:00 -
[154]
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.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 08:08:00 -
[155]
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.
|
Everyone Dies
Caldari
Lucky Tampon
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 08:12:00 -
[156]
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
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 08:17:00 -
[157]
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.
|
TheEndofTheWorld
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 08:37:00 -
[158]
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.
So, you do know that those 5-10 BC and BS gang will run from a 10-15 BC and BS gang...
Everybody blobs (and engages only when they can win) - that is 0.0 for you.
|
xxxak
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 08:41:00 -
[159]
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.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 09:00:00 -
[160]
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.
|
|
|
Liang Nuren
The Avalon Foundation
Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 09:02:00 -
[161]
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
--
Originally by: "QProQ"
When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
|
xxxak
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 09:04:00 -
[162]
Edited by: xxxak on 18/01/2008 09:07:19
Gamesguy, ok good point and probably true. Still, brawls (even when I lose) seem more fun to me than nano**** dances. Maybe that is my personal preference, I donno.
Part of it is the risk/reward. Everyone likes a good fight. No one likes losing a lot of ISK.
I can PVP in a Drake or a Hurricane or even a Raven and die, and I don't care about the ISK much. But most people don't feel the same way about a rigged Vaga or Ishtar.
Thus, you get a lot of "dances" and less actual fighting. Less KMs. And in my opinion, less fun.
T2 can actually be less fun, unless you count killing haulers and the rare mindless Raven pilot as "fun".
|
Gamesguy
Amarr
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 09:05:00 -
[163]
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.
|
StickyFingerz
Dark Materials
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 09:20:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Gamesguy
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.
and right there is everything thats wrong with carriers.
|
Beowulf Scheafer
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 09:53:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Squatdog
They never get close enough to Web
it seems tactical terms of combat have been forgotten totally by the population of eve. IF you would have positioned the tron at 15-20km next to you while the curse was orbiting you, it sooner or later would have come to web range
and a tron is very well able to kill a webbed nanocurse even without guns. well, next time you better think of how to kill it ingame, not in the forums, mkay?
|
Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 10:09:00 -
[166]
Originally by: xxxak
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.
But I do this in Rifters sometimes, I'll stick around at a 100km off from a blob and watch ;P
You don't need a nano-HAC to be able to choose not engage (well, OK, in 0.0 you do need a fast and agile ship).
I have played dancing games in every ship I own really, from frigs to battlecruisers. That is EvE. I don't fight to lose really, and I won't bring five BS because the opponent has 5 BS..
It is, first off, quite unsafe to roam in a BS. Secondly, a BS can't really do much if blobbed, unlike smaller and faster ships. There are many times when the fight wasn't winnable (because someone brought in a falcon plus a neut domi or two) and I could get away in a BC (not nanoed btw), but I would've died in a horrible fashion using a battlehsip.
At any rate, often you have to display to the opponent a force he will be willing to take on. If you're sitting in five battleships, then, of course, given the chance to avoid it, nobody will engage you with a couple of HACs. It would be stupid to do so.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Haradgrim
The Wild Bunch
INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 16:05:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Beth Heke
Originally by: Haradgrim
and btw, I don't fly nano ships except for my Crow which if someone tells me its unfair to hit 7km/s plus in I will scream.
How would your Crow fair against a nano-HAC? That's what I thought...
Depends on the nano-hac, however, most of the time I'm smart enough not to engage one without support. I.e. jump into a system, see vaga off the gate, have allies (with neuts) on other side of gate, lock orbit and get a point on vaga. tell allies to jump, they get lock and neut vaga hopefully before I die (which i usually don't), usually vaga tries to run as soon as BS or more vagas or whatever jump in since their choice is kill me and die or run and maybe live.
I don't know why you expect a 50-100 mil inty to "fair" better against a 250m nano ship than that which imo is completely in line with how things should be. Also, realize that it took as stupid amount of isk to make a ship that good/fast, that means one of their weaknesses is going to be fear of losing it, use that to your advantage, you won't see alot of nano-hacs stick around if you neut or web them even if there is a chance they would win.
Originally by: CCP Oveur
...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
|
Fenderson
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 17:39:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Squatdog
Nice. Good kill... obviously you knew how to deal with one of them.
The Ishtar pilot may have been a 'bit special'.
He dropped enough +speed gear and rigs to maintain an ungodly transversal outside web range.
cba to read another 6 pages of nano-whine, but this is my favorite part.
so nano-hacs are overpowered even tho you can kill them?
DO YOU PLAY POKER????
Join ingame channels "DOA Poker" and "Eve Online Hold'em" |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |