EVE Search - Proposed nano ship counter

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Proposed nano ship counter

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:15:00 - [31] wah wah 'think outside the box to kill a nano' Bull****. the only way you can actually KILL a nanoship is getting them webbed or use another nanoship otherwise a semi-decent pilot will just run away.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:17:00 - [32] Originally by: Lorz0r wah wah 'think outside the box to kill a nano' Bull****. the only way you can actually KILL a nanoship is getting them webbed or use another nanoship otherwise a semi-decent pilot will just run away. You're doing it wrong (ironically). There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself) who steadfastly refuse to use the powerful counters that already exist. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Auraurious Quam Singulari The Church.	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:18:00 - [33] Originally by: SK Rooster Originally by: Liang Nuren But there currently exist many counters to nano ships - and two extremely powerful counters in the form of webs and neutralizers. The most powerful counter, though, is your brain. -Liang You say exactly there that a neutralizer is a powerful counter, to which i agree. Yet on a cruiser or battlecruiser sized ship the range of a energy neut is not long enough to be effective, i.e. not enough range. as im pretty sure you are aware a MWD is pretty much standard for every ship these days so keeep that in your head. MWD towards him and neut, if you are webed then you are in neuting range anyway(disregarding a min recon). if you arent webbed go back to the gate if you dont fancy your luck of getting into range. so why is there not enough range on the mod? Perfection.
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:22:00 - [34] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Lorz0r wah wah 'think outside the box to kill a nano' Bull****. the only way you can actually KILL a nanoship is getting them webbed or use another nanoship otherwise a semi-decent pilot will just run away. You're doing it wrong (ironically). There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself) who steadfastly refuse to use the powerful counters that already exist. -Liang Sorry? please point me to the thread I made about nano-ships. Counters? yeah there are counters. my gripe is there's like 2 that you can use to actually DEFEAT a nano-ship
SK Rooster No Trademark Notoriety Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:41:00 - [35] Originally by: Liang Nuren Cruiser and BC sized ships have other counters though - such as higher base tracking. Also, are you prepared to see 70km neuts on a curse? -Liang This is the first valid argument I have seen yet. I will agree that medium turrets can hit orbiting nano ships. I fly mostly battleships and did not think about the extra tracking on medium turrets.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:50:00 - [36] Originally by: Lorz0r Sorry? please point me to the thread I made about nano-ships. Counters? yeah there are counters. my gripe is there's like 2 that you can use to actually DEFEAT a nano-ship People (such as yourself). Reading comprehension FTW! Also, there's quite alot of counters that you can use to DEFEAT nano ships. I had a geddon strip the shields off of my Ishtar in 4-5 seconds a couple of days ago - I very nearly lost the ship. Even a couple more seconds and I'd have died just from damage alone. What's the counter to that? What about heavy neuts that completely destroy my capacitor? 2 heavy neuts and a MWD is a "advance to Go" card against nano ships. What about stations, stargates, and asteroids that nano ships are constantly bouncing off of? Why aren't you using your surroundings to your advantage? What about WEBS (specifically faction, overloaded, or recon variety)? What about a MWD of your own? What about tracking computers? What about damps and TD's? What about ECM? There are lots of counters that PEOPLE LIKE YOU simply are too lazy to fit or use. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 22:52:00 - [37] Originally by: SK Rooster This is the first valid argument I have seen yet. I will agree that medium turrets can hit orbiting nano ships. I fly mostly battleships and did not think about the extra tracking on medium turrets. Oddly, the Rokh and Megathron are the best non-faction anti-nano BS in the game. Tempest, phoon, and Domi come in the next tier. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:04:00 - [38] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Lorz0r Sorry? please point me to the thread I made about nano-ships. Counters? yeah there are counters. my gripe is there's like 2 that you can use to actually DEFEAT a nano-ship People (such as yourself). Reading comprehension FTW! Also, there's quite alot of counters that you can use to DEFEAT nano ships. I had a geddon strip the shields off of my Ishtar in 4-5 seconds a couple of days ago - I very nearly lost the ship. Even a couple more seconds and I'd have died just from damage alone. What's the counter to that? What about heavy neuts that completely destroy my capacitor? 2 heavy neuts and a MWD is a "advance to Go" card against nano ships. What about stations, stargates, and asteroids that nano ships are constantly bouncing off of? Why aren't you using your surroundings to your advantage? What about WEBS (specifically faction, overloaded, or recon variety)? What about a MWD of your own? What about tracking computers? What about damps and TD's? What about ECM? There are lots of counters that PEOPLE LIKE YOU simply are too lazy to fit or use. -Liang LOL. you can't just cut half of the sentance off to give it a different meaning. you typed "There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself)..." which CLEARLY says that I have made threads about nanoships. I suggest you read what you have typed before the old 'reading comprehension' **. Firstly - it's not laziness for me not to fit these modules - it's just a matter of practicality - to fit heavy neuts I have to sacrifice an awful lot of other mods just to fit them. So I prefer to just not fit them and avoid nano's. Right, so the first thing I can use to defeat a nano-ship is pure luck. 2. Neuts - Unless you're extremely unlucky you'll still get away with 0 cap 3. Yeah I'll use my surroundings to my advantage moving at like 13 m/s 4. I mentioned Webs were one of few ways of defeating nano's 5. All the other ** isn't going to defeat a nano - because as soon as they see I'm using it they just run. Jesus, you need the reading comprehension lessons. I SAID THERE WERE COUNTERS. I said there just weren't enough ways to actually defeat them.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:07:00 - [39] Originally by: Lorz0r LOL. you can't just cut half of the sentance off to give it a different meaning. you typed "There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself)..." which CLEARLY says that I have made threads about nanoships. English isn't your first language is it? Quote: Firstly - it's not laziness for me not to fit these modules - it's just a matter of practicality - to fit heavy neuts I have to sacrifice an awful lot of other mods just to fit them. So I prefer to just not fit them and avoid nano's. Ok, so you feel that it's too impractical to fit a counter to a ship that has specifically countered your setup. No wonder you lose. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:17:00 - [40] Edited by: Lorz0r on 13/02/2008 23:20:11 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Lorz0r LOL. you can't just cut half of the sentance off to give it a different meaning. you typed "There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself)..." which CLEARLY says that I have made threads about nanoships. English isn't your first language is it? Quote: Firstly - it's not laziness for me not to fit these modules - it's just a matter of practicality - to fit heavy neuts I have to sacrifice an awful lot of other mods just to fit them. So I prefer to just not fit them and avoid nano's. Ok, so you feel that it's too impractical to fit a counter to a ship that has specifically countered your setup. No wonder you lose. -Liang How has it specifically countered my setup? Nano-ships have countered nearly all setups going. It is my first language and "There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself)" means to me that I've made one of thousands of threads. I simply don't see how it could mean anything else. Please explain. EDIT: OK I've seen the misunderstanding. You should have put "Similar to yourself" instead of "Such as yourself" because the latter can actually mean me and not people SIMILAR to me.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:25:00 - [41] Originally by: Lorz0r How has it specifically countered my setup? Nano-ships have countered nearly all setups going. No, they don't counter all setups. I just gave a dozen examples of things that you could put on your ships to be counters to the nano fad. Even better, people who actually stop whining and try out the counters are out there collecting billions in loot. Quote: It is my first language and "There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself)" means to me that I've made one of thousands of threads. I simply don't see how it could mean anything else. Please explain. quote the whole sentence - not just half. Originally by: "Liang Nuren" There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself) who steadfastly refuse to use the powerful counters that already exist. Ok: There exists a set of players P. There exists a subset of P such that all the players are too lazy to use proven and effective counters. We will call this set L (for lazy) There exists a set of threads made by elements of set T. There exists a subset of L that makes threads on Eve-O in set T. We will call this set W (for whiners) You are grouped by the statement into set L, not W. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Zhulik Abyss Restless Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:31:00 - [42] Speaking of them "effective counters", why do you people always assume everyone has Energy Management @ 5 and is thus capable of overloading their webs? Those extra 3km aren't that much of a help against the majority of nanohomosexuals anyway. Just curious, not going to argue about anything. ----- My views reflect those of my corp completely and entirely. My corpmates will gladly go to war over my forum antics.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:33:00 - [43] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 13/02/2008 23:33:19 Originally by: Zhulik Speaking of them "effective counters", why do you people always assume everyone has Energy Management @ 5 and is thus capable of overloading their webs? Those extra 3km aren't that much of a help against the majority of nanohomosexuals anyway. Just curious, not going to argue about anything. Because Energy Management 5 is a basic skill? Do you honestly expect to be able to kill everyone with any ship - even if they're specifically fit against you, and have more and better placed SP? -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:36:00 - [44] Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 13/02/2008 23:27:41 Originally by: Lorz0r How has it specifically countered my setup? Nano-ships have countered nearly all setups going. No, they don't counter all setups. I just gave a dozen examples of things that you could put on your ships to be counters to the nano fad. Even better, people who actually stop whining and try out the counters are out there collecting billions in loot. Quote: It is my first language and "There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself)" means to me that I've made one of thousands of threads. I simply don't see how it could mean anything else. Please explain. quote the whole sentence - not just half. Originally by: "Liang Nuren" There have been thousands of threads made by people (such as yourself) who steadfastly refuse to use the powerful counters that already exist. Ok: There exists a set of players P. There exists a subset of P such that all the players are too lazy to use proven and effective counters. We will call this set L (for lazy) There exists a set of threads made by elements of set L. We will call this set of theads T. There exists a subset of L that makes threads on Eve-O in set T. We will call this set W (for whiners) You are grouped by the statement into set L, not W. -Liang tl;dr over-complicated rubbish Basically I have a Falcon alt so there goes your point about me being too lazy. I'm also training for an anti-nano Sleipnir setup - but that is taking a lot of time to finish. I'm sorry I don't care enough to try and decipher all that rubbish you typed but I still believe I'm correct in that your post was unclear. To say the least.
Imaos	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:40:00 - [45] Easiest counter to use by turret ships is to spread out. Nano ships can only keep their transversal up against close groups. If you spread out at least one of you should have low enough transversal to hit the nano. Imaos ------------------------------------------ Originally by: NoNah My friend, this is EVE, as it's a space oriented game, they couldn't have trolls. We have Caldari.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:40:00 - [46] Originally by: Lorz0r tl;dr over-complicated rubbish Basically I have a Falcon alt so there goes your point about me being too lazy. I'm also training for an anti-nano Sleipnir setup - but that is taking a lot of time to finish. I'm sorry I don't care enough to try and decipher all that rubbish you typed but I still believe I'm correct in that your post was unclear. To say the least. Too lazy to fit a counter, too lazy to read a rebuttal to your flaming crap, too lazy to properly formulate your thoughts... too lazy. Of course - you're too lazy to fit a counter, and would rather that any ship that you warp to just explodes. It might be too inconvenient to pick up the loot tho, so that should just magically appear in you cargo.. or at Jita 4-4. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Berrik Radhok GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:49:00 - [47] Someone's unhappy about control-q not saving their pod anymore
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:50:00 - [48] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Lorz0r tl;dr over-complicated rubbish Basically I have a Falcon alt so there goes your point about me being too lazy. I'm also training for an anti-nano Sleipnir setup - but that is taking a lot of time to finish. I'm sorry I don't care enough to try and decipher all that rubbish you typed but I still believe I'm correct in that your post was unclear. To say the least. Too lazy to fit a counter, too lazy to read a rebuttal to your flaming crap, too lazy to properly formulate your thoughts... too lazy. Of course - you're too lazy to fit a counter, and would rather that any ship that you warp to just explodes. It might be too inconvenient to pick up the loot tho, so that should just magically appear in you cargo.. or at Jita 4-4. -Liang Again - I have counters. I use alt's. I also explained that I don't want to sacrifice mods on my main ship just to counter nano-ships. I like a good skirmish as much as the next person. But I believe that nano-ships have simply just taken the fairness away and that they are causing everyone to use the same ships and mods. Diversity is dissapearing as a direct result of nanoships. Lazy this lazy that - what are you on about? Ultimately we're all just clicking a mouse and using our keyboards. Because I don't choose to fit anti-nano setups on my main doesn't make me lazy. Also everyone knows nano is going to get nerfed in someway anyway so I'll just sit back knowing that someone alot more important than you in relation to EVE agrees with me, and that's what counts right?
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:55:00 - [49] Originally by: Lorz0r Again - I have counters. I use alt's. I also explained that I don't want to sacrifice mods on my main ship just to counter nano-ships. If you refuse to fit counters, then you forfeit the right to complain. Quote: I like a good skirmish as much as the next person. But I believe that nano-ships have simply just taken the fairness away and that they are causing everyone to use the same ships and mods. Diversity is dissapearing as a direct result of nanoships. MMmmmmhmmmmm. Yeah, you refuse to fit a counter, and then complain about it being "fair" that someone who fit their ship to counter big slow fatty ships like yours can best you. Quote: Because I don't choose to fit anti-nano setups on my main doesn't make me lazy. Sure it does - because you're whining about it. Quote: Also everyone knows nano is going to get nerfed in someway anyway so I'll just sit back knowing that someone alot more important than you in relation to EVE agrees with me, and that's what counts right? I guess it depends on your definition of "counts" and "important". ;-) So: what are you going to do to the next fad? Refuse to fit a counter to that too, and whine until they nerf it eventually? -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Zhulik Abyss Restless Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.02.13 23:58:00 - [50] Just to clear something up: when I say "you", I mean noone in particular, but rather the collective image of your average forum nanodefender. I fly nanos. Mostly rapiers. And only three thing pose a real threat to a rapier: nano-curse, another rapier/huginn with any tackler and a crapload of inties swarming it. Nanos aren't professionals' ships, like many pilots try to convince themselves they are. They're cowards' ships, unless you've sworn yourself to never disengage a target. I'm ashamed to fly one, but I do it anyway, because there is no way for people to get me, unless I mess up really bad, which I haven't done for a couple months. It's a vicious cycle. I'm just sick of people not willing to admit they have no balls. If nanoships are so damn vulnerable, how come you're flying them all the time instead of jumping into one of those anti-nano ships you propose everyone to fly and going out to reap souls of vagas? Ooooh, I know, because you like to do it the hard way. COME ON! When you fly nano you can pick your fights and I DARE YOU to say you never pick fights that you know you would normally win and don't go through copious amounts of thinking before engaging anything that might pose a threat to you, often not doing so. No amount of minmatar recons and inties will ever prevent you from mwding back to the gate if you pop into a gate camp accidentally, I've done it countless times myself. And there is on other way to even get close to you to try out one of them fancy nano countermeasures. A nanoship can disengage most of the time if things don't go his way and never come back. That's MY problem with nanofaggotry, if all these arrogant pilots would quit being *******s, I would be perfectly content with any amount of nanoing going on. There, I finally snapped. Off i go. ----- My views reflect those of my corp completely and entirely. My corpmates will gladly go to war over my forum antics.
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.02.14 00:01:00 - [51] Originally by: Liang Nuren There are innumerable counters to nano ships.... just that nobody is willing to use them. How do you separate the nanoships from the nano-counters, since.. ya know, the best way to actually kill one is to nano up? I mean, why bother to "counter" if you're going to do it half-assed? Scaring them away simply isn't good enough.
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.14 00:09:00 - [52] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Lorz0r Again - I have counters. I use alt's. I also explained that I don't want to sacrifice mods on my main ship just to counter nano-ships. If you refuse to fit counters, then you forfeit the right to complain. Quote: I like a good skirmish as much as the next person. But I believe that nano-ships have simply just taken the fairness away and that they are causing everyone to use the same ships and mods. Diversity is dissapearing as a direct result of nanoships. MMmmmmhmmmmm. Yeah, you refuse to fit a counter, and then complain about it being "fair" that someone who fit their ship to counter big slow fatty ships like yours can best you. Quote: Because I don't choose to fit anti-nano setups on my main doesn't make me lazy. Sure it does - because you're whining about it. Quote: Also everyone knows nano is going to get nerfed in someway anyway so I'll just sit back knowing that someone alot more important than you in relation to EVE agrees with me, and that's what counts right? I guess it depends on your definition of "counts" and "important". ;-) So: what are you going to do to the next fad? Refuse to fit a counter to that too, and whine until they nerf it eventually? -Liang Yeah it counters my slow big fatty ships alright. But there's an awful lot more than that it counters as well. That's right I refuse to fit counters - because it gimps my setup too much to the point where it's pointless to fly that ship anymore other than to actively hunt nanoships and nanoships only. Which is exactly why I'm training for a Sleipnir because I have the luxury of nanoships thinking twice before engaging me. But look! I've had to train a nano-ship to counter nano-ships! Holy **** I've done it! I've actually gone one better than fit Anti-nano mods on to my ships! I've got a WHOLE ANTI-NANO SHIP! Which brings me back to the start. To kill nanoships you need to fly nanoships. As soon as it all gets nerfed I'll go to a more traditional Sleipnir setup. So yeah, I can complain. For the record I've only ever been killed by nano-ships once (that wasn't a blob) and that was because I was momentarily AFK when they found my safespot.
Chomapuraku Templar Republic R0ADKILL	Posted - 2008.02.14 00:15:00 - [53] entire alliances base (almost) all of their roaming gang fighting on nanoships. why? because they're easy to skill for (HAC, t2 weapons, and navigation), they move quickly, and you have a FAR, FAR greater chance of disengaging a fight you can't win. yeah, the dps of each individual pilot is "meh", but a 20-man gang consisting entirely of t2 nano-cruisers (logistics, hacs, recons, HICs) is damn-near impossible to lock down and commit to a fight. the point isn't that there are viable counters. it's that these viable counters are far, far more skill-intensive, specific, and, quite frankly, boring as hell to fly. whereas you can fight other gang styles many different ways (remote-repping BS gangs, ewar-heavy gangs, cap-supported gangs, lil-bit-of-everything gangs) and have rousing battles where you lock each other down and fight tooth and nail, when you fight nano-gangs, you can't just send in what you have and see what happens. everyone has to dock up and refit their special anti-nano setups, and if the nano-gangs see that, they just run away (and with far, far greater ease and chance of success than other gang styles allow for.) if ccp doesn't nerf nanos in a way that allows for speed-tanking while forcing them to commit to a fight, they should at least: A) introduce new mods/shiptypes to counter nano-gangs that are fun to fly B) buff existing ships/mods or game mechanics so that a nano-gang has to commit to a fight to the same degree as other shiptypes. the only ship that should be able to run away with the ease a nano-ship can is a cov. ops or other non-combat setup. like the WCS and cloaking device, a setup that allows you to disengage at will should have a stack of penalties that limit its usefulness to travel setups only.
Lorz0r You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2008.02.14 00:23:00 - [54] Here we go - everyone coming out with essentially the same views. You can't just fit a half-assed anti-nano setup on your ships as you're suggesting. It's either Anti-nano or not. Nothing inbetween. AAAAND what is an anti-nano setup folks?? More nano ships! woohoo thats right!
SK Rooster No Trademark Notoriety Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.14 01:04:00 - [55] Originally by: Chomapuraku entire alliances base (almost) all of their roaming gang fighting on nanoships. why? because they're easy to skill for (HAC, t2 weapons, and navigation), they move quickly, and you have a FAR, FAR greater chance of disengaging a fight you can't win. yeah, the dps of each individual pilot is "meh", but a 20-man gang consisting entirely of t2 nano-cruisers (logistics, hacs, recons, HICs) is damn-near impossible to lock down and commit to a fight. the point isn't that there are viable counters. it's that these viable counters are far, far more skill-intensive, specific, and, quite frankly, boring as hell to fly. whereas you can fight other gang styles many different ways (remote-repping BS gangs, ewar-heavy gangs, cap-supported gangs, lil-bit-of-everything gangs) and have rousing battles where you lock each other down and fight tooth and nail, when you fight nano-gangs, you can't just send in what you have and see what happens. everyone has to dock up and refit their special anti-nano setups, and if the nano-gangs see that, they just run away (and with far, far greater ease and chance of success than other gang styles allow for.) if ccp doesn't nerf nanos in a way that allows for speed-tanking while forcing them to commit to a fight, they should at least: A) introduce new mods/shiptypes to counter nano-gangs that are fun to fly B) buff existing ships/mods or game mechanics so that a nano-gang has to commit to a fight to the same degree as other shiptypes. the only ship that should be able to run away with the ease a nano-ship can is a cov. ops or other non-combat setup. like the WCS and cloaking device, a setup that allows you to disengage at will should have a stack of penalties that limit its usefulness to travel setups only. This is the thread winner here.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.14 01:53:00 - [56] Originally by: Lorz0r Here we go - everyone coming out with essentially the same views. You can't just fit a half-assed anti-nano setup on your ships as you're suggesting. It's either Anti-nano or not. Nothing inbetween. AAAAND what is an anti-nano setup folks?? More nano ships! woohoo thats right! You're doing it wrong (still). Though I suppose bringing friends (alts) is a perfectly acceptable solution too. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Gamesguy Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.02.14 02:05:00 - [57] Originally by: Lorz0r Here we go - everyone coming out with essentially the same views. You can't just fit a half-assed anti-nano setup on your ships as you're suggesting. It's either Anti-nano or not. Nothing inbetween. AAAAND what is an anti-nano setup folks?? More nano ships! woohoo thats right! Rapiers/huginn/kitsune, Interdiction maneuvers, curse, heavy neuts. You're a ****** if you think the only counter to nanos is more nanos.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation	Posted - 2008.02.14 02:11:00 - [58] Originally by: Chomapuraku entire alliances base (almost) all of their roaming gang fighting on nanoships. why? because they're easy to skill for (HAC, t2 weapons, and navigation), they move quickly, and you have a FAR, FAR greater chance of disengaging a fight you can't win. It also reduces the tedium of traveling long distances... But copious amounts of ewar is an even better way to ensure that you can disengage at will. Quote: yeah, the dps of each individual pilot is "meh", but a 20-man gang consisting entirely of t2 nano-cruisers (logistics, hacs, recons, HICs) is damn-near impossible to lock down and commit to a fight. Logistics, recons, and HICs hardly qualify (generally speaking) as nano ships. Especially the HICs. It seems that your complaint is that cruiser sized ships can run from battleships. Quote: the point isn't that there are viable counters. it's that these viable counters are far, far more skill-intensive, specific, and, quite frankly, boring as hell to fly. Ok, I encourage you not to fly a ship that you feel is boring. Eve is a game afterall. Quote: whereas you can fight other gang styles many different ways (remote-repping BS gangs, ewar-heavy gangs, cap-supported gangs, lil-bit-of-everything gangs) and have rousing battles where you lock each other down and fight tooth and nail, when you fight nano-gangs, you can't just send in what you have and see what happens. Recon gangs just jam everyone, cloak, and warp off. I fail to see the difference, except that a solo recon generally isn't a big threat to your ratting raven. Quote: everyone has to dock up and refit their special anti-nano setups, and if the nano-gangs see that, they just run away (and with far, far greater ease and chance of success than other gang styles allow for.) So the problem is that you can't pwn them all in your ratting-raven-with-a-warp-disruptor? Quote: if ccp doesn't nerf nanos in a way that allows for speed-tanking while forcing them to commit to a fight, they should at least: A) introduce new mods/shiptypes to counter nano-gangs that are fun to fly B) buff existing ships/mods or game mechanics so that a nano-gang has to commit to a fight to the same degree as other shiptypes. Ok, so you'd either like a fun way to instantly and easily drop T2 and faction loot into your hanger or remove skirmish style battles from the game entirely. Even though you may find it hilariously fun to fly slow and ponderous battleships doesn't mean that everyone does. Quote: the only ship that should be able to run away with the ease a nano-ship can is a cov. ops or other non-combat setup. So... what? Are you asking for instanced PVP battles or something? Quote: like the WCS and cloaking device, a setup that allows you to disengage at will should have a stack of penalties that limit its usefulness to travel setups only. Ok, so out goes recons, stealth bombers, frigates, destroyers, and anything smaller than whatever ship you happen to be flying? Ok. No, the optimal gang should not be 10 nano hacs, but nor should it be 10 battleships either. Fortunately, it isn't. -Liang -- My new keyboard is awesome... I can type again (beware Eve-O spreaders of misinformation!)
Zanon Xiu EnTech Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.02.14 03:04:00 - [59] i will have to agree with liang here. Prob like Liang, i cannot discuss allience tactics and counters, but we do have very clever and effective ways to not even worry about nano ships. think outside the box like many people who came up with counters and know how to deploy them. Once again i am not allowed to discuss what type of tactics we use. Op if other people have figured out counters on their own, so can you, stop relying on whining on the fourms hoping ccp will change your diaper and brestfeed you. your a grown man, use your braincells like many already have.
Hank Soral	Posted - 2008.02.14 03:22:00 - [60] Liang pretty much owned your face kid, stop arguing and LEARN TO PLAY.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: 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.