EVE Search - Stasis Webifier II Buff/Balance

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Stasis Webifier II Buff/Balance

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cpt Branko	Posted - 2008.03.29 10:06:00 - [61] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf Personally: I want to use afterburners, I want to use close range frigates Buff the afterburner then. Only when AB frigate goes as fast or faster then a MWD-ing cruiser/BC/BS, we can talk about effective use of close range frigates. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Siigari Kitawa	Posted - 2008.03.29 11:18:00 - [62] Originally by: Lord WarATron Webs need scripts to be honest. Most competent nano pilts never really get into web range and web does not decelerate people fast enough to matter most of the time. But what I think would work is a +100% range, -50% effectiveness web script. So a standard t1 75% web does 37.5% web at 20km (26km with overheating). This means a typical 10kms crow does 6,250 m/s. Seems pretty fine to me as multiple webs are required to slow it down and stop it. T2 90% webs with this scripts would do 45% web at 20km (26km with overheating). So the 10kms crow would be only doing around 5,500m/s which is also pretty fair. Thats only 4-5 seconds to get out of web range so nano pilots can still do their thing, and a conventional gang will have to focus webbing, thus adding more tactics to the game. So rather than solve nanos by a nerf, solve it by a boost by boosting webs via scripts NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO DO NOT GIVE WEBS SCRIPTS!!! I hate scripts. They are literally the biggest gimmick ever. They are ways of taking something that should be able to work efficiently on its own and making you need two of them to achieve any sort of reasonable effect. I HATE the fact that I can't have long lock range and high scan res on my stealth bomber without using TWO sensor boosters. I mean come on, seriously. Now you're wanting to put webs on the scripting crutch and it's going to make webs practically USELESS. Seriously, there is no realistic way to implement scripts into an electronic warfare module and have them work effectively. Tracking disruptors are a joke now and target painters are starting to become more and more useful. Don't script webs. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Tarkin8 DOWN THE PIPE Celestial Frontier	Posted - 2008.03.29 12:05:00 - [63] Why not just add a web bubble, Like a warp scrambling bubble, but instead, slows you down -90%
Daelin Blackleaf	Posted - 2008.03.29 16:34:00 - [64] Buff the afterburner: Suggested already. Web Bubble: Massively overpowered vs any blaster boat, smaller ships, or speed-tank. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Kaben Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.03.30 16:33:00 - [65] Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf Buff the afterburner: Suggested already. Web Bubble: Massively overpowered vs any blaster boat, smaller ships, or speed-tank. Scripts also overpowered to blaster boats. Sure a blaster boat will use these, but what good is using them if by the time he gets into range he has little to no armor left.
Daelin Blackleaf Naqam	Posted - 2008.03.30 16:54:00 - [66] I don't like the script idea much either, but since it would likely come with changes to the base web strength then it would probably be of benefit to blaster boats. The superior tracking of blasters would be more important at close range than today and (since you could use "focus webbing") opponents would have a much harder time escaping. Of course if the blasterboat pilot starts too far away he will end up half dead by the time he gets there but that's pretty much how things are today and the way things are supposed to be. In total it would result in a smaller margin of error when it comes to engagement ranges (which are typically very small anyway) and a greater ability to evade damage at close range since it's guns will track considerably better in comparison than they do now. Of course all of this would depend on the exact numbers used but I'm a firm believer in testing to find the right balance instead of pulling numbers out of my rear.
Doddy	Posted - 2008.03.30 17:08:00 - [67] Originally by: sakana Originally by: Lorna Loot Edited by: Lorna Loot on 23/03/2008 02:09:43 OR the -15% extra in max velocity bonus is the stasis webifier II's tech 2 bonus. Just maybe. Edit to shut people up: Warp scram gets bonus to range, web gets bonus to targets max speed. Whats wrong with that? Doesnt the fleeting web have the same max speed bonus as t2? Lots of top end named modules match their t2 counterparts, i think its more of a case that named warp scramblers are underpowered range wise tbh seeing as they give no adantage in range or effect. If you made t2 webs have the longer range you would really need to nerf their effectiveness back to the t1 level, otherwise you are just making them powerful for the sake of it.
Doddy	Posted - 2008.03.30 17:10:00 - [68] Originally by: Siigari Kitawa Originally by: Lord WarATron Webs need scripts to be honest. Most competent nano pilts never really get into web range and web does not decelerate people fast enough to matter most of the time. But what I think would work is a +100% range, -50% effectiveness web script. So a standard t1 75% web does 37.5% web at 20km (26km with overheating). This means a typical 10kms crow does 6,250 m/s. Seems pretty fine to me as multiple webs are required to slow it down and stop it. T2 90% webs with this scripts would do 45% web at 20km (26km with overheating). So the 10kms crow would be only doing around 5,500m/s which is also pretty fair. Thats only 4-5 seconds to get out of web range so nano pilots can still do their thing, and a conventional gang will have to focus webbing, thus adding more tactics to the game. So rather than solve nanos by a nerf, solve it by a boost by boosting webs via scripts NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO DO NOT GIVE WEBS SCRIPTS!!! I hate scripts. They are literally the biggest gimmick ever. They are ways of taking something that should be able to work efficiently on its own and making you need two of them to achieve any sort of reasonable effect. I HATE the fact that I can't have long lock range and high scan res on my stealth bomber without using TWO sensor boosters. I mean come on, seriously. Now you're wanting to put webs on the scripting crutch and it's going to make webs practically USELESS. Seriously, there is no realistic way to implement scripts into an electronic warfare module and have them work effectively. Tracking disruptors are a joke now and target painters are starting to become more and more useful. Don't script webs. To be honest i don't see how his proposal would make webs useless, in unscripted form they would have the same effect they do now .... So basically he wants to give them an extra ability on top. That would suck tho, there is nothing wrong with t2 webs.
Daelin Blackleaf	Posted - 2008.03.30 22:53:00 - [69] Originally by: Doddy there is nothing wrong with t2 webs. I, personally, think that a 90% reduction in speed is massively overpowered. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Delezar	Posted - 2008.03.31 06:09:00 - [70] In my opinion, webs should have different sizes. Something like: Small: 10km range, -90% speed (for best named and t2), 1pg Medium: 20 km range, -70% speed (for best named and t2), 150pg Large: 40km range, -50% speed (for best named and t2), 600pg That will enable most ships to choose which web they want, if they want extra range for a loss of effectiveness. A Huginn/Rapier can either go with the small one and up to 40km range with Recon 5 or just use the large, with some fitting trouble to get a much higher range, but at a big penalty to its effectiveness.
Erotic Irony 0bsession	Posted - 2008.03.31 06:49:00 - [71] Standard 12km webs would be stupidly damaging to everything not touting heavy tanks and would practically beg for another tackling ceptor buff which would inturn demand another web boost ad infinitum. More web classes and scripts are all nonsensical solutions to problems that don't exist when heat, multiple faction and officer webs exist for the bigger ships and the gang mod is another option, you might as well ask for centurions to augment web range too. The issue of momentum is the only interesting thing mentioned but one that I don't think will ever be satisfactorily solved. ___ Eve Players are not very smart. Support Killmail Overhaul
Thelok Mashito	Posted - 2008.05.16 15:56:00 - [72] Edited by: Thelok Ma**o on 16/05/2008 15:59:12 Edited by: Thelok Ma**o on 16/05/2008 15:58:28 Would like to see this change, but add scale to the picture. If a BS uses a web on a smaller target it should reduce the speed on said target to the max amount. Max speed reduction should only happen on like sized/massed objects or smaller. Either that, or gets me a harpoon. Reduce the speed on the target, and drag me along with it. Should do immediate armor/structure damage on both sides, with continuing damage as long as it is employed, and have an ability to tear the ship apart if multiple ships employ it from various points in space.
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba	Posted - 2008.05.16 16:06:00 - [73] everything is fine with webbers no need to change
Cortana AI	Posted - 2008.05.16 16:17:00 - [74] Originally by: Lorna Loot Edited by: Lorna Loot on 23/03/2008 02:09:43 OR the -15% extra in max velocity bonus is the stasis webifier II's tech 2 bonus. Just maybe. Edit to shut people up: Warp scram gets bonus to range, web gets bonus to targets max speed. Whats wrong with that? T1 webs can get to same specs as T2 web, T1 warp scrams can't because of range, giving them an extra 2km isn't exactly gonna ruin the game, I actually think it will bring it more into line.
Angelonico Series of Tubes	Posted - 2008.05.16 17:06:00 - [75] Originally by: Galen Naranek I think webs would be a perfect module for a script implementation. Maybe a base 75% speed reduction and 10 km range (T2) with scripts to either extend the range to 15km or the boost the speed reduction to 90%. Let the pilot choose! Even though I'm a nanofag myself, I'm signing this. /Signed
Harotak THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2008.05.16 17:15:00 - [76] Originally by: Thelok Ma**o Either that, or gets me a harpoon. Reduce the speed on the target, and drag me along with it. Should do immediate armor/structure damage on both sides, with continuing damage as long as it is employed, and have an ability to tear the ship apart if multiple ships employ it from various points in space. Best idea I've heard in a LONG time. Ship launches Harpoon, if it hits, it starts to reel in and the ship with less mass/propulsion impulse is the one that moves. Maybe a few harpoon battleships could drag a carrier off a station in less than 60s too......

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: 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.