EVE Search - Nanos should be nerfed

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Nanos should be nerfed

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.24 18:35:00 - [121] lol you also have to laugh at the people that ***** about turret nano ships and drone nano ships. Kill the damn drones. And turret nano ships can't hit you while they are nanoing either. Stop whining on the forums, because you'll never be able to logon and learn to adapt.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.24 18:48:00 - [122] Edited by: ***zilla on 24/04/2008 18:49:05 Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby The snipers WILL destroy any nanos that remain to fight and if they turn to engage the remote snipers then they contend with the group they just left. If they turn to engage the remote snipers the other group won't have anything to engage with. You left your close range ships and slower support there remember? The nanos were just handed a great opportunity by either going close to the snipers or keeping range from the close up ships. Having the hostile count split makes it easier to work. With the warps the snipers are likely to lose numbers as they warp off a few are bubbled and pop before the others can get back. There is a very simple counter tactic. Fly nanos. Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby All of life isn't 1-10km. If you don't adjust your tactics, you will die. Simple enough. Absolutely. Fly nanos. Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby THAT is why people don't like nanos; the tried-true plated blaster setups can't fight them effectively Nor do missiles, most drones, lower sp characters, etc. But nanos work great against nanos. Fly nanos. Originally by: Marcus Druallis ... because you'll never be able to logon and learn to adapt. Most of us have; we fly nanos. I agree. Those whining should just wise up and fly nanos.
Pesadel0 Minmatar Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.04.24 18:50:00 - [123]
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.24 18:56:00 - [124] Originally by: ****zilla Edited by: ****zilla on 24/04/2008 18:49:05 Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby The snipers WILL destroy any nanos that remain to fight and if they turn to engage the remote snipers then they contend with the group they just left. If they turn to engage the remote snipers the other group won't have anything to engage with. You left your close range ships and slower support there remember? The nanos were just handed a great opportunity by either going close to the snipers or keeping range from the close up ships. Having the hostile count split makes it easier to work. With the warps the snipers are likely to lose numbers as they warp off a few are bubbled and pop before the others can get back. There is a very simple counter tactic. Fly nanos. Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby All of life isn't 1-10km. If you don't adjust your tactics, you will die. Simple enough. Absolutely. Fly nanos. Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby THAT is why people don't like nanos; the tried-true plated blaster setups can't fight them effectively Nor do missiles, most drones, lower sp characters, etc. But nanos work great against nanos. Fly nanos. Originally by: Marcus Druallis ... because you'll never be able to logon and learn to adapt. Most of us have; we fly nanos. I agree. Those whining should just wise up and fly nanos. Not so stealth wah wah anyone?
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:11:00 - [125] nano is for minnies! it's all they have... -.- but yeah... the MWD speed boost is over the top - +300% boost/signature should do the trick. oh and -75% webs maximum then. - putting the gist back into logistics
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:37:00 - [126] Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby If the BSs in the OP's situation can't handle 5 nanos with their friends within rep range, they were going to die anyways. The snipers WILL destroy any nanos that remain to fight and if they turn to engage the remote snipers then they contend with the group they just left. we are talking about the snipers... These are remote-rep snipers then? My, what great tracking and damage they have? There is a reason no one but Bruce does this[hint: its the worst of both worlds]
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:39:00 - [127] Originally by: Marcus Druallis lol you also have to laugh at the people that ***** about turret nano ships and drone nano ships. Kill the damn drones. And turret nano ships can't hit you while they are nanoing either. Stop whining on the forums, because you'll never be able to logon and learn to adapt. Yes they can, please check the hit rates of large turrets[and hell, small turrets] against cruiser sized targets orbiting without their MWDs of. The damage reduction is not perfect, but its significant due to tracking for large guns and range for smaller that its a very significant damage reduction technique.
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:41:00 - [128] moar whine than usual.... these threads get moar hilarous all the time... nanos are fine speed is fine plenty of tactics no counters stop cryin, start flyin
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:41:00 - [129] Originally by: Marcus Druallis Yes, if this was a one on one fight between the single neuting BS and the Vagabond, in the end the vaga would leave the field and the BS would hold it. WHo wins, you tell me. BUT. It is much more likely that the BS has a friend or two, and they would easily be able to outmanuever the Vagabond to keep him in range. Its also just as likely that the vagabond has friends, because only an idiot of a vagabond pilot is going to attack a battleship when he is outnumbered and/or there is perfectly good support to pop first.
Leon 026 Caldari Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:43:00 - [130] Edited by: Leon 026 on 24/04/2008 19:42:59 Originally by: Marcus Druallis snip You realize your "average" inty is using WAY more isk in rigs than it would spend on the "specialized" MWD would spend. B-type gistii costs 45 million. It will get you to 10km/s with rigs, so don't pull that a-type only works stuff. So an average inty is spending 100+ million in rigs on a 8-12 million ship. And to make it a "specialized" ship, they only need to add 45 million more? Your logic fails. So I used a [Poly] -> [Poly + MWD] -> [Poly + MWD + Snake] progression. Whats the big deal? Did you prefer that I go the [MWD] -> [MWD + Poly] -> [MWD + Poly + Snake] progression? Oh hell, maybe I should've written [Snake] -> [Snake + Poly] -> [Snake + Poly + MWD] ? What's your exact point to the reply other than attempting to argue semantics of a choice order list? Originally by: Megan Maynard A ship going 10-14 k/s SHOULD be hard to kill.............How is this so hard to understand? Yes it should be hard to kill as the investment gives me them an edge, but unlike your initial post which I quote "THEY SHOULD WIN", so which is it? Should they win, or should they be hard to kill? You tell me, I wrote that isk investment should give them an edge, not "should win". At the same time, you're neglecting to comment on the fact that some weapons that were designed to fight high-speed targets, are no longer capable of doing so. Originally by: Megan Maynard So now add to the fact that all these ships are incredibly expensive when fitted for nano? Why can't the economics directly affect ship performance? Eve is all about isk. The simple fact is the OP thought they outnumbered the gang when in fact a smaller lighter force that had spent way more money won the fight. It also sounds like the nano gang was clearly the smarter party. I don't know why you're bringing up the OP when I didn't even address it, but okay. The "economics" of the nano factor is hardly a way to discourage people from using nanos. Why? Because its a known fact that people have more access to money-making methods, and have more money in their wallet. For a person that is actually serious about investing in an interceptor, then a 90-120mil isk investment in polycarbs rigs is pocket-change in light of long term gains made by the speed boost benefits. Originally by: Megan Maynard It's not that hard people, pick a target, spread out so it can't orbit all of you out of range and blow it up! JEEEEZ. You do realize that that is actually the best way to get killed by a skirmishing nano gang yea? Stragglers and people that wander away from the main group are the first to get picked off and die - this is quite basic.

Everyone Dies Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:46:00 - [131] nanos are probably the most imbalanced messed up thing in eve. nerf them to hell.
Indyman tech2	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:49:00 - [132] Wow, people really feel the need to vent now don't they?
Everyone Dies Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:50:00 - [133] Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Marcus Druallis The other ships you mention for nano's nano up horribly. ... those are fully insurable. A polyrigged vagabond is not. Yes, but a bad nano is better than no nano. I was playing with a few scimitars and a small gang. Slowest scimitar was about 4km/s and fastest was about 7km/s. All fairly cheap fittings and implants circling a ball of about 40-50 hostiles on a gate. The hostiles really couldn't do much. Yes. Losing a rigged vaga hurts. The vaga is still a better deal regardless of how much less a bs with insurance is or how much polys are. Spending lots of isk on fittings (billions) should not give that dramatic of an edge. This is the same argument for nanophoons. This
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.24 19:55:00 - [134] Originally by: Matrixcvd moar whine than usual.... these threads get moar hilarous all the time... nanos are fine speed is fine plenty of tactics no counters stop cryin, start flyin Absolutely. Everyone and their step brother should be flying nanos by now. Don't bring non nanos to a nano fight. Originally by: Leon 026 You do realize that that is actually the best way to get killed by a skirmishing nano gang yea? Shhh! You're reducing the number of possible targets. They need to spread out. Way out. Things like remote reps on battleships which require close ranges are overrated. Advising heavy ships that can't move fast to spread out and also the use of modules like remote reps which are very close range isn't a contradiction.
Leon 026 Caldari Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.04.24 20:04:00 - [135] Edited by: Leon 026 on 24/04/2008 20:05:50 Originally by: ****zilla Shhh! You're reducing the number of possible targets. They need to spread out. Way out. Things like remote reps on battleships which require close ranges are overrated. Advising heavy ships that can't move fast to spread out and also the use of modules like remote reps which are very close range isn't a contradiction. I was debating that myself :( Being a skirmish centric pilot I was quite tempted to leave that alone >_> ------- Leon 026 Once I was fallen, now I have wings*
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.24 20:06:00 - [136] Originally by: Goumindong we are talking about the snipers... These are remote-rep snipers then? My, what great tracking and damage they have? There is a reason no one but Bruce does this[hint: its the worst of both worlds] I have always wondered why you are fairly bright on most topics but go completely cookoo about Nanos. You always go way out of the way to "prove" your point, making your whole argument get buried in the non-sense. Obviously you don't mount remote reppers on your ships. Strange, I thought that was a fairly common practice to use your extra highs for most of our war enemies have. I mean we even mount them on our mission ships and turtle our newer members so they aren't in any danger when we don't feel like bringing out the logistics ships to protect them. Originally by: Audri Fisher On the other, the emo tears being cryed in this thread tell me that just because you shoot somebody for a living, does not mean you aren't a carebear
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.04.24 20:17:00 - [137] Edited by: Ulstan on 24/04/2008 20:23:34 Frankly, nanos are the new WCS. Warp core stabilizers were nerfed because they let people engage and then bug out of battle whenever they felt like it, with no ill consequences, barring an unreasonably herculean response from their opponents. Nanos are much the same way, except that filling your slots with propulsion mods gives you a better tank than filling your slots with WCS. I don't think a whole lot needs to be done however. A few obvious things stand out: polycarbs are way too good compared to their module version, and shoul be brought back into line with all other rigs compared to their module versions. Missile explosion velocity is much too low for some missiles (particularly heavies) meaning it is trivially easy for a ship to go fast enough to be immune to all missiles shot by everyone on the battlefield. At least with turrets you can't have high transversal to everyone at once.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.24 20:19:00 - [138] Edited by: Goumindong on 24/04/2008 20:20:03 Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby ... Have you ever tried to fit a remote rep sniper gang out? Not only are you very short on powergrid, but you drop DPS and range etc in order to make them tankable. No, they all universally end up with no range, not enough tracking, and low DPS or a terribly weak tank even with the RR going. They not only cannot kill the nanogang but will lose to a conventional remote rep gang or gank/tank gang or ewar gang or sniping bs gang, etc, etc, etc. In the end, even if you don't lose battleships because you brought enough to RR their DPS you won't kill them Vote Goumindong for CSM
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.04.24 20:19:00 - [139] Edited by: Anaalys Fluuterby on 24/04/2008 20:20:48 Originally by: Leon 026 Edited by: Leon 026 on 24/04/2008 20:05:50 Originally by: ***zilla Shhh! You're reducing the number of possible targets. They need to spread out. Way out. Things like remote reps on battleships which require close ranges are overrated. Advising heavy ships that can't move fast to spread out and also the use of modules like remote reps which are very close range isn't a contradiction. I was debating that myself :( Being a skirmish centric pilot I was quite tempted to leave that alone >_> ~ 8500 km range on larges. Max 50% on a vaga is... some 22km? By using a lattice formation you can easily keep 3-4 remote reps on each ship in a gang of 30 (the OP's *-complaint) while covering enough distance to be far enough away from the extremities that your guns can track them at that range. Even with 5 BSs you can cover a 15km area easily, making the ships come within web range if they circle and requiring the nano pilots to actually fly their ships. Of course that actually requires the defending gang to fly their ships too, get in a formation, be aware of their FC, etc and not just F1-F8... But the OP's point of them being able to pop a Mega with just 5 nanos is about silly. That is telling me they didn't have any support at all, no ability to back each other up, no ewar, etc. Its full of stupidity and stupid people SHOULD die. added I should have said Mega in a WAR gang of 30 ships... Originally by:** Audri Fisher On the other, the emo tears being cryed in this thread tell me that just because you shoot somebody for a living, does not mean you aren't a carebear
NightmareX Quam Singulari Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.24 20:56:00 - [140] Edited by: NightmareX on 24/04/2008 20:58:10 Originally by: Ulstan Edited by: Ulstan on 24/04/2008 20:23:34 Frankly, nanos are the new WCS. So by saying that, is all Interceptors the new WCS to? Because it's 8586758 times easier to get out and survive with an Interceptor than it is with a Vagabond. And saying the nanos is the new WCS is only beeing said by noobs who don't know how to PVP. END OF STORY. And everytime you reply to a nano topic, you ALWAYS say the same over and over and over......... Maybe you should try to find more out about nanos and play the game before you post next time, because that LOL comment is old.

Garion Avarr Amarr Zero Zero Traders	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:05:00 - [141] Originally by: Leon 026 Originally by: Garion Avarr Originally by: Indyman tech2 i was in this fight with this guy in 00, then all of a sudden this gang shows up out of nowhere, and i'm like wtf...and not only that, my support fleet of 30 poeple couldn't catch them....and this was only like 5 people in nanos vs us...and they killed our megathron pilot, THEN WARPED AWAY WITH NO LOSSES...thats so stupid. itsl ike the new wcs, no need to commit to a fight. It's called hit and run. Guerilla Warfare. Read up on the historical uses of it. Then understand why the fact that it exists along with regular fleet combat makes Eve a richer game, both on a tactical and strategic level. As one can see with my reinclusion of the quote from the OP, I was mainly addressing his complaints. To address your objections that my response does not work for his complaint: Originally by: Leon 026 The whole basis of hit and run is to make use of a lighter, understrength and more agile unit/group to take on a larger group which they would not be able to in a straight up conventional fight. That seems to be exactly what happened here, and what he complains about. Originally by: Leon 026 Guerilla warfare (both in historical and EVE gameplay context) does not rely on flying too fast to be hit - its about being flexible, so to be quite honest, trying to defend the current situation by pulling that 'reference' out of nowhere is misplaced. I wouldn't quite say that it's misplaced . . . though if I implied that it was about flying to fast to be hit, I appologize, as that was not my intention. Rather, I was addressing the 'not having to risk all your forces in committing to a fight,' which is a part of guerilla warfare, and something the OP complained about, their ability to not commit due to their supperior mobility. Originally by: Leon 026 Skirmish warfare adds a strategic level, yes. But the current variant of 'skirmish' warfare is simply blobs on wheels, and adds nothing to the overall strategic enrichment of EVE gameplay. The OP mentioned five foes, which is hardly a blob. Certainly anything under about 15 or 20 people can't really be called a blob, due to the size of the fleets I usually fly with, I'd hesitate to call anything under 40 or 50 a blob, though I'm aware that a 'blob' for most people starts well below that. I don't fly in 0.0 (and not lots in lowsec), maybe there are blobs of 50+ nanoships out there, I wouldn't know. But either way, that's not what the OP was complaining about, so I used the example that was best suited. 'Blobs on wheels' makes me think of mechanized warfare, though -- maybe it becomes blitzkreig then? ________________________________ This is not a signature.
Red Thunder	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:10:00 - [142] nanos are completely fine the way they are. There are loads of ways to counter them, neuts, missiles, webs, decent tracking etc. If you need to whine about getting killed by nanos its because: a. your opponent is more skilled than you. or b. your just too much of a noob to understand how to counter it. A lot of people in this thread are b. now stop whining noobs
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:15:00 - [143] Quote: There are loads of ways to counter them...missiles lolwhat? How is your nano getting hit by cruise and heavy missiles?
NightmareX Quam Singulari Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:21:00 - [144] A Vagabond / other HAC's attacks a Raven with 6x cruise launchers and 2x Heavy Neuts, lololololLOOOOOL, good luck with that.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:29:00 - [145] Originally by: NightmareX So by saying that, is all Interceptors the new WCS to? Because it's 8586758 times easier to get out and survive with an Interceptor than it is with a Vagabond. Ceptors are balanced because while they can go fast they've no tank and not much dps. Nanos have greatly replaced ceptors as the premier tackler due to superior dps and buffer tank. I think that many asking to nerf nanos are specific about nerfing nanos on anything cruiser sized or larger. As it stands ceptors and assault frigs need a major buff if nano cruisers are to remain in game. The t1 frigs are useless against nanos. They need some serious love with nanos in the game. The eas hyena is the best frig at the moment. Requiring t2 frigs to play with nanos is silly. Originally by: Garion Avarr That seems to be exactly what happened here, and what he complains about. Mobility usually means hitting loan targets. Getting into and out of belts quickly. Getting on grid, fine. Not going where they want through the hostile fleet. The nano problem is that they can get very much in the face of a much larger fleet and disengage at will. Effectively run back and forth taunting a firing squad knowing that if they keep their speed up they won't be seriously hit. Originally by: Leon 026 'not having to risk all your forces in committing to a fight,' which is a part of guerilla warfare, and something the OP complained about, their ability to not commit due to their supperior mobility. Guerilla warfare works because the smaller force forms up quickly and appears out of no where. They must commit to a fight. Guerilla quickly wither in the face of a large force. Guerillas can withdrawal and disperse quickly. Their mobility allows them to quickly commit and disengage. But they must commit. Their mobility allows them to pick the fight (fine) but the hostiles can and will give chase.
Corwain Gallente DIE WITH HONOUR	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:31:00 - [146] "whiners": The myrm is overpowered! it does 200dps more than the next damaging Tier2 BC and tanks better at the same time! Myrm pilots: The drake can tank it indefinatly without cap! The harb has more range! The hurricane is faster! CCP: Nerfed! "whiners": nanos are overpowered! They fly 5x as fast as a non-nanoed ship. They're so good that nobody flies anything but them in 0.0 unless they're killing a POS or sieging a system! nano pilots: Well at least we can be killed every now and then when we make a mistake. Also what will we do if we're not fast? It's the only thing we do well because we fail at everything else. Also blobs make us cry! Ignore the fact that we blob more than anyone else and actually create blobs as it takes a 5:1 ratio against us to kill 1 of us and make the rest run away crying (but glad we still have our 13km/s 10bil ISK rapier that hasn't died in a year!) Yeah, the fact that you die once a year (SRSLY, GUYZ! I DID DIE ONCE) doesn't mean that you're not overpowered. All you have to do to be overpowered is gasp be slightly more powerful than the alternative. You don't even have to be game-breaking. I'm not saying that nanos are overpowered, but if you want to argue that you're not overpowered stop using the fact that nanoships have at one time died as your only defense. -- Distortion\| Distortion 2 Preview
joshmorris AnTi. Atrocitas	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:37:00 - [147] Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Euriti "OMG I CANT WIN IN COOKIECUTTER HACK AND SLASH SETUP NERF NREF NREF NREF" Yes, because a cookiecutter nano setup is vastly superior. Fly Nano Spaceships (tm). Originally by: Phil Miller Nano need a nerf. A hard cap of 3km/s, while at the same increasing the effectives and range of webs. But then how would a small gang go toe to toe with a larger blob picking off ships at will? How would they run away when the other side doesn't have nanos & nano minm recons? As it stands now there is no reason to not fly nanos. The game changes. Adapt. Fly nanos. Drink the Koolaid. Well yeah please fly more frikin nanos .. i just love it when my mega pops them ... Uber idea solves all !!
Andracin Free Galactic Enterprises Infinite Innovation	Posted - 2008.04.24 21:38:00 - [148] Ive done my share of dying to vagas, I aslo can fly them. TBH they are not much more than a fast ball of tinfoil and the least amount of damage turns them into scrap fast. 90% of everyone I have seen killed by them are usually doing something stupid like trying to fly out solo to tackle it or not paying attention to local and suddenly find one in a belt with you 3/4 of the way through your hulk before you stop watching tv to come see what the noise on your pc's speakers is about. Flying a nano ship and fighting nano ships I can attest to how fast they die. Mostly the solo vagas are out for easy kills and to zoom through your defense force spraying with ineffectual fire and making jokes about how inept you are in local. Most of the time if you don't have a ship that can catch one, best defense is to dock up and not talk. Marauding pirate vagas are there for excitement or smack talk and when they don't get it from you and your fleet of ships that can't catch it they go find someone else who will give them more enjoyment.
Leon 026 Caldari Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.04.24 22:01:00 - [149] Edited by: Leon 026 on 24/04/2008 22:04:57 Originally by: Garion Avarr Interesting stuff I didn't want to address the OP too too much mainly because well... his gang composition wouldn't have handle a small scale skirmish gang anyways, but.... My main "blob on wheels" comment was more about the increasing tradition to have gangs consisting off all-out nano huginns/rapiers, vagas, inties, dictors, ishtars, claymore(s) that in essense would make up a quite heavy hitting fleet on it own, with the added benefit of the zoomzoom capabilities. My personal view of the original nano is to have understrength gangs raiding into hostile territory picking off stragglers - which is what is going right now to an extent. I'm not advocating a removal of skirmish warfare, on the contrary I fully advocate skirmish warfare and would rather CCP look into improving skirmish warfare in EVE. My main personal issue with 'nanos', is not that its game-breaking and everyone should fly boring battleships, its just that the current state of nano's is a little too extreme. I'm all for high paced skirmish gangs hitting enemy strategic assets and all, but I honestly do not believe that having ships fly as fast as they currently do is adding a positive effect to the game. People want their skirmish warfare, and trust me when I say this, and so do I. However, having focused much of my EVE career thus far on inty vs inty dogfighting, it's led me to realize a few things - After you reach a certain speed level, turrets no longer track you, missiles no longer hurt. When you compare an 8k/s inty to an overloaded 28k/s inty, they do nothing different what so ever, only difference being a 28k/s inty will get to a target faster [in terms of tackling]. However, the main gripe I've had ever since the interia-stab buff was that the faster things fly, the more nerfed small ships become. In an 6k inty vs 6k inty fight, so long as you fly clever, you can avoid damage, yes, but with clever maneuvering you can take out the enemy as he drops his transversal and etc. However the present situation of high level interceptor fights at 14k/s, even WITH clever maneuvering and loop-the-loops, you're lucky to get him consistently under 8k/s where you may have a chance to hit him. And that is basically the principle part of my issue. If people are not able to adapt to fight and counter skirmish gangs, that really isn't my problem, since I personally advocate their use. However its the issue that things are going a little too extreme in ship speed which is, and that imo is two seperate things (which is why you won't see me whining/complaining about use of skirmish gangs, but only about ship speeds). The problem is that as you reach a certain speed weapons are no longer effective, due to ship speeds this is also beginning to apply to cruisers as well. My personal vagabond, can hit 10k/s - not exactly something to boast about, but even WITH the invest isk, I think it's a little too much. And keeping with the frigates going too fast problem (since frig-pvp is what I specialize in), is that the main counter to frigates got horrifically nerfed not too long ago. It had been that the counter to some of the zoomzoom polysnakedgistii 14k/s crows would be the interdictor class, but due to the flat 25% reduction to all interdictors has created a vacuum in the anti-skirmish position. We all knew that the Sabre was a little too powerful, but as some had suspected, the -25% to ALL dictors have disastrously upset the balance. Dictors were a strong, viable and useful counter (and addition) to skirmish warfare gangs, and its effective removal has really upset the balance. As for the blitzkrieg/mechanized infantry idea, thats actually a good one and I'll keep that in mind :) EDIT - no space for this so bullet point format : * high inty speeds has made the claw suck * continuous HP "buffs" to prolong pvp has made "gank with larger numbers" more important = increase in gang size of a skirmish gang ------- Leon 026 Once I was fallen, now I have wings
Tomsudy Minmatar Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2008.04.24 22:06:00 - [150] Originally by: Indyman tech2 i was in this fight with this guy in 00, then all of a sudden this gang shows up out of nowhere, and i'm like wtf...and not only that, my support fleet of 30 poeple couldn't catch them....and this was only like 5 people in nanos vs us...and they killed our megathron pilot, THEN WARPED AWAY WITH NO LOSSES...thats so stupid. itsl ike the new wcs, no need to commit to a fight. why not just use ur brain and pick the right ships and train for overload



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: 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.