EVE Search - Enough with all the NANO figs?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Enough with all the NANO figs?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Exuscon Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.28 05:25:00 - [1] I like Hyro's Idea: For starters change the way of how overdrives, inertia stabilizers and nanofibers affect the speed. There are two ways i can think of right now... 1. - Overdrives: Change the cargo capacity penalty to an inertia penalty. This would prevent ships from beeing agile and fast at the same time - Inertia stabs: Chance the signature radius penalty to a speed penalty. This would prevent fast ships compensating the lack of agility. - Nanofibers: Leave them alone, they would be a module that affects both attributes a little bit. A ship gets a little more agile and a little faster with an AB/MWD fitted. - Improve the inertia of interceptors so it would compensate the use of two overdrive modules. - Allow only 3 mods or rigs to be fitted at the same time that affect either of the following attributes: inertia, mass, speed This way people would have to decide to be either very agile or fast, but not both at a time! Interceptors would not be affected very much, cause they are agile as it is and with the inertia improvement they could fit overdrives without having to suffer from a bad inertia. Even covert ops would not suffer from that cause they still could fit overdrives to go fast as they are cloaked. 2. - Overdrives: Change the cargo capacity penalty to an inertia penalty. Change the bonus to be a thrust bonus (AB/MWD) instead of a speed % bonus. This way the speeds of "supposed to be slow boats" wont get through the roof anymore, cause the additional speed is based on the MWD/AB now. - Inertia stabs: Change the signature penalty to a speed penalty. If you want an agile ship you won't go as fast anymore. - Improve the inertia of interceptors so it would compensate the use of two overdrive modules. - Nanofibers: Leave them alone again, little profits for both, speed and agility. - Allow only 3 mods or rigs to be fitted at the same time that affect either of the following attributes: inertia, mass, speed Even with this solution fast and agile are out of the picture if they were not supposed to be. Interceptors would stay where they are. This of course would change the behaviour of cloaked ships. I totaly agree and wish CCP would take a real long serious look at the state of nano in the game. I have played many years but, this unchecked easy mode play style most have took on is for the weak and scared. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.28 05:33:00 - [2] Originally by: Satura Quote: I do not want to fly Min recon.. Think this is the problem of all people who cry about nano ships. They either don't fly one, or don't have a few in gang. If you would try ingame as hard as you try on forums to counter your problem...think you would be pleased with the results. Hmm, few nanos? A few is killable ,but I personaly only see them in mass in the 0.0 and low secs I frequent. I am not the only one that see it this way either. Nano is off-the-chain and I beleive CCP is gonna do somthing about it soon "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.28 05:40:00 - [3] Hotaro's fix: "For starters change the way of how overdrives, inertia stabilizers and nanofibers affect the speed. There are two ways i can think of right now... 1. - Overdrives: Change the cargo capacity penalty to an inertia penalty. This would prevent ships from beeing agile and fast at the same time - Inertia stabs: Chance the signature radius penalty to a speed penalty. This would prevent fast ships compensating the lack of agility. - Nanofibers: Leave them alone, they would be a module that affects both attributes a little bit. A ship gets a little more agile and a little faster with an AB/MWD fitted. - Improve the inertia of interceptors so it would compensate the use of two overdrive modules. - Allow only 3 mods or rigs to be fitted at the same time that affect either of the following attributes: inertia, mass, speed This way people would have to decide to be either very agile or fast, but not both at a time! Interceptors would not be affected very much, cause they are agile as it is and with the inertia improvement they could fit overdrives without having to suffer from a bad inertia. Even covert ops would not suffer from that cause they still could fit overdrives to go fast as they are cloaked. 2. - Overdrives: Change the cargo capacity penalty to an inertia penalty. Change the bonus to be a thrust bonus (AB/MWD) instead of a speed % bonus. This way the speeds of "supposed to be slow boats" wont get through the roof anymore, cause the additional speed is based on the MWD/AB now. - Inertia stabs: Change the signature penalty to a speed penalty. If you want an agile ship you won't go as fast anymore. - Improve the inertia of interceptors so it would compensate the use of two overdrive modules. - Nanofibers: Leave them alone again, little profits for both, speed and agility. - Allow only 3 mods or rigs to be fitted at the same time that affect either of the following attributes: inertia, mass, speed Even with this solution fast and agile are out of the picture if they were not supposed to be. Interceptors would stay where they are. This of course would change the behaviour of cloaked ships." Fair and balanced! "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.28 05:51:00 - [4] Originally by: Lykah Storm Edited by: Lykah Storm on 28/05/2008 05:44:29 I have seen closely how effective fast nano gangs are. The alliance where I used to be had big problem from nano gangs. Mostly because they didn't have the correct ships against them. They tried to fight them with battleship gangs. They tried to fight solo in battleships. You don't win a nano fight with heavy tanked battleships. And there is nothing wrong on it. There is just one exception, the mighty Bhaalgorn. With two faction/officer webbers it is the monster wich can slow nanos down for the fleet. Only problem is that it's expensive faction battleship so it will be called primary really fast. Huginn. There is the ship what is the killer for nanos. Huginn has 60% bonus to stasis webifier range! Get more Huginns! Best named webber has range of 40 km in Huginn and it will take 90% of the speed away. Fit another and you knock out 99% of the speed away up to 40 km! So really, if you don't have nanos against nanos or Huginns around to help you - stay away from nano gang. And if you get pwn'd by Vagabond in torp Raven in 0.0 while ratting - you can only blame yourself - not the Vagabond. It should not be that way. That is not balance. If you have full gangs of nothing but, one type (nano) set-ups running around there is a serious balance issue going on. If its too popular and that is what most are using in PVP engagements, I would think it would raise an eyebrow as to somthing not being right? CCP is affraid to take another look and approach the nano issue or are they too scarred to because it might offend their lazy subscriber base? "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:01:00 - [5] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:03:07 Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:01:14 Originally by: Lykah Storm Originally by: Exuscon Cut cut cut There is Huginn and Rapier wich can take 99% of your speed up to 40 km using just best named webbers. That doesn't look what ship is there - the rest of the fleet will kill it. For example if your nanoship is flying 3500 m/s, you will be flying 35 m/s after those webs on you. And then it isn't hard to get one point of scram on you. Killing nanos is perfect example of needed team work in Eve. Huginns and Rapiers with intys while rest of the fleet gets ready to shoot em. You don't solo these nanos. And that's the real problem, not the balance. Every player in the game thats been here any amount of time has flown or flys that style. It's whats popular now. Quit pretending there are usualy just a couple. Easier said than done with theres like 40 of them running around the region. Want me to start naming aliances? The list will be huge! "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:10:00 - [6] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:14:26 Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Exuscon Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:01:14 Originally by: Lykah Storm Originally by: Exuscon Cut cut cut There is Huginn and Rapier wich can take 99% of your speed up to 40 km using just best named webbers. That doesn't look what ship is there - the rest of the fleet will kill it. For example if your nanoship is flying 3500 m/s, you will be flying 35 m/s after those webs on you. And then it isn't hard to get one point of scram on you. Killing nanos is perfect example of needed team work in Eve. Huginns and Rapiers with intys while rest of the fleet gets ready to shoot em. You don't solo these nanos. And that's the real problem, not the balance. Quit pretending there are usualy just a couple. Easier said than done with theres like 40 of them running around the region. So, you bring a balanced fleet of 40 or more of your own. And if you can't bring that, well then the problem isn't their speed, it's your numbers. Quit being a twit and face the facts. You are missing the point. 40 nanos are a balanced fleet? "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:19:00 - [7] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:19:28 Originally by: Cpt Cosmic a remote repping neut cruise raven gang fitted against nanos will easily defeat a group of nanos as an example. too bad most people dont have working braincells or are too lazy to use them, that means even if it gets nerfed causes of those crybabies (what will not happen) they will still suck and dont get them I have no problem killing a few solo as well. That is not what we are talking about here. I wanna see the fraps of your Raven defeating 40 nanos. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:27:00 - [8] Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Exuscon Quit being a twit and face the facts. You are missing the point. 40 nanos are a balanced fleet? No they're not, and that's exactly why a balanced, well organized, fleet defeats them. 40 man Fleets grow on trees with those exact set-ups and ships needed? Why shouldn't 40 Domi's be able to do it? Ahhh ,because the speed and the option of surviving or fighting each nano ship has? There is no balance in that. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:28:00 - [9] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:30:31 Originally by: Cpt Cosmic Originally by: Exuscon I have no problem killing a few solo as well. That is not what we are talking about here. I wanna see the fraps of your Raven defeating 40 nanos. bring in your friends and be safe lol what a FAIL argument "oh noes they have 40 ships, I am alone and cant win, thats unfair cry" Dude, you make no sense. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:32:00 - [10] Originally by: Cpt Cosmic then where is the problem? there is none! Hitaro's fix to the problem: For starters change the way of how overdrives, inertia stabilizers and nanofibers affect the speed. There are two ways i can think of right now... 1. - Overdrives: Change the cargo capacity penalty to an inertia penalty. This would prevent ships from beeing agile and fast at the same time - Inertia stabs: Chance the signature radius penalty to a speed penalty. This would prevent fast ships compensating the lack of agility. - Nanofibers: Leave them alone, they would be a module that affects both attributes a little bit. A ship gets a little more agile and a little faster with an AB/MWD fitted. - Improve the inertia of interceptors so it would compensate the use of two overdrive modules. - Allow only 3 mods or rigs to be fitted at the same time that affect either of the following attributes: inertia, mass, speed This way people would have to decide to be either very agile or fast, but not both at a time! Interceptors would not be affected very much, cause they are agile as it is and with the inertia improvement they could fit overdrives without having to suffer from a bad inertia. Even covert ops would not suffer from that cause they still could fit overdrives to go fast as they are cloaked. 2. - Overdrives: Change the cargo capacity penalty to an inertia penalty. Change the bonus to be a thrust bonus (AB/MWD) instead of a speed % bonus. This way the speeds of "supposed to be slow boats" wont get through the roof anymore, cause the additional speed is based on the MWD/AB now. - Inertia stabs: Change the signature penalty to a speed penalty. If you want an agile ship you won't go as fast anymore. - Improve the inertia of interceptors so it would compensate the use of two overdrive modules. - Nanofibers: Leave them alone again, little profits for both, speed and agility. - Allow only 3 mods or rigs to be fitted at the same time that affect either of the following attributes: inertia, mass, speed Even with this solution fast and agile are out of the picture if they were not supposed to be. Interceptors would stay where they are. This of course would change the behaviour of cloaked ships. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:44:00 - [11] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:44:49 Originally by: Cpt Cosmic Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 28/05/2008 06:39:50 Originally by: Exuscon OWNS YOU well then: - I can't speaketh the eingleesh - my turrets kapootz - I R A NOOB SOCIALIST You are stupid and we know it! and you have still not brought up a valid argument against nano fits Heh "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:49:00 - [12] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 06:51:21 Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Cpt Cosmic Edited by: Cpt Cosmic on 28/05/2008 06:39:50 Originally by: Exuscon useless stuff well then: -limit turrets/missiles and tanking mods to 3 -if you fit tankmods reduce dmg done by turrets -if you fit turrets/missiles reduce tanking abilities now do you see how stupid that is? and you have still not brought up a valid argument against nano fits His arguments are fine. Yours are lacking. Everything you listed (gun and tank balance) is counterable by a wide variety of other setups in game. If someone fits tank mods you are not limited to bringing only one or two ships to counter it. The answer to nano gangs invariably seems to be "learn to fly a Huginn" (perhaps a Rapier or Curse). That is bogus. I do not fly any of those 3 and feel that I should not have to to be able to take part in war against the mass of nanos. Just sucks ,that this is what EVE Online PVP balance has come down to. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 06:59:00 - [13] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 07:01:43 Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Exuscon Quit being a twit and face the facts. You are missing the point. 40 nanos are a balanced fleet? No they're not, and that's exactly why a balanced, well organized, fleet defeats them. So, you are solo and I NEED a fleet to maybe kill you? In reality you'll probably just bolt (not being snarky...anyone would...point is I cannot catch your nano if you are paying attention or get unlucky). We weren't talking about a solo ship. We were talking about a gang of 40 all fast ships. Yes, it's difficult to catch speed fitted ships (solo, small gang or mid-size fleets of them), but that's the whole point. That's what they are meant to do. It's the one thing they're really good at. This is their role. To raid and skirmish. If there's any kind of problem here, it's in the way almost any cruiser sized ship with lots of low slots can be made to go reasonably fast with a smaller investment in rigs and what not. For example, the Sacriliege and Zealot are supposed to be armor tankers, not Vagabond wannabes. Although, at the same time I think all heavy assaults should remain at least a bit fast, because the speed is the only thing for a lot of them that makes them better than their race's tier 2 battlecruiser. They are supposed to be the most survivable fitted ship in the game? The most versaltile too , I might add. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon	Posted - 2008.05.28 07:14:00 - [14] Edited by: Exuscon on 28/05/2008 07:16:44 Originally by: Hannobaal Originally by: Exuscon They are supposed to be the most survivable fitted ship in the game? No that would be a cov ops, or maybe a cloaking interceptor. Nanotars and phoons are still a problem. The current FOTM in eve is nano gangs and in many ways they ARE over-powered. Mostly due to the extremely low risk they take when engaging due to their speed. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon Phantasmal Collective Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.28 19:04:00 - [15] I am gonna file a petition because I can't get my harbinger to do 10k. "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."
Exuscon Phantasmal Collective Sylph Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.28 19:07:00 - [16] Originally by: Ariel Dawn Nano-Ships are only good at killing other nano-ships. Heh? "Save the tree! Wipe your arse with an owl instead."

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.