|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ulstan
State Protectorate
   |
Posted - 2008.06.13 14:56:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Ulstan on 13/06/2008 14:56:25
 Quote:
Here are a few we have come up with.
huggin and rapiers are the anti nano ship use them with a claymore and the web range can be up to 50+km.
Sniper nano ships (hacs) can counter some of the nano fleets going about.
Haha. I think this illustrates the problem perfectly. The counter to nano ships is *drumroll* more nano ships of your own!
This is entirely true by the way - the other 'counters' merely involve 'driving the nanos away'. If you want to actually kill them you gotta bring nanos of your own.
That said, the biggest thing that irks me about nanos is how utterly impervious to any and all missile fire they are - a lot of this is heavy precision missiles being randomly crap, but even light precision woudln't dent a fast nano ship.
And I don't think I've ever seen a fleet more vulnerable to nano sniping ships than the Caldari Militia: 2/3 of it is T1 cruisers and frigs who who shoot missiles which are bad at range and bad against nanos and really really bad against nano ships at range. They just kind of huddle together and hope the big bad nano ships don't hurt them. Don't know as I blame them, really, given the lack of effective counters available to a fleet like that.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:07:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Xaen
Originally by: FlameGlow
Originally by: Euriti
It's funny that RR BS gangs are totally accepted even though they're more powerfull than nano gangs.
More powerfull? Maybe, but they are not getting away if taken on by a fleet. Do you know why warpstabs were nerfed with penalties they give now? Just for that reason - they allowed to escape any fight you didn't want to commit to.
No, it was because they allowed you to escape from any fight you didn't want to commit to without any drawbacks whatsoever. Nanos are expensive as hell and you completely give up tanking, and if you go really fast you have tracking issues of your own.
Ah yes. The reliable "If it's expensive it's ok for it to be overpowered" response.
Also, if you fit all your slots with WCS, you gave up all your tank. So don't pretend stacking WCS didn't have any drawbacks. Nano'ing, however, gives you an *excellent* tank as long as you can maintain your speed.
WCS only let you get out of fights you didn't want to be in. Nanos lets you get into fights your opponent wants to escape from, provides you with a very good tank against some weapon systems, and then lets you escape from fights you don't want to be in.
While it requires more piloting skill than just throwing on a hangar full of WCS, it's definitely more powerful than the old WCS was. And that's not even considering heavy interdictors ability to ignore WCS entirely.
Of course, the people who say that nanos are their only counter to blobbing are generally correct. So I can understand the visceral fury with which they defend their chosen playstyle. Blobbing is also a horrible feature of EVE which needs to be corrected, and I don't think you can just outright nerf nanos without also finding some way to 'nerf' blobs so that that doesn't become the only way to play EVE.
Small incremental common sense fixes (like reducing polycarbs to be in line with all other rigs and upping the effectivenes of the bugged heavy precision missiles) should of course be implemented asap. |
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:10:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
I like the way all the whiners are caldari
Were you also surprised at how all the whiners in the 'lasers suck' thread were amarr? 
Caldari ships are slow and heavy and tend to use missiles. Think about that and you'll see why people flying caldari ships are most likely to be unhappy with the current state of nanos. |
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 21:26:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Euriti
Edited by: Euriti on 13/06/2008 21:15:11
Originally by: RC Denton
Originally by: Euriti
All those people saying "missiles dont do ****!", it's not nanos that are the problem there, it's missiles being broken on that point.
This is something that I totally agree with. Precision missiles should have their explosion velocities upped to around 10k-15km/s. This with the missile velocity bonus's you can get from ships and rigs and skills would serve as a very nice nano counter as they would take full dmg from precision missiles which are exactly the type of weapon that should do full dmg to them.
Full damage would be a bit over the top, the damage should be brought in line with turrets hitting same target, aka if turrets get 30% cut off their dps because of the speed precision missiles should too.
I'm a fan of buffing, since nerfing just wastes peoples training and isk and ****es them off.
I agree that full damage would be too much. However I also agree that precision missiles need some help (especially the poor lamentably bad heavy precision missiles).
Basically a max killed precision missile needs to be able to hit a max fast nano ship of the same class for a 'reasonable' amount of damage.
It's tricky because it's not like the nano can reduce the damage by clever piloting (hey maybe we could make defenders not suck?) like they can with turret damage but the nano shouldn't be able to go "lolimmune" to missiles either like they can now.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 18:59:00 -
[5]
This thread has gotten way too long. In general though, I agree with Euriti.
I think only a couple minor things are needed: bring polycarbs back in line with all other rigs compared to the respective modules and fix precision missiles. Right now heavy precision missiles are lolbad.
Everyone needs to consider the 'other sides' viewpoint in this.
Guys who run nano gangs: just try to imagine how frustrating it is for newer players to see people zooming around with what they consider near impunity, killing who they feel like, running away from fights they wish to avoid, and taking no damage from their missiles. It's just not a lot of fun to be trying to fight a nano gang - they can be countered, in the sense they have to leave, with some rather specialized ships, but these are not typically ones that new players know about or are even skilled to fly. in general fighting nanos is an unsatisfying experience as if they win, you die, but if you 'win' usually they'll just fly away (for most of the counters listed)
People who hate nanos: try to remember that the people using nanos are doing so to avoid gigantic blobs. It's no fun to be blobbed over and over, so when you suggest removing nanos from the game, the nano users feel as though you are attacking their playstyle and want to remove the only fun way left for them to play, which makes them le sad. Also remember that while nothing you can fly may be able to damage or stop a nano it is theoretically possible, so get to trainin' and figure out what it takes!
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 19:21:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Ulstan on 17/06/2008 19:25:12
Quote:
I dont care who gots frustrated
In that case, nanos will inevitably be badly nerfed. Look, it's obvious they're at least slightly overpowered and it is pointless to pretend otherwise. As we've learned, things that generate massive massive outcries from huge swathes of the playerbase not only get nerfed, they tend to get *over* nerfed, even if most of those complaints are exaggerations.
So, instead of acting like children and simply insulting everyone who is frustrated at combatting a slightly overpowered combination, you would be much better advised to spend your time educating the population on how to effectively catch and kill nano ships without using nano ships of their own. In effect, you should show them clearly and convincingly that nanos, while admittely difficult to kill, are not invincible. Calling them noobs and telling them they suck won't get you anywhere. It's not going to change anyones mind. When nano pilots act like *******s it just makes your average joe even more convinced that nanos are overpowered and even more desirous of seeing them nerfed.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 20:06:00 -
[7]
Quote:
EVE was perfectly fine until until HEAVY assault ships started to outrun intys all over the place
Heavy assault ships do not outrun similarly fit interceptors.
I suspect you are thinking of AF's? Yes they are horrible and gimp and need fixing, but I think everyone agrees on that.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 20:35:00 -
[8]
Quote:
How can you suggest a solution to a problem when all you fly is t1 crusiers?
What's wrong with flying only T1 cruisers? EVE was more fun back then anyway.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 14:02:00 -
[9]
Originally by: burek
Originally by: Xeronn
you should NOT be able to disengage so easely once you engage in a fight
And why exactly should you NOT be able to? No one ever retreated in history of warfare? Come on...
If non nano ships could escape as easily from nanos as nanos can from non nanos, I think you'd see a lot less complaining. Incidentally, this would be a much more fair situation.
The current situation, where nano ships still have amazing tanks (yes there are counters, but there are counters to any tanks) and can pretty much go immune to all missile fire on the battlefield, while simultaneously being fast enough to catch anyone trying to get away, while *also* being fast enough to escape from any fight they don't like, is giving them the best of all worlds.
As I said, it's far worse than the old WCS was in terms of being able to get out of fights you don't like and not giving up anything for it. Now, it does take more skillpoints to fly, and the setups are more expensive, so there is that mitigating factor.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 15:40:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Kristoffer
Originally by: Shadowsword
Originally by: Kristoffer
Im not interested in the rest of your post btw.
A typical nano HAS has 2 LSE II, so around 9k shield, 3k armor, 3k structure. Killing that with one salvo mean a lots of medium guns.
So you say that to counter a single nano ship, we should have a blob of 50? That's the most idiotic argument a nano lover has uttered yet, and it takes some doing.
Im talking about the caldari and their current situation about being unable to hit nanos in their drakes.
Well if heavy precision missiles didn't suck, we could tell them to train heavy missile V and stop complaining!
|
|
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 15:42:00 -
[11]
Quote:
The rather depressing fact that every single Caldari blob features 3-10 Drakes only goes to prove their incompetence
Wait...are you saying that the Drake needs a buff for PvP?
It'd be fine, if the powergrid for HAM's was reduced and heavy precision missiles weren't terrible.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 17:56:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Euriti
Originally by: Cathojen
Edited by: Cathojen on 18/06/2008 16:53:53
A slightly lower ceiling on possible top speed might be good imo.
I can agree with all (to some extent) but this, an overall blanket nerf would just end up with polycarbs + snakes being the only way to go which it shouldn't be.
This. If you reduce anything, it should be the effectiveness of polycarbs and snakes so that nanos who don't use those aren't affected. (And really, if you're not using polycarbs you're hardly a nano ship at all)
But anyway, I think approaching it from a 'lets make nanos slower' direction is a lot less intelligent than simply adjusting precision missiles so they don't suck and can actually hit nano ships if you have max skills + appropriate implants etc and brining polycarbs back into line with all the other rigs, instead of being way more effective than the corresponding modules :p
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 18:00:00 -
[13]
Quote:
What? No. I'm saying that Drakes are for noobs ...and how they are awful at combating nano ships.
So, you do think they're terrible in PvP then. Why is that? And why would a fleet of caldari ships not include any of their signature battlecruisers? I can't think of any reason other than that the battlecruiser in question is in need of some serious PvP help.
Caldari Pilots fly missile ships. If missile ships cannot combat nano ships, then it's time to adjust missiles.
Or hey, if you think it's fine for one combat system to not harm nanos, let's switch thing up and make missiles good at combating nanos and turrets useless at it.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 19:50:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Ulstan on 18/06/2008 19:51:16
Quote:
No, WCS were nerfed because one or two modules could let you get away 90 percent of the time while still allow you to fit for gank or tank.
If you're set up for nano, you dedicate ALL your lowslots to the nanosetup. There's nothing left for tank or gank. Big difference.
You are in error. People fitting 1 or 2 WCS were easily easily countered. The issue was them fitting all their slots with WCS, leaving them with no tank, but also meaning no one could stop them from running.
Now, if you nano, you can still get away from just about any fight (much easier than someone fitting a full rack of WCS can) *and* you have a superb tank, arguably the best as long as you can maintain your speed, because you effectively take zero damage from missiles.
Nanos right now are far worse than the old WCS were, since you get the best of all worlds. It's just that it takes a lot more skill points and a whole lot more money to fly them. They still let you get out of any fight without any real downside, but in addition, they let you chase down other people who are trying to escape, and have a tank all at the same time. In short, you can force an engagement, gank your target while having a tank, and break off the engagement if you are losing.
But any fixes to nanos are going to have to go hand in hand with fixes to blobbing. Blobbing is another security mechanism with no downside, and these are bad for the games. Nanos are the only real current mechanism for avoiding blobs. So fix blobs first, nanos second.
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 19:19:00 -
[15]
Quote:
There is also nothing wrong with missiles against nano ships.
Oh, come now. Almost every reasonable person recognizes that heavy precision missiles are erroneously and hilariously awful, and wholly inadequate against nano ships. You do yourself no favors by holding such an untenable position. I realize you may be one of those "It's ok for weapons systems I don't use to suck" people, so, how about we switch the effectiveness of guns and missiles vs nano ships?
|
Ulstan
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 21:45:00 -
[16]
Quote:
Yes, because heavy missiles are the only missiles you can use. There are no cruiser sized missile systems besides heavy missiles.
The only other cruiser sized missiles are heavy assault missiles. Are you suggesting that these are going to do better against nano cruisers? They don't even *have* a precision version and are much shorter ranged.
Seriously, only the most idiotic and blind-to-balance of the nano partisans can't see that heavy precision missiles need some help. It's an excellent litmus test for whether you understand balance and game mechanics or not.
|
|
|
| |
|