EVE Search - Why nano everything?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Why nano everything?

» 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)
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.20 14:24:00 - [1] Originally by: The Tzar from the all too common hotdropping these days. Hotdropping isn't that common. The issue is that nanos are by far the best way to reduce risk. The nano blob is the new blob. If HICs had mobile cynojammers that would be a massive buff to nano gangs. I would expect to see very large nano gangs with a token HIC for the cynojammer.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.20 15:47:00 - [2] Originally by: TidPow please explain what you mean by "nanoed"? Speed tank. Usually a hac/recon cruiser or support with speed related lows, implants (not common), rigs, and a nice mwd. Nano refers to nanofibers which started this craze. If you're not shooting at a pos or running missions everyone should be flying nanos by now. Go faster than 4-5km/s and you'll start to avoid damage. A nano might fly 7-8km/s or 15km/s+ (uncommon, maybe a pimped ceptor). Even flying at a normal 4-5km/s you can avoid most damage and mostly be threatened by another nano or a Rapier/Huginn (also likely nano'd). Speed is life. Speed is more important than tanking or dps. The goal is to use speed to attack at will, avoid damage, control range, and escape when threatened.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.20 17:29:00 - [3] Originally by: Trojanman190 I think of added important is the warp time. If warp time were this important than wouldn't that be reason enough to fly hacs versus t1 battlecruisers? Wouldn't hacs etc rely more in i-stabs versus only for maintaining orbit? If warp time were this important than remote rep bs gangs would be very viable. They'd only need a frig or two to web and get the gang into warp. Any warp over 12-15au (roughly) they could web each other and be out of aggression by the time they hit the gate to jump through. A freighter gang can coordinate getting into warp in a few seconds. Why is this not seen in remote rep bs gangs? Seems to me that we spend more time in warp than aligning. If warp time mattered than wouldn't rigs to accelerate speed in warp be worth more than shaving a few seconds off of the align time? Most everyone knows the usual speed for most hacs. The standard eft fits take great interest in the mwd speed. Yet align time and speed in warp is nearly entirely ignored. Nanos are fit for speed on grid. Their ability to jump from system to system quickly without coordination is a freebie. Nanos are not fit for getting into warp quickly nor speed in warp. These attributes are entirely a secondary consideration after addressing the primary issue of speed.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.20 23:50:00 - [4] Originally by: Halkin mobile cyno jammer was to be an option make it grid specific (or AU), rather than system wide. This would also help those that don't need the buff. Flying a large nano gang? Take a mobile cyno jammer and you'll never be surprised again! Your fleet has a cap fleet on standby and the hostiles have a cap fleet ready. To spring a trap only pop your cyno first and hit the mobile cyno jammer a second later and the hostiles can't interrupt without giving you time to get out. Your cyno will last 10 minutes. You can get in reinforcements but they can't. Want to lock down a system? Put mobile cyno jam ship + support on every gate. Disable the pos guns and put a mobile cyno jam ship outside every hostile pos. Now hostiles must cyno into a safe spot without the benefit of a gate for cover or a pos for protection.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.22 03:38:00 - [5] Originally by: Reem Fairchild counter =/= render completely obsolete and unusable Ya know that if CCP ever releases the Rapier/Huginn they could web at 40km @90% and possibly much longer with faction webs, gang bonuses, and overloading? Oh the humanity! Oh wait. We've got 2x ships dedicated to webbing and that hasn't broken the nano fad. In fact the two ships dedicated to webbing are mostly nano'd themselves. If webs had a longer range then they'd be more effective and a realistic counter. Possibly offer a web or script that allows 10km @90% webbing or 24km @30% webbing. It wouldn't break the game. Currently everyone fits a point. Force folks to decide between scramming the target and webbing. Of course this is bad news for a vaga as if it wants to nano, scram, and web it must sacrifice its buffer tank. This would bring at least some variation in nano fittings. Until CCP does something everyone should be flying nanos. No excuse. Don't whine that you can't catch them or kill them. The only reasonable course of action is to fly one yourself.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.22 05:16:00 - [6] Originally by: Reem Fairchild effectively render them obsolete by giving every single ship in the game similar abilities. Not similiar abilities. Currently Huginn/Rapiers have a very unique ability that makes them very valuable in fleets. There aren't other t1 options that compare. I'd like to see something in between the mostly useless webs we have now and a t2 fitted Minm Recon. Not every single ship would have similiar abilities. A Lachesis or Arazu has bonuses to points for range and still everyone fits points. Which ship has a free mid slot for a web? Not everyone would fly with a web. Folks would be forced to decide between tank, speed, points, and web. What I'm asking for is a viable t1 webbing solution.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.22 06:08:00 - [7] Originally by: Reem Fairchild Hyena. T2 Originally by: Reem Fairchild Beyond that, asking for regular webs to reach out to warp disruption range = Minmatar recons and speed fitted ships completely obsolete and useless. Scripts. Scripts that work like scrams/disrupters. Scripts that trade range for effectiveness. Originally by: Reem Fairchild Their main use is in electronic warfare with their target painters, or at east should be before those were killed because of forum whiners. Now, they're near useless. But anyway... Fixed. Gallente Recons are there mostly for points. Minm Recons for webbing. Everyone fits points. Minm Recons are must have ships in many fleets. Originally by: Reem Fairchild Most ships I fly have a web. And you've likely traded tank, another point, a cap recharger, something for that web. Webs do not have the utility of points currently. Originally by: Reem Fairchild If you let them web out to 20-24 km on regular ships you make most speed fitted ships obsolete and grant the main role for Minmatar recons to every ship in the game. I know they web at far longer ranges, but their main use against fast ships is within that range Minm recons try and web outside of scram range. They try and web at 30-35km if they know someone else has a point. I've lost a few Rapiers getting too close because I didn't trust that someone had a point. Minm recons can web at considerable range and effectiveness. I'm asking for a solution which trades range for effectiveness. This leaves a need for Minm recons. A long range web doesn't make nanos obsolete. If two nanos meet the one with the web can control the range. If both have webs and similiar skills then they can dart in, web the other, and hopefully get out of range before they're webbed. There are tactics around this currently. A long range web would force nanos to commit. It would be even better if the effectiveness of webs also was based on the sig radius. So a cruiser with mwd would be more affected than a ceptor with a ab.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 14:31:00 - [8] Originally by: Angelonico Highlighted the ridiculous part. Large nano gangs with 50+ isn't unrealistic. 20-30 pilots in a gang is somewhat common. The upper limit is how many the fc lets join before they think the sheer numbers will generate too much lag. Since many can fly nanos finding pilots isn't that difficult. The nano blob has replaced the bs blob. Originally by: Sean Faust On the one hand, it's very training intensive. It means having nearly maxed out navigation and cap skills, and it means having to put polycarbon rigs on your ship, which are RIDICULOUSLY expensive and can double or even triple the cost of your already expensive HAC or recon. Actually flying a nano isn't that skill intensive. Takes something like 2 months for great nav skills. Most should have decent cap skills. It'll take a bit for Cruiser 5 and for the hac skill itself. So most can nano it up in about 2 months and have great skills for nav, cap, ship, and weapons in 3-4 months. For costs a nano is about the same as a battleship. The main issue is insurance in that you don't get anything significant back. For their ability to survive and considering how long they'll last, poly's aren't just an expense but a great investment. Originally by: Sean Faust On the other hand, there are a lot of tech 2 ships whose only advantage over their battlecruiser counterparts (which are cheaper, easier to fit, and less training intensive) comes from their mobility. Thats the funny part. While a bc could do the job better a non nano hac could jump faster and get into warp faster. So if a ship couldn't be nano'd like today, it would still be useful when needing to move on a long roam. So the excuse that a nano makes a long roam possible would be valid for a nano setup. However the non nanos could be caught at gate camps and could be trapped. So this will never happen while the nano solution exists. So truely the only valid answer is for us to not whine about it but to train and fly nanos ourselves.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 17:38:00 - [9] Originally by: Bronson Hughes 1. It's fun to fly fast ships. 2. You're far more likely to win a fight if you can choose them. 3. You're far more likely to survive a fight if you can run away from them. Surviving isn't winning. Its a draw. If you might die or draw and the nano is more likely to draw or win then the nano has the advantage. Fast ships are only fun to fly for some people. Not everyone has a computer that can handle it. Not everyone has a connection that can handle it. Not everyone can handle the speed nor has the twitch type reflexes. Fast ships are a bit too much fps-like for some. It attracts the younger crowd and pushes away those that are older. There are some that just don't want to fly them. They're foolish but what can you do. In a nano world anything that isn't nano'd is usually a liability. Originally by: Bronson Hughes that is the very nature of guerilla warfare: hit fast, inflict maximum damage, fade away before your target can mount a defense. It becomes a war of attrition on a very small scale and unless the defenders can lock down and destroy the nano-gang, only the nano-gang can determine when it ends. This isn't guerilla warfare. The "hit fast" thing is often designed to force the defenders out to get even more easy kills. Nanos are there to stir up the hive because unless the "defenders" field greater number of well equipped nanos then there isn't much risk. The defenders cannot lock down nor effectively destroy the nano-gang. The nanos will engage until they start taking more losses than acceptable then they'll withdraw. As you've stated: "only the nano-gang can determine when it ends". This does not reflect guerilla warfare. Originally by: Bronson Hughes History has shown that guerilla wafare is incredibly effective because the guerillas chose the terms of the fights and run away when out-numbered. Why should EvE be any different? Guerilla warfare works by striking where the enemy is not. A stealth bomber/black ops gang would be guerilla warfware. Nanos strike mostly where they please. Nanos prefer a target rich environment as they can choose the engagement. Nanos are closer to the fighter aircraft in a world with limited surface to air weapons. You might get lucky by tossing a rock up but mostly the best idea is to ignore them or fly them. The grunt out of basic is useless. Heavy and light armor on the ground is mostly useless when they cannot choose when to fight. What we get is the current trend. The push is for everyone to fly nanos. There are the occasional remote rep bs gang but mostly what I see are gangs forming up for nanos only. If it isn't a nano/nano support then it isn't welcome to even undock. So the only rational thing is to fly nanos yourself and mock those that won't fly nanos.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 18:51:00 - [10] Originally by: Xaen No, it's not far more effective. It's the only way to fit that justifies a HAC over a battlecruiser. Versus the "i win" for a nano? A tanked hac can warp faster system to system. Greater agility, less sig radius. In a tanked ship versus tanked ship fight a hac may have to commit however can control range better. There is the Eagle and Muninn. Mostly ignored in favor of nanos. However niches like these prove that non nano hacs have a place. There are many t2 ships that are vastly more expensive than the t1 stuff. However the nanos are in a different league than the t1 ships entirely. Just because something is expensive doesn't mean that it has to be good. Price does not control utility. Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Xaen First explain why you think you should be able to kill them. Maybe because the point of the pvp part of the game is to blow up enemy ships? :O And if you can't the choices are either 1) don't fight, 2) fly them yourself. Both options are depressing. But hey, variety in pvp ships and fittings are mosty dead anyways.

Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 19:15:00 - [11] Originally by: Xaen Get a covops to give you a warp-in on the nano gang. Drop your whole god damn 50 man battleship fleet right in their laps. Last I checked warping drops lock. Whens the last time you've seen nanos in a tight ball? They'll be spread out. That cov ops would be lucky to get a warp in point for more than a handful of nanos. If the battleships do warp the nano have lots of time to pulse their mwd and escape. The battleships 1) won't lock in time, 2) won't be close enough to web. Most likely the last battleship or two to warp off will be scrammed and popped before the rest can make it back. In a best case scenerio the battleships might pop a nano or two that is a bit slow or distracted. More likely the battleships take greater losses. Originally by: Xaen CCP have specifically stated that any speed nerf applied will not touch the vagabond. Keep the vaga fast. Just offer some counter to speed besides speed. Seriously. The way this is going it is very silly for anyone to not fly nanos.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:01:00 - [12] Edited by: ***zilla on 23/06/2008 20:05:03 Originally by: Xaen Most places, driving the enemy out is considered victory.. Driving them a hundred km a way is a victory? Driving them so they're still on grid is a victory? driving them so they hop to the next belt is a victory? Attrition generally works in favor of the nanos. Originally by: Xaen So we should slow the whole game down for your sake? It has been speed up for yours. Part of this isn't really a change in the game but an "inflationary" effect as more max out their skills and we see high sp characters pushing the limits with isk and mods. What was fast a year or two ago is no longer fast. With the change of price for t2 mods going fast etc is cheap and standard fits. Originally by: Xaen There's nothing inherently wrong with it. There is when the best counter is to go fast also. Fine. Let people go fast. Offer a decent counter. Just like any other electronic warfare offer something a low sp char can use. Originally by: Xaen So? The game shouldn't be changed to suit just you. Nor should it be changed to suit you. Oh wait. It has. Originally by: Xaen Sniper battleships are hardly a liability. EWAR boats are hardly a liability. Logistics ships are hardly a liability. Ever think about backing up your tacklers with a couple of Basilisks? A basilisk sucks to help tacklers. Often they'll be lured beyond the range of its reps. A nano Scimitar is vastly superior for this role. Yes I've flown nano scimitars for this. Oh wait, its nanoed. ewar are nano support. Scorps aren't all that great. Better to have disposable blackbirds or nano support like falcons. Nano support may not be nano'd but usually can assist a nano gang without direct risks to themselves. Originally by: Xaen Geurilla warfare is all about getting in, doing as much damage as possible and getting out. This is precisely what nanos do. Then we could say that nano phoons etc were balanced for the same reason. If it can get in, kill at will, and get out then it must be balanced. A closer argument would be foot soldiers versus light calvary. Either hold ground with pikes and wait for the calvary to impale themselves or field calvary of your own. This is different than guerilla warfare. And in a game where balance is needed it is driving many to nano. Originally by: Xaen Get in, bloody their nose, disappear. yet nanos aren't seriously threatened unless the hostiles bring nano/nano support (vagas/huginns/etc). So you're saying the only way to end a guerilla action is to field your own guerillas while the traditional forces do nothing? Originally by: Xaen I've yet to see a justification to being able to wholesale decimate nanos, The issue is that nanos do not have to commit to a fight. As such the only logical thing to fly is nanos. This is the same issue that folks had with wcs. Which the nanos have replaced. Originally by: Xaen Again this is exactly guerilla warfare. guerilla warfare determines the start of the engagement but as the weaker force they don't determine the end. Generally the presence of traditional forces determines the end of an action. Originally by: Xaen none of them can warp cloaked. Force recons are more guerilla than black ops or stealth bombers. Warping cloaked doesn't mean guerilla warfware. Only different tactics. I agree that force recons are part of what was intended for guerilla warfare. Some of them nano up rather well. Then you have those that complain about the pilgrim/curse/lach/arazu because they don't nano. Perhaps you misunderstand. I fly nanos nearly exclusively for pvp (alt). Flying nanos is the best solution. If everyone is special then no one will be.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:05:00 - [13] Originally by: Xaen Why should cheap ships flown by lower skilled players be able to kill ludicrously expensive ships flown by veterans? It's irrational at best. Because otherwise it creates a gap of haves and have nots. Otherwise it discourages people from fighting. Otherwise it creates a god mode. Otherwise it becomes WoW where char level and equipment were everything and a replacement for skill. Otherwise it forces blobs as they're the best way for non nanos to counter nanos. It's irrational for veterans with expensive ships to expect to dominate lower skilled players.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:18:00 - [14] Originally by: Tenuo No one asked for nanos to be powerful, so he didn't ask for it to be his way, stop throwing a ***** tantrum already. Ah, so rather than debating the points you agree that nanos are powerful? He's arguing because the changes agree with him. I'm arguing because I prefer a balanced game. I prefer a game with variety. I left WoW because I saw many of the same elements in PvP (ie: Gotta be paladin!). I'm arguing because PvP has taken a nose dive. Originally by:** Tenuo Older players in battleships pwn new players in battleships etc. etc. There is a gap, there will ALWAYS be a gap between new and old in any game where you progress. Always. One of my first battleship kills was me and a few low sp characters that found a high sp character in a faction battleship. We used teamwork to take him down. This covers that gap between the old and new. Throw a bunch of low sp characters against nanos and it'll be mostly comedy. For non nanos the gap isn't as great as there are for nanos. There will always be a gap. Part of the point of the current 5 level system is to avoid the gap being too great. The point is to take someone with a brand new character and make them useful.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:43:00 - [15] Originally by: Bronson Hughes the player with the higher skills will always have an advantage assuming all other things to be equal. Always. That advantage doesn't necessarily translate directly into victory, but it will make victory for the higher-skilled player easier. 100% agreed. The issue is that as speed increase the game mechanics start to break down. For example look at why some ships can be nano'd but others cannot be. This points not merely an edge but a large advantage. The benefits of speed outweigh the disadvantages at a certain point. Originally by: Bronson Hughes The same is not necessarily true for expensive ships; most of them are expensive because they're highly specialized and should absolutely be killed by less expensive ships that exploit a weakness in the more expensive ship. agreed. Originally by: Bronson Hughes Is it irrational for a 1-day old character in his rookie ship to expect to kill a much older, focus-trained player who's flying an interceptor? How about a 1-month old player taking on the same older player in a nano-HAC? Where do you draw the line? Very good points. The rookie ship should be useful. Currently it can point, etc, even do a bit of dps. Since it can't web/neut at a usable range than it isn't useful in a nano fight. Same issue with the 1-month player. Effectively to counter the players need to be in battleships/ceptors (t2)/eas (t2) fitted specifically to counter nanos. Or be in cookie cutter nanos themselves. Now you could mix it and say a rookie ship can jam while a higher sp char webs. But we're back at you must have the skills and ship to handle the situation. I'm not sure where the limit is. Only that the gap is too far currently.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:55:00 - [16] Originally by: Xaen If you know your facing nano gangs prepare for them. scrammed and popped before they make it back? What are you even talking about? Whens the last time you've ever stopped moving in a nano? By the time the cov ops yells "warp" the nanos will be outside web. By the time the bs get into warp, land, target, lock, the nanos will probably be outside scram/neut range. Originally by: Xaen You don't need engineering V. You don't even need great cap skills thanks to Trinity's interceptor bonus changes. For HACs you still need T2 medium gun/missile skills to be worth it (there's a month of training). Cruiser V (another month). Assault Ships IV and Heavy Assault Ships IV (another week at least). Engineering V, Weapon Upgrades V, Gunnery V, Mechanic V. Interceptors are actually the easiest T2 ship to get into. HACs are one of the hardest. So quit pretending the skills required are even remotely similar. For a nano HAC you need HAC skills AND interceptor skills. It doesn't make it easier, it makes it way freaking harder. By the time someone learns to properly fly a ceptor they'll be ready for hacs. And blacks ops/jump freighter might be a bit more difficult of a t2 ship to train for. Look at training for command ships. With the skill inflation, hacs aren't that hard to train for. Originally by: Xaen looking at boarding in 83 days, flying very well in 146. Don't whine at me about training times. Whine? I'm saying that hacs aren't that hard to train for. So am I whining about how easy they are to get into one? If someone knows what they want to fly then hacs just take a bit of time. Ceptors don't have that many advantages over hacs. In general pilots go to hacs. Not many specialize in flying ceptors.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 21:13:00 - [17] Edited by: ***zilla on 23/06/2008 21:14:54 Originally by: Xaen You argue that nanos aren't guerrilla warfare and thus are somehow invalid, but imply that it would be cool if they were, I point out that they are and so you change your point completely. I'm refuting that guerilla warfare is a justification for an imbalance. Originally by: Xaen ECM the nano, then your tacklers are safe, they catch and web, you bring the hurt. What's so hard about that? And kill maybe a nano or two while taking serious losses? If you want to endanger the entire nano fleet you'll need multiple tacklers and jammers per nano. On a per pilot basis they'd be better served flying nanos themselves. On a per pilot basis, whats the best counter for a single nano? Another nano. Against a fleet of nanos whats the best counter? More nanos. Yes you can kill nanos by throwing sheer numbers against them. This arguement breaks the reasoning that nanos exist to "beat the blob". Or you can say that sheer numbers should be required. Then this points to a problem. Are numbers required to take down caps? Yes. But caps have severe disadvantages. Nanos are better than most ceptors and most battleships. While they can't go as fast, hit as hard, or tank as well, they're in a sweet spot that makes them favored. Originally by: Tenuo I dont see in any way how medium turrets, drones, cruiser 5, mechanic, etc. help you become a better ceptor pilot. If you've skilled up and learned how to fly a ceptor then a hac isn't that far of a stretch. In many ways a hac is a superior ceptor. edit eh, Bronson got it.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 21:54:00 - [18] Edited by: ***zilla on 23/06/2008 21:55:15 Originally by: Xaen Serious losses like what? A couple of insured ships? Cost them billions, cost you <50M thanks to insurance. Generally it doesn't cost billions. Even non rigged non implant nanos can be effective. It is odd that many decide to pimp out a nano and not a battleship. Originally by: Xaen earth makes you think you should be able to even have a chance of endangering their entire fleet. Because a remote rep bs gang or any other gang must commit. They fight or die. Nanos are special. They fight or flee. Originally by: Xaen So please, describe for me, in detail the size and fleet composition you think should be able to take down large nano fleet, and why you think this is justified, and maybe you won't sound so ridiculous. Originally by: Xaen Have you never heard "if you can't beat'em, join'em"? Besides, nano ships are fun to fly. More fun than my fat cow of a NOS domi and over three times as expensive. I've given up flying battleships a long time ago. Mostly caps and nanos. Originally by: Xaen They have really low hitpoints and relatively low damage, and they're ludicrously costly to replace. Damage can be controlled by controlling the distance and risk. They've got good resists and a nice shield buffer tank from t2 lse. And considering how often they're lost they're not very expensive. Losing the average t2 fitted nano occasionally isn't a big deal. Originally by: Xaen Some pilots fly nanos that cost more than a carrier, but the nano isn't insurable, the carrier is. I'd argue that this is because the nano has less of a chance of being killed. It used to be that carriers were loaded with faction etc. Now with as often as they're killed using t2 setups are common. Originally by: Xaen I created an interceptor plan. Then I created a copy of it and added the skills for a HAC. ... Training time from respectable (level IVs where V isn't necessary) Interceptor plan to respectable HAC plan: 106 days There is a difference from flying a ceptor and flying one well. And no, 3 months or so isn't a long time. By the time the pilot learns (experience) to fly a ceptor well they'll probably be ready for the hac. And once the pilot has the skills why would they fly ceptors (unless they enjoy it)? Hacs make better ceptors than ceptors. Originally by: Dmian Edited by: Dmian on 23/06/2008 21:53:29 I want a nanoed titan! If you can cloak a titan, why not making it go 4-5km/s? 1km/s is roughly the upper limit for a nano titan usually. Yes it has been done. Successfully.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:26:00 - [19] Originally by: Xaen So you say it doesn't take many skills to go from one to the other, then when I prove that you're wrong, you change your point to be about experience. stfu already I say its about skill points and experience. HACS aren't difficult to get into. They take a bit but it isn't much of a road bump. HACS shouldn't be special because someone has to wait a few months. Ah, I love when an argument turns to insults etc.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:52:00 - [20] Originally by: Dmian if nano gets nerfed, a lot of people will revert to logofski? What's worse: nano or Ctrl-Q? logoffski is a very common nano tactic currently. Fight until there is a decent gate camp with too many huginns/rapiers. Wait for agression, logoff. 5 to 50 man fleets might log off. A few hours later without enough rapiers/huginns the defenders are forced to let the nanos leave. Or you might see the 15min logoffsky where the pilot logs on for a few seconds to check local then log off. Both mechanisms heavily abused. Originally by: Naomi Knight Every newby fc can lead a nano gang even a bad ones as pilots can disengadge at will if thigs turns to bad, nor it does help to develop good group as all ships do the same thing and no need to diversity and noone is dependent on the other gang mates. Quality of the FC is important. But yes, nanos are more forgiving. If the nanos are willing to risk and lose then they're much more forgiving. Very amusing to take 30-40 noob nanos into a hostile system. Even then most will live where with anything else they would be out right slaughtered. There are a few roles. But you're absolutely right there isn't much diversity. Vagas use the same fittings. Rapiers also. Etc. The only question is the mix of pure nanos with nanos support (rapiers/falcons/scimitars).

Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.23 23:50:00 - [21] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Haakelen Devil's Advocate here, James: Why is numerical supremacy your primary factor? Because speed and agility allow for more forces to be brought to bear faster. Plus the assumption is that if tank/dps is sacrificed for speed/agility then superior numbers will be needed.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.24 15:55:00 - [22] Edited by: ***zilla on 24/06/2008 16:02:11 Originally by: Hastur DragonTooth if you nurf nanos then HAC/Recon will be as rare and as useful as an AF. The intention isn't to make nanos useless but a bit more rare than they are currently. The issue is that the cookie cutter nanos have become fleet/blob standards. Speed is heavily favored over tank/dps. Originally by: EinaruS Fits exist because they work, it's that simple. When many start flying the same few ships with very similiar fittings than the fits work a bit too well. Originally by: Xaen But simply nerfing the speed capability of HACs down will cannot accomplish this without making the entire HAC class useless. Sniper hacs are flown. While the HACs won't be as favored, they'll still be useable if the the counter boost/nerf is done properly. Take the Curse for example. It was a recon that was better than many HACs. Then the nerf bat hit. Hard.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.24 16:29:00 - [23] Edited by: ***zilla on 24/06/2008 16:32:01 Originally by: Tenuo They dont use vagabonds for fleets Nanos are a large part of many fleets. Battleships have a niche however nanos are extremely common for roaming fleets. They make up a large percentage of even fleets to hit POSs. Nanos do much of the killing while battleships are seen as support. Originally by: Tenuo Why do (nearly) only see these nerf posts from FW people Because they're merely the latest to experience it. Originally by: Tenuo Because in 0.0 people adapt and learn how to kill them. Absolutely. There was a bunch of nano hate threads over the last year by those in 0.0. However now many in 0.0 fly nanos themselves. Problem solved. It'll take a while but those in FW will learn that they must cross train so that Caldari gangs are flying Minmitar recons & hacs. Missiles will be dropped in favor of guns. Shield tanking replaced by speed. Then everything will be peachy.

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.