EVE Search - Why nano everything?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Why nano everything?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Italian Wedding Soup Of The Day	Posted - 2008.06.22 10:21:00 - [91] Some people just can't effin read so I am going to put it in caps, bold, underlined, and italicized. IT IS NOT ABOUT THE SMALL 5 MAN ROAMING GANGS ANYMORE - IT'S ABOUT THE 100+ MAN NANO FLEETS. SPEED HAS BECOME A MAJOR PROBLEM IN EVE AND NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED WHEN THE ONLY COUNTER IS MORE NANO SHIPS. I think that about covers that.
Tenuo Native Freshfood	Posted - 2008.06.22 10:48:00 - [92] Originally by: Italian Wedding Some people just can't effin read so I am going to put it in caps, bold, underlined, and italicized. IT IS NOT ABOUT THE SMALL 5 MAN ROAMING GANGS ANYMORE - IT'S ABOUT THE 100+ MAN NANO FLEETS. SPEED HAS BECOME A MAJOR PROBLEM IN EVE AND NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED WHEN THE ONLY COUNTER IS MORE NANO SHIPS. I think that about covers that. Would you rather have a 100 man cap fleet or 100 man RR BS gang. Also, please show me a 100man nano fleet, I have yet to see one. ______________________________________________ Euriti - I'll continue my nerd forum rage!
Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.06.22 11:34:00 - [93] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 22/06/2008 11:34:16 Originally by: Apoctasy Stasis webifier 'Nuff said. I love people who use 10km Stasis Web. Thats why I have never ever lost my nano zealot even though it went though suicidal pvp battles in the past. Also love the people talking about overheated webs hitting at 13km vs a 36km scram most nano pilots are now starting to use. -- Billion Isk Mission
Tenuo Native Freshfood	Posted - 2008.06.22 11:43:00 - [94] Originally by: Lord WarATron Edited by: Lord WarATron on 22/06/2008 11:37:36 Edited by: Lord WarATron on 22/06/2008 11:34:16 Originally by: Apoctasy Stasis webifier 'Nuff said. I love people who use 10km Stasis Web. I also like people who use 10km webs vs 10k/sec targets without being nanoed. At least when they die, they have the satisfaction of saying "told ya 10km does not work". If you want to tackle a nanoship - you nano up yourself. If the targets are not nanoed, then a competent pilot can dictate terms. Thats why I have never ever lost my nano zealot even though it went though suicidal pvp battles in the past. Also love the people talking about overheated webs hitting at 13km vs a 36km scram most nano pilots are now starting to use. Faction points is a totally different discussion and only rich people can afford that. ______________________________________________ Euriti - I'll continue my nerd forum rage!
Angelonico Series of Tubes	Posted - 2008.06.22 11:50:00 - [95] Originally by: Italian Wedding Some people just can't effin read so I am going to put it in caps, bold, underlined, and italicized. IT IS NOT ABOUT THE SMALL 5 MAN ROAMING GANGS ANYMORE - IT'S ABOUT THE 100+ MAN NANO FLEETS. SPEED HAS BECOME A MAJOR PROBLEM IN EVE AND NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED WHEN THE ONLY COUNTER IS MORE NANO SHIPS. I think that about covers that. Where are these common (key word there) 100 man nano gangs? I saw tri field a few, AAA as well. Commonly? No. Also, simple question - and I'm actually not trolling for once - who would in a straight fight (lag inclusive) 100 man bs fleet w/support or 100 nanorecon/hacs w/ limited support (only what ships can keep up with them.) There is no nano problem, in laggy fleet fights it's just silly to bring a polycarbed vaga rather than your insurable buffer tanked gank bs.
Diomidis Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.22 12:03:00 - [96] Originally by: Tenuo Originally by: Italian Wedding Some people just can't effin read so I am going to put it in caps, bold, underlined, and italicized. IT IS NOT ABOUT THE SMALL 5 MAN ROAMING GANGS ANYMORE - IT'S ABOUT THE 100+ MAN NANO FLEETS. SPEED HAS BECOME A MAJOR PROBLEM IN EVE AND NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED WHEN THE ONLY COUNTER IS MORE NANO SHIPS. I think that about covers that. Would you rather have a 100 man cap fleet or 100 man RR BS gang. Also, please show me a 100man nano fleet, I have yet to see one. Even 10-20 man nano-fleets make ppl hide in their stations or POSes...no need to raise 3digit numbers, and I've never seen more than 20-25 man nano-gangs myself...it starts to beat the purpose IMHO. Nano fleets make ppl feel comfortable as they can peak fights, out-running BS blobs and braking tough tanks, something 1-2 nano-ships cannot easily do... Nano's are also a valid counter for missile-boats. Nerfing nano's against missiles or boosting the later with higher explosion velocities etc, tho seemingly fair using common logic (common, a huge, heavy ship cannot out-run a light missile), it will leave the missiles having no counters at all...no tracking to worry about, no cap usage, decent damage with relatively low skill requirements...how to balance that? Huge explosion radius increase as with the recent torp changes? That would beat the buff against anything not double painted or something, and more caldari whines could commence... Even then it would leave the Missile weapon platforms with too few cons to balance the pros... Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2008.06.22 12:15:00 - [97] Originally by: Tenuo Originally by: TZeer Another thing, the insane speeds you get nowdays combined with the nerf on sensorbooster makes ranged combat a thing of the past... By the time you get a lock, it`s already on top of you... Or if you get a lock on it, it`s already either so close that the guns cant track or so high speed that missiles dont do any damage... And if you kill it, theres now a wreck for hostiles to warp to... And yeah, rapier or huginn does good, but when there are multiple nanostuff incomming it`s only so much a huginn/rapier can do before it either must get out or gets popped... If they want to spend thier time zipping in and out of lock range why dont you just ALIGN and WARP OUT? Never said anything about zipping in and out of lockrange... And your solution with warping out = no fight against nanos...
Miss KillSome School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.06.22 12:41:00 - [98] Reason for annoing is blobing! U cannot win if u jump into 50+man camp in your 7BSs. Some of us still like to go with their friends on roaming, not with friends plus their friends plus their friends friends.. Here is a suggestion where playstyle could change OMGWTFINSTAPOPING one BS. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=798984 We really need to prolong fights, no matter how many ships are on the battlefield. Proloning means that u are able to at least tank other gang for a few more seconds. In todays scenarion, gang who has bigger number of members win (ofc, titan gangs dont count..). We would need scenarios where gang who brings more different classes of ships win.
Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.06.22 13:10:00 - [99] Originally by: Miss KillSome In todays scenarion, gang who has bigger number of members win (ofc, titan gangs dont count..). We would need scenarios where gang who brings more different classes of ships win. incorrect. If people play FFA style then it is correct. But if people use hit and runs and force teh bigger fleet to drag them selves out and use tactics etc etc, then the smaller fleet can still win. Its been happening every day for the past year or two -- Billion Isk Mission
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2008.06.22 13:17:00 - [100] Originally by: Miss KillSome We really need to prolong fights, no matter how many ships are on the battlefield. Proloning means that u are able to at least tank other gang for a few more seconds. In todays scenarion, gang who has bigger number of members win (ofc, titan gangs dont count..). We would need scenarios where gang who brings more different classes of ships win. Fights already last quite some time. And introducing some cap on how many ships that fire on you or stacking penalty on damage is not an option. the day CCP starts considering that is the day I quit. Some poor bastards always have to pop first. Just how it is.
Gimpb	Posted - 2008.06.22 14:23:00 - [101] Originally by: Parsival Originally by: Italian Wedding What so many don't understand is that there are 100+ man nano fleets that are common now. It isn't just about roaming with 3-4 people in nano gangs to get away from the blob anymore because nano blobs are becoming very common. The problem there is the blob, not the nano. Its just fashionable to blame the nano. Both sides of that one like to point the finger at the other, and they are somewhat tied together, but saying hot-drops and blobs are the reason people nano is just as short-sighted as the other way around. On the other side of the coin you have newer players that fly BSs in big groups at least partially because it is actually an effective and affordable counter to nanos. It's a way of exploiting some of the well-rehearsed weaknesses of nanos to keep them from being effective against you. (crappy dps, heavy neuts, remote reps, etc) Flying anything smaller or going out in smaller groups just makes you food for the local 30 ship nano gang. So you end up with one side saying we fly nano so we can get away from your blob and the other side saying we bs blob so your nano swarm can't do anything to us. I have to be honest here, I would love to fly T1 ships smaller than BCs in PvP from time to time but it just doesn't make sense in my situation with the escalation of arms the way it is. Now please don't misinterpret me, I think nanoing is a playstyle that should be embraced by the design team and elaborated upon, not destroyed. It does seem as though the whole nano game is a little half-baked right now though, and in need of game design refinement. I think the recently introduced faction cruisers will help as they make it into circulation. It would also be nice if AFs actually had frigate speed. (instead of BC speed) One would think AFs should be a natural tackling choice against HACs, but for some mysterous reason they have a fat-ness not seen in their bigger brothers, HACs and CSs.
Jalif Deviance Inc Nocturnal Legion	Posted - 2008.06.22 15:02:00 - [102] Problem with Nano's is: - As nano you try to avoid damage, but the shield extenders create a large buffer if you get hit. Thats why they are overpowered. The Solution to this is that Large Shield Extenders & MWD shouldn't work togheter. You wouldn't see any nano ship if these 2 were not togheter. - The HP buff also was just to help about Nano's. Same as the reason as above, they can survive multiply hits. Solution to this is to increase mass of those ships who shouldn't be nano'd. - Any Cruiser sized nano ship has taken over the role of the interceptor. Cause they can take more hits (becuase of the Shield Buffer)... Have more Damage Output. Because of Nano-Ships & Nano-Blobs, interceptors have been nerfed too. - There is no single way to take down a nano-ship with a non-nano-ship. YOu need a nano-ship to kill him. Therefore you will see only & more nano-ships everyday. - Nano-Recons who have the same Price as a good fitted Battleship. Those Recons have the ability to kill the battleship or to run from it. The Battleship has no way to kill those ships but just saving his ship. You need more then 1 person to kill just 1 nano ships if you want to use non-nano ships. Is this really balanced? - New people in the game can't go into a pvp-tackling frig as they won't be able to catch anyone & are easy targets for nano-ships. You are ruining the gaming experiance for the newbies who like to get dirrectly into pvp. ********** BOOST MINMATAR!!! **********
Cpt Branko Surge. NIght's Dawn	Posted - 2008.06.22 16:02:00 - [103] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 22/06/2008 16:02:23 Originally by: Jalif - As nano you try to avoid damage, but the shield extenders create a large buffer if you get hit. Thats why they are overpowered. The Solution to this is that Large Shield Extenders & MWD shouldn't work togheter. You wouldn't see any nano ship if these 2 were not togheter. I'd much sooner face nanos with LSEs then nanos with full out EW. Originally by: Jalif - The HP buff also was just to help about Nano's. Same as the reason as above, they can survive multiply hits. Solution to this is to increase mass of those ships who shouldn't be nano'd. The "shouldn't be nanoed" argument is just LOL - if ships X,Y,Z were not supposed to be nanoed, would CCP really make the ships nano-capable? I mean, look at the new faction cruisers, and they're all designed to be nanoed. Originally by: Jalif - Any Cruiser sized nano ship has taken over the role of the interceptor. Cause they can take more hits (becuase of the Shield Buffer)... Have more Damage Output. Because of Nano-Ships & Nano-Blobs, interceptors have been nerfed too. Not really. Inteceptors are still very much used and a part of speed gangs, and are still a good deal faster then nano-HACs. Originally by: Jalif - There is no single way to take down a nano-ship with a non-nano-ship. YOu need a nano-ship to kill him. Therefore you will see only & more nano-ships everyday. I wish you would stop sprouting nonsense. There's tons of ways to kill a nanoship pilot 1v1, in anything from a Rupture upwards Once the pilot decides to try to take you on, he's suspectible to a ton of counter-nano tools. If he decides he'll never engage, well, he's almost guaranteed to be able to run. Do not think that solo nanos are anything resembling safe when attacking PvP-fit ships. Originally by: Jalif - Nano-Recons who have the same Price as a good fitted Battleship. Those Recons have the ability to kill the battleship or to run from it. The Battleship has no way to kill those ships but just saving his ship. You need more then 1 person to kill just 1 nano ships if you want to use non-nano ships. Is this really balanced? Battleship has no way to kill a nano-ship? Riiight Furthermore, BS are cheaper to lose. A non-rigged gank BS (Typhoon) costs me 25-30ish M to lose. A trimarked gank Typhoon costs me 65M to lose. It won't cover the loss cost of a bloody nano-HAC/recon hull, much less the fittings and the polycarbons. Premium insurance is for the win. Originally by: Jalif - New people in the game can't go into a pvp-tackling frig as they won't be able to catch anyone & are easy targets for nano-ships. You are ruining the gaming experiance for the newbies who like to get dirrectly into pvp. Newbies can go have fun in low-sec, we use plenty of non-nano ships there. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2008.06.22 17:48:00 - [104] Quote: There's tons of ways to kill a nanoship pilot 1v1, in anything from a Rupture upwards Then please tell me thoose tons of ways that dont include Rapier/Huginn. And that actually kills the nanoship, not just forces them to dissengage... Quote: Battleship has no way to kill a nano-ship? Riiight What would you do then against a nanoship thats outside you web range? And on the edge of your nos/neut range and fitted with cap boosters. When his cap is finally gone, it`s just to coast out of scramrange and run.
Italian Wedding Soup Of The Day	Posted - 2008.06.22 21:08:00 - [105] Originally by: Angelonico Originally by: Italian Wedding Some people just can't effin read so I am going to put it in caps, bold, underlined, and italicized. IT IS NOT ABOUT THE SMALL 5 MAN ROAMING GANGS ANYMORE - IT'S ABOUT THE 100+ MAN NANO FLEETS. SPEED HAS BECOME A MAJOR PROBLEM IN EVE AND NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED WHEN THE ONLY COUNTER IS MORE NANO SHIPS. I think that about covers that. Where are these common (key word there) 100 man nano gangs? I saw tri field a few, AAA as well. Commonly? No. Also, simple question - and I'm actually not trolling for once - who would in a straight fight (lag inclusive) 100 man bs fleet w/support or 100 nanorecon/hacs w/ limited support (only what ships can keep up with them.) There is no nano problem, in laggy fleet fights it's just silly to bring a polycarbed vaga rather than your insurable buffer tanked gank bs. Yes, commonly. They are becoming more and more common. Maybe GS doesn't seem them as they fight off the NNC because the NNC are lol but if you look at the killboards of alliances fighting in the south you will see them. They are becoming more and more common. You can look at right now and predict what is going to become more and more common if nano's are not toned down. I have respect for you Angelonico (not that you care) but don't be so narrow minded to see what is happening :)
Lyria Skydancer Eve Defence Force Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.06.22 22:09:00 - [106] Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 22/06/2008 22:09:18 Originally by: Hijara Why does EVERY ship have to be nanoed? Seems like i am the only one who pvp's with a zealot going only 256m/s. What happened to large alpha, or good tanks? Nope you're not the only one that pvp's with a zealot fitted the right way. That is why you and me get ontop of every mail and actually are a use in a gang. But there are other ships out there that really dont have a good "real" fit but where the nano fit is actually the best fit for the ship. Blame ccp. ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Wasted Mind Syntech Research and Development Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2008.06.23 00:21:00 - [107] I love how ppl like to use the excuse of "Hot Drops" as the reason for using nano ships. Come on ppl give me a break. Even if you had mobile cyno jammers you would still fly nano ships and you know it. Why fly anything else when you have a ship that is hard to hit, allows you to escape most situations and kill ppl as well? The only thing that ****es me off about nano's is that in the past fleets were diverse and you didnt know what you were going up against. Now (and it will get worse unless they put speed caps on ships) you always have to sit in a nano most the time or be rdy to hop in one because that's all you can do when fighting another nano group.
Terianna Eri Scrutari	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:11:00 - [108] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 22/06/2008 22:09:18 Originally by: Hijara Why does EVERY ship have to be nanoed? Seems like i am the only one who pvp's with a zealot going only 256m/s. What happened to large alpha, or good tanks? Nope you're not the only one that pvp's with a zealot fitted the right way. That is why you and me get ontop of every mail and actually are a use in a gang. But there are other ships out there that really dont have a good "real" fit but where the nano fit is actually the best fit for the ship. Blame ccp. Lyria - bit offtopic question here but I know you fly a Zealot. Are fits other than "nano-pulse zealot", "sniping beam zealot", and "holycrap anti-support pulse zealot (<3)" even worthwhile to be flying? __________________________________
Herring Alcatraz Inc. Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:30:00 - [109] Originally by: ****zilla Hotdropping isn't that common. Maybe not where you live, but in some places, it's rampant. Boost patch...nerfs: 1) faction passive shield resistance amplifiers, 2) exploration radar sites, 3) faction co-processors*
Lyria Skydancer Eve Defence Force Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:55:00 - [110] Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/06/2008 01:57:05 Originally by: Terianna Eri Lyria - bit offtopic question here but I know you fly a Zealot. Are fits other than "nano-pulse zealot", "sniping beam zealot", and "holycrap anti-support pulse zealot (<3)" even worthwhile to be flying? Those are basically it, yes. Imo. Note though 2 of them arent nano fits :-). Thats why I like this ship. edit: well there is the injected solo fit also. ----------------------------------------- [Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name
Solid Res Haven Front	Posted - 2008.06.23 02:29:00 - [111] Edited by: Solid Res on 23/06/2008 02:33:28 Nano is fine. We only see more now because of FW where it will be natural to see more Nano ships. You are effectively solo as you can't trust your gang the same way you can in an alliance. And nanos have been nerfed plenty of times. EAS, Recons, over heated webs, Inty buff, is just a few of the recent direct nerfs CCP did. Then you have polycarbs that cost an insane 50mil/pop. If you look at KBs you will see nano ships being popped left and right as they have zero tank. You will also see gangs that can't take down a single DPS because their DPS is **** poor. Stop with the whining becuase you lost your super tanked and high dps ship you were so proud of that you created in EFT and that all your mission skills is not transferring over to PVP. Those damn NPC Rats never went fast, so why are players doing it!
Italian Wedding Soup Of The Day	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:07:00 - [112] Originally by: Solid Res Edited by: Solid Res on 23/06/2008 02:33:28 Nano is fine. We only see more now because of FW where it will be natural to see more Nano ships. You are insanely ignorant to think that. Nano's haven't just become more popular since FW. If you were in 0.0 and are actively engaged in PvP pretty much anywhere you will have noticed that pretty much all you see are nano gangs. Quote: You are effectively solo as you can't trust your gang the same way you can in an alliance. A large and organized nano gang is nigh invincible. Anything that can burn out and get a tackle will be dead before they get there. Nothing that can burn out fast enough to get a tackle has a large enough HP buffer to survive being alpha'ed, even if they are being remote repped. Take cepters, very little HP, they will die quicker then reps will come because they don't have a large enough HP buffer and HACS use medium guns which means very good tracking and very good damage. So what does this mean? It means the only counter to nano's is more nano's. Ships larger then cepters and fast enough and be able to take more damage then a cepter and have enough of a buffer to be repped and no die while getting there. Quote: And nanos have been nerfed plenty of times. EAS, Recons, over heated webs, Inty buff, is just a few of the recent direct nerfs CCP did. Then you have polycarbs that cost an insane 50mil/pop. Battleship speed has been nerfed, not much else. Quote: If you look at KBs you will see nano ships being popped left and right as they have zero tank. You will also see gangs that can't take down a single DPS because their DPS is ** poor. No, if you look at the kill boards you will generally see Nano gangs killing and then generally a large gang killing a single nano because that is generally what it takes to kill them. Otherwise they just get away. Quote:** Stop with the whining becuase you lost your super tanked and high dps ship you were so proud of that you created in EFT and that all your mission skills is not transferring over to PVP. Those damn NPC Rats never went fast, so why are players doing it! Stop trying to defend a broken game mechanic like speed currently is. It's broken. CCP will eventually tone it down. 100% of hacs aren't supposed to be nanoed (oh im sorry, caldari can't nano and their missiles can't hit vs speed, so 98% of hacs with caldari being worthless vs speed and terribly sad at achieving speed).
Solid Res Haven Front	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:45:00 - [113] Edited by: Solid Res on 23/06/2008 05:54:24 Originally by: Italian Wedding Originally by: Solid Res Edited by: Solid Res on 23/06/2008 02:33:28 Nano is fine. We only see more now because of FW where it will be natural to see more Nano ships. You are insanely ignorant to think that. Nano's haven't just become more popular since FW. If you were in 0.0 and are actively engaged in PvP pretty much anywhere you will have noticed that pretty much all you see are nano gangs......100% of hacs aren't supposed to be nanoed Ignorant? FW started 2 weeks ago, I am well ware of 0.0 life and the joys of having to always be in a Sniper BS to protect and/or kill something. If you look at the KB of many alliances you will see that Battleships are on the top. I wish I was in a Nano-HAC all the time. As for 100% of HACs being Nano, that is funny. Go on any respectable KB and look at the fittings of the last 10 HAC kills. I just did and 9 out of 10 were not Nano fitted. They were almost all a mix of Armor Tank / Damage Mods. CCP has stated they dont like how people put on 5-6 speed mods and then rigs. I actually agree with this. However, to say we have a Nano Crisis is pure ignorance of the facts and understanding of the game mechanics. The problem is when a person dies they assume the ship that killed them HAD to be a Nano. Nothing else could of possibly ever killed them. CCP knows the truth though, and if you did a little research you would know it also. That is why, after all these years, speed fitted ships still exist and will continue to exist. If you don't like it, quit (and transfer me your stuff) And I made a mistake about FW creating an increase in Nano-cruisers. That is wrong because most people are flying frigs/destroyers because those are the only ships that can enter all the complexes. And from what I read a fast frig/destroyer is alright? Or is that bad also now?
Italian Wedding Soup Of The Day	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:54:00 - [114] Quote: I live in 0.0 so I know what it is like. I am always having to be in my Fitted Sniper BS for something we have to protect and/or kill. If you look at the KB of many alliances you will see that Battleships are on the top. As for 100% of HACs being Nano, that is funny. Go on any respectable KB and look at the fittings of the last 10 HAC kills. I just did it and 9 out of 10 were not Nano fitted (i do realize this is emperical evidence). They were almost all a mix of Armor Tank / Damage Mods. Well they died, obviously they weren't nano'd :) Quote: CCP has stated they dont like how people put on 5-6 speed mods and then rigs. I actually agree with this. I do not agree with a speed cap (the problems with this is endless) or nerfing people that only put on 2-3 speed mods and rigs. All of which suffer stacking penalties and take up slots which could have been used for damage or tanking. I haven't said anything about a speed cap and I don't think their should be one. However, cruisers shouldn't be hitting 4k either other then the Vaga. I don't care if it cost them a lot of money or not. They were not designed to go fast. They will get nerfed as CCP nerfs speed year after year :) Quote: The problem is when a person dies they assume the ship that killed them HAD to be a Nano. Nothing else could of possibly ever killed them. CCP knows the truth though, and if you did a little research you would know it also. No, the problem is people die and there is nothing but 50 nano'ed out ships on the KM. Quote: If you don't like it, quit (and transfer me your stuff) I don't need to quit, I know speed will get reviewed and toned down on cruiser sized ships just like it got toned down on battleships
JVol The IMorral MAjority Imorral Dragons	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:55:00 - [115] Originally by: Solid Res Edited by: Solid Res on 23/06/2008 05:51:54 Originally by: Italian Wedding Originally by: Solid Res Edited by: Solid Res on 23/06/2008 02:33:28 Nano is fine. We only see more now because of FW where it will be natural to see more Nano ships. You are insanely ignorant to think that. Nano's haven't just become more popular since FW. If you were in 0.0 and are actively engaged in PvP pretty much anywhere you will have noticed that pretty much all you see are nano gangs......100% of hacs aren't supposed to be nanoed Ignorant? FW started 2 weeks ago, I am well ware of 0.0 life and the joys of having to always be in a Sniper BS to protect and/or kill. If you look at the KB of many alliances you will see that Battleships are on the top. As for 100% of HACs being Nano, that is funny. Go on any respectable KB and look at the fittings of the last 10 HAC kills. I just did and 9 out of 10 were not Nano fitted. They were almost all a mix of Armor Tank / Damage Mods. CCP has stated they dont like how people put on 5-6 speed mods and then rigs. I actually agree with this. However, to say we have a Nano Crisis is pure ignorance of the facts and understanding of the game mechanics. The problem is when a person dies they assume the ship that killed them HAD to be a Nano. Nothing else could of possibly ever killed them. CCP knows the truth though, and if you did a little research you would know it also. That is why, after all these years, speed fitted ships still exist and will continue to exist. If you don't like it, quit (and transfer me your stuff) You are funny! the REASON you see that 9 out of 10 hacs killed are tanked is because the nanos ones dont DIE! lol They dissengage.... try again
Solid Res Haven Front	Posted - 2008.06.23 06:11:00 - [116] Originally by: JVol You are funny! the REASON you see that 9 out of 10 hacs killed are tanked is because the nanos ones dont DIE! lol They dissengage.... try again I was responding to a post that said 100% of HACs are Nano fitted. If that was the case then there should be no HAC kills as they are not able to die and if there were a HAC kill it must be Nano fitted. The facts are in your faces. The ships that kill the most ships are Battleships. This is the cold hard facts. You look the HACs fittings on Killboards and they are not all Nano fitted. You look at this very forum and view the most popular HAC setups and they are not all Nano fitted. I sometimes feel I am playing a different game. We are playing Eve right? This idea that every cruiser is nano'd to the gills is a myth. If you believe otherwise I challenge you to back it up with proof.
Solid Res Haven Front	Posted - 2008.06.23 06:16:00 - [117] And it is no suprise that many HACs go with a tank, it is because they can be ridiculously strong. Especially in FW where you have all these T1 frigs with **** poor DPS. However, if they tried to nano they might hit 4k/s which is not fast enough to get away from even the slowest Interceptor.
Italian Wedding Soup Of The Day	Posted - 2008.06.23 06:17:00 - [118] Edited by: Italian Wedding on 23/06/2008 06:17:20 Originally by: Solid Res This idea that every cruiser is nano'd to the gills is a myth. If you believe otherwise I challenge you to back it up with proof. Of course not EVERY single pilot fits nanos, but more often then not, they do, because it is simply FAR MORE EFFECTIVE to be nanoed then it is not to be nanoed, hence why you see more non-nanoed hacs on the killboard on the dieing side then nanoed hacs. I believe my work here is done. Thank you for trying o/
Lord WarATron Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.06.23 06:27:00 - [119] People need to ask themselves why, due to game design, that there is a need to nano in the first place. -- Billion Isk Mission
Tefkros The Dead Pod Society Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.06.23 07:00:00 - [120] Huginn (3k/s) + Curse (3k/s) vs 4 Megathrons, Deimos, Enyo, Lachesis, Incursus (¦pirate¦ gang), at a planet. Think for a second, would a properly fit and coordinated gang like that, lose to these two recons? Our friends were 20 jumps away so no help was coming. 1 Megathron, Lachesis, Enyo and Incursus died. The rest warped off, with second Megathron in structure. Is it because we were "nanoed"? 3km/s is OK according to the whiners. NO Is it because we are uber? NO Is it because the opposing gang are completely useless blobbers that find thrill in only pressing F1-F8 and can¦t make a proper gang to save their life? You tell me. Why do we nano our ships? Because we want excitement, we want to take on huge odds since thats what we encounter, we want to ** off people that can¦t catch us while we kill them. We want to be able to spring traps and laugh in their face. We want to make the thigs we trained and practiced, useful. We do what anyone who lacks numbers and firepower would do. If you want to live in your sad world with fat ships, no skill and coordination involved, quoting wrecking hits in your bio, I pity you. And to the OP, who doesn¦t seem to be whining...not everything is nanoed. I enjoy the Typhoon (and kill nanoships with it) as much as I enjoy the Vagabond. It just takes a to catch a** :) Not to mention I never go near Zealots or lazorz in general in a nanoship, for a reason :)

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: 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.