EVE Search - Nano Counters (yes it can be done!)

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Nano Counters (yes it can be done!)

» 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)
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 09:13:00 - [1] Originally by: Tenuo Problem with that is that no one wants to fight in a 200mill uninsurable ship with no chance to disengage ever, HACs are too costly to be used like BCs or other t1 ships. I like to quote posts like this in nano threads, because the nerf whiners never reply to it. Unless you nano it, there's absolutely no reason to use a HAC unless you like throwing money away.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 09:56:00 - [2] Dear terrible poster, you're missing the point. Those other ships you mentioned? They have a role. Command ships can use warfare links (hint: Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Maneuvers. You can even put it on a drake!). Black ops can use covert cynos and do their black opsy things. Marauders, well. HACs. 'Tanks better than a cruiser'. Not worth 200M ISK when blobs are the name of the game.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 10:09:00 - [3] Originally by: FlameGlow Originally by: Haakelen Dear terrible poster, you're missing the point. Those other ships you mentioned? They have a role. Command ships can use warfare links (hint: Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Maneuvers. You can even put it on a drake!). Black ops can use covert cynos and do their black opsy things. Marauders, well. HACs. 'Tanks better than a cruiser'. Not worth 200M ISK when blobs are the name of the game. Having the role doen't make them automagically invulnerable or fully insurable - that means they will be eventually destroyed and their pilots won't get much of an insurance. All compaints about HACs not having a role can be addresed to gamedesigners but probable answer will be - "what did you expect?, they are made as 'better' cruisers, just like AF are 'better' frigates" Are you seriously saying that HACs should be the Assault Frigates of cruisers? Stop posting.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 10:25:00 - [4] Edited by: Haakelen on 23/06/2008 10:25:11 If you people (idiots) could learn to read, I never said HACs need a role, I said that the other ships he mentioned had one. HACs have one, too. They're fast moving, relatively good damage skirmish ships. They are not the end all be all of combat. Nerf speed and their role becomes 'wreck'. edit: Seriously I'm not Tenuo's alt
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 10:55:00 - [5] Precision lights can already. What do you want, t1 heavies going 9km? If you go into the market, and go to ships, and close the battlecruiser and cruiser tabs, you could see that there are ships other than the Caracal and Drake.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 11:00:00 - [6] Plating/resisting out a Sacrilege for RR gangs is a viable strategy. It doesn't translate very well to other ships (it's certainly possible, but not that awesome), though. And it's still just yet another method of blobbing things.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 11:05:00 - [7] Congratulations, if you find one or two T1 cruisers you will indeed be very good. The problem arises when you find 15-20 T1 cruisers.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 11:08:00 - [8] Yeah, neither did I . Conventional ships die to blobs. This is why people fly nanoships. That's the point.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 12:31:00 - [9] There's no problem with that, in principle. I get the feeling, though, that the kind of people who are *****ing and crying for these changes won't be happy enough with a T2 ship of every other race getting a web bonus.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 12:53:00 - [10] Originally by: Sileam Well... problems with those counters are quite simple: - ISK - SKILLS To fly a nano-frig or nano-cruiser (very common in the FW Militias now) you need about 5-10 mil and quite a newbie skills. To catch and counter such ship - you need a ship for 150 mil with no insurance and months of training, while your "nano-counter" gets kicked by other standard ship. That is why almost everybody fly rifters, stabbers, vexors, thoraxes and other stuff with speed-tank. They are cheap and the loss is afordable, while there are not many brave enough to counter them. Other thing is a player skill... But thats a longer topic. So, you're supposed to be able to easily kill a T2 ship with a T1 ship? With much less investment in time and money? This is why you're whining. Nano HACs are something you can't blob out. Get over it.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 13:05:00 - [11] Originally by: Sileam Did even you tried to read my post or you burned in holy anger that someone can take away your solopwntoys from you? Here's my battleclinic page. http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Haakelen Find a kill using a nano ship. Good luck, as there aren't any. Get out. Quote: You all fight so furiously to save your nanos... no wonders, I'd be sad to if someone took away my "I WIN" button from the game interface Don't worry, the way things are going, I doubt anyone will ever take away your 40-Man tech 1 cruiser blob I win button.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 14:11:00 - [12] If you want to argue that T2 missiles (and T2 ammo in general) need a boost, I would agree 100%. There's no reason that T2 ammo should suck compared to faction ammo. With a missile explosion velocity rig, a Cerberus with assault launchers using T2 precision lights should do more damage against faster ships than it does. There should be more ships with web bonuses. Hell, maybe even ARM scripts for webbers. Boost the T2 over the fleeting, whatever. All of these things would probably promote a bit more diversity in small gang skirmishes.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 16:24:00 - [13] Xean we've been posting that for like 4 pages and they still don't listen
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 16:35:00 - [14] Originally by: Pithecanthropus Originally by: Xaen Most nano ships cannot break 4km/s without a snake set. Yea, right... LOL. Speaking of lol, you're an idiot. With my skills (HSM 4 / Accel Control 4 / EM 5 / Nav 5 / Spaceship 5). No snakes, rogues, zor's, etc. Ishtar: 3.6km. Zealot: 3.4km. Sacrilege: 3.9km. All T2 fit, polycarboned. You don't know what you're talking about. Stop posting.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 19:05:00 - [15] Precision heavies is a straw man. Precision lights on a Cerberus is more than acceptable.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 19:59:00 - [16] Originally by: Veng3ance First off, you have no idea what your talking about. A Cerberus can't do ** against nano.... ever. Missiles DO NOT damage nanoships no matter how much you want them to. Warhead Flare Catalyst. Precision Light Missiles. Max theoretical velocity is 8500m/s, max theoretical explosion velocity is 5175m/s. Most nanoships don't go faster than that. Quote:** Second, Warrior drones only catch slower nano ships. You mean, most of them? Sacrilege, Zealot, Ishtar, Vaga without snakeset = Warriormeat. In summation, stop posting.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:34:00 - [17] It's easily calculated, assuming you have the mental capacity for math and the motor control to type coherent English sentences. Nano HACs are specialized ships, and require a modicum of skill or tactics to neutralize their effectiveness. If the anti-nano crying lot are to be believed, speedfit cruisers are antithetical. Do the same and make an out of the box ship fitting. We put time and money into specialized equipment and skills, don't expect to be perfect in response without at least trying to do a little bit of the same.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 20:47:00 - [18] Probably, because all you ***** dip**s are completely incapable of thinking laterally, or gaining any PvP experience, or doing anything except creating homogeneous blobs of the wrong kinds of ships to counter every single threat. You will then succeed in dumbing down Eve PvP to the point of irrelevance. Congratulations.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 21:15:00 - [19] Originally by: Spineker ** I read and wish I didn't You've been playing since beta. Good for you. Tell me then, what replaces nanos for small gang stuff when you get the nerf you're crying so much for. T1 cruisers 23/7? The only people stupid enough to use HACs at that point would be people with more money than sense. Or remote rep BS fleets? Yeah, that'll last a while. Until you get another wave of people crying about how 'invincible' those are, despite the counters to it being completely obvious. What's the end goal of your holy quest for 'unbroken' ships? All races have identical ships, doing identical things, with different names and skills? Who the ** could find that fun?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 21:25:00 - [20] All four races have a HAC that can be nanoed acceptably for a gang. It's not our fault you can't figure that out. What good is a non-nanoed HAC? A high-resist Sacrilege with sensor boosters to lock stuff for an RR fleet? Sniping HACS ? You're trying to enforce your remarkably myopic view on combat.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 21:34:00 - [21] It is being met with derision, by people who know what they're talking about.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 21:49:00 - [22] Isn't it funny how 90% of the anti-nano people are using alts?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 21:58:00 - [23] Yeah, I've died to nano gangs quite a bit. Because of that I'm supposed to be in favor of nerfing them?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:02:00 - [24] it's cool /\
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:12:00 - [25] Edited by: Haakelen on 23/06/2008 22:11:50 Originally by: Clone 231B The same thing I would say to those who invested all those same skillpoints into NOS-domis, or DUAL-MWDing ravens, or nano-domis. Yes, its not overpowered anymore, but those skillpoints are still very useful, oh and stop training flavor fo the month (year is more like it) stuff. Character attacks only prove my point btw. When you can't defend a position attack the person. Time for some of you to take a good look at what/how you are defending things. If nanos aren't overpowered you guys have nothing to worry about and you all should chill out. If, however, they are then you guys are living up to exactly how someone with an unfair advantage should act. We'll see what happens. Worst case scenario, I got BS 5 for a reason. It's mostly the principle of the matter. Most of the anti-nano crowd seems to be singlemindedly interested in even further homogenizing Eve combat, and I don't really like it .
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:27:00 - [26] Edited by: Haakelen on 23/06/2008 22:32:17 Originally by: Pithecanthropus Bottom line... nano fleets are made to gank 1 or 2 players. To me that is not pvp, that's a grief fest with chestpoppers looking for an ego trip. Perhaps I didn't see all your posts, but this is the first time I saw your justification (Ganking is bad). (serious) What's PvP then? Blobbing more expensive ships with cheap ones? Remote rep gangs? Capital hot drops? Sniper fleet lagfests? Sarcasm aside, what's PvP to you then? Because, when I read your posts (aside from wanting to shoot myself), I get the distinct impression that you don't know what you're talking about, and/or should stop posting so Originally by: Clone 231B As it is now there is very little counter to nano-ships for the vast majority of vessels, with a few more stalemating devices. This imbalance should be obvious to any pod-pilot. I totally don't disagree. As I've said before, If CCP rules speed as a valid way of doing things, there should be a readjustment to webbers, MWD cap use, bonuses, etc across the board to make it so that not only Minmatar Recons get a direct counter to speed. This will make nanos more susceptible to the 'bring more ships' philosophy of threat response, which is the primary reason to fly one, but whatever. My problem is that without speed, (most) HACs are (nearly) useless, and the anti-nano side seems unwilling to admit it. It seems many of them have the idea in their head that PvP must somehow be like missions, where people just sit and tank things, and I and many others don't see any fun in that.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:33:00 - [27] Edited by: Haakelen on 23/06/2008 22:34:03 Originally by: Jack Jombardo Originally by: Ignatious Mei Also, people tend to think that every fight should be winnable. I don't understand this. Seams as you do understand this as pro-nanos often argue with "I spend so much ISKs so I must have an advantage" and they do spend so much ISKs becouse they know that they a) win or b) can escape with nano-fittings with a very high changs. Or do you realy belive they would nano if it wouldn't gave em an noteble advantage? If HACs didn't have survivability, why would anyone use them? e: ^^ this is the problem with threads on this forum, people who essentially agree end up at each other's throats
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:44:00 - [28] Jack, if you can't nano HACs, what do you do with them? I'm serious, stop ducking it
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:51:00 - [29] Pst. Jack. If you can't nano a HAC, what do you do with it? Ever flown one? Tried to fit one? Used a HAC in both nano and conventional fittings?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 22:56:00 - [30] Ah, and now we get down to it. Yes, some of the HACs, compared to their T1 counterparts, have nice tanks. The problem is, battlecruisers do more DPS and tank better than HACs, and are a fraction of the price. There's no reason to fly a tanked HAC, literally. Sniper fit and speed fit HACs are the only setups worth using. Okay, so, you have a cruiser that tanks like a BC. I suppose that's useful in a few situations. But more often than not, you're going to find a blob somewhere (on a station or a gate or wherever), and when it's 20 ships versus you, it doesn't matter if you tank twice as good as a T1 cruiser, or five times as good, you're going to die, no matter what. Which is the base of the issue. Nano HACs gained popularity as blobbing got worse. You don't address that, at all. It is because of that, that I doubt you either fly a HAC or do much active PvP.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 23:12:00 - [31] Originally by: Jack Jombardo But nanoing a Habinger or Geddon Originally by: Jack Jombardo nanoing a Habinger or Geddon Originally by: Jack Jombardo Habinger or Geddon
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 23:15:00 - [32] Now I don't have to try to make my point anymore, you've done it for me.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 23:29:00 - [33] Every ship does not get nanoed. Every HAC doesn't even get nanoed. There are preferred ways to do things for every situation, and it depends on your play style, skills, and backup.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.23 23:46:00 - [34] You don't seem to realize that you're making the point for us about why HACs need more than just 'tanks better'.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.24 00:08:00 - [35] Because every nano pilot has a snake set.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.24 00:12:00 - [36] My Ishtar goes 3.6km. I don't have a snakeset. Is that slow enough for you to stop pushing to nerf it?

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.