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 [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:00:00 - [31] Originally by: Tamia Clant Edited by: Tamia Clant on 23/06/2008 00:42:56 Originally by: Wendat Huron That's how far away they'll be the second they realize they can't win the engagement. It's not about the damage they do then but how hard they're to kill if not piloted by a moron. Well, silly of me to think that high-speed ships were designed for hit-n-run warfare, which mainly involves getting the hell away when you know you're about to get your ass handed over to you. I'm getting the impression that people aren't complaining over the fact nanoships are causing damage to their fleets, they are complaining because they see nanoships flying around, doing sod all, and are unable to kill them. I thought that was KINDA obvious. Lets face it if the nanoship can't kill the ship in front of it, the nano can get away with ease except for that .01% of the time its a dedicated anti nanoship and the nano pilot got stupid. However those that are not in the nanoship are screwed if they know they can't kill the nanoship. They can't outrun the nanoship. They can make a run for the gate but what happens if they aren't at a gate? Something that is hit and run should have max firepower that it can carry. It should rely on speed instead of shields/armor,sure. The problem with nanoships is that while they are fragile their fragility never comes into play unless you got a specific anti-nano ship which belongs to 1 race and 1 race only. Its this small chance of countering the nano ships that make everyone that doesn't swing that way hate them. Its why nanos are broken. Its why the "hit and run" ideal is broken with them. Seriously what CCP should do is either increase real ways to counter nanoships by introducing new mods or new ships, longer range and faster missles as well as turrets with higher tracking speeds. Webs should also be modified. Either give us long range ,reduced strength webs or give us scripts so we can modify the range and effect. the longer out you want it to reach the less it reduces the target's ship's speed. Unless ccp does that its as though a group of players are running around with 99.9999999999% resists to all damage types ,tanks. Topped off with a full rack of prenerfed warpstabs. If ccp wants to take a lazy approach to this then just unnerf warpstabs so everyone else can get some of the benifits of nano gameplay. we might not be able to tank but your nanoships is going to have a hard time scramming me with 2 or more warpstabs on. oh how bout t2 warpstabs with +2 strength? yeah that would be cool. Also ecm and other methods of "dealing" with nano ships isn't exactly a way to deal with them. It might stop them from shooting but its not a real threat to them as all the ECM in the world isn't going to pop their ship or their pod. Yet the nanoships are able to pop those ships that don't have ecm or isn't a specific races specific ship fit specifically to stop a nano and kill it. so its really not a counter, just a deterent....a temporary one at that.
Nikita Alterana	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:00:00 - [32] I'll tell you what: you get a nanoship, and I'll get a myrmiddon, load it with drone nav comps, and warrior's. we'll see who wins. __________________________________________________
Kame Malice Mitsukashi Holdings Limited	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:09:00 - [33] ok then, you can kill NANOs that way... what about OVERDRIVES? /thread P.s. STOP THE WHINING!
Mahke Carrion Crows	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:11:00 - [34] Edited by: Mahke on 23/06/2008 01:12:03 Originally by: ShardowRhino words Agreed fully. I like the web idea: a script that doubled web range and halved web slowing effect (combined with training thermodynamics) would fix the nano problem: they'd still be completely able to get out of dodge if a blob was coming, but if they chose to fight, it would be much more feasible to force them to to fight to the end.
Wasted Mind Syntech Research and Development Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:13:00 - [35] Warrior 2's arent going to do anything to a nano because as soon as he floats out of web range he can warp away. Bottom line, they need a speed cap for each ship class (frigs,cruisers, bs's etc). I dont think half the ships you see out there nano fit today were meant to travel as fast as an interceptor. It defeats the purpose of needing an interceptor to tackle all together. It also alienates noobs because in the past you could have new players in a t1 frig and they would still be useful for tackling people. Now that is not the case.
Jurgen Cartis Interstellar Corporation of Exploration Nex Eternus	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:26:00 - [36] Originally by: Nikita Alterana I'll tell you what: you get a nanoship, and I'll get a myrmiddon, load it with drone nav comps, and warrior's. we'll see who wins. Depends on how you define 'win'. If you define win as 'I drive him off' and I define win as 'I escape to fight another day', then it's very easy for both of us to 'win' that fight. So long as I avoid web range, I can leave whenever I want, and those Warrior IIs 120 DPS aren't going to kill a nano cruiser before it can flee. That's the real debate with nanos, how you define 'counter'. If you define 'counter' as 'can drive them off', there's plenty of ways to do that. If you define 'counter' as 'can reliably kill nanoships in small or large group combat, without needing a numerical advantage', then the list gets a lot shorter. -------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth
Van Steiza Eternal Perseverance	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:28:00 - [37] Ur average nanoed hac goes from 3 to 4km/s 4km/s being the higher skilled. That applies to all but a vagabond which hangs from 5 to 6kms which can only be pulsed seing as it has to slow down to do damage. Anyway I fly a hurricane with 220 IIs and barrage and 3 ambits I have 23km fall off when anythin nanoed throws itself at me its like xmas a free kill because All i got to do is hit approach burn my mwd and i am able to hit him with my guns. Wheather he makes a mistake and doesnt burn away before he dies or comes in web range is his choice if he decides quick enough to run then thats fair. A harb with t2 guns a cane with t2 guns can track a nanoship. Neuts theres MORE things that can kill nanoed ships then people like to limit too. People need to broaden there minds. Stop complaining. You see the few hacs and recons and bs that can go 10kms + rare that they are are due to snake implants faction and all manner of EXPENCIVE habbits. Snake implant effects + polycarbs no kind of penalty to stacking that im aware of and when they are put together with a full speed fit it becomes stupid yes but the majority of people DO NOT and CAN'T buy them maybe you can look at that. Otherwise I dont think nanoing is overpowered. ----------------------------------------------- Stop removing my Sig its fine!!!! Nerf Moderaters.
Noelle Fay State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:29:00 - [38] Originally by: touchvill As an ex Tri I should be among the most qualified to speak out. I hate flying nano's, they are killable but it's not easy. When there is a gang of them it is 100% completely, totally and utterly impossible to kill them all. You may gank 1 but the rest will get away. Unless they are really stupid and sit still doing nothing. They are overpowered in that there is not really a weapon to get them at full speed and the only ships capable to web long range are dedicated to a single race (minmatar). I don't think nano's should be nerfed, people find them fun. Ships shouldn't be nerfed because I find flying/fighting them tedius and mundane. What I do think is every race should get more anti-nano ships whether missiles getting speed boost to make them super fast (18km/s missiles ftw :P) or to give all ships a webbing specialized ship. I don't know. As it is though the nano takedown is restricted to minmatar unless you are fighting idiots. So basicly nano's should be in game but there should be more methods for takedown than training for minmatar recons. To the pro nano people saying people want solo pwn mobiles, I think they want gang pwn mobiles without having to have a bunch of minmatar recons in gang. There is far less ways to counter nano than pretty much any other tactic in game. Give people more options for taking them down and I think people will start more varied gangs other than everyone flying nano's. It's clear from the ammount of people flying nano's that it's an issue, nerfing is not necesarry a cure though. I agree, yet polycarbs have to be fixed still. That and what you said. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- The secret to success, whether it's women or money, is knowing when to quit. I oughta know: I'm divorced and broke.
Icutty Lotz	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:43:00 - [39] heres the data for you ppl warrior II with drone nav 4 go about 6050m/s aug warriors go 6650 m/s this will get bad ceptor pilots with 1 drone nav they go agu warrior 8316 warrior II 7560 this will get a lot of ceptors when they are orbiting except mabby the ones ppl spend a lot of isk on(gisti-A and t2 polycarbs) as a crow pilot i have been hit by a good cerb pilot for about 20 damage a missile wich is alot to a frig sized ship with less than 2000hp a bs with a 30km nute range and warrior II or hobgobs II will eat a ceptor in about 5-15 seconds(depending on how far away the drones are and when the MWD turns off) rapier/hugin/curse will do this also also adding (Tracking disruptor's for turret ships)reduce there opp have to get in close this is death for a vagga ECM- they cant target they cant shoot or scram nanos are not the problem you are for not finding a way to kill them or make them useless to there gang Originally by: CCP Wrangler do not start your own thread or I will omgwtfbbqpwn you
auverne	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:55:00 - [40] Originally by: Shinux Edited by: Shinux on 23/06/2008 01:13:03 The problem isn't with nanos in itself. There's ligitimate complaining from Minmatar pilots who say that agressive nano nerfing will make many of their ships [edit: non-]useful. The problem isn't with all nano ships, it's the ships that were never intended to travel that fast which retain their sniper capabilities such as the aforementioned cerb (and others). Noone is arguing against quick ships that can get into their optimal range in time, such as the minmatar design dictates for autocannons - it's the long range platforms that were never meant to be able to effectively stay out of missile range, while flying under the tracking speed of turret battleships. That is what is unbalanced, and that aspect should definately be fixed. I would agree with this. Certain ships and modules need some tinkering with to make them do a better job at catching and destroying engaged nano ships so there would be no more or much less whines and complaints that "omg if they engage us we can't kill them all". Additionally may be give polycarb rigs certain penalties that would have to do with damage or sniping ability so that the speed is not affected but their ability to take out other ships is.
Gimpb	Posted - 2008.06.23 01:58:00 - [41] Originally by: Spineker cerberus with missiles take down a nano ship... Perhaps you people can see why I laugh at you and your knowledge on this subject You mean they can make the nano ship run away... ...big difference between that and taking them down. Note, I'm not one of those nerf nano guys, you can look up some of my other posts on the subject if you like.
Bum Slave	Posted - 2008.06.23 02:02:00 - [42] Originally by: Van Steiza Ur average nanoed hac goes from 3 to 4km/s 4km/s being the higher skilled. That applies to all but a vagabond which hangs from 5 to 6kms which can only be pulsed seing as it has to slow down to do damage. Anyway I fly a hurricane with 220 IIs and barrage and 3 ambits I have 23km fall off when anythin nanoed throws itself at me its like xmas a free kill because All i got to do is hit approach burn my mwd and i am able to hit him with my guns. Wheather he makes a mistake and doesnt burn away before he dies or comes in web range is his choice if he decides quick enough to run then thats fair. A harb with t2 guns a cane with t2 guns can track a nanoship. Neuts theres MORE things that can kill nanoed ships then people like to limit too. People need to broaden there minds. Stop complaining. You see the few hacs and recons and bs that can go 10kms + rare that they are are due to snake implants faction and all manner of EXPENCIVE habbits. Snake implant effects + polycarbs no kind of penalty to stacking that im aware of and when they are put together with a full speed fit it becomes stupid yes but the majority of people DO NOT and CAN'T buy them maybe you can look at that. Otherwise I dont think nanoing is overpowered. People always ignore the good posts....
Jeckes	Posted - 2008.06.23 02:13:00 - [43] Originally by: ShardowRhino Originally by: Anisa Schardl In before the people who want to be able to fly a solopwnmobile and will ask why they should ever have to think about how to counter a nanoship, or any other kind of setup. Darn, I was too slow. In before the people that want to fly a ship that are basically invincible to 99.9% ship setups. that 0.1% set up being worthless against everything else. oh....crap....too late... epic
Jeckes	Posted - 2008.06.23 02:14:00 - [44] Look at it this way. Interceptors were designed to pin down ships, but Interceptors have to get dangerously close to do this, which in turn leads them to being pinned down and killed. and why? all because someone (god forbid) tried to use a ship in its intended manner VS some nanohac nublet.
Grath Telkin Evolving Paradigms	Posted - 2008.06.23 04:17:00 - [45] So lets get this straight, now you all think INTERCEPTORS go to fast too. A ship with less than 0 tank, and you want it slowed down? I saw the number 4000m/s...are you serious? So, you want a pilot, no matter WHAT his ship to be forced, to stay on grid, and finish the fight, to the end, every time they engage? So do we nerf tanks? I think its unfair the way battleships can re-approach the gate and de-agro and jump through to the other side. Thats unbalanced, and ....do you see how stupid this sounds now?
Yarr2K 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.06.23 04:22:00 - [46] The only nano ship that is remotely unbalanced are the intys with the warp disruptor range bonus. Those are pretty much a perma tackle on any single ship the run across. All the others have pitiful dps and tanks so they pay for their 'immunity' with impotence on the battlefield.
Aria Seniste	Posted - 2008.06.23 04:38:00 - [47] You all miss the real "nano" problem. It's always ignored. Every. Single. Thread. They are, in combat, PERFECTLY balanced. Neuts, webs, ewar... they're not pathetically easy to kill, but they're far from impossible. No worse than a group of tanked ships. The problem occurs outside of the actual battle. Nanoships move through systems faster than normal ships. (Faster align time.) If they run, large ships will not catch them. They move faster on the grid than larger ships. If they want to run out of range, they can, easily. You might tackle one in time. The rest get away. When they want to leave, they can rush through the gate before you can lock / kill them. You might, again, tackle one. They have the advantage of picking their own fights. It's very difficult to force them to engage. Therefore, they can simply choose not to fight anyone who might put up an even match. When they do choose to engage, they know they'll win (They have more numbers, the right ships, etc.). So, to people fighting nanos, what they see is either... the nanos don't engage, or the nanos easily kill them. It's easy to mistake them as "broken" ships when they always win.. but it's not the speed tank that causes this. It's the ability to always pick their fights, and of course, always picking the fights they know they can win.
Yarr2K 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.06.23 04:42:00 - [48] Originally by: Aria Seniste You all miss the real "nano" problem. It's always ignored. Every. Single. Thread. Didn't I just say that nano ships trade combat effectiveness for 'immunity'?
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate The ENTITY.	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:04:00 - [49] Originally by: Mahke ... What broken is their ability to DISENGAGE from a fight they've already joined at will ... This is key to the debate. In fact it has been the core of just about every major nerf. CCP has this commit to combat philosophy, which is quite counter to human behavior. People will do anything they can do put them selves in the best possible position to win and/or at least not loose. The implementation of the commit to combat philosophy, within existing mechanics, is what is flawed. The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
Grath Telkin Evolving Paradigms	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:14:00 - [50] Originally by: Adunh Slavy The implementation of the commit to combat philosophy, within existing mechanics, is what is flawed. I thought it was people's inability to grasp the strengths and weakness's of the different combat ships in EVE. The role fill and niche's of the different classes. Nanno's are hard to kill. I'm a nanno pilot, and I can promise you that we miss out on alot of kills simply because we CAN'T down the target with our dps. We are jackals. Vultures. Pick any random vermin you will, we shy from the light, avoid the heavy engagements where we can't make a difference, and pick off the weak, slow, and generally inept. The pack is always safe. Stray from that, the wolves will take you down. Unless the battleship is solo, or at worst poorly accompanied, it gets to live. Whereas a big fleet gets to engage targets at the FC's whim, often using brute force and heavy tanks to smash an enemy, Quick strike cruisers must use their agility to score victories, as they simply die in a stand up brawl.
Aria Seniste	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:25:00 - [51] The reason for the "Commit to combat" philosophy is that it's not satisfying to win a battle without killing someone, to most people. They don't want to win the engagement and make the enemy retreat. They want to kill every last ship on the opposing side. Either for loot, killboard stats, etc. ..Although, nano gangs running a few 100k away and being invincible, yet a danger that keeps you stuck in a gang "hunting" them until they decide to leave.. well, that's just annoying.
Lilith Velkor Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:31:00 - [52] Didnt bother to read the whole thread, maybe add t1 frigates to the list of counters. Fit a vigil with rat loot (~300k a pop), have 3-4 of them charge towards the target and get it webbed. You'll be successful against vagas and ishtars (esp. those) almost all the time, curse/rapier/huginn will be harder but its doable and you wont loose much. Guess this works with other frigates too, just play around, maybe go to SiSi and improve your tactics there first.
Lokche	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:33:00 - [53] Never losing equates not to always winning.
Aria Seniste	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:36:00 - [54] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Didnt bother to read the whole thread, maybe add t1 frigates to the list of counters. Fit a vigil with rat loot (~300k a pop), have 3-4 of them charge towards the target and get it webbed. You'll be successful against vagas and ishtars (esp. those) almost all the time, curse/rapier/huginn will be harder but its doable and you wont loose much. Guess this works with other frigates too, just play around, maybe go to SiSi and improve your tactics there first. Yes, but they're easy to kill when they engage. The thing is, if you can kill them, they won't engage. They win by picking their fights, not by being overpowered.
Gamesguy Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:47:00 - [55] Originally by: Spineker LMAO Nano ships don't cost 2 billion isk Cerberus with MAXED skills in missiles the missiles will not catch an intecpetor or nano-ship Cerberus is useless against them without them being tackled For the 1000th time precision missiles are slower than standard missiles they have higher explosive velocity to kill orbiting ships not to catch 4000+ms nano ships. Nano when needing to escape is gone before you lock You have no clue NoClue+Noob=Nikita Cerb with assault launchers loaded with precision lights is an excellent anti-inty counter, it does decent enough damage to scare off nano-hacs as well. The missile travels at around 8km/s, and explosion velocity is around 5km/s.
Gamesguy Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.06.23 05:54:00 - [56] Originally by: ShardowRhino You.....never went against a gang of TRI did you? 4 BSes to take out a single interceptor in no way sounds like a decent counter to nanoships. You might as well have had 20 BSes to take him out. No one is saying they are 100% immune, just that they are immune to 99.99999% of damage and setups out there. Eventually if you stack enough crap against a single nanoship and if the pilot does something stupid, yes you will kill it. But to suggest its possible to kill a single nanoceptor with 4 bses seems absurd. The question is what do you do against a pack of nanoships then? what do you do when its just you and this guy isnt undocking? its to small of a window of opportunity and its to much against 1 ship to suggest it means much. I was in tri, its not that hard to kill your average nanoship. Barring rapiers/huginns(and yes we did engage even if the other guy had them), you can use ceptors+ECM support. A single falcon can lock down 5-6 nanoships and allow your inties to tackle them unmolested. Which is why I find it so funny that the caldari militia is whining about nanoships, other than rapier/huginns, ECM is by far the most potent anti-nano weapon. Instead of 80 drakes and caracals, how about bringing half a dozen falcons and a dozen inties? All the whining you see is mostly what happens when an organized group meets an unorganized rabble of mission runners. I'm sure invicta can pwn the caldari blob with RR bs or a sniper gang as well, in fact there's a link of them doing a gang of stealth bombers floating around here somewhere.
Jui Tse State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.23 07:25:00 - [57] There seems to be two camps arguing this issue: those who think there are sufficient counters to nano gangs, and those who think there arenÆt. So far both camps remind me of democrats and republicans arguing over the economy... And then thereÆs the ôlone wolfsö who seem to actually have rational positions. So far, my vote for the person with the most common sense goes to ShardowRhino. And if I can take the discretion of summarising his position, itÆs this: DISENGAGEMENT. Yes thereÆs methods of getting nanos off your back, but very few methods to actually kill them û especially if youÆve got low-skilled noobgangs seen in FW so far. First off, nanos nearly always get to choose their fights. Secondly, once in a fight where they begin to take damage theyÆll stop orbitting, align, cruise for a second or two and warp off. Unless theyÆre webbed, theyÆll usually get away with only minor damage. As for webbing them, noobs in t1 frigs can be used to intercept, but then it becomes a numbers game, not a game of skill and chance. The only other webbing choice is the minny recon, which very few people have trained (although imho the most useful ship in the game). Yes there are counters to nanos: Neuts, Swarming, Drones+NavComp (doesnÆt the drone MWD drop out once in range?? So one volley and then chase again?!?), Cerbs, ECM, etc. But none of these are effective at actually killing them! And please donÆt raise the argument that you can kill nanos with nanos.. we ALL realise that.. itÆs a moot argument to say fight fire with fire. I donÆt particularly want to start messing with these counters. For example, 60km neuts would have a lot of crappy consequences on other gang types, and ships that WERE meant to go fast (inties). Same goes for webs with distance scripts or missiles with faster explosion velocities. So coming full circle, we get back to this issue of disengagement. How can we make nanoships commit to a fight once they start one. This is how we need to frame this nano issue. So all you ôdemocratsö and ôrepublicansö out there... please stop the dribble! As for my two cents, the only thing I can think of is to make the activation of a MWD disable the shipÆs warp engines for 20 seconds. That ensures that if a nano gets in trouble, they canÆt just warp off. They have to turn off the MWD and wait for the timer. They can keep their current speeds. They can keep their manuverability. They just have to commit to a fight. Between 10 and 20 seconds of commitment. Does this hurt other ships like inties and ships like megas? Yeah, a little. In fact IÆd probably give inties an invulnerability to this or a reduction of the timer to 10 seconds (MWD duration length). And blaster boats usually use their MWDs to approach, not so much to get away. As for 0.0 gangs who use MWDs to stay out of bubbles.. well, gates would still activate without delay, if nothing else. /me shrugs Not a complete answer to the problem, but the best I can add.
Lilith Velkor Oyster Colors	Posted - 2008.06.23 07:40:00 - [58] Originally by: Aria Seniste Yes, but they're easy to kill when they engage. The thing is, if you can kill them, they won't engage. They win by picking their fights, not by being overpowered. They wont be dead before the web is on. And once that happens, gunbased nanos dont do anything, the rest can try but likely dies. True on the target selection argument, but honestly, you can do that in any ship, if you dont like the scanner readout you're off. Not a nano phenomenon at all. Is a ship running away really more annoying than playing docking games in BSs? Imho not.
Zaqar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2008.06.23 07:42:00 - [59] nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano nano
Aria Seniste	Posted - 2008.06.23 07:57:00 - [60] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: Aria Seniste Yes, but they're easy to kill when they engage. The thing is, if you can kill them, they won't engage. They win by picking their fights, not by being overpowered. They wont be dead before the web is on. And once that happens, gunbased nanos dont do anything, the rest can try but likely dies. True on the target selection argument, but honestly, you can do that in any ship, if you dont like the scanner readout you're off. Not a nano phenomenon at all. Is a ship running away really more annoying than playing docking games in BSs? Imho not. The difference is, a nano on grid with a battleship can run from the battleship. The battleship cannot run from the nano. A group of nanos can outrun a pursueing group. A group of BS will get trapped, probed out, and have to get ganked or logoffski. Also, docking games are terrible lame, yes. If you think it's annoying in BS, I had someone doing it in a Dread.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: 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.