| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
SMASH Alliance
   |
Posted - 2008.06.25 15:54:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Xparky
We can't bring hyenas or huginns to web the nanoers
So you're saying to both train for another race *AND* for nanos to counter nanos? This is like saying that I've got my god mode. If you wish to play you must also have the same god mode.
Originally by: Xparky
Remote repairing them to keep them alive is out of the question.
Remote repping isn't a counter. It doesn't threaten nanos. It is an annoyance.
Originally by: Xparky
Claymores or other fleet command ships or BCs to boost fleet's web range with ganglinks from a safe spot are also out of the question. We want to win with our T1 ships
So you're saying that training for Minm is required? That t1 ships cannot effectively web unless specialists are brought in?
Originally by: Xparky
Nerf nanos, they shoot us from far away. We don't want to fit remote sensor dampeners to force them closer to target us or tracking disruptors to lower their optimal range,
ECM falls under annoyance, and not counter.
Originally by: Xparky
or use heavy nos to kill their cap when they come closer
So now battleships are required to counter nanos?
Originally by: Xparky
target painters on the nanoers,
Target paint something that already has a 550% larger sig radius?
At the end of the day we're back at the best counter to nanos are nanos. Cross training for Minm/Amarr/Gallente. Mixed nanos fleets (ie vagas/ishtar/huginn/rapier) with nano support (claymore/falcon/scimitar).
Is it somewhat ridiculus to expect an entirely Caldari force in Faction Warfware to have a counter to nanos? I'm not saying it couldn't be done. Crows to web + a few basilisks + nano Cerebuses + falcons. My issue with this is still that if t2 ships are so heavily favored than something is wrong.
t1 ships should be viable against nanos.
Until then *everyone* should be training for and flying nanos.
|
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 16:41:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Xparky
No, I said remote repaired Huginns are a counter. Way to go quoting it out of context.
Huginns and rapiers are certainly the way to go. However problematic in that cross training is still required.
Originally by: Xparky
I said sensor dampeners and tracking disrupters,
Part of electronic warfare. Same category as ECM. Mostly an annoyance.
Most nanos are close enough that sensor damps aren't terribly effective after the last nerf. Damps are great against ceptors but mostly fail against nano'd recons (long base lock range).
If they're disrupted it'll likely take longer to kill the target. A vaga often will turn off the mwd to get better damage. Tracking disrupters won't help much here. If an Ishtar is tracking disrupted it won't notice.
Most nano pilots won't get close enough to be webbed for any reason. If they realize that damps/disrupters are being used then they'll have an urge to grab an axe.
I'm not saying that electronic warfare has no use. It can certainly help to get away. However I wouldn't argue that electronic warfare is a counter.
Originally by: Xparky
Easier to hit ?
Compared to what? A station?
If the nano is going fast enough missiles won't be effective. If the nano is orbiting then traversal is the issue. Target painting is mostly for hitting nanos at a distance where they can warp off at will.
|
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 21:34:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Gamesguy
Bring some f*cking interceptors and EW support, like you know, falcons, blackbirds,
So to kill a nano you need:
1) ceptor
2) jammer
3) dps
This may work for one nano but not so well against multiple nanos. The ceptors are quickly primaried. Then the jammer, then the dps. So now we need remote reps to keep the ceptors alive (ie the nano scimitar).
The other issue is the numbers. If 10x nanos show up this means needing 2x - 3x times the numbers to kill a significant portion. Otherwise maybe one dies and the rest warp off. Averaged out the nano has the advantage per pilot.
I actually did this particular tactic a few times against Tri. I'd have the gang members field about 10-15 blackbirds. Then try and keep the ceptors alive. The ceptors would call the web and that would be the primary for the snipers/dps. Worked out fairly well.
In the end it required the fleet to commit and required a large blob. It was more likely to go south if the nanos were scouting for a larger fleet etc. The tactic can kill a bunch of nanos and I made some nice isk back when t2 was worth something.
The issue was that the nanos had the advantage. The FC must play to the ego of the nano pilots. The tactic has the issues listed above.
Wouldn't getting everyone to fly nanos just be so much easier?
|
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 22:06:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Gamesguy
No you dont moron. One falcon can lock down 5-6 nanoships, you dont need one interceptor for every nanoship they have, you dont need one dps ship for every nanoship they have, have you ever heard of focus firing?
You need enough dps to quickly take down the target. Since the target is going to be a fair bit out this means likely snipers. Not blastathrons. You'll need a fair number of snipers to chew through an 8k-9k shield buffer tank with decent resists.
You'll need a fair number of ceptors. They pop _very_ fast to a nano gang if a jam fails or someone isn't covered. Lots can go wrong with the ceptor so enough is needed to cover for this.
Good luck with 1 falcon covering 5-6 nanos. Consider the nanos will have some recons of their own (difficult to jam). The nanos will be warping on grid. A falcon can cover maybe 2 or 3 nanos.
Originally by: Gamesguy
Against 10 nanoships. Two falcons to lock down every single ship in their gang, 3 inties to do the tackling, and 4 RR bs/1 logistics to keep your falcons/each other alive.
For this to happen you'd need perfect communication of who is jammed. You can't miss that many jams. You can't get drones on the ceptors or the jams are worthless.
This requires large amounts of coordination. Lots of t2, isk, and skillpoints. Of what you mentioned having a few logistics in gang would give the best chance of success. In the end if it works you might kill a nano before the rest warp off.
Flying nanos to counter another nano gangs would be easier and give better results.
Originally by: Gamesguy
Maybe if your alliance weren't so utterly **** this might work better, blackbirds are for 2 months old FW alts, not acceptable in a 0.0 alliance.
OOh, personal elitism insults. My favorite.
Yes blackbirds aren't very acceptable. Thats why we mostly fly nanos.
Originally by: Gamesguy
Its called a scout moron, 10 recon ships can do this as well, are you trying to tell me recons are overpowered?
Some where (curse) and have been nerfed.
Recons aren't generally used to go up directly against a large fleet. Either the recons can cloak and have traded dps/tank for this or the recons are likely nano'd themselves.
If they're not nano'd they generally won't get anywhere close to a large fleet.
|
| |
|