EVE Search - CCP will nerf nanos because :

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP will nerf nanos because :

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 11:52:00 - [1] CCP will nerf speed tanking (a.k.a. nanos) because we, the factional warfare militia players can't counter it. Especially us, the Caldari (damn you Invicta!!). We want to play only with our T1 ships, fitted for DPS, and win ! We can't bring hyenas or huginns to web the nanoers because they will die first thing. Remote repairing them to keep them alive is out of the question. 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 fitted for DPS only ! 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, or use heavy nos to kill their cap when they come closer or use ships with range bonuses to medium guns like the Eagle. We want to win with our T1 ships fitted for DPS only! Nerf nanos! They move too fast while we have to stand still near the gate! Damn gates have glue on them. We don't want to use tracking computers, tracking links and target painters on the nanoers, we want their speed to be nerfed! All that electronic warfare stuff is stupid. Nerf nanos! They can hit at high speeds! There's no way to counter that with our T1 DPS ships! There's no room in our setups for tracking disruptors! I don't even know what tracking disruptors are or what ships give bonuses to tracking disruptors! Everybody said this expansion will be fun - T1 frigs and cruisers - but it's not, because of nanos ! Nerf nanos or this expansion will fail if you don't nerf nanos! Militias don't have the teamplay and coordination of regular corps, so we want our cheap T1 fully insurable disorganized fleets to be able to counter nano fitted HACs and other t2 or faction gizmos flown by organized and rich corps. Because of that, CCP, we demand you nerf nanos! It is only fair! P.S. Nerf nanos! P.P.S Stop giving us advice on how to counter nanos because we don't listen. We will only settle for a nerf ! Nerf nanos ! .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 14:06:00 - [2] No trolling of flaming please, CCP Navigator is lurking. .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 15:11:00 - [3] Originally by: Tenuo Quote from Jade Constantine on SHC after the latest CSM meeting: Originally by: Jade Constantine Nano's didn't formally get raised. [...] Got a link to that? .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 15:40:00 - [4] Originally by: Tenuo Here you go Thanks! .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 16:08:00 - [5] Originally by: ***zilla 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. No, I said remote repaired Huginns are a counter. Way to go quoting it out of context. Originally by: ***zilla 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? Well if you deal with speed you bring the speed specialist to counter it. Also I don't think the interdiction maneuvers warfare link can be mounted only on claymores. So no, you don't have to train Minmatar command ships. Originally by: ***zilla 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. I didn't say ECM (target jammers). That would be just an annoyance yes. I said sensor dampeners and tracking disrupters, which seem to effectively counter nanos (i.e. force them to come closer to both lock and fire from optimal turret range, and risk getting hit by a faction neut) Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Xparky or use heavy nos to kill their cap when they come closer So now battleships are required to counter nanos? Why not ? Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Xparky target painters on the nanoers, Target paint something that already has a 550% larger sig radius? Easier to hit ? Originally by: *****zilla 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). Ok. .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 16:17:00 - [6] Nice sig Miz. .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 16:35:00 - [7] Edited by: Xparky on 25/06/2008 16:35:58 Originally by: Steel Tigeress And No one see's that as a nerf? CCP says "We're gonna cut top possible speed by at least 1/2 [...]" [...] Got a link to that quote ? Also, is Jade Constantine's informal talk with the devs incorrectly related ? As far as I understand it, the devs think only speeds over 8000 m/s are broken. That's pretty uncommon... snakes and faction mwds being so expensive. .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 16:55:00 - [8] Originally by: ***zilla 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. Tracking disruptors affect optimal turret range also, not just tracking. True, an Ishtar will shrug it off, it's a special case, but once his drones are dead he's out. The vagabond is also tricky, since TDs don't affect falloff (there were some threads suggesting falloff scripts for TDs). But for non-minmatar turrets I'd say an optimal range reduction can be useful. Originally by: *zilla Originally by:** Xparky Easier to hit ? Compared to what? A station? Sorry, I'm a turret user. I meant easier to track and hit by large turrets. .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 17:26:00 - [9] Originally by: Kristoffer The Caldari are going to love what we pull out of the box next. Keep us posted! .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 18:28:00 - [10] Is it nerfed yet? .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 21:29:00 - [11] Edited by: Xparky on 25/06/2008 21:30:57 Originally by: Gamesguy Bring some f*cking interceptors and EW support, like you know, falcons, blackbirds, scorps, etc. [...] Tackle with the inties, which will outrun the nanos easilly, and jam the nanos with your ECM ships so they cant kill your inties, there you go, dead nanoships I've intentionally left those out in the first post, expecting a quick response from some calamari about how I forgot ECM ... Yet the response I got was "nerf nano or gief 15000m/s missilz" .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 21:41:00 - [12] Originally by: Memnoch Ares Originally by: Xparky Tracking disruptors affect optimal turret range also, not just tracking. True, an Ishtar will shrug it off, it's a special case, but once his drones are dead he's out. The vagabond is also tricky, since TDs don't affect falloff (there were some threads suggesting falloff scripts for TDs). But for non-minmatar turrets I'd say an optimal range reduction can be useful. Uh, TD's DO affect falloff....One decently skilled TD is enough to make life difficult (i.e. halve turret range) for a Vagabond or Zealot. Nanos are SO hard to counter, huh? Hm, you're right. Last time I checked they didn't. But that was a while ago. .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 21:45:00 - [13] Originally by: Spineker When 10 Nano's can pick a fight with 100 ship fleet and pick and chose when and what to kill at will it is broken. Wow 100 vs 10 ! NERF NANOS !!! 100 ships can't jam tackle and kill 10 ships ! Nerf nanos ! THE CALDARI MILITIA IS LOSING THE WAR ! (sorry for caps) .
Xparky Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.06.25 21:47:00 - [14] 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. Please, this is not CAOD. .

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.