EVE Search - Why Nanos are NOT the problem

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why Nanos are NOT the problem

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Straight Chillen Solar Wind Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.06.25 19:40:00 - [1] Edited by: Straight Chillen on 25/06/2008 19:44:18 Why Nanos are NOT the Problem Over the past few months, the forums seem to have descended into an all out troll/flame war over the issue over the ever increasing prevalence of Nano fitted ships for PVP use. There are people who will tell you there is no problem: they are lying or simply havenÆt seen it abused to the extent that some go. There are people who say that nanos and speed in general needs to be nerfed: TheyÆre over exaggerating, and have no concept of balance There are people saying there are reliable counters: TheyÆre full of it too No my friends, there is no problem with Nano ships, they work perfectly as intended, No, the problem is simple, one word even STACKING ItÆs simple. A Nano ship fitted with just the lows filled with speed mods, moves at a completely reasonable speed. But the problems arise when several effects that do not face any stacking penalty is applied. These are Rigs, Drugs, and Implants. Some people argue that heat is over powered, to that I say, what happens when I overload my mwd for 30 seconds and it offlines? Risk vs. reward right there, I see no problem. To help illustrate exactly what IÆm saying, hereÆs some numbers. For this example we will use the Eris (Gal) interdictor. We will assume that all relative skills are at lvl 5 The Eris will have a base speed of 406 M/S with no mods If u fit 3x OD IIÆs and 1x Nano II the base speed is 638 m/s Speed with a MWD II and no speed mods is 2268 M/s Speed with an MWD II and mods is 3977 M/s So essentially you are getting an additional 1709 M/s for sacrificing all your tank. That hardly seems skewed or out of line. Now for where the stats do get skewed a bit Adding 2 Poly carb rigs will get your speed upto 4894 M/s so for about a bit of cash u gain 917 M/s This in its self is not out of line. However when you add Implants to the equation that 917 m/s boost becomes even larger. With a full set of snakes + speed hardwirings, (Rogues and ZorÆs) that 4894m/s is increased to a whopping 8599 M/s. thatÆs a 3705 M/s boost right there. With out poly carbs that number is 6968 M/s. That 917 M/s Boost from the poly carbs goes upto 1631 m/s just from the rigs. Of course some will probably point out that a full set of the best implants is going to run you billions, and fair enough, if you are willing to spend that kind of money, you should be considerably faster then everyone. However not having a stacking penalty apply to implants and rigs, is essentially giving those players with enough ISK, God mode in a sense. And in my humble opinion breaks the ethos in EvE, that even a 3 month old noob can kill a 4 year old player in certain settings. The current state of the game essentially prevents that. And IÆm not saying this for the benefit of the caldari militia, who cant seem to realize that not every ship in the fleet needs to fit a full tank. But thatÆs a whole different discussion for that matter. Boosters are also quite a joke, I unfortuantly donÆt have on hand to test the speed bonus, but I do know that their use is laughable. ATM when u use a booster, you have a % chance of getting a side effect from using that booster. OK, but heres the punchline. That % chance is ran the instant u use the booster. Whys that a big deal? Simple because if you get that side effect, all ya gotta do is undock in your pod, and self destruct, or have one of your m8Æs pop you. Now just rinse and repeat as necessary until you get the bonus with out the side effect. Whats the point of a side effect that you can negate? Hell that you can get rid off. Granted you will have to waste a little bit of isk to update your clones and buy extra boosters, but the point is still valid. So essential it comes down to this. Nano and Speed fits are not broken or out of line. Non Stacking Penalized Rigs and Implants are. Boosters are a joke.
Straight Chillen Solar Wind Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.06.25 19:41:00 - [2] Edited by: Straight Chillen on 25/06/2008 19:41:17 Solution Add stacking penalties on all implant and Rig bonuses, Not just ones with speed bonus Make booster side effects happen 100% of the time, change the skill that affects the side effect chance to one that alters the penalty from said side effect.
Suboran Victory Not Vengeance Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.06.25 19:50:00 - [3] truth is most complainers have never actualy flown one
Tae'Lin Hynd Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.25 19:53:00 - [4] Originally by: Straight Chillen Edited by: Straight Chillen on 25/06/2008 19:41:17 Solution Add stacking penalties on all implant and Rig bonuses, Not just ones with speed bonus Make booster side effects happen 100% of the time, change the skill that affects the side effect chance to one that alters the penalty from said side effect. good solution to the largest flamewar in eve!! That will cause a stacking penalty on OTHER overpowered rigs that you don't hear whinage on, because......the non pvprs use them!!
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.25 19:55:00 - [5] stacknerfed purgers and SPRs :V
Straight Chillen Solar Wind Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:00:00 - [6] Originally by: Tae'Lin Hynd Originally by: Straight Chillen Edited by: Straight Chillen on 25/06/2008 19:41:17 Solution Add stacking penalties on all implant and Rig bonuses, Not just ones with speed bonus Make booster side effects happen 100% of the time, change the skill that affects the side effect chance to one that alters the penalty from said side effect. good solution to the largest flamewar in eve!! That will cause a stacking penalty on OTHER overpowered rigs that you don't hear whinage on, because......the non pvprs use them!! exactly, This shouldnt be something that simply **s over all the pvper's it should be done unilateraly and effecting all rigs and imps regardless of the bonus's they give. Yes this will ** off a lot of people, more then just nefring nanos would. But this is the only logical way to do it fair. I know some of my m8s are gonna hate me for this one, esp my bud with a NH with dual t2 shield purger rigs. IM SORRY TUNA!
Modrak Vseth Veto.	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:03:00 - [7] Originally by: Straight Chillen ...However not having a stacking penalty apply to implants and rigs, is essentially giving those players with enough ISK, God mode in a sense. And in my humble opinion breaks the ethos in EvE, that even a 3 month old noob can kill a 4 year old player in certain settings. Until that dictor runs into his own bubble or gets webbed and melts. And then that newb also gets to get on a kill of some idiot with 2B in implants plugged into his head! Originally by: Straight Chillen Simple because if you get that side effect, all ya gotta do is undock in your pod, and self destruct, or have one of your m8Æs pop you. Now just rinse and repeat as necessary until you get the bonus with out the side effect. Whats the point of a side effect that you can negate? Hell that you can get rid off. Granted you will have to waste a little bit of isk to update your clones and buy extra boosters, but the point is still valid. But who would blow away their 2B clone that you used as an example in the first part of the post to negate the side effects? And THAT is probably the bigger problem. People using examples to show you how horrible things are and what's wrong, but tailoring the examples to be VERY specific, using rediculously expensive fits and implants to show how untouchable nano-pilots are, then using things like base ship cost and implantless clones to show how it's unfair that their T1 frigate can't kill them. If there IS a problem with "nano" fits, it's probably is the stacking, but even if you added stacking penalties, the nano-whiners wouldn't be satisfied...
Ulstan State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:05:00 - [8] People think nanos are a problem because they're essentially the new WCS. They typically let you get out of fights you are losing, and most counters to nanos that don't involve hitting them with an even larger group of nanos merely succeed in driving the nanos away. Now, dual polycarbed T2 nanos take a big chunk of uninsurable ISK from your wallet when they go down, so it's not like nanos are actually risk free, but when people see the dynamic is "Nano wins, you die, you win, nano flies off and finds someone easier to fight" they get irked and their sense of fair play usually gets unhappy. If when a nano ship beat you all that happened was you had to warp off, and likewise when you 'beat' a nano ship all that happened to him was he had to MWD away and warp off, I imagine people would complain a lot less. It's the perceived asymmetry in the ease of disengaging from combat that irks most people. But that ease is why people fly nanos in the first place, so they don't get screwed over by the omnipresent blobs. It's a tough problem to solve.
Tae'Lin Hynd Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:10:00 - [9] I am really not liking the whole disengagement argument, it is not valid and is flawed thinking. First off, there are many many ways to disengage from a fight, and all those that whine get told is "fair play". Take Caldari jamming ships. They too dictate what fights they will and won't engage in. Take fighting on or near station/gate, again you can decide to turn the guns off and dock. It is called, fight or flight, as said before a most basic response in nature. If you aren't going to win, you do all you can to avoid, unless you are like me and like to jump into fights you know you will never win. But that is the great part of it, CHOICE. You have a choice to sit in that belt and let a poly fit catch you. You have a choice to engage on a station or gate. The running away argument is not valid.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:10:00 - [10] Nanos can burn off and disengage, conventional and RR gangs can deagress and dock/jump.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:17:00 - [11] Edited by: ***zilla on 25/06/2008 20:19:59 Originally by: Haakelen conventional and RR gangs can deagress and dock/jump. Where they can be caught on the other side of the gate. If they get caught off a gate then they've limited options. Either way they must commit. Docking games are silly and boring. Originally by: Ulstan It's the perceived asymmetry in the ease of disengaging from combat that irks most people. Bingo.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:19:00 - [12] Edited by: Haakelen on 25/06/2008 20:19:26 They sure are. Doesn't stop it from happening, however. Any gang can get caught on the wrong side of a gate. Assuming a stalemate, neither side has an advantage when it comes to disengaging.
Laae Aenus	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:25:00 - [13] Can we have a separate global thread for all the nano-whining? I've never flown a nano, I admit it, but hell, this is just getting annoying.
Straight Chillen Solar Wind Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:25:00 - [14] Originally by: Modrak Vseth Originally by: Straight Chillen Simple because if you get that side effect, all ya gotta do is undock in your pod, and self destruct, or have one of your m8Æs pop you. Now just rinse and repeat as necessary until you get the bonus with out the side effect. Whats the point of a side effect that you can negate? Hell that you can get rid off. Granted you will have to waste a little bit of isk to update your clones and buy extra boosters, but the point is still valid. But who would blow away their 2B clone that you used as an example in the first part of the post to negate the side effects? And THAT is probably the bigger problem. People using examples to show you how horrible things are and what's wrong, but tailoring the examples to be VERY specific, using rediculously expensive fits and implants to show how untouchable nano-pilots are, then using things like base ship cost and implantless clones to show how it's unfair that their T1 frigate can't kill them. If there IS a problem with "nano" fits, it's probably is the stacking, but even if you added stacking penalties, the nano-whiners wouldn't be satisfied... I stated, i did not have boosters at the time of the test, so i didnt do any calculations towards it, or even infer that the pilot had implants in his head, This is simply the work around that I, and many other pilots use to completly evade any penalty to using boosters. If your foolish enough to pod your 2bln clone thats your own perogative. Also as far as using extremly expensive fits and implants to illustrate my point. It really makes no difference, if the rigs are t2 or the implants are low quality, it doesnt change the fact that the bonuses they give are not penalized for stacking. And where did i say anything about using a T1 Frig to kill a Nano? (tho i did pop a crow in my t1 destroyer yesterday) This thread should have nothing to do with tactics to combat Nano's. Its simply pointing out the flawed mechanics that effect a whole lot more then just nano's. You ever seen an Abaddons armor when the pilots loaded with Crystals, and Trimark II's? its obscene. My buddies NH can tank 2 fully T2 fit torp ravens, PASSIVLY, and thats with out any kinds of implants. Do you see my point now?
Amy Wang	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:29:00 - [15] Originally by: Haakelen stacknerfed purgers and SPRs :V stacknerf blobs
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:30:00 - [16] Find a reasonable way to do it. CCP's tried and failed, hence fast ships.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:31:00 - [17] Originally by: Amy Wang stacknerf blobs Its called "lag".
Relleh	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:34:00 - [18] You actually should have named this thread, why rigs are the problem.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:36:00 - [19] Edited by: baltec1 on 25/06/2008 20:37:58 If I get into a fight with the geddon I must commit, I have no other option. Nano does have this issue unless it get lazy and makes a fundamental mistake. This is what irks me, I can do everything right and be in a position where I cannot escape while a nano flown well can always run for the hills. This is why I want to see a new line of T2 battleships with hugginn style web range bonuses. These wont be fast enough to chase nano ships down but will be a serious threat that cannot be trifled with.
Adunh Slavy Ammatar Trade Syndicate The ENTITY.	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:38:00 - [20] Originally by: Ulstan If when a nano ship beat you all that happened was you had to warp off, and likewise when you 'beat' a nano ship all that happened to him was he had to MWD away and warp off, I imagine people would complain a lot less. It's the perceived asymmetry in the ease of disengaging from combat that irks most people. Get rid of warp scrams and warp bubbles, then every one can get away, nanos will become mostly redundant. The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:43:00 - [21] Originally by: Adunh Slavy Get rid of warp scrams and warp bubbles, then every one can get away, nanos will become mostly redundant. Actually then nanos will become even more important. Webbing won't hurt them as much. To get kills it'll all be about bumping someone from being aligned. Which nanos work well at. The nanophoon might even be useful again. But yes, part of the issue is the range of the warp scrams/bubbles versus the speed mods.
Pithecanthropus	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:47:00 - [22] The problem isn't stacking... the problem is BIG ships traveling too fast. They are far too overpowered compared to ceptors, frigs, destroyers, dictors. Quite possible the solution could be like the fix to 1mn, 10mn, and 100mn mwds... add overdrives with the same hierarchy. This way, medium ships can't stack them as much. Why should the same overdrive used on a ceptor give the same bonuses to a battleship? Same nanofiber? Same interia stab? --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man.
Straight Chillen Solar Wind Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.06.25 20:56:00 - [23] Originally by: Pithecanthropus The problem isn't stacking... the problem is BIG ships traveling too fast. They are far too overpowered compared to ceptors, frigs, destroyers, dictors. Quite possible the solution could be like the fix to 1mn, 10mn, and 100mn mwds... add overdrives with the same hierarchy. This way, medium ships can't stack them as much. Why should the same overdrive used on a ceptor give the same bonuses to a battleship? Same nanofiber? Same interia stab? Actually the problem is stacking, its because of the lack of stacking penalties that large ships are able to get their base velocity up high enough, that using an MWD on them has such a huge effect. Fix the stacking and everything will fall into place.
Pithecanthropus	Posted - 2008.06.25 21:01:00 - [24] Originally by: Straight Chillen Actually the problem is stacking, its because of the lack of stacking penalties that large ships are able to get their base velocity up high enough, that using an MWD on them has such a huge effect. Fix the stacking and everything will fall into place. But then you're hurting small ships intended to go fast. We don't want to slow done ALL of Eve, just the ships that are grossly overused due to their overpower in pvp. Those ships have turned Eve into a speedracer game. But ya know... anything to fix the problem is fine with me :) --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man.
Dianeces The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.06.25 21:03:00 - [25] Speed rigs already stack. Just sayin'.
Armoured C Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.06.25 21:05:00 - [26] the question when all this nano crap blows over what are they going to moan about next speed up missiles, nerf ECM , hull tanks O_O ..... it just a fase it will blow out when someone comes up with a better way to kill peeps this why i mock nano whine threads because they are just moving with the crowd least this post actually has a decent why to solve the "problem" only problem is when you solve this problem you effect ships that are designed to do this
Bronson Hughes The. Conspiracy	Posted - 2008.06.25 22:01:00 - [27] Originally by: Dianeces Speed rigs already stack. Just sayin'. QFT. I'm not sure what the OP is going on about, but every single module and rig in the game that changes your speed is already stacking nerfed with every other module and rig that changes the same attribute. Implants and boosters are not AFAIK, but they're far more expensive and therefore far less common. The reason that it's relatively easy to make ships go so fast is that there are multiple attributes that affect a ship's speed: speed, mass, and inertia (inertia doesn't make you go faster directly, but it allows you to maintain higher orbit speeds). No other key ship property can be directly modified in this many ways. If someone wanted to re-balance how speed worked, this is where they should be looking. (You could argue that weapon damage can be modified in more ways but you typically need to improve the other 'tracking' attributes a lot to see any actual change in damage output; damage and RoF obviously have a much more direct impact, but that impact still depends a lot on other factors that you can't always control.) -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Splagada Tides of Silence Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.25 22:04:00 - [28] i think blobs of titans might be a bigger prob ------ Tides of Silence
Bellum Eternus D00M. The Requiem	Posted - 2008.06.26 00:54:00 - [29] Originally by: Straight Chillen Edited by: Straight Chillen on 25/06/2008 19:41:17 Solution Add stacking penalties on all implant and Rig bonuses, Not just ones with speed bonus Make booster side effects happen 100% of the time, change the skill that affects the side effect chance to one that alters the penalty from said side effect. Nah. They need to nerf speed mods heavily, so that with snakes and other speed implants, you can get to maybe 3.5-4km/sec with a cruiser (Vagabond excepted). Implants don't need to be nerfed. Speed mods and rigs need to be nerfed. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Straight Chillen Solar Wind Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.06.26 04:21:00 - [30] Originally by: Bronson Hughes Originally by: Dianeces Speed rigs already stack. Just sayin'. QFT. I'm not sure what the OP is going on about, but every single module and rig in the game that changes your speed is already stacking nerfed with every other module and rig that changes the same attribute. Implants and boosters are not AFAIK, but they're far more expensive and therefore far less common. Wrong. Just tested it again on the test server. Malediction base speed. 522 With T2 MWD. 3680 M/s with 1 poly carb T1. 4237 M/s Thats a bonus of 557 M/s with 2 poly carb t1. 4794 M/s Thats a bonus of 557 M/s over one rig. Id say they stack quite nicely together, but i guess you wish they would compound stack dont ya. Please try to actually test things instead of just spouting off false information. This the the flawed mechanic that needs to be corrected.

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.