EVE Search - The most overpowered nanoships

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The most overpowered nanoships

» 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 - 2008.06.26 01:09:00 - [1] Edited by: Haakelen on 26/06/2008 01:11:47 Edited by: Haakelen on 26/06/2008 01:09:16 Originally by: Tamia Clant The ishtar does seem broken as it can just release drones and keep orbitting at MWD speed while doing maximum damage. The Ishtar is the slowest of the lot (3.7km/s or so with AC4/Nav 5/Polycarbs vs. 4km+ for Zealots/Sacs and around 6km/s for Vagas). You can shoot the drones quite easily. These are STRAIGHTLINE speeds. Not real-world orbit/manual path speeds. Also: most people in nano gangs don't use claymores w/mindlinks and snakesets you ******* birth defect
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 01:26:00 - [2] Edited by: Haakelen on 26/06/2008 01:28:31 Gang bonuses != mindlinnked Claymore with Skirmish Spec 5 / Command ships 5 / Warfarelink spec 5. Zor's Hyper link and mid-level rogues != Snakes. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/haake/ishtar.jpg The real-world orbit velocity of the lower-tier nano HACs is lower than their straight-line speed. If you're going to sit here and try to tell me that inties aren't going to tackle that Ishtar and heavy missiles aren't going to hit it and make life interesting, then you're deluding yourself. e: MWD are mandatory in 0.0 because of bubbles, don't be dense.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 01:55:00 - [3] Originally by: *****zilla Are you going to seriously tell me that a hac wouldn't stop orbiting when a ceptor is heading their way? Are you suggesting that we politely ask nano pilots to continue orbiting while we shoot them and web them using ceptors? Okay, I give. You won't be able to catch a Zealot with a gankfitted Taranis. Nearly every other ceptor however, is going to catch up to everything except the highest of high end setups. On my Ishtar example, that speed is the straightline. Show me a real-world inty fitting that won't catch that. Will it die? Maybe. Inties die a lot, especially when there's not a proper gang behind them.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 02:48:00 - [4] Gewurtztraminer, you're looking at missile velocity, not explosion velocity. That affects the damage received by the ship, and cruises are rather low in that respect. Precision lights on the other hand hit just fine on 90% of the nano HACs in the game.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 05:25:00 - [5] Warhead Flare Catalyst, 15% bonus.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 12:33:00 - [6] Originally by: Xparky Originally by: Kelli Flay They just want the "I get of jail free cards" taken out of the game. Get out of jail free card ? I don't understand. So you believe a fleet of nano ships can run at any time and it is impossible to tackle at least one or two of them ? Of course he believes that. He's obviously never seen a 'conventional' battleship fleet get bubbled, followed by half the ships burning out of the bubble (because the support fleet primaried the huginns/inties). Sometimes it's as if these people think that when two fleets are on the same grid, all the ships of one side must die, or it's not 'real'.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 13:08:00 - [7] I thought you went all emo because your *** little poll didn't work out like you hoped and were going to stop posting.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 14:06:00 - [8] Missiles don't even have that big of a problem, they just want a one-size-fits all weapon system that lets them dynamically choose between any considerations you'd have with a weapon (Range, damagetype, effectiveness vs. speed) without refitting.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 15:15:00 - [9] To rep any drones I had left. All I have is Gallente Cruiser 5. Otherwise I'd use something else.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 16:55:00 - [10] Originally by: *****zilla There really isn't any excuse to fly anything but nanos. POS shooting, remote rep gangs, close-range gank fitting. Three things you can do with a BS with Trimarks that you cannot do with Nano HACs, in any capacity (Unless you want to seriously split hairs and claim nano-scimitar).
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 17:09:00 - [11] Originally by: *****zilla Let someone without the isk and sp fly battleships. Battleship 5 - 2M SP T2 Large Turrets - About 3M SP Tanking (HU 5 / Mech 5 / RS 5) - 1M SP Call it 6. Cruiser 5 - 1.2M SP (Vaga/Zealot) T2 Medium Turrets - About 1M SP (Ishtar) T2 Heavy Drones - 1.2M SP (Sacrilege or Cerb, you could argue Vaga) T2 HAM - About 1M SP Nav (EM 5 / Accel 4 / HSM 4 / Nav 5 / SC 5) - About 1.8M SP Call it 4.5, I guess. Probably more. Not counting gunnery/drone/missile/cap support skills, because that could be considered universal. I'm sure I'm missing something somewhere too, so vOv. It is not that different. As for ISK, yeah, you're probably right. Depending on the rigs, a rigged/insured/well fitted BS will most likely be cheaper than a Polycarboned HAC. Are you upset that battleships aren't as popular in roaming gangs now, or what?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 17:40:00 - [12] Edited by: Haakelen on 26/06/2008 17:40:54 Originally by: O Thief [But that doesnt stop me being blind to the fact that when you literally have to nano EVERYTHING that things have gone too far and there is a need for some re-balancing. I've asked this before, and I'll ask it again: If you can't nano a HAC, what good is it to fly one over a tier 2 battlecruiser e: except the sniperhacs?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 17:45:00 - [13] Change to what? Cheapen the build reqs for HACs to make them cost not that much more than T2 BCs? Nerf blobbing (har har)? Of course no one bothers flying them for the most part, they're a waste of time and money when battleships do the job better in almost all situations.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 17:55:00 - [14] Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Haakelen Change to what? Cheapen the build reqs for HACs to make them cost not that much more than T2 BCs? Nerf blobbing (har har)? T2 has always cost lots more than t1. If a nerf happened there would still be reasons to fly nanos. Not just a reason for everyone to fly nanos. Yeah, pubbies with more money than sense. You meant 'HACs' not 'Nanos', right? For someone who rails about how 'you shouldn't need to train <not my racial shiptype 5> to do anything', you WOULD need to train for a Vaga and all that goes along with it to use an even slightly fast HAC if you got your way.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 18:07:00 - [15] Edited by: Haakelen on 26/06/2008 18:08:46 And why is it such a horrible thing that people feel 'forced' into training 'the only counter' to a single shiptype (nanos), and it's tough ** that you have to train Caldari for ECM (which works on everything, far too well), or Amrr to use a cruiser-sized cap warfare boat? e: I thought the whole point of T2 was that it does one or two things very well and has small niches, and there should be a reason to train for it**. Why must there be a T1 equivalent for every race for every single thing? Why don't you just make all weapons the same, all tanking the same, but just have them use different names, so it's all fair?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 18:18:00 - [16] Edited by: Haakelen on 26/06/2008 18:17:58 Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Haakelen And why is it such a horrible thing that people feel 'forced' into training 'the only counter' to a single shiptype (nanos), Because these counters are fairly sp intensive (huginn/rapier). They work to exclude new players. I have much less SP than other people, and I can't do things they can. Should things get nerfed for my benefit, too? You're advocating removing the real differences between races, and eliminating by and large the usefulness of T2 ships, T2 cruisers in particular. Originally by: Haakelen it's tough ** that you have to train Caldari for ECM (which works on everything, far too well), You didn't address this from the realm of 'ECM is overpowered' (I'M NOT SAYING ECM IS OVERPOWERED CALM DOWN), as you're doing with nanos. Originally by:** Haakelen or Amrr to use a cruiser-sized cap warfare boat? Because cap warfare isn't a must have like webs. However if there were a t1 Amarr cruiser with a range bonus to nos/neuts then this would be very reasonable. So basically you want to obsolete HACs (I don't care what you say, you are wrong, there are about two reasons to fly a non-nano HAC), AND Recons?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 18:38:00 - [17] Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Haakelen I have much less SP than other people, and I can't do things they can. Should things get nerfed for my benefit, too? You're advocating removing the real differences between races, While you can't do what they can you should be able to have some of the capabilities using purely t1. I'm going to go ahead and guess this isn't the idea CCP had in mind, considering it isn't like this at all in the game. Originally by: ***zilla I'm advocating encouraging ceptors. Because nobody uses interceptors amirite Originally by: *zilla Originally by:** Haakelen there are about two reasons to fly a non-nano HAC), AND Recons? Falcons seem to do ok. The rest are either ignored or nano'd (huginn/rapier). The rest are ignored because they've been nerfed into oblivion. This is what will happen to all Recons (except the Caldari ones) if you get your way. If cruisers can't go fast, and you have this magical T1 variant that has the same abilities (only not as well), and Recons are still 10 times as expensive, why would anyone fly the Recon? 'The Curse is a nice neut boat?' Yeah, so's an Abaddon.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 19:26:00 - [18] Originally by: ***zilla That explains the t2 battleship the blackops? itt we compare ships to black ops with black ops being the gold standard of ship balance and proper role definition Quote: T2 ships are generally fairly specialized with a more limited role than t1 stuff.[/qote] No, T2 ships generally take a useful attribute of their t1 hull and improve upon it significantly to make it worth using. Quote: Hics that can't nano. Because they're... designed to sit on gates and camp/tackle supercaps/tank DDs, as opposed to regular dictors which are designed for roaming? Quote: Easy to jam mauraders. Missionrunning boats, you would be here yelling how overpowered marauders were if they weren't easy to jam. Quote:** The t1 stuff should be usable. It shouldn't require t2 stuff to counter t2 stuff. So, T2 should be the realm of rich idiots to waste money?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 19:39:00 - [19] Thank you for admitting that you want to completely obsolete HACs and Recons. Now we can stop paying attention to you.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 19:56:00 - [20] Nanos are a specialization. How can you not see that?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 20:17:00 - [21] Originally by: ***zilla Originally by:** Haakelen Nanos are a specialization. How can you not see that? I would agree that the vaga was designed for speed. That could be considered the only specialized nano. And we come right back to Minmatar Cruiser 5. Quote: Take the ishtar. If it had the speed of a cerebus I doubt it would be as commonly used. Of course not, because it'd be worthless, and we'd be forced into using Myrmidons. You know this. Or at least you should. Seriously, how can you even justify the existence of HACs if they can't go fast? They are completely outclassed for any other use. If your brilliant plan of 'All the bonuses Recons get should be applied to Tech 1 cruisers', then Recons would be completely outclassed, too. What about this do you not understand?
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 20:34:00 - [22] What you fail to realize, guy from SMASH, is that the Hyena WAS CCP's answer to nanos. If you CBA to do two weeks of training to achieve a new goal, you aren't cut out for this game. The entire point of the skill system is to prevent people from being able to do every single thing very easily without any dedication in skill time.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 21:02:00 - [23] Originally by: Tenuo Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tenuo Originally by: Foocurr Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton hai guys! lets to pos shooting with our nanos!!!!! ofc, theres no reason to fly anything else!!! nop, tanks ddds too, killed a titan in this last night lolol. Silly nubs! They should have nano:ed that Titan û then it would have been unkillable! yes, you can get a ******* titan to go 1000m/s! NERF! Only the minmatar one so you'll have to train minmatar just like with recons. WHAT ABOUT CALDARI CITADEL TORPS DO NOT HAVE A HIGH ENOUGH EXPLOSION VELOCITY
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 21:12:00 - [24] Originally by: Pithecanthropus just kidding... nanos need to be nerfed! Actually, this message is an apology. To all the people out there.... I'm sorry I posted so many of my nano opinions. Even though I may be right, and you are all greatly mistaken and naive. I should of known better and not voice my opinion more than once. As my vote poll shows... HERE the 'NO' to a nano nerf are winning. Of course, there is a +/- 5% error and human tampering factor you have to take into account. So, basically its a 50/50 and until CCP does their own vote, and until they realize how right I am and nerf the BIG nano's, people will continue to complain. Until CCP realizes that the direction of Eve has gone several ways throughout the years, and its once again time for a new direction. A nano nerf to big ships will not end this game, nor ruin it, it will only make it better, more exciting, and more risking. It won't change the gankers, cuz they will always find ways to grief, but it will change the pure balance of pvp... and for that, I'd be thankful. For those wondering why the nano threads have increased, it is because of FW... and yes, the nao complaints where there before. So this only goes to show that even when MORE pvp, they see a huge unbalance with nanos. We have more people pvping now more than ever... the problem is on the front page news. That is why nano threads increased. Put your selfish egos away, and do what is best for this game... and zippy-dee-do-daa ships are NOT what should be the major element of Eve. ... and THAT is all folks.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 21:47:00 - [25] Originally by: Foocurr Originally by: Haakelen Originally by: Tenuo Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Tenuo Originally by: Foocurr Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton hai guys! lets to pos shooting with our nanos!!!!! ofc, theres no reason to fly anything else!!! nop, tanks ddds too, killed a titan in this last night lolol. Silly nubs! They should have nano:ed that Titan û then it would have been unkillable! yes, you can get a ***** titan to go 1000m/s! NERF! Only the minmatar one so you'll have to train minmatar just like with recons. WHAT ABOUT CALDARI CITADEL TORPS DO NOT HAVE A HIGH ENOUGH EXPLOSION VELOCITY no noob, any good phoenix pilot puts flare catalysts on their ships. LERN TO PVP!!!!!!!!!11111 ** i got owned
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 22:00:00 - [26] Originally by: Foocurr Originally by: Pithecanthropus Originally by: Kery Syander Here's your cluepon to the op and the misc. idiots who climb out of their holes to make arguements that look more like cavemen humping rocks in an attempt to procreate then anything remotely like a well-reasoned opinion: YOU ARE TOO DUMB TO PVP IN EVE. THAT coming for a corp who decs wars to gank haulers. Have you seen their killboard? pft didn't you know killboards don't have honour
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 22:47:00 - [27] Originally by: Pithecanthropus I say, if you are going to nano, you should have some negative effect to another aspect. Your guns don't track worth **** You must work in falloff (ie: lower damage) or use long range (ie: lower lower damage) ammo You have zero tank Yeah, let me tell you nanos have no negative aspects at all.
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 22:55:00 - [28] Originally by: Pithecanthropus That's not the point, you can counter anything with the right ships and elements Originally by: Pithecanthropus That's not the point, you can counter anything with the right ships and elements Originally by: Pithecanthropus That's not the point, you can counter anything with the right ships and elements Originally by: Pithecanthropus That's not the point, you can counter anything with the right ships and elements Originally by: Pithecanthropus That's not the point, you can counter anything with the right ships and elements
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.26 22:56:00 - [29] Originally by: Pithecanthropus Originally by: Haakelen Your guns don't track worth ** You must work in falloff (ie: lower damage) or use long range (ie: lower lower damage) ammo You have zero tank Yeah, let me tell you nanos have no negative aspects at all. missiles work, drones work. Drones can get shot. Originally by:** Pithecanthropus That's not the point, you can counter anything with the right ships and elements
Haakelen Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.27 00:14:00 - [30] anyone else think that this is a terrible thread
Haakelen Gallente Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.27 16:07:00 - [31] Originally by: *****zilla This could actually give a role to the sniper hacs as they might have a bonus to hitting small stuff. In this way they would be unique from sniper battleships as they would be better suited to snipe frigs. You or someone else like you would be back within five hours of downtime crying about 249km Eagles w/Scimitar backup instapopping frigs on gates in lowsec. Is the new point of the nano crying lot now that Tech 1 frigates aren't useful enough? Is that what you've moved to for a compelling argument?
Haakelen Gallente Force d'action navale	Posted - 2008.06.27 17:31:00 - [32] Originally by: FORD ESC0RT griefer

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.