Originally by: Haniblecter Teg

---

http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view/player-Haniblecter+Teg-kills.html

6:1 ratio *****, and I havent posted on that site in years.

---

Originally by: CCP Dionysus

---

This weekend's knee-jerk comments will be taken with a large grain of salt. If you (in general "you") want to do something about these changes, then get on sisi and try out various scenarios and give feedback then :)

---

Originally by: CCP Dionysus

---

Originally by: Matrixcvd

---

4km/s vaga

---

Vagabond:
High: nothing
Med: 10mn microwarpdrive
Low: Overdrive Injector System II x2

Rigs: Auxilliary thrusters II x2

Implants. full snake set.

No special named modules etc.

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

I speak from a point of view of experienced fighter, specializing in battleships, small scale pvp fights. There are a few points I want to say

1. Nerfing in general is a bad thing. If you feel that there is no other way to fix an important game problem, try to find a solution that involves as little nerfing as possible. I think the currently proposed changes are excessive.

2. EVE works as it is now. You can't deny that EVE is a successful game and that it is not failing because of nanoships. Therefore, it should be in our interest to try be careful with the game design changes and avoid redesigning big parts of the game. The game design currently proposed by Nozh involves too many changes. Why not just make another space game - different game mechanics and all? There are still lots of people who want to play EVE as it is now.

Ok, now to the real issues.

Nozh sets up his arguement based on all the possible speed increasing methods availale in game. All those best modules and implants happen to be rare items. They are officer loot, top complex loot, multibillion isk implants.

Now that we have that fact in mind, lets consider game balance as a whole. From point of view of perfectly balanced PvP system, rare loot has no place in it. Good balance relies on standardized modules, easily accessible modules. That way, the power and performance of ones ships becomes a matter of choosing the right module combination and using the right tactic. It shouldn't be influenced by ability to afford some modules that are clearly better than all other variants.

Simply put, we can't have good balanced system if we allow rare modules to exist. We need to choose, either we have these rare modules, and allow small percentage of people to have unbalanced performance in combat. Or we make all the best modules easily affordable, so everyone has a choice in their setups, and everyone is equal in their ability to fit ships.

What we absolutely should not do, is to take rare and expensive modules as proof of broken balance, and then nerf all the related modules across the board. Alternatively, you can choose to nerf a combination of rare modules, but not a combination of common modules, based on the initial example that consists of purely rare modules.

Lastly, for game balance changes related to speed, we need more solid evidence to base our solutions on. It is not sufficient to give an example of a ship that combines all the rare modules and implants. We need actual statistics, we want analysis of ship kills and losses with respect to the type of modules they are using. We need to make analysis of isk gained and destroyed. It is the minimum that should be done to seriously consider such massive sweeping game changes.

---

Originally by: Shadoo

---

And so the Remote Rep on everything age begins.

---

Originally by: Jenny' JoJo

---

ECM and ECM Bust > Remote rep.

Also remote rep without ECM is easy to beat. Only the primary or secondary gets remote repped. Just pick off people outside remote rep range etc. Remote rep ships lack damagemods etc. Very vurnerable to competent fleets. In fact, some of the top pvp alliances never use remote rep.

Oh Wait, that means you have to look at the battlefield tactically insted of firing MWD?

---

Originally by: Serilla

---

Originally by: GO MaZ

---

Originally by: Shadoo

---

And so the Remote Rep on everything age begins.

---

Mark 3's... EVE WIDE

---

350mm Navy Megas?

---

Originally by: Areo Hotah

---

I am on the receiving end of (AAA) nano-hacs daily.
I have had an invasion of the old TRI in my space.

Observations from me fighting nano gangs:
-nobody takes booster pills
-Claymores are quite rare to see, and tend do die a lot.
-Hardly anyone uses snakes
-There are plenty of ways to kill (part of) a nanogang, without everybody being in a Rapier or Huginn. They bring a specialized ship to do something, so you have to do something specialized to counter them. Nothing wrong with that. No standard gang (some inties, ewar and DPS) should be able to counter 95% of enemy gang types. Eve should be rock-paper-scissors
-I like fighting them. Some people have even begun to count their kills in polycarbs/week.

I think there is nothing wrong with HACs going 3-5km/s.

I think there is nothing wrong with players investing 1Bn isk in snakes and going 8km/s.

I agree there is something wrong that practically every single HAC can go faster than a standard fitted inty.

There is nothing wrong with having speeds that makes you more or less immune to missiles and drones. These offensive weapons take minimal player skill to use (hence their popularity for mission runners), while good players can avoid the damage of turrets, simply by manual piloting (and vice versa, a good player in a turret boat can maximize his damage potential). A better solution would be to have significantly reduced damage, but not 0, for hurling missiles and drones at fast targets.

I think you should never ever nerf warfare links, as they are really a team-based module, and nerfing decreases the incentive to field one is bad. A good nano gang has a Claymore, so they go even faster. So what? Kill the Claymore first.

Nerfing all at once is bad (damps anyone?).
Just start by adjusting the polycarbs to be worse than t2 nanofibers, and modify the 3 "speed" stats (mass, max velocity, agility) into 2, so more stacking penalties get applied.

Making warp scramblers useful is good (maybe do something with warpcore stabs too).

Changing a web from 90% to 60% is a 400% nerf (max speed of webbed target from 10% to 40%); nothing in the history of eve has been nerfed so hard.

Once again, I fear that the Devs are listening too much to whines, without seeing the real problem. I think they should have focussed their time solely on their last "mission statement":
Guerrilla warfare must remain a viable combat tactic.
Please make more ways to make this possible, than simply nano'ing it up.

Cause:
Skilled players should be better than defending blob in crap ships.
Skilled defenders should be able to beat cookie-cutter setups.

Areo

---

Originally by: Selindra Lavaris

---

CCP: Nerf MWD's more please, In my opinion MWD's are meant to get you to and from a battle fast, you aren't supposed to be fighting at MWD speeds

---

Originally by: Jenny' JoJo

---

Nope. Learn to adapt. Eve is about evolving. If you do not adapt, you die.

Anti-remote rep tactics are very good. Remember how you used to tell people to "use brain to beat nano"? Well, use brain to beat remote rep.

Remote rep ships have low damage, some lack even full set of turrets. Remote rep range is less than web range making RR gangs inflexible and sitting ducks if your fleet/gang uses tactics. You can ECM/Dampen them. Bump them out of rep range. You an trick them into repping primary and secondary while you switch to attacking another target.

You can attack remote repping gangs by attacking everybody. You can use HEAVY NEUTS. No Cap = no remote rep (yeah remember how you lot used to say the same stuff to nano victims?).

You can also spread fire over several targets which breaks remote rep chains easaly. Remote rep gangs are complete rubbish currently, used mostly by people who lack tactics.

---

Originally by: DeadDuck

---

I believe that DEVS know how the game is played, thats why they are introducing the changes. Blob away you say ? I remember the 50 nano hacs gangs you guys were using in Providence... Like you used to say ...ADAPT!

---

Originally by: Ranger 1

---

Actually, no they don't.
They simply realize that while a reduction in speed means they may actually be able to hit you from time to time, it doesn't automatically mean that they will be able to do any significant damage to you at the speeds you will STILL be able to travel at.

Try again please.

---

Originally by: Bobby Atlas

---

You are assuming hit and run within the wrong context, hit and run is actually you attack a target that is either isolated or alone - kill it then leave the field of engagement before backup arrives. The changes in the mentioned dev blog will make it so that 'speed tanking fleet battles' can not happen where you just swoop in at obscene speeds into groups of hostiles - do damage to target x and run away at obscene speeds. It will actually require some tactical thinking now which is perhaps just a bit too much work for some people...

---

Originally by: Bobby Atlas

---

Yes cause clearly all that rage in your reply speaks volumes, why not try to instead address some of the fundamental points ccp has posted with valid and tangible rebuttals other than you enjoy nanoing at obscene speeds. Let us face it, ccp has a very valid point that right now the only ceiling on speed is more speed by the opposing force (unless you get a couple of very lucky webs on a target coming at you).

---

Originally by: Ranger 1

---

To be frank, if you are putting pulses on your nano-Zealot... your doing it wrong. Unless of course you are merely acting as a screen for your nano-Cerbs along with your nano-Rapiers to keep tacklers and lone wolves off of them. In that case if you are in range of the main fleet and actually have to worry about incoming damage... again... your doing it wrong.


We also seem to be avoiding talking about the Vagabond suddenly, interesting.

Again, you know exactly what I'm saying GO. I'm trying to be gentle, but I think your perception is colored by that Zealot loss to a Crow and a Raven a few days ago.

Just relax, you'll still be just as effective as you are now...

---

Originally by: Gneeznow

---

It is a shame that most of this thread is PL going mad because of this when they have not given it a chance, they just see that they are not gonna be able to pwnpwnpwn with nano-zealots and snaked up Ishtar's and curses and now are throwing the rattle out of the pram, most of the PL in this thread fly almost nothing but speed ships with snakes despite them saying otherwise.

---

Originally by: Ranger 1

---

But you are busted on the Zealot argument though... I "knew" you understood exactly what I was saying.

---

Originally by: Thebro Nobrunder

---

There must be balance.

Nothing should be able to outrun modded Warrior II's and light precision missiles.

No ship should be useless, and no ship should be uber useful.

Perhaps these won't be the final changes (likely) but it is certainly something which needs changed.

---

Originally by: Re'taka

---

Well, once apon a time, there where these little gangs flying around, normaly 4 to 8 ships, these where battle crusiers, to battleship size, sometimes hac's if they could foot the bill, these ships did something that is hardly ever seen today, its called tanking, and your roaming gang wasn't a nano gang but a RR Roaming gang, thats right remote rep gangs, they did just fine back then, they will do fine now, Im glad to see this change, will mean more tanked combat instead of a bunch of ppl flying around me bugging me but with no DPS for the real kill...

---

Originally by: Sakura Nihil

---

Right, before I forget, here's my take of what I saw on SISI tonight.

---