Originally by: CCP Dionysus

---

Originally by: Matrixcvd

---

SO did that 4km/s vaga not really have T2 lows but Republic fleet ODs? come on now tell us the truth, T2 polys with there 7& bonus... You can tell us you got that number right off EFT wiht all the best implants and fittings, barely broke 4km/s, and btw breaking 4km/s doesnt mean 4028m/s either.

---

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: CCP Dionysus

---

Originally by: Asero

---

[Ares, Speed]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Damage Control II

1MN MicroWarpdrive II
Warp Scrambler II
Stasis Webifier II

125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Gremlin Rocket

Auxiliary Thrusters I
Auxiliary Thrusters I

ok, now that my vaga goes 3.4k what does the tackler on my vaga go at?

note: this is not a t2 crow, this is an ares, which are more common as cheap tacklers

---

hitting 5k

---

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: facialimpediment

---

You know, after all this discussion about speed in the CCP meeting, what about just axing snakes? Sure seems more prudent to me to screw over 1% of all HAC/inty users rather than screwing over 50% of all HAC/inty users.

---

Originally by: Kasheem Cetanes

---

Are you trolling? I mean not to sound like a jerk, but are you serious? Really? Don't Worry! you only need to spend a Billion ISK, inorder to make your vaga go... 4k... you're awful.

---

Originally by: Zhula Guixgrixks

---

Edited by: Zhula Guixgrixks on 25/07/2008 16:49:13
"Addiction", from wikipedia:

"In medical terminology, addiction is a state in which the body relies on a substance for normal functioning and develops physical dependence. When this substance is suddenly removed, it will cause withdrawal, a characteristic set of signs and symptoms"

Best comment so far:

Gneeznow:

"I like this change simply because it has all the illuminati all crying their eyes out on the first page, I'll stilll be able to rock on in my arbitrator so whateva"

---

Originally by: Sakura Nihil

---

You know, we've been talking pretty much about inties and Vagas this whole time.

What about other nanocruisers? Curses, Zealots, Ishtars, Sacrileges, the works - how hard is this going to smack them?

I would find it pretty ironic if the people complaining about fighting only Vagas, Rapiers, Ishtars, and Zealots all the time only start to see Vagas.

---

Originally by: Larkonis Trassler

---

I've gone over it again. This is all pretty rage inducing.

Two things which combined I have major issues with:

Reactivation delay on MWDs

---

Quote:

---

Warp scrams disabling MWD while maintaining their 'points'
Overpowered. You are effectively combining a 90% webber with a warp disruptor. No no no no.

---

Quote:

---

My suggestions:

Keep webs at current strength, reduce range slightly and allow scripts to be loaded

Double range for 50% strength still gives non nano'd ships a chance to close the gap for a split second with a bit of overload magic before switching scripts

---

Originally by: CCP Dionysus

---

Originally by: Asero

---

[Ares, Speed]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Damage Control II

1MN MicroWarpdrive II
Warp Scrambler II
Stasis Webifier II

125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Gremlin Rocket

Auxiliary Thrusters I
Auxiliary Thrusters I

ok, now that my vaga goes 3.4k what does the tackler on my vaga go at?

note: this is not a t2 crow, this is an ares, which are more common as cheap tacklers

---

hitting 5k

---

Originally by: Sakura Nihil

---

You know, we've been talking pretty much about inties and Vagas this whole time.

What about other nanocruisers? Curses, Zealots, Ishtars, Sacrileges, the works - how hard is this going to smack them?

I would find it pretty ironic if the people complaining about fighting only Vagas, Rapiers, Ishtars, and Zealots all the time only start to see Vagas.

---

Originally by: Cota Senn

---

OH MY. Day this happens is day I disable accounts.

---

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: reivol

---

For all of you whinning about this big nerf bat plesae note that :
- today, speed tanking = no damage wether armor or shield tanking = reduced damage
- today, speed = 99% chance of fleeing away a combat without countermesure.

---

Originally by: ZAKARIUS

---

Sorry but i would be seriously ****ed off if these nerfs come into operation regarding snakes. How can u expect a pilot who invests in a full set of snakes only for them to be seriously nerfed to be happy with this?
Its not as if u can take them off to sell!
Ok, its understandable to nerf other modules as u can then have a say if u want to fit them or not but implants are different.

---

Originally by: CCP Dionysus

---

Originally by: Saturn 5

---

translation: We don't actually care what our player base thinks about our proposals, we're pretty much gonna do whatever the hell we like.

Does CCP have a Customer Service dept? I would suggest that they are sacked, but with no customer care team, who would make important decisions on balancing game play?

---

Translation pt2: yelling "the sky is falling" without even seeing the changes is not very helpful. Some of the comments in here have been interesting and useful, others not so much. thats what "grain of salt" is all about. If you come back with a thought through and intelligent commentary on these proposals, then we can understand what and why you are making them. 1 line flippant comments are not very helpful.

---