Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 144 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
WidowMaker IX
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:00:00 -
[1081]
haha oh god i am soo happy thanx CCP
|
DGWabbit
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:00:00 -
[1082]
Please someone (Dev) actually read this post:
Speed tanking is not always done with billion isk ships, I was able to speed tank a BS in a Hac using an AB and 1 polycarb, the low slots were tank and he barely ever hit me.
Rather than reducing the speed of all ships by 2k, increase tracking a little more? So they at least get glancing or light hits vs excellent or nothing at all. Boost missles and drone speeds even.
Also, you are NERFING the ENTIRE playerbase because of those few, very few that do have full snake sets. Why not just nerf down the implants? As it is, the only way for your dev to break 4k in a vaga was to abuse those particular implants.
Also, I hope you realize that nano-ships now have poor dps since their low's are full of speed and not damage, shouldn't that be trade off enough? Even a drake can push back a vaga 1v1.
Opinions that I feel the dev's should read:
I did not enjoy seeing that the devs are taking these posts' with a "grain of salt" because that effectively means they are ignoring 90% of them.
The solutions are easy, but your approaches you are taking are very game-breaking. Yes you can break your own game, you'd think that the 40 pages this has gone so far (majority are against your proposal) you would have realized that.
The Dev's balancing ideas...I do not believe he plays on the main server in a 0.0 alliance. He should not be allowed to drastically affect the ENTIRE game. It's almost as bad as the carrier proposal of a 5 drone limit. No offense intended, i simply do not believe the dev in question is qualified to make this balance.
|
Cutesmile
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:01:00 -
[1083]
Edited by: Cutesmile on 25/07/2008 19:02:01
Originally by: Tal Notts
Originally by: Lord EmBra
Originally by: Areo Hotah Edited by: Areo Hotah on 25/07/2008 13:18:08 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
Read this CCP!
signed
Signed too. CCP try to fix the lag and not try to nerf the all EVE. CCP working again for nothing and make more lag in EVE world. Pls go and work for the bigest problems of game.
|
Anahid Brutus
TunkbwahCorp GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:01:00 -
[1084]
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Originally by: Whiners
You Mean Im Going To Have To Commit To Fights???
Originally by: CCP
Yap
except people will just fly sniping ships and engage that way, or simply do deaggro/docking games. just because you kill off one way of fighting doesn't mean that people will suddenly stop caring about the time they put into their ships. you ****ing idiots.
|
matty01
Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:03:00 -
[1085]
Originally by: GO MaZ
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?
If everyone fitted these we'd have no issue with people whinging about overpowered nanos...
Also a lot of spare lino and dead alliances
needs gravy quote imo
|
Dungar Loghoth
Caldari The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:03:00 -
[1086]
Originally by: WidowMaker IX haha oh god i am soo happy thanx CCP
WidowMaker, member, State War Academy, 2 years, 4 months, 20 days. ---
|
Kery Syander
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:03:00 -
[1087]
Originally by: SSDD24 How the hell did we end up with a game in wich the peeps that make it (aka get money to develop, play and test it) know less about it then a guy that spends 20 hrs/ week playing it?
After reading all these pages i stil fail to see any coherent support for this nerf. You call this rebalancing? I think you dont understand the meaning of the word balance.
Mad props to all the peeps that tried to argue with valid arguements with CCP. CCP by calling theyr arguments knee-jerking you show you really dont deserve your players.
CCP is just smart. I mean they know that there is no counter to nanos and that missiles not doing full damage sometimes is broken.
I'm pretty sure nohz camped a nano gang into a dead end const with a 60 man gang and then got angry when they just 'nanoed off' from his ratting raven gang. -----
|
Loka xDD
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:05:00 -
[1088]
Originally by: Dungar Loghoth
Originally by: Lord EmBra
Originally by: Areo Hotah Edited by: Areo Hotah on 25/07/2008 13:18:08 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
Read this CCP!
signed =)
|
GO MaZ
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:05:00 -
[1089]
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
---
|
Dinamita Tona
Minmatar Privateers
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:09:00 -
[1090]
can you even more nerf minie ships or is that all? missile boats will love this change, but hit and run tactics are obsolete now and speed was only real weapon for some of minmatar ships, how do you intend to compensate that? almost every nerf goes in caldari favour
|
|
Shin Ra
BURN EDEN Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:10:00 -
[1091]
Originally by: Space Flyer THANKS CCP for killing the only way that we all had to fight blobs outnumbered in this game... really THANKS!
But its not the only way to fight blobs outnumbered. We have been doing this for years.
|
kOZMIC sNIPER
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:11:00 -
[1092]
Nazh doesn't use a raven gang. I seen him nanoing on his mom the other night. He was going about 10K a sec and lasted only one volley. She was packing quiet a punch from the looks of it. Since he had no skill and he wasted time with that training and decided to fix it for good. Sad that the sick basterd had to do it this way. |
Guillame Herschel
Gallente Buffalo Soldiers
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:12:00 -
[1093]
A few comments on the proposed changes:
1. Interceptors and Nano-ships of larger classes are not invulnerable to missile fire because they fly so fast. They are invulnerable to missile fire because the explosion velocity is an order of magnitude smaller than the ship velocity. Missiles catch nano-ships just fine, except for some implant-boosted interceptors. It is the missile explosion that ships can easily outrun. What sense is there shooting a 7200 m/s cruise missile at a target, when the explosion only propagates at 500 m/s? It makes no sense. Boost missile explosion velocity 10 times.
2. No mention of Skirmish Mindlink implants in the dev blog. How are they affected? They presently add a 1.5x multiplier to the wearer's Skirmish Warfare boosts, passive and active.
3. I like the other changes. That a warp scrambler (short range) deactivates the target's MWD but not his AB is a pretty good idea. I also like very much that higher meta MWD impose a smaller capacitor penalty. It's a ***** trying to run 3 gang links at once while MWD around trying not to get splatted.
-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then --
|
OVERCOPES 1
Amarr Amarr Secret Service
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:12:00 -
[1094]
Originally by: XxAngelxX Also lol, while we're at it, lets nerf carriers and let them only field 5 drones
Cry some more.
If you cant see that a ship,any ship should not be able to out run missiles then your just a one trick pony thats got found out.
Your famous for nano ***gotry now we will se how good you really are in proper fights.
Technolisa>those yellow things work better than platinum insurance :P |
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:12:00 -
[1095]
Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 25/07/2008 19:13:51
Originally by: DGWabbit Yes you can break your own game, you'd think that the 40 pages this has gone so far (majority are against your proposal) you would have realized that.
The Dev's balancing ideas...I do not believe he plays on the main server in a 0.0 alliance. He should not be allowed to drastically affect the ENTIRE game. It's almost as bad as the carrier proposal of a 5 drone limit. No offense intended, i simply do not believe the dev in question is qualified to make this balance.
Actually I think if you were to count the posts and repeated posts, it's only been about 100 people discussing it; hardly a representative figure, but then most people probably stopped looking at the forums years ago because it's mostly just a bile-filled cesspool. Secondly, 0.0 is not the ENTIRE game, it's 0.0. Stop exaggerating. If nano-ships only worked in 0.0, hell I suspect half the whines from people would stop because that's where they are probably the most genuine use (to avoid blobs). Meh I for one have given up arguing, people are too passionate about either side to see any sense. At least CCP come at it from the right direction, that of entire game balance, whether their approach is too strong or weak or whatever. I trust them more than I do some biased alliance group or empire-only PvE group. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... |
Sir Scorpion
Black Banners
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:13:00 -
[1096]
oh the Tears of Nanofaqs, soo sweet
|
Dungar Loghoth
Caldari The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:13:00 -
[1097]
Originally by: fire5tar Excellent approach CCP, well thought out, good reasons for doing it, and it looks like it will be well implemented too.
That took guts and effort knowing how the skilless wonders will whine that they can't just spin around the system laughing in local anymore. Not that'll they'll ever admit thats what they are whining about :)
Congrats job well done looking forward to it!
fire5tar, six month old character, 3 losses, 0 kills: http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view/player-fire5tar-kills.html ---
|
Avon
Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:13:00 -
[1098]
The fact that nano setups are unbalanced is kinda proved by the number of posts from people worried about losing their I-WIN button.
The more they post, the more clear it is that rebalancing is required.
This isn't the first major rebalance of something that was way out of line with game expectations, and I have no doubt that it won't be the last.
Adapt kiddies - do your guerilla stuff in ships designed for that role.
Eve-Online: The Text Adventure |
Trojanman190
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:22:00 -
[1099]
Originally by: Dungar Loghoth
Originally by: Avon losing their I-WIN button.
If you think nanos are the I-WIN button, you may consider using them to take a station system up north, as nothing else you do seems to be working very well.
I lawled.
|
Jesse Jamess
Caldari Red Tides
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:23:00 -
[1100]
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth
Originally by: Jesse Jamess so now n00bs have an equal opprotunity to kill people who have been skilling and playing for multiple years...
Ah, I see what you did there. Tell you what, lets rename ISK and skills to levels, and then you can go and complain that you're level 50 and this bunch of level 2s killed you.
why is it absurd to think that someone that has spent years skilling a certain tree should not have a advantage of someone that hasnt.... im not *****ing about omg im uber and this noob killed me... im saying that there is a logical advantage of someone that has spent time and isk to train and specialize in a certain field....
|
|
Trojanman190
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:24:00 -
[1101]
Edited by: Trojanman190 on 25/07/2008 19:25:24
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
Originally by: Loka xDD
Originally by: Dungar Loghoth
Originally by: Lord EmBra
Originally by: Areo Hotah Edited by: Areo Hotah on 25/07/2008 13:18:08 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
Read this CCP!
signed =)
Quoting this for great justice.
My hero, and ive probably seen him on the battlefield too.
But in reality there are far less skilled players than there are those whining about the skilled players...
|
Kar Stoertebecker
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:25:00 -
[1102]
hm lol i am a good skilled minma pilot (i think)
so what i get from this is
Gang Bonus Skill: Skirmish Warfare - 10% velocityBonus Module: Skirmish Warfare Link - Rapid Deployment 38.81% speedFactor
will be reduced thx ccp for all the trainingtime i waste
Webifiers Currently when youÆre webbed itÆs pretty much game over unless youÆre doing more DPS or have a better tank. The 90% speed reduction makes combat too static and predictable when webifiers have been applied. To address this, webifiers in our proposed changes have been reduced in effectiveness down to between -50% and -60%
lolers antinanogang will be rapier and huginn for my little mind the range from the webers was allways to short why i can scrample 25km t2 and only web 10km t2 why not can web 25km maybe with 85%
if good skilled nano gangs will not that much around but with a 10km /40km(recon) web you have not much change to web ships run all the time away
i think a longer webrange will do the job and you dont have to nerv this and here and there and soon
i think somewhere for 1 year i made a comment allrdy on one thread maybe with another char i think longer webrange will give less nanogangs
|
Borasatar
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:25:00 -
[1103]
Originally by: Stiletto Minmatar Character for Sale
LVL 5 RECON HIGH NAV SKILLS
2 x POLY RIGGED RAPIERS 2 X POLY RIGGED VAGA
1 isk or best offer,
CCP this is the most lame idea ever, This will become BLOB Online, What fun is that, This kill all Solo and Small Gang warfare which is enjoyable way of combat, Why not boost missles instead of nerfing Minmatar,
I like roaming in small gangs now with this being implement that gone out of the window,
If this goes ahead then my 5 accounts would be closed, unless you rebalance all time and isk i spent maximised a minmatar character which main bonus reley on speed to survive,
Boycott this Dam idea
Can I have your stuff? I'll pay you the 1isk. Contract to me in-game.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:25:00 -
[1104]
When you got much skill and you flying shiney ship like a absolution for example.
Then you got clearly an advantage above those who can only use a cruiser. With these changes nothing about that will change. And it also means that when noobies get 20 cruisers, that absolution will go down quick.
When you got nano ships you shouldnt die to 20 t1 cruisers unless you are seriously screwing up. So it should mean that because you got skill for nano ship you should be immune to rookies in t1 cruisers?
|
alterist
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:25:00 -
[1105]
Originally by: Avon The fact that nano setups are unbalanced is kinda proved by the number of posts from people worried about losing their I-WIN button.
The more they post, the more clear it is that rebalancing is required.
So the more the experienced small gang pvpers point out that no nerf is needed or wanted and the fact that the examples ccp have given are all ridiculous you think means totally the opposite.
You are and always have been an idiot.
|
Cynthia Ysolde
Tritanium Workers Union
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:26:00 -
[1106]
Originally by: Trojanman190
Originally by: Dungar Loghoth
Originally by: Avon losing their I-WIN button.
If you think nanos are the I-WIN button, you may consider using them to take a station system up north, as nothing else you do seems to be working very well.
I lawled.
pretty much this
|
Tal Notts
Caldari Divine Power R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:26:00 -
[1107]
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: Tal Notts
Originally by: Furb Killer No i am not alt.
Great changes imo. Always intresting to see that the nano abusers are filled with the idea that the only way to do small scale pvp is using nano ships. Probably because they think it is normal to reach ridiculous killrates. I do solo stuff mainly in battlecruisers. I get kills in them and i lose a shitload of them. You now just got to accept that you cant run away from every fight that is going sucky.
Something not much discussed: what i especially like is that now i can actually be flying during combat. Unless i got a nano circling arround me, i am usually webbed during combat, meaning that even with mwd i barely can move. With these changes i can actually move arround a bit.
and how much isk after insurance do you lose when you lose one of your BC? how much do you think a polycarbed hac loses?
Way too much, it depends a bit on which one i use. Hurricane probably 20-30 million. Harbinger closer to 30-40 million. (yes that is after insurance, and no i dont use very expensive crap). If i then add rigs i get to arround 70 million easily. (which is why i dont rig them). Sure you may lose a polycarbed hac less often than a non rigged battlecruiser. I also lose a rigged battlecruiser less often than a non rigged one. But right now i lose far more on battlecruiser than if i would use nano'd ships.
Using more expensive gear should mean you lose your ship less often. It shouldnt be that 2 times as expensive = you lose your ship 2 times less often (which would make it just as expensive as your cheaper ship). And right now it is more like 4 times more expensive, 20 times less likely to die.
it's not just price though, people invest a lot of time in skill training. it takes a LOT longer to fly a hac than it does to fly a BC. why should people invest in this training time if a ship 4 times the price is just going to die 4 times less often?
|
SephiriotH
REUNI0N Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:27:00 -
[1108]
"Speed must never reach ludicrous speed, which is defined as speeds where missiles and drones don't intercept the class of ship they were intended for."
Gratz, someone finally realized it. Now plz make me even more happy by implementing it.
|
matty01
Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:28:00 -
[1109]
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
|
Furb Killer
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.07.25 19:29:00 -
[1110]
Originally by: Tal Notts
Originally by: Furb Killer Random crap
it's not just price though, people invest a lot of time in skill training. it takes a LOT longer to fly a hac than it does to fly a BC. why should people invest in this training time if a ship 4 times the price is just going to die 4 times less often?
Quote pyramid broken
Let me see: So why should people fly a ship that they have to replace 4 times less often? Isnt that kinda obvious?
When i rig my battlecruiser it makes it at least 2 times more expensive, more usually. That doesnt mean i lose it 2 times less often. I dont complain about that. Spending more isk increases my changes to survive, but it doesnt get a war who can spend most isk on stupid setups so you become invunerably.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 144 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |