| 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) |
Thorradin
State Protectorate
   |
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:16:00 -
[1441]
 Originally by: Ituralde
Basically, you are saying that nanos are overpowered because they let you run away, yeah? Or am I missing something? Care to please elaborate?
If nanos ran you'd have a point, however nanos give raw superiority of the field, purely because someone had more isk than the other guy to spend on a borked ship setup type. If you want to run, and somehow can't in a ship that still moves several km/s and can warp out in a few seconds, it sounds like a personally issue.
I'm sayng a setup that completely dwarfs all others is overpowered. People like to throw ISK figures around ut putting several billion ISK into a non-nano setup makes others rich, rather than giving the nano's "Well I'll do whatever the hell I feel like because they lack the ability to plan a counter that far exceeds my effort to keep moving at breakneck speeds, doing whatever I want" status to them.
A single ship setup that can go on any ship, even ships designed to work entirely differently, allowing fleets of only that setup to be damn near unkillable, is broken. Remember when ECM was fit to every ship, even those not intended to be effective with it? Remember damps being the same way? Remember the results?
Your nanoboat will still be able to run from me if you choose to do so, as I'll be slower, but you will not also enjoy having a 'tank' that can negate firepower that can bring down capitals. If you want both, then go fly an inty.
The mods are being brought in line with the rest of the game, and having their pedestal taken away. Nano setups were a FOTM(Y), and have been long overdue for a fix, just like Javelin HAMs(nerf range if nothing else) and Precision heavy missiles(buff exp velocity from T1 stats), and other mods. Tracking disruptors still could use a little love as well imo, defenders should be changed to be alittle more useful, but not to the point that all missiles go the way of the Citadel torp when the target has smartbombs.
So keep in mind Ituralde, you'll still be able to run after this, but you won't be able to tank a fleet because they made the 'mistake' of not having several ships specifically to counter your setup on a ship to meant to use such setup, let alone the others in your gang with the setup.
|
RuneTday
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:16:00 -
[1442]
Time to drop being a minmatar.. No Rapier, and no Vaga. Just getting to the point to use them. Might as well put them up for sale... Hail the BOB MAX BLOB !
|
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:16:00 -
[1443]
This nerf wasn't needed. Also, are we going to rebalance ships like the ishtar so that they don't suck without nanos? See, if there had been a viable alternative in the first place...
|
Cerui Tarshiel
Minmatar
Clown Punchers.
Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:18:00 -
[1444]
Originally by: Rhamnousia
Nano isn't the ONLY method of guerrillas warfare out there atm. The other option is force recons and other cloaking ships.
but don't you have to look at what really ruining the game? such as cyno jammer, blob warfare, capital infestation to name a few. Anything that revolve around a damn PoS.. or twenty.
Nano isn't "imbalance" at the moment. it's the inability to really stop it.
also, for the umpteenth time, nerfing isn't the answer. try boosting the other counterpart of nano. the stasis webifier.
Err, and what defence do the rapier and the arazu mostly use? speed, the pilgrim is about the only recon that can sucessfully tank it up and go up close and personal.
|
Thorradin
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:18:00 -
[1445]
Originally by: Korinn
Don't worry, I've unanchored all my poses in fountain and I'm cancelling my subscription as we speak 
Your loss. People who don't throw a tantrum and quit will continue and be fine, just like with all the other 'wtf are you doing ccp' nerfs in EVE's history.
Assuming this hits TQ without any changes, but if there are none at all I'd be pretty amazed.
|
Kerfira
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:18:00 -
[1446]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Kerfira
My post
That is not a complete list of counters
Nanogangs can be countered by:
- Sniperfleet with support staying close together to make sure no stragglers get picked off and focusfiring on any Nano-HAC slowing down to fire (most nanoships cant hit anything unless they slow down a lot).
- Fleets smart enough to shoot drones instead of Ishtars.
- Fleets using enough blackbirds/rooks/falcons/scorpions
- Fleets with a ton of interceptors that screen the rest of the fleet to keep nanoships away.
- Fleet using logistics ships to keep alive (nano-HACs have pretty low DPS).
- Fleets having so much support and ceptors on the gate that they can catch nanoships trying to get in system.
Lots of ways to counter nanos, but its not the fault of nanopilots if people don't learn the possibilities.
For small nano-gang vs. small non-nano-gang, my list IS the complete list of counters!
Your argument is why a numerically LARGE group (fleet) can counter nano-gangs. Of.c. they can!
Essentially, you're arguing that just by fitting for nano, you should have a devastating advantage over other people, who don't fit particularly to counter that one play-style...
The nano group ALWAYS have the big advantage of being able to disengage fast (or not engage at all). This keeps their losses down, which is of.c. what makes it so attractive, but it is also the reason it is so unbalanced.
Take two similar sized groups (ne always fitted for nano). Several scenarios are possible:
1. Both group nano'ed.
2. One group nano, other fitted especially against nano.
3. One group nano, other fitted generally.
So, in #1, we have an equal fight.
In case #2, the nano team will not engage as they see all the minnie recons. The non-nano team will be useless against every other similar sized group.
In case #3, the non-nano team will loose.
So in essence, the only realistic counter to nano's for similar sized groups..... is nano'ing.... Otherwise you'll either not get fights (and'll die to anything else than nano's), or you'll die.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Haakelen
Gallente
Genesis Rising
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:19:00 -
[1447]
Edited by: Haakelen on 26/07/2008 00:19:22
Originally by: Rhamnousia
Nano isn't the ONLY method of guerrillas warfare out there atm. The other option is force recons and other cloaking ships.
If you think that this nerf wasn't the result of people crying, you're an idiot.
If you think they haven't been and won't continue to cry about cloaks just as much as they did about HACs, you're an idiot.
|
Xyleya
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:21:00 -
[1448]
Originally by: Haakelen
Edited by: Haakelen on 26/07/2008 00:19:22
Originally by: Rhamnousia
Nano isn't the ONLY method of guerrillas warfare out there atm. The other option is force recons and other cloaking ships.
If you think that this nerf wasn't the result of people crying, you're an idiot.
If you think they haven't been and won't continue to cry about cloaks just as much as they did about HACs, you're an idiot.
People cry alot about POS' and blobs...
.
|
Wyliee
Taurus Inc
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:21:00 -
[1449]
the problem is that small gang/solo pvp needs fast ships, something you have a hope of excaping the blob with.
if you do this change, it will just become a case of who has the biggest gang.
|
Haakelen
Gallente
Genesis Rising
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:22:00 -
[1450]
But CCP apparently likes blobs, so there's nothing to worry about there.
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:22:00 -
[1451]
Originally by: Haakelen
Edited by: Haakelen on 26/07/2008 00:19:22
Originally by: Rhamnousia
Nano isn't the ONLY method of guerrillas warfare out there atm. The other option is force recons and other cloaking ships.
If you think that this nerf wasn't the result of people crying, you're an idiot.
If you think they haven't been and won't continue to cry about cloaks just as much as they did about HACs, you're an idiot.
Until the game has been nerfed so much that ppl can own all with passivly tanked drakes ppl will continue to cry for nerfs.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Thorradin
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:23:00 -
[1452]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Thorradin
Originally by: Kery Syander
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Missiles have an advantage that they never miss if an enemy is close enough/going slow enough. Additionally, a missile user doesn't need to worry about transversals or his own speed. That he then can't hit other ships going really fast, well I'd call it a form of balance. How are we gonna compensate gun users for the fact their guns don't always hit compared to missile users?
this. unfortunately people seem to forget this all the time.
Tell you what, fly 4km/s at a missile ship, then fly 4km/s at a gunboat, straight line both times.
You get back to me on which one blows your inty out of the sky and which one is still only doing 0.1 damage. Missiles have a higher threshold to work with, but it goes purely by target speed and nothing else when checking (and sig ofcourse).
And then try it with an inty circling your ship at 1km range while strafing you with his ACs. Guns won't hit due to the tracking, but missiles will when a ceptor is close because he needs to reduce speed to keep a small orbit. Missiles are great at short range and slower speeds, guns are better at idiots who fly at you with an MWD in a straight line. Any decent inty pilot will keep his transversal up vs a gunboat.
Its called a trade-off.
If an inty is 1km from me it's already webbed and disrupted so it's going to get blown away regardless of whether I'm using guns, missiles or drones.
|
Kal Zaketh
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:23:00 -
[1453]
much neded change look forward to it
|
Xyleya
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:24:00 -
[1454]
Originally by: Haakelen
But CCP apparently likes blobs, so there's nothing to worry about there.
If CCP would hate cloaks as much as you suggest, then they would'nt have removed the ability of Frozen Corpses or JetCans and Wrecks decloaking you 
.
|
Thorradin
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:24:00 -
[1455]
Originally by: Aya
I see 2 good things coming from this nerf if it goes through
1. The people who whined about nanos will still get their asses kicked by the 04-05 people and realize its not the nano but the fact that they suck at this game which is causing them to die.
And the nano pilots that thought the ISK that allowed them to outrun all weapon types meant they were skilled, will get blown to hell. Honestly it's a win-win wouldn't you say?
The 'good' nano pilots will get wiped out, and the good nano pilots will survive, and some of each type may decide to use something else for a setup.
|
Tixxie Lix
Outer Heaven
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:25:00 -
[1456]
Originally by: Kerfira
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Kerfira
My post
That is not a complete list of counters
Nanogangs can be countered by:
- Sniperfleet with support staying close together to make sure no stragglers get picked off and focusfiring on any Nano-HAC slowing down to fire (most nanoships cant hit anything unless they slow down a lot).
- Fleets smart enough to shoot drones instead of Ishtars.
- Fleets using enough blackbirds/rooks/falcons/scorpions
- Fleets with a ton of interceptors that screen the rest of the fleet to keep nanoships away.
- Fleet using logistics ships to keep alive (nano-HACs have pretty low DPS).
- Fleets having so much support and ceptors on the gate that they can catch nanoships trying to get in system.
Lots of ways to counter nanos, but its not the fault of nanopilots if people don't learn the possibilities.
For small nano-gang vs. small non-nano-gang, my list IS the complete list of counters!
Your argument is why a numerically LARGE group (fleet) can counter nano-gangs. Of.c. they can!
Essentially, you're arguing that just by fitting for nano, you should have a devastating advantage over other people, who don't fit particularly to counter that one play-style...
The nano group ALWAYS have the big advantage of being able to disengage fast (or not engage at all). This keeps their losses down, which is of.c. what makes it so attractive, but it is also the reason it is so unbalanced.
Take two similar sized groups (ne always fitted for nano). Several scenarios are possible:
1. Both group nano'ed.
2. One group nano, other fitted especially against nano.
3. One group nano, other fitted generally.
So, in #1, we have an equal fight.
In case #2, the nano team will not engage as they see all the minnie recons. The non-nano team will be useless against every other similar sized group.
In case #3, the non-nano team will loose.
So in essence, the only realistic counter to nano's for similar sized groups..... is nano'ing.... Otherwise you'll either not get fights (and'll die to anything else than nano's), or you'll die.
Seriously, do you even play this game? Of course a nano gang will beat a gang not meant to take out nanos. Fights shouldn't be even or fair just because you weren't prepared for the unexpected. That's the point of intel. If you can't take a nano gang then don't engage. Same thing if you can't take a BS gang.
|
Haakelen
Gallente
Genesis Rising
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:25:00 -
[1457]
Originally by: Xyleya
Originally by: Haakelen
But CCP apparently likes blobs, so there's nothing to worry about there.
If CCP would hate cloaks as much as you suggest, then they would'nt have removed the ability of Frozen Corpses or JetCans and Wrecks decloaking you
Give it a few months. Since the CCP way to 'fix' things is to silently implement a set of widespread, sweeping, shortsighted changes that attack the results of problems, not the problems themselves, for all you or I know, there's already a Cloak nerf in the working that just hasn't been publicized yet.
|
GreGh Rakrot
Rionnag Alba
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:27:00 -
[1458]
so today we had 3 man nano gang roaming, we pewpew some stuff on gates then just when it dies gate flashes few times and local goes up 10 or so, thorax uncloaks we start hurting him then cyno pops! and 3 carriers jump in, on our 3 man gang, with rest of their gang rolling in...
we get chased for few jumps and manage to get rid of them thanks to our speed ofc
now imagine 3 man bs/bc gang roaming like that...
ccp, this blanket style changes that you came up on 5h brain-storming session is overdoing it
yes, balance speed, np with that, but there are less complicated core game changing ways of doing that like:
- balancing polys (dont know why this hasnt been done next day after rigs were introduced)
- stack penalty for all speed mods/rigs combined (as suggested)
- simply reducing MWD speed boost
- adding more counters like fixing bonuses on lachesis/arazu so they can properly damp
game has changed so much and is so complicated that no radical changes should be applied but instead slow step-by-step balancing
if you go on with this changes ...no i wont quit lol, ill just find next type of roaming gangs that will probably soon become next subject to endless cries and whines on this forums ...its not like i would do that the first time, think its more like the 4th time ^^ ...and round and round we go |
Shinigami
Gallente
Shinra
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:28:00 -
[1459]
Are you still going to allow web stacking? Kind of makes the whole web nerf pointless if you allow them to continue stacking.
|
Dr Decay
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:31:00 -
[1460]
Edited by: Dr Decay on 26/07/2008 00:31:05
Originally by: Haakelen
Give it a few months. Since the CCP way to 'fix' things is to silently implement a set of widespread, sweeping, shortsighted changes that attack the results of problems, not the problems themselves, for all you or I know, there's already a Cloak nerf in the working that just hasn't been publicized yet.
Cloak nerf? Sweet about time.
As far as the nano nerf goes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb8fWUUXeKM
|
Sid Zero
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:32:00 -
[1461]
Originally by: Shinigami
Are you still going to allow web stacking? Kind of makes the whole web nerf pointless if you allow them to continue stacking.
This.
The effect on a ship should be the same wether one ship with 1 web is webbing it, or 20 ships with 2 webs each. Otherwise every 20man gatecamp is just going to have 40 webbers 
|
Deitre Cibrus
You're Doing It Wrong
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:34:00 -
[1462]
-----------
Originally by: Santiago Cortes
Please don't derail your own thread.
What is this sig missing?
Pretty colours? -Conuion
Not true! Has plenty -Deitre
|
Yaay
Game-Over
The Requiem
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:34:00 -
[1463]
Originally by: GreGh Rakrot
so today we had 3 man nano gang roaming, we pewpew some stuff on gates then just when it dies gate flashes few times and local goes up 10 or so, thorax uncloaks we start hurting him then cyno pops! and 3 carriers jump in, on our 3 man gang, with rest of their gang rolling in...
we get chased for few jumps and manage to get rid of them thanks to our speed ofc
now imagine 3 man bs/bc gang roaming like that...
ccp, this blanket style changes that you came up on 5h brain-storming session is overdoing it
yes, balance speed, np with that, but there are less complicated core game changing ways of doing that like:
- balancing polys (dont know why this hasnt been done next day after rigs were introduced)
- stack penalty for all speed mods/rigs combined (as suggested)
- simply reducing MWD speed boost
- adding more counters like fixing bonuses on lachesis/arazu so they can properly damp
game has changed so much and is so complicated that no radical changes should be applied but instead slow step-by-step balancing
if you go on with this changes ...no i wont quit lol, ill just find next type of roaming gangs that will probably soon become next subject to endless cries and whines on this forums ...its not like i would do that the first time, think its more like the 4th time ^^ ...and round and round we go
soooo, omg have a scout or bail earlier?
It's the Economy Stupid |
Thorradin
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:34:00 -
[1464]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
At the bargin price of only 6 billion isk and it can all be flushed down the drain by a rapier, huggin or nuet ship.
Nano give players great enjoyment and that is soon to be removed for a nerf that will turn gang fighting into mini blob fights.
When other ship types are equally unkillable and the costs aren't due to a fluctuating player market you'll have an argument. Put that 6 billion ISK in to a tank on a BS and tell me what happens to the ship.
|
Haakelen
Gallente
Genesis Rising
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:34:00 -
[1465]
I disagree with the dev blog, but that's not the point. I disagree even more with the way this shit always plays out.
CCP doesn't make an ordered, (relatively) manageable '<Topic>: What of it' Thread and ask for ideas and post feedback and introduce huge things a little bit at a time to see the result. They (apparently) read whine threads and hide behind the idea of this CSM bullshit and then release all of it at once to the predictable response by the community. It's treated with a complete lack of understanding, which is the problem here, not just the changes. Because they'll keep doing it, and they'll keep ****ing it up.
This is one more step towards 'You get into a ship. You fire a weapon at another ship. It takes damage.', where everything might be named differently and look different but acts the same. You already have unskilled groups (see also Caldari FW militia) deploying homogenous fleets. That is the result of things like this, not 'diversity'. But you don't care, CCP. So whatever.
|
Dungar Loghoth
Caldari
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:34:00 -
[1466]
Originally by: Kal Zaketh
much neded change look forward to it
- Kal Zaketh, member, Republic Military School, 4 Months and 21 Days.
---
|
Kerfira
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:34:00 -
[1467]
Originally by: Tixxie Lix
Originally by: Kerfira
Take two similar sized groups (ne always fitted for nano). Several scenarios are possible:
1. Both group nano'ed.
2. One group nano, other fitted especially against nano.
3. One group nano, other fitted generally.
So, in #1, we have an equal fight.
In case #2, the nano team will not engage as they see all the minnie recons. The non-nano team will be useless against every other similar sized group.
In case #3, the non-nano team will loose.
So in essence, the only realistic counter to nano's for similar sized groups..... is nano'ing.... Otherwise you'll either not get fights (and'll die to anything else than nano's), or you'll die.
Seriously, do you even play this game? Of course a nano gang will beat a gang not meant to take out nanos. Fights shouldn't be even or fair just because you weren't prepared for the unexpected. That's the point of intel. If you can't take a nano gang then don't engage. Same thing if you can't take a BS gang.
And YOU are seriously missing the point. If one fit make it impossible for others to effectively counter it (unless they use the same), then that fit is simply too good!
And don't wave the discredited rapier/huginn argument! Saying "The counter is to have a majority of your ships being very specialised ones that are useless against everything else!" doesn't work.
But in essence, the argument FOR a nerf is made by nano'ing having SHOWN (in practice) to have no effective counter (no matter how much theory-crafting the nano-USERS do), and by how much nano'ing has taken over small-gang warfare. No other proof is needed really.
Anyone who have fought nano-gangs know so (which is why we support this), and all nano-users ALSO know this thus the desperate fight in this thread not to loose their I-Win button!
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
ArmyOfMe
hirr
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:37:00 -
[1468]
Originally by: Xyleya
First of all, as there were calculated and written before, ships like a Vagabond or any Interceptor will still go easily 4+ km/sec without rigs or Snake-Sets, even without Gang-Boni!
i think u must have missed the dev post were he said his vaga with high grade snakes, t2 rigs and 2x overdrive t2 went just a bit over 4k
|
Demagnon
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:37:00 -
[1469]
This proposition appears to change too much and does so too harshly, in too short a time span. Whether or not nano-gang ships need to be curbed is irrelevant, these are umbrella changes which will affect more than planned; not to mention that you are affecting months worth of skill planning all at once. You can argue that nothing will be affected, but there is more to a game than pure number balancing.
It just feels wrong. If change is to be effected this is not the way to do it, and everyone involved with these changes should take a step back. At least that's my two cents.
|
Sid Zero
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 00:38:00 -
[1470]
Originally by: Rhamnousia
Nano isn't the ONLY method of guerrillas warfare out there atm. The other option is force recons and other cloaking ships.
(until those get nerfed)
|
| |
|
| 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 |