EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Speed Rebalanced by Nozh

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Speed Rebalanced by Nozh

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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)
Lily Cole	Posted - 2008.07.28 08:37:00 - [2521] Monday is here and you can all test out your new 7.5km/22.5km nanostoppers... lol What a nanoboost. I can't believe all CCP want us to fly is nanoboats :(
Noelle Fay SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.07.28 08:40:00 - [2522] 100k views. Impressive. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- The secret to success, whether it's women or money, is knowing when to quit. I oughta know: I'm divorced and broke.
Hul'ka Minmatar MicroFunks	Posted - 2008.07.28 08:44:00 - [2523] Edited by: Hul''ka on 28/07/2008 08:44:15 sooooo, monday is here, when will this failure of a patch be deployed on SISI? Really really want to see how bad you screwed things up with this.. --------- I want to phew phew
Unreal5 Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2008.07.28 08:50:00 - [2524] Poasting in ze nano emo thread. nano tears make baby jebus smile! It's hard if you'd have to actually have some skillz to fly nano huh? So if you all nanoemorage kids quit eve, can i have your stuffs? plx! ASD
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum TRUST Coalition	Posted - 2008.07.28 09:08:00 - [2525] Originally by: Destructor1792 Quote: By CCP Nozh Who knows? We might even see some crazy setups where both afterburners and MWDs are utilized Err, the ability to fit an AB and MWD at the same time was removed from the game quite a few years back.. If you expect people to fit both then have to offline one to online another.. hehe.. really shows you don't play eh Actually, it was the ability to activate both MWD and AB that was removed. I have a ship setup that has both AB and MWD fitted, and you can definitely have them both online at once, and activate whichever one you want in a situation. Given the above changes, it wouldn't be unreasonable to MWD into scram range and then switch to AB to keep range if/when your MWD gets disabled. Anyway, having just moved and not having internet at home yet, I've had a couple of days to think these changes over without knee-jerk posting, and come up with some ideas about how it will impact on combat. And, I have to say, I like where it's heading. Currently speed is an all-or-nothing thing - and a lot of this is due to the savageness of webs; currently, if you get webbed, any ability to dictate range and use speed to avoid turret damage is pretty much gone. Thus your options were either to go tank and gank, wade into web range and slug it out, or go all-out nano to avoid web-range at all costs. Bringing webs down to 50% speed reduction (still pretty significant) means that it is still possible to use higher speed to your advantage within web range, when previously (currently) getting webbed made speed more or less a non-issue and you were just trading damage vs. tank at that point. Of course, 50% webs make speed difficult to affect on your opponent - so scrams turning off MWDs is actually pretty elegant, in many ways. First off, and the most basic, is that a scram and web will reduce a MWD ship to lower speed (half base speed) than a scram + web would have previously (10% full speed). So in terms of simply being able to keep ships stationary, the options are still definitely there. However, it now introduces a lot more tradeoffs - fit the scram for shutting down MWDs and applying two points, but at closer range, or keep the longer-range disruptor to stop enemies warping quicker, but use more cap and have no ability to shut down a MWD ship that comes close to you? And likewise, fit a MWD for higher top speeds and getting around ability, or fit the AB for a persistent speed boost that can be used within scram range? It works really nicely with the rock-paper-scissors nature, as regarding speeds, MWD (unscrammed) > AB (any state) > MWD (scrammed). AB frigates in particular, with scrams, will now become a lot more viable as tacklers, as they'll be able to get into web range without it meaning automatic death for them - and imagine how much more cap they will have available to actually do things, without the MWD and long-range point. It might even be worth tanking them too, as they'll still be fast enough when webbed to mitigate a lot of damage from larger turrets and missiles. Light drones will, however, still wreck their day - so I can see that it might even encourage dedicated anti-drone ships such as destroyers to support the tacklers by taking out drones from long range (whereas currently, this isn't worthwhile as a webbed frigate will generally die to the webbing ship anyway). And on the other changes, these are basically just rationalising base speeds, and reducing the effectiveness of speed mods overall due to either lower basic effectiveness (polycarbs) or increased stacking (nanos). This is fine again, since nano ships will still be faster than other ships, so still able to retain the tactical option to disengage, but are no longer immune to missiles and light drones - so their decision to trade off damage and tank against speed will be something that needs to be carefully weighed up. They'll be able to engage in hit-and-run tactics just fine, but against larger more powerful opponents they may well be forced off before they can inflict as much damage as they would like. Again, I consider this to be pretty balanced. This isn't so much the death of nanos, as it is an additional counter to nanos (missiles and light drones) that could previously be completely negated by the nanoships. Of course with such a wide-ranging change, it will remain to be seen how things play out in practice. But I see a the possibility of a brighter future than the posters who have said combat will just be RR battleship gangs. There are now many more trade-offs and tactical options to be explored, such that I expect competant FCs will be able to bring a wider range of counters to the table. Importantly, it looks as if ABs and scrams will be viable alternatives to MWDs and disruptors in mainstream combat, which is excellent. I look forward to seeing how it all comes together.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2008.07.28 09:15:00 - [2526] Where is test server patch it should be there already
Slade Hoo Amarr xPlaguex	Posted - 2008.07.28 09:25:00 - [2527] Originally by: Kalintos Tyl Where is test server patch it should be there already neeeeeeeeeeeed sisi patch...now! wanna test
Mashie Saldana Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams	Posted - 2008.07.28 09:39:00 - [2528] It would be interesting if CCP introduced racial webbers as the ships after all have stats for it. Say a racial webber would do 80% effect on the inteded propulsion type and 20% on the incorrect type. The multispec webbers would do 50% to all races.
Brayiel	Posted - 2008.07.28 09:48:00 - [2529] Originally by: Mashie Saldana It would be interesting if CCP introduced racial webbers as the ships after all have stats for it. Say a racial webber would do 80% effect on the inteded propulsion type and 20% on the incorrect type. The multispec webbers would do 50% to all races. If you look in the Item DB (out dated I know) there is a statistic for racial propulsion strengths. It's redundant, and from what I can remember way back they were hoping to have specific racial modules for engines. e.g. The Ares has an Ion Propulsion strength of 5. But then there are a lot of redundant statistics etc. floating around. Like back in the day when Tactical Shield Manipulation was going to prevent shield and armour piercing ammo.
Shinigami Gallente Shinra	Posted - 2008.07.28 10:26:00 - [2530] Edited by: Shinigami on 28/07/2008 10:25:57 I would love it if they would focus on removing lag, boring timesinks, and revamping sov for the next 12 months. Introducing changes like this without tackling the major problems is pointless.

Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 10:34:00 - [2531] Originally by: Yaay People say speed is the only way to counter jump bridges and jammed systems and drake gangs, Yet they don't even try to come up with better solutions for those problems, instead, it's just let me keep my speed. That's such a ******ed arguement. Maybe somebody who thinks of himself as such a great FC could enlighten us on how to counter a hostile blob jumping over a roaming gang in their systems to the constellation choke point with caps and other ships (maybe even a titan or 4), then putting a shed load of bubbles all over the gate?.
Zikka Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn	Posted - 2008.07.28 10:46:00 - [2532] Originally by: Andnowthenews Originally by: Yaay People say speed is the only way to counter jump bridges and jammed systems and drake gangs, Yet they don't even try to come up with better solutions for those problems, instead, it's just let me keep my speed. That's such a ******ed arguement. Maybe somebody who thinks of himself as such a great FC could enlighten us on how to counter a hostile blob jumping over a roaming gang in their systems to the constellation choke point with caps and other ships (maybe even a titan or 4), then putting a shed load of bubbles all over the gate?. That's very dependant on what both you and they have though. One obvious step would be covops and flybys to give you warp in point then harass the gatecampers with snipers (warp in, snipe one target, warp out). Or be flying a recon gang and just cloak past them. Or a black ops one and cyno jump past. Etc.
Ithrinim	Posted - 2008.07.28 10:48:00 - [2533] Edited by: Ithrinim on 28/07/2008 10:48:59 Are we saying here that roaming gangs shouldn't be able to be caught in hostile sovereign space? Cos that's how it sounds to me, and that statement in itself is quite ridiculous. You enter a bottleneck constellation and start killing, and expect to be able to leave without consequence? Funny Funny Funny. EDIT: Maybe, just maybe, that's what Black Ops are for.... (with a slight tweak/buff)
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.07.28 10:51:00 - [2534] I was taking a look at this version of the speed chart (http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0807/speed_nerf_comparison.jpg, just both of them put side by side on same graph) and I noticed a few things. 1. These graphs seem to be slightly confusing on the actual numbers. It would help if ccp said what setup they used on these ships, or what the skills of the pilot are. I did a quick calculation on slasher with just t2 mwd (no other speed mods) and max skills and I got 4035m/s where graph shows max frigate is about 3750. I'm wondering how the republic firetail (fastest faction frigate in game) which with no speed mods, max skill and a single t2 mwd should have speed of around 3681m/s yet faction frigates max speed is shown to be under 3000/ms 2. A lot of the sections are a lot more squeezed together now (for example frigates). This means that the fastest ships will be going slower obviously, but also the slower ships are getting a lot faster. How/why are these slow ships getting that much faster? I'm assuming that the slowest ship for frigs is probably the merlin or some similar slow frigate, this ship with mwd is now around 700m/s (40%) faster than it was pre-nerf.
Tomic The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.28 10:54:00 - [2535] Originally by: Typhado3 I was taking a look at this version of the speed chart (http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0807/speed_nerf_comparison.jpg, just both of them put side by side on same graph) and I noticed a few things. 1. These graphs seem to be slightly confusing on the actual numbers. It would help if ccp said what setup they used on these ships, or what the skills of the pilot are. I did a quick calculation on slasher with just t2 mwd (no other speed mods) and max skills and I got 4035m/s where graph shows max frigate is about 3750. I'm wondering how the republic firetail (fastest faction frigate in game) which with no speed mods, max skill and a single t2 mwd should have speed of around 3681m/s yet faction frigates max speed is shown to be under 3000/ms 2. A lot of the sections are a lot more squeezed together now (for example frigates). This means that the fastest ships will be going slower obviously, but also the slower ships are getting a lot faster. How/why are these slow ships getting that much faster? I'm assuming that the slowest ship for frigs is probably the merlin or some similar slow frigate, this ship with mwd is now around 700m/s (40%) faster than it was pre-nerf. My guess is the numbers have been fiddled to "prove" the guy's reasons for the nerf.
Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 10:54:00 - [2536] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Marcus Druallis Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Lt Angus Sounds good overall, but feel it might nerf blaster ships more then speed ships On the other hand, if you fit a warp scrambler and stasis webifier, the overall speed reduction is much greater than 90%. That is, if your target is using a MWD not an afterburner. But this is something we'll be keeping a close eye on. The only thing you need to keep a close eye on is the number of subscribers to eve. lol its probably gonna drop to half its current size. This nerf will completely destroy pvp in eve. The only pvp will be laggy blobs. Can't wait. Gonna be great... I cannot believe you managed to ruin the game due to uneducated whines from people with probably very little pvp experience. Thanks again. LOL do you really think nano users represent more than 2-3 % of the total playerbase? LOOOOOOLLLL!!!!!! NANO users represent the majority of the PVP player base and as this nerf does not effect miners, mission runners or ratters id say they should be the ones who have the say in the matter.
Kern Hotha	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:00:00 - [2537] Edited by: Kern Hotha on 28/07/2008 11:01:05 All the changes sound good except the webifier one. If the intent is to encourage combat at slower speeds, why diminish the module that makes combat happen at slower speeds?
Ithrinim	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:02:00 - [2538] The main issue here is nano-***s don't seem to understand the definition of raiding/roaming. It isn't flying in and out of the Enemy's capital system without rebuke. It's harassing their borders and supply routes. You want your cake and eat it, that's your problem.
Birdynumnum Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:04:00 - [2539] Speed has needed to be nerfed somehow for a while. There is one aspect of these changes however that I completely do not get the point of. Microwarpdrives will all have the same speed bonus and only differ in fittings/reactivation delay and cap penalty/usage. This doesn't seem to do anything but make high end faction mwd's pointless. Tech II MWD is reasonably easy to fit already negating fitting Tech II MWD is reasonably easy to permarun negating cap penalty/usage If you require your MWD to survive (ceptors) then whether it is knocked off for 2 seconds or 1,000,000 seconds, your pretty much dead negating the reactivation timer I personally think MWD's should keep there variations in speed bonus. I totally agree that it is stupid having ships so fast that there is no viable tactics to counter them but at the same time, there should be a worthwhile point to spending those extra ISK to fit higher quality modules. I guess my question is are lowend MWDS (Tech 1, named and Tech II) going to be nerfed in line with this? Is the cap penalty/activation going to be increased on lowend MWD's for example! TBH I hope this specific change does not make it live though I do agree with the idea behind most of these changes! My Vids
Hugh Ruka Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:04:00 - [2540] Originally by: Ravil Thon Originally by: Mashie Saldana It would be interesting if CCP introduced racial webbers as the ships after all have stats for it. Say a racial webber would do 80% effect on the inteded propulsion type and 20% on the incorrect type. The multispec webbers would do 50% to all races. Well, thats certainly a better idea than the overall nerf to webs. No need for a multispec though. Correct racial web = 80% incorrect racial web = 50%. Its not like a web should be as specialized as the far more effective ECM. mhhhmmmmm I am starting to LIKE this idea very much :-) --- SIG --- CSM: your support is needed !

Ithrinim	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:05:00 - [2541] After digesting the changes, only one further change is needed to remove nano immunity to death. Warp scrambling/disrupting prevents use of gates. Otherwise, it's near impossible to prevent MWD-slide back through gate.
Damned Force Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:06:00 - [2542] Im not a great fun of nanoships. I think that if there are just 1-2 possibilities to counter a ship, there is something wrong. But other hand if u nerf nanoships under a certain level, would be useless to nano a ship and so the last type of smallgang pvp would die. This would be sad but not tragical if the system u made could handle blobs, what can't!!!!!! In empire lowsecs even if u sitting in an SS and u "blobbed" by 20 ships u become a lag where u see after 5 min u already dead. So if u destroy nanoships at least fix lag because at the moment the funny part of the game(pvp) is unplayable without nanos!!!! Seems devs want us to missioning and farming in 90% of evetime to get money for ships which would be popped in blobs without be able to activate any module...... Have fun.....this game would day to day worst :(
Haakelen Gallente Genesis Rising	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:06:00 - [2543] Originally by: Ithrinim The main issue here is nano-**s don't seem to understand the definition of raiding/roaming. It isn't flying in and out of the Enemy's capital system without rebuke. It's harassing their borders and supply routes. You want your cake and eat it, that's your problem. Hello Ithrinim, unknown member of probably an NPC corp with zero killboard exposure. Thank you for telling people with years of experience what roaming gangs are supposed to be. Your insight is deep and broad and certainly worth listening to. My views and opinions represent my corporation just fine, thanks.*
Andnowthenews Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:10:00 - [2544] Edited by: Andnowthenews on 28/07/2008 11:13:42 Originally by: Ithrinim The main issue here is nano-**s don't seem to understand the definition of raiding/roaming. It isn't flying in and out of the Enemy's capital system without rebuke. It's harassing their borders and supply routes. You want your cake and eat it, that's your problem. Borders?..Supply routes?..with jump bridges and cyno jammers?. Nano pilots want to fly in gangs that do more than sit opposite another gang and hit f1-f8 bud. While carebears like you want there home systems to be like empire. Cake and eat it indeed. Thanks for at least clearing up the definition of the word rtard for us.
Hugh Ruka Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:12:00 - [2545] Originally by: Typhado3 I was taking a look at this version of the speed chart (http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0807/speed_nerf_comparison.jpg, just both of them put side by side on same graph) and I noticed a few things. 1. These graphs seem to be slightly confusing on the actual numbers. It would help if ccp said what setup they used on these ships, or what the skills of the pilot are. I did a quick calculation on slasher with just t2 mwd (no other speed mods) and max skills and I got 4035m/s where graph shows max frigate is about 3750. I'm wondering how the republic firetail (fastest faction frigate in game) which with no speed mods, max skill and a single t2 mwd should have speed of around 3681m/s yet faction frigates max speed is shown to be under 3000/ms 2. A lot of the sections are a lot more squeezed together now (for example frigates). This means that the fastest ships will be going slower obviously, but also the slower ships are getting a lot faster. How/why are these slow ships getting that much faster? I'm assuming that the slowest ship for frigs is probably the merlin or some similar slow frigate, this ship with mwd is now around 700m/s (40%) faster than it was pre-nerf. ah thanks for the chart, I was too lazy to create one myself :-) I think CCP forgot to exempt the speed bonused ships from comparison and they are screwing the max attainable speed for each class (and by speed bonused I mean all the ships that had a speed bonus and were changed in the past). so each class slowest ship is on par with next class fastest (or a slight overlap). this is not that bad an idea, but then tracking needs to be revisited too I think. --- SIG --- CSM: your support is needed !
Natalia Kovac Minmatar Phoenix Tribe	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:14:00 - [2546] Edited by: Natalia Kovac on 28/07/2008 11:14:24 Originally by: Yaay Edited by: Yaay on 28/07/2008 07:50:09 The problem with speed right now is the average fit can easily get speeds and passive tanks high enough to combat too many obstacles w/o fear of heavy loss. I do not mind watching an alliance get camped into their home system by 20 people. I do mind that there is very little they can do about removing those people from local beyond besting their speed setup to even have a chance at catching them. Speed goes in the same category as what cloaks should be, they should be good short term tools, ie 15-20 min. People say speed is the only way to counter jump bridges and jammed systems and drake gangs, Yet they don't even try to come up with better solutions for those problems, instead, it's just let me keep my speed. That's such a ****ed arguement. I do think that to counter this speed nerf, CCP needs to Implement removal of the ability to both cyno jam a system while still allowing jump bridges. Alliances should have to choose one or the other. How to kill a nanogang in your home system. 1: Interdictors/Heavy Interdictors 2: Rapiers/Huginns 3: A little DPS. 4: Engage enemy 5: Profit Kindly shut the ** up.
Dana Serenity Caldari Guerillaz	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:18:00 - [2547] Originally by: Ithrinim After digesting the changes, only one further change is needed to remove nano immunity to death. Warp scrambling/disrupting prevents use of gates. Otherwise, it's near impossible to prevent MWD-slide back through gate. Sorry bud I have to disagree with you there. Gatecamps should never be 100% unescapable. That would probably be worse than nano's already are. Yes a nano can turn and burn back to the gate and jump.. but they can just as easily bounce off the gate (Killed a few nanoships due to that happening ) The changes to scramblers already suggested by CCP will make gatecamps tougher to escape... Lets not make them unescapable completely
Haakelen Gallente Genesis Rising	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:19:00 - [2548] Edited by: Haakelen on 28/07/2008 11:20:29 You don't even need a rapier and huginn or new Arazu to kill the slower nano hacs currently (Ishtar, Sac, Zealot). I've had my Sacrilege (going 4500m/s mind you) completely **d by a Dominix with T2 sentries in less than 30 seconds, whilst being completely unwebbed. I've had my Vaga going 5200 hit with 500 damage hits from a Sacrilege. Warrior 2s will catch and barbecue an Ishtar. That's without ECM or Neuts even. ECM + Tacklers + Heavy Neuts/Curses = dead HAC. This is not complex. 'There is no counter' is a complete *ing myth, and the fact that CCP is trying to parrot it back at us shows they either don't care and want to do this no matter what their playerbase say, or that they're too stupid to know it. My views and opinions represent my corporation just fine, thanks.*
Hul'ka Minmatar MicroFunks	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:23:00 - [2549] Originally by: Damned Force Im not a great fun of nanoships. I think that if there are just 1-2 possibilities to counter a ship, there is something wrong. ( What are solutions for blobing? Bigger blob or nano - only 2 solutions. what is the solution for ECM? Blob or ECM - only 2 solutions What is solution for nano? Nano, ECM, Neut, pulses, RR - counted 5 If there are only 1-2 possible solutions for a problem, invent some more, don't nbernerf the problem (small nerf for polies is welcome, but then you should consider what they are beeing made of so you won't have overpised t2 nanofiber) --------- I want to phew phew
Natalia Kovac Minmatar Phoenix Tribe	Posted - 2008.07.28 11:23:00 - [2550] Originally by: Haakelen Edited by: Haakelen on 28/07/2008 11:20:29 You don't even need a rapier and huginn or new Arazu to kill the slower nano hacs currently (Ishtar, Sac, Zealot). I've had my Sacrilege (going 4500m/s mind you) completely **d by a Dominix with T2 sentries in less than 30 seconds, whilst being completely unwebbed. I've had my Vaga going 5200 hit with 500 damage hits from a Sacrilege. Warrior 2s will catch and barbecue an Ishtar. That's without ECM or Neuts even. ECM + Tacklers + Heavy Neuts/Curses = dead HAC. This is not complex. 'There is no counter' is a complete **ing myth, and the fact that CCP is trying to parrot it back at us shows they either don't care and want to do this no matter what their playerbase say, or that they're too stupid to know it. Very true. Btw, 5200 m/s Vaga? Lolnoob



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

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.