EVE Search - Nano-nerf: Too much at once?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Nano-nerf: Too much at once?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
doctorstupid2 The Accursed	Posted - 2008.07.26 00:16:00 - [1] Source: 7/25 DevBlog Let me preface this by saying that I do not fly any nano ships, and do not want to fly nano ships; it's simply not my style, even my interceptors are damage-fit, not so much as an overdrive to be found. I simply dislike nanos on every level, yet this devblog has me a bit ****y. One part of me is glad to see a long overdue nerf is on the drawing boards, but at the same time, the blog covers nerfing a lot of stuff that is in my opinion (and I doubt I am alone) working just fine. First up, webs. I love my webs. They make me happy in special places. They also make it possible for me to kill things. 50-60% webs are just laughable. I'm not really sure what more can be said here, I don't want to blob stuff to be able to track it. I don't expect to track interceptors, I just don't want to lose the ability to track, you know, battleships. MWDs, while I do agree that afterburners are in their current implementation pretty useless, isn't it a more logical approach to boost afterburners instead of nerfing MWDs? A lot of slow ships that don't need to be made slower still fit MWDs. Afterburners still have a mass addtion attribute, removing that and increasing the multiplier should be ample enough to give ABs a bit of use outside of deadspace, no? On the topic of MWDs, the warp scrambler deactivation effect, while I can appreciate the intended relation of a warp scrambler and microwarp drive, means a fast-locking lachesis on a gate, compounded with the other changes proposed, makes just about everything dead. A T2 scram, recon 5, overload = 22km; 29km with mindlinked claymore; 36km with the preceding and domination scram. Even a <5m shadow serp scram overloaded reaches 23km. Fit an MWD to the lachesis and say hello to the superhuginn. I do like the idea of varying cap penalties for meta levels. Snake sets, while I do not own one, for the cost that people have invested here, practically halving their effectiveness seems harsh, for lack of a better word. With the proposed changes to nanofibers and polycarbons, it seems an unnecessary twist of the blade. Simply put, I think it's too much at once, and I don't eve fly nanoships. It's my opinion that starting with the nano/poly changes in the devblog, seeing how things shift, and then tweaking things as needed is the most prudent, least devestating-to-other-styles approach. Before revelations 1, overdrives were nowhere near as effective as they are today, as I recall a local hull (best in game at the time) gave 33m/s increase, with navigation 5 that's 41.3m/s, not even a 10% boost to an interceptor. Today's 20% OD II give 20%, making those stack with nanos as described is a well-implemented solution to a major piece of the speed issue that was kindled near 2 years ago. Abusive \| Deadspace2 \| Deadspace
doctorstupid2 The Accursed	Posted - 2008.07.26 00:16:00 - [2] Source: 7/25 DevBlog Let me preface this by saying that I do not fly any nano ships, and do not want to fly nano ships; it's simply not my style, even my interceptors are damage-fit, not so much as an overdrive to be found. I simply dislike nanos on every level, yet this devblog has me a bit ****y. One part of me is glad to see a long overdue nerf is on the drawing boards, but at the same time, the blog covers nerfing a lot of stuff that is in my opinion (and I doubt I am alone) working just fine. First up, webs. I love my webs. They make me happy in special places. They also make it possible for me to kill things. 50-60% webs are just laughable. I'm not really sure what more can be said here, I don't want to blob stuff to be able to track it. I don't expect to track interceptors, I just don't want to lose the ability to track, you know, battleships. MWDs, while I do agree that afterburners are in their current implementation pretty useless, isn't it a more logical approach to boost afterburners instead of nerfing MWDs? A lot of slow ships that don't need to be made slower still fit MWDs. Afterburners still have a mass addtion attribute, removing that and increasing the multiplier should be ample enough to give ABs a bit of use outside of deadspace, no? On the topic of MWDs, the warp scrambler deactivation effect, while I can appreciate the intended relation of a warp scrambler and microwarp drive, means a fast-locking lachesis on a gate, compounded with the other changes proposed, makes just about everything dead. A T2 scram, recon 5, overload = 22km; 29km with mindlinked claymore; 36km with the preceding and domination scram. Even a <5m shadow serp scram overloaded reaches 23km. Fit an MWD to the lachesis and say hello to the superhuginn. I do like the idea of varying cap penalties for meta levels. Snake sets, while I do not own one, for the cost that people have invested here, practically halving their effectiveness seems harsh, for lack of a better word. With the proposed changes to nanofibers and polycarbons, it seems an unnecessary twist of the blade. Simply put, I think it's too much at once, and I don't eve fly nanoships. It's my opinion that starting with the nano/poly changes in the devblog, seeing how things shift, and then tweaking things as needed is the most prudent, least devestating-to-other-styles approach. Before revelations 1, overdrives were nowhere near as effective as they are today, as I recall a local hull (best in game at the time) gave 33m/s increase, with navigation 5 that's 41.3m/s, not even a 10% boost to an interceptor. Today's 20% OD II give 20%, making those stack with nanos as described is a well-implemented solution to a major piece of the speed issue that was kindled near 2 years ago. Abusive \| Deadspace2 \| Deadspace
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2008.07.26 00:50:00 - [3] Here, here!
El Mauru Amarr Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.26 01:32:00 - [4] Edited by: El Mauru on 26/07/2008 01:32:53 If these changes come across I'd rather have the whole package now than a steady "decline"- For these changes to be effective they either need to be made all at once or not at all- IMHO Personally, I think it will be interesting -
doctorstupid2 The Accursed	Posted - 2008.07.26 01:43:00 - [5] Originally by: El Mauru Edited by: El Mauru on 26/07/2008 01:32:53 If these changes come across I'd rather have the whole package now than a steady "decline"- For these changes to be effective they either need to be made all at once or not at all- IMHO Personally, I think it will be interesting Well that's just it, if we don't need the whole package deal, why have all the collateral damage to other playstyles and setups? Abusive \| Deadspace2 \| Deadspace
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.26 07:07:00 - [6] There is absolutely no need for "full package". Polycarbon and OD stacking nerf, all MWDs speed caped at 500%, rebalance of ship masses and base speeds, and snake nerf (they still give more speed % than any other module). Thats all thats needed CCP! Leave webs and scrams as they are today. Its changing of too many base game mechanics, all at once. Remember Starwars Galaxies NGE!!! Please CCP! I hate nano setups, not every hac was made to speed tank, and indeed, speedtanking a Heavy Assault Cruiser is a bit silly, and frigs and their T2 variations need to be faster than bigger stuff. But please CCP, dont break the game by changing a ton of stuff in one go.
n4DuL Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.07.26 09:50:00 - [7] **ING STUPID NEW NERF. CCP IS A BIG PEACE OF SHIT **ING STUPID NERF
Ser'aina Swedish Aerospace Inc	Posted - 2008.07.26 10:02:00 - [8] Edited by: Ser''aina on 26/07/2008 10:02:06 BLOBB WARFARE FTW since nanos was the way to get around the blobs and ofc all the carebears out in 0.0 that dont undertand that you should look in your intel channel or at local to avoid beeign ganked will be happy about this. good way to kill gerilla warfare and make 0.0 even more safe [url=http://kb.wildzor.com/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=39450] [/url]
verde bandit Amarr Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:10:00 - [9] "Nano-nerf: Too much at once ?" Wana talk about the Eos again ?
nomlasmit Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:16:00 - [10] Originally by: Dzajic I hate nano setups, not every hac was made to speed tank, and indeed, speedtanking a Heavy Assault Cruiser is a bit silly Never flown Minmatar have you??? Basically this will hit them the hardest. First it was the missile nerf Caldari got slaughtered, then the nano nerf Minmatar got slaughtered, then the NOS nerf Gallante got slaughtered, Amarr got buffed, now more speed changes and to top it off Web changes making both the rapier and Huginn completely useless and one of the most fun Hac's in game the Vagabond a waste of time. Without the speed the Vagabond is worthless... I predict huge blobs of missile spamming Cerbs/Drakes/Ravens/Falcons/Sacrelidges, noone will jump into gatecamps anymore as you will all die and noone will be able to fight outnumbered. Basically the options available for warfare have been severely reduced and the blob/lag wins. Nice job ccp

Diehard Si UK1 Zero G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:24:00 - [11] Way too much at once. Why does every single patch favuor the Caldari as well? So 0.0 space is now run entirely by the big alliances fielding titans. At least small scale PVP was possible while nano gangs were viable. Now the only fighting to happen in 0.0 will be laggy 200man a side blobs. All this cos a few carebears and isk farmers moaned at losing their Ravens. Its just made it impossible to launch guerilla raids into hostile space now. So you take a few BS's, you get spotted, bubbled and a titan lands on you and DD. If your not a member of a big powerful coalition you will find it hard to enter hostile space. Solo PVP will be completely dead as well. Recon gangs? Not exactly very effective in reality, nice idea on paper though. So for the smaller alliance, the idea of 0.0 warfare is now pretty dead. Much more sensible would be to nerf polycarbons a little, make all MWD's the same and to be fair this warp scram thing does sound interesting. Maybe boost afterburners to make them more viable, or just increase cap use or fitting requirements of MWD's a little. BUT LEAVE IT AT THAT. Any more and hacs are useless, Gallente are unable to fly with Guns, Minmatar are dead.. period! We'll enter a world where everyone flies Drakes and no-one can kill each other in small scale combat.
Swren1	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:34:00 - [12] There goes the past 3 months training for the vaga....
Diehard Si UK1 Zero G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:38:00 - [13] Originally by: Swren1 There goes the past 3 months training for the vaga.... Thats the least of your worries... try 2 years training Gallente and minmatar now down the pan
Captator Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:42:00 - [14] Originally by: Dzajic There is absolutely no need for "full package". Polycarbon and OD stacking nerf, all MWDs speed caped at 500%, rebalance of ship masses and base speeds, and snake nerf (they still give more speed % than any other module). Thats all thats needed CCP! Leave webs and scrams as they are today. Its changing of too many base game mechanics, all at once. Remember Starwars Galaxies NGE!!! Please CCP! And boost t2 precision variant missiles (mainly cruiser sized ones) - they are currently broken and this will give them a viable anti nano medium class weapon (all medium guns can track nanos so missiles should at least be able to do some semblance of damage. 0.1 damage per missle you hear quoted, utter nonsense, I tried to solo a ratting cerb a week or so ago, and he was hitting me for 60 a missile on my curse that does 3.1km/s (2.7km/s orbit velocity) Quote: I hate nano setups, not every hac was made to speed tank, and indeed, speedtanking a Heavy Assault Cruiser is a bit silly, and frigs and their T2 variations need to be faster than bigger stuff. But please CCP, dont break the game by changing a ton of stuff in one go. With the introduction of tier 2 BCs, more of the HACs were speed tanked - plate fitted zealots and sacrileges and ishtars got a lot less viable, as they are totally outclassed in damage/tank by the new BCs.
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:43:00 - [15] Of course Vagabond should be able to speed tank. Ship IS build around it. But coming to a point where only usable setup for every single HAC in game is to nano it, is silly. CCP should drop T2 prices a bit for armor or shield tanking HACs, or increase BS prices. Once again, to be clear. Polycarbon fix is much needed. Snakes are f-ing expensive and are being nerfed to much, although a small nerf wouldn't hurt. Reworking ship base speeds is good. Web/scramb/mwd changed are idiotic. At most scrambs and disruptors could be given a script to work as anti MWD webs. Minnie ships should be able to speed tank, blasterboats should be able to approach their targets. But for only way to drive a HAC or CS being to nano it, and nanoing every one of them over way 3-4k where they cant be tracked by guns or get zero damage from explosions is stupid.
Ser'aina Swedish Aerospace Inc	Posted - 2008.07.26 11:52:00 - [16] well the thing is you can be in a raven in a short amount of time training to to a heavy assoult crusier takes much longer and to get all the fancy navigation gunnerymissile skills upp it takes soem time now a heavy assoult cruiser can atm take out most bs if the HAC is speed tanked but if the bs pilot woudl fit some sort of pvp module lets say a webs neut nos or somethign liek this on there ratting bs the hac cant do shit without faction modules since a neut reaches 24 km and bamm the nano hac is gone cnt do anything more then to hop that he got enough speed to strafe out of range of that neut. Ofc then there is the Nanogangs well hoe do you kill a Nanogang well you make on your self, ohh but sorry ont we have skills or experince in our little 0.0 allince to feild more then ratting bs and some capitals or is it jsut so that 0.0 is goign to be the safest thing after 0.5 and above empire since everything nerf we get is just makeing the pvp based coporation less since they cant go in to 0.0 and do some gorilla warfare due to that the ones that liv in that area cant take care of a nanogang bahh and i thought ccp wanted to get rid of the BLOBS and LAG from fleet fight not increas the lagg and blobs. and tbh this game is about skillpoints since a pvp Character from 2005 shoudl with his skills be far more superior on the feild then a 2008 cahr correct if so why nerf them to so that everyone is equal since your skillpoints wont help you out btw might be grammatic and spellign errors but tbh i dont care [url=http://kb.wildzor.com/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=39450] [/url]
Captator Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.07.26 12:24:00 - [17] Originally by: Dzajic Of course Vagabond should be able to speed tank. Ship IS build around it. But coming to a point where only usable setup for every single HAC in game is to nano it, is silly. CCP should drop T2 prices a bit for armor or shield tanking HACs, or increase BS prices. Once again, to be clear. Polycarbon fix is much needed. Snakes are f-ing expensive and are being nerfed to much, although a small nerf wouldn't hurt. Reworking ship base speeds is good. Web/scramb/mwd changed are idiotic. At most scrambs and disruptors could be given a script to work as anti MWD webs. Minnie ships should be able to speed tank, blasterboats should be able to approach their targets. But for only way to drive a HAC or CS being to nano it, and nanoing every one of them over way 3-4k where they cant be tracked by guns or get zero damage from explosions is stupid. I only hear of nano claymores and sleipnirs, the rest are tanked - guns will still track the orbitting ship if you fly right, and it is not like they can sustain that speed and actually hit you, or even sustain it forever. at 3km/s I am still taking 25-40% of a faction missiles damage, if they boosted precision missiles a bit, that would solve the 'waah missles don't work' problem.
Nightelf Mowhawk	Posted - 2008.07.26 13:14:00 - [18] this patch is going to be the ultimate lag fest. rr bs fleets will reign the slideshows that will surly come of age with the fallout of this wonder patch good work ccp. ill be seein you ... one frame at a time
Lyvv Amarr Personal Vendetta Vendetta Alliance.	Posted - 2008.07.26 13:24:00 - [19] It seems CCP makes decisions based on the findings of some weekend warriors within their dev teams. Or, which I hold more accurate than the latter statement, based on little kid whine threads on the forums, the so called Feedback from Players. Its so unreal to think you can keep guerilla warfare alive and a viable options for smaller and outnumbered gangs with this upcoming nerf. Mobility is no longer an option. 0.0 space just became secure unless you roll in there MAX style or with a very large and slow BS gang. Bye bye HACs - you just got kicked to the curb. I just find it sad that these so called "tested" and somehow certified and deemed "functional" changes are actually making it to the production environment. Who tests this shit? I will pay 1 billion isk to whoever puts up a f'ing face (picture) of one of those engineers that actually are responsible for making these decisions. I just want to know if the mental picture I have of these ******s is actually accurate or not. Anyways, CCP, you suck! I want my money back!
Napro Caldari Paxton Federation	Posted - 2008.07.26 14:30:00 - [20] Yes yes, Nano pilots are selfless messiahs protecting the Universe from hordes of blobbing noobs one defenseless ship at a time. Please don't take them from us CCP! I like shooting pointlessly at invincible enemies til they destroy me and loot my wreck. It's what separates us from the WoWers

ChangWufei The White Fang	Posted - 2008.07.26 14:33:00 - [21] Originally by: Lyvv Edited by: Lyvv on 26/07/2008 13:26:32 Edited by: Lyvv on 26/07/2008 13:26:10 Bye bye HACs - you just got kicked to the curb. It might just make people tank HACs like they are supposed to with their high resistances? Other than the Vaga of course which I do hope is not affected too badly by these nerfs. If all the other ships are nerfer the same, the vaga will still be faster than everything else though. Everyone seems to think this will kill minmatar ships but surely ALL ships will be affected by same so the minny ones will still be the same percentage faster than everything else that they are currently. So basically it will just make all the people who love nano get minny skills, which most of them do anyway, so it wont rly make much difference.
Captator Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.07.26 14:49:00 - [22] Originally by: ChangWufei Originally by: Lyvv Edited by: Lyvv on 26/07/2008 13:26:32 Edited by: Lyvv on 26/07/2008 13:26:10 Bye bye HACs - you just got kicked to the curb. It might just make people tank HACs like they are supposed to with their high resistances? Other than the Vaga of course which I do hope is not affected too badly by these nerfs. If all the other ships are nerfer the same, the vaga will still be faster than everything else though. Everyone seems to think this will kill minmatar ships but surely ALL ships will be affected by same so the minny ones will still be the same percentage faster than everything else that they are currently. So basically it will just make all the people who love nano get minny skills, which most of them do anyway, so it wont rly make much difference. problem is they are currently horrendously outclassed by tier 2 BCs
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.07.26 15:14:00 - [23] Originally by: Captator And boost t2 precision variant missiles (mainly cruiser sized ones) - they are currently broken and this will give them a viable anti nano medium class weapon (all medium guns can track nanos so missiles should at least be able to do some semblance of damage. ha ha lol
Slobodanka	Posted - 2008.07.26 15:42:00 - [24] See, if you *** and moan about "few carebears that lost their ravens" you should understand that this goes both ways. Nanos are becoming "standard" ships for any pvp op except for POS warfare. Every one and their mothers (bastard offspring included) is flying with polycarbs (or trusters if you're poor like me), overdrives and nanos. If you don't fit nano then you most likely fly ship with cov ops cloak. This situation is silly... all we get from pvp is "hunting" ratters (which most of the times looks more like execution... warp to belt, catch raven, point, web, jam, shoot till he dies then GTFO because some pvp fitted ships are incoming or already in the belt) and picking up stragglers. Long gone are the days of blasterboats, ceptors jumping through the gate to tackle big ships, some time even T1 frigates (they can fit point and should be faster than cruiser class vessels, but ATM they are not). Most of the time I fly nanoships only because not flying one at this point is just stupid. But seeing CCP looking into nerfing nanos even further fills me with joy and nostalgia of battles where hitting MWD and running away was not the first thing people did in combat. They activated guns and EW and got rich or died trying. I fully support CCP on this one, speed must be nerfed across the board and ship classes should be clearly defined with their hull sizes. P.S.: Nano** tears taste oh-so-sweet
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.26 15:54:00 - [25] Well it should go like "most long ranged low damage medium guns can track nanoes, a bit."
Captator Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.07.26 16:09:00 - [26] Originally by: Typhado3 Originally by: Captator And boost t2 precision variant missiles (mainly cruiser sized ones) - they are currently broken and this will give them a viable anti nano medium class weapon (all medium guns can track nanos so missiles should at least be able to do some semblance of damage. ha ha lol focused medium pulse/heavy pulse with scorch or faction microwave, 180/220/425mm AC with barrage, dual 150mm rails with faction antimatter, blasters with null, think that covers all medium shortrange guns, sorry I should have clarified.
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.26 16:28:00 - [27] Do you know how much dual 150mm suck for everything else but tracking? On a Moa they get 14km optimal, so they just cross 20km at falloff. On everything else their optimal is 9km? What nano pilot gets within 15km?
Orar Ironfist Toys R Us	Posted - 2008.07.26 16:31:00 - [28] Originally by: Captator Originally by: Typhado3 Originally by: Captator And boost t2 precision variant missiles (mainly cruiser sized ones) - they are currently broken and this will give them a viable anti nano medium class weapon (all medium guns can track nanos so missiles should at least be able to do some semblance of damage. ha ha lol focused medium pulse/heavy pulse with scorch or faction microwave, 180/220/425mm AC with barrage, dual 150mm rails with faction antimatter, blasters with null, think that covers all medium shortrange guns, sorry I should have clarified. rails are terrible for tracking even the dual 150's bro. 150mm and smaller are the best shot youve got....null ammo in blaster means they have goo tracking...and still terrible range so thats alo a no go for nanos...425's have terrible tracking when fighting nano ships so those are out Pirate for Life(no matter my sec)
Dran Black	Posted - 2008.07.26 17:00:00 - [29] I fly the vaga, huginn, rapier and claymore and yeah they are fast but all of them are killable. Sure they can run and junk but they can die. My point is if your going to put a 2 bill implant set in your head, at least a 500 mill deadspace mwd, and about 200 to 300 mill in polys and faction overdrives on a hac or cs you should have some type of advantage, right? So after you hit vagas with the nerf bat how are they going to be useful? are you going to buff them with some type of tank or what? I just want to see how your going to make them useful after this? As you can see im not going crazy wanting to quit im just asking a simple question and want some type of response please.
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.26 17:26:00 - [30] ISK cost and skills involved should mean something. But not be a fully deciding factor. A lone carrier without support might very well be easier to pin and kill than a skilled (as in player skill) nanogang.



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.