| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 73 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cutesmile
   |
Posted - 2008.07.26 12:32:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Cutesmile on 26/07/2008 12:33:33
 Originally by: LaVista Vista
I think it's tragic how CCP is talking about fixing the effect, without even MENTIONING the cause.
It was obvious that nano needed nerfing, as speeds over 7-8k breaks the physics engine.
But I WILL remind you all, the dev blog was just an IDEA, for which they wanted feedback. So it's not even sure, that it will happen.
We will signed if the CCP make a smart idea for fixing.
But this idea will make the game to ruin.
The devs will make unuseable the all matar and half of gallente ships and overpowering the caldari ships.
We dont wanna this. Looking another ideas like a script for MWD aka. lesser throttle = lesser cap penalty or something.
Stacking speed modules ok.
Lesser MWD throttle ok. (300-350% maybe would be enough)
Web nerf a stupid things, when a web can kill the nanos.
Scrambler mwd off effect stupid thing too with 8km range.
|
Tzuko1
Minmatar
The All-Seeing Eye
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 12:41:00 -
[32]
Against the nerf,
This is crazy this will make the game Drake,Raven-online.
olß |
Elistara Eldore
Light Sparkle Development
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 12:46:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Elistara Eldore on 26/07/2008 12:47:02
This is not a "balancing", it is a complete removal of speed as a tactic at all in this game. Maybe poly rigs need to be brought in line with their T2 counterparts, but instead of actually nerfing the specific problem, the suggested "fix" blatantly nerfs every possible aspect of speed, which is rediculous.
The fact that CCP seem to think that T2 rigs and HG Snake sets are the "normal" thing for speed pilots to have just goes to show they are far removed from their own game. If speed is removed from this game to the extreme that they are suggesting, pvp becomes nothing more than, sit still-launch missle-win. Drakes and Ravens will be kings, they already are extremely difficult to kill (if fitted correctly for the engagment) in nano ships.
As someone said in the enourmous thread, CCP need to actually look into and show statistics and data on the supposed nano ship problem, instead of just counting on the tales of crying players who get their horribly fit Raven ganked by HACs while ratting in the open with hostiles in system.
|
XxAngelxX
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 12:52:00 -
[34]
Let PVPers decide the fate of PVP in eve.
--------------------------------------
Dance Puppets, Dance |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 12:53:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Herschel Yamamoto on 26/07/2008 12:56:09
I like a lot of the individual changes being proposed. The redistribution of ship speeds by class, the polycarbon nerf, and the elimination of mass reduction are all likely to be good things, and I can see the web nerf and the meta>0 MWD nerf being good things as well, though I'm less sure of those.
But so many more of the individual changes are utterly wrong. People spend billions on Snakes, and destroying their value this thoroughly seems a mistake. Boosters aren't as expensive, but them having utility seems a good thing, and sig radius just isn't as important as speed. If they're underused, you don't nerf them. Similarly, if you're willing to give up 300+ DPS of heavy drones, an 83% web is not unreasonable, and so nerfing the virtually unusable web drones is a mistake. And the scram change, while interesting on paper, just seems foolish - MWDs aren't a problem inside 9 km(because of webs), they're a problem at 15-20.
Furthermore, their whole approach seems flawed. Speaking for myself, I don't want a speed nerf. Nerfbats are unsubtle, uninteresting, and just serve to **** off people who have invested a lot of time and money into doing things in a way that is no longer possible. What I want is a countermeasure worth a damn. Right now, I can think of exactly one module a generic non-nano ship can fit to counter a nano ship, and that's a heavy neut, not counting funky faction webs and stuff. There's no T2 ammo that provides a tracking bonus(an ideal role for Tremor/Gleam/Javelin, IMO), there's no web with enough extra range for less than 200 million, there's really nothing. That's the problem - the only decent counter that lets you actually kill a nano HAC is an interceptor. Add an anti-nano T2 ammo, and maybe change webs such that a higher meta adds range instead of speed reduction - T2 webs doing -50% at 20 km would be almost enough by itself(and change the Paladin and Kronos to 10% web effect, to keep the 2-in-1 effect). But don't just say "Everything speed-based has got to go" and assume that's a fix, let alone the right fix. Cutting all speeds in half doesn't nerf nanos worth a damn, it just buffs bubbles.
And to stave off whining, the only ship I've ever speed-fit is an Ares.
------------------
Fix the forums! |
Vigor
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 12:57:00 -
[36]
give us the means to fight the blob again
|
Chienka
Victory Not Vengeance
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 12:59:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Chienka on 26/07/2008 12:59:43
Another thoughtless "solution" from CCP that will ultimately do more harm than good, and imbalance the gameplay more than it currently is.
I am for well thought out solutions! The suggested changes are anything but.
|
Vittore Mos
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:07:00 -
[38]
|
Pheonix Kanan
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:08:00 -
[39]
I'm sure all of the other people in this thread and other will give reason as to why this is a terrible idea. I choose not to because it's so infuriating that I want to fly to Iceland and beat the devs senseless.
-----
|
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:17:00 -
[40]
We all had it coming, so come on folks, let's just suck it up and use your own words...
ADAPT
|
|
|
Broska
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:18:00 -
[41]
The dev's clearly don't play their own game.
4billion is vaga is clearly a standard fit (and the fit was shit aswell!)
|
Heartstone
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:21:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Heartstone on 26/07/2008 13:23:11
Against in it's implementation outlined in the original DevBlog but probably not for the reason you would expect.
Quote:
A few points:
- People who say that it was possible to go on 0.0 roams before nanos, so it should be possible after. You are mistaken. 0.0 has changed. You will be surrounded by defenders using jumpportals and wiped out in your small gang if you jump through the next gate. Its not that nanogangs don't use scouts, its that nanogangs can go through small gatecamps without being slowed down enough for a big blob to catch them.
- That is not just a matter of getting to warp faster. A nanogang will typically be able to jump into a 10-15 man gatecamp and run off without losses if they just run off. Nanogangs don't kill anything while running off, but they can run through smaller gatecamps. That is important because otherwise the only alternative becomes to log off or cloak (unless you want to Leeroy and die horribly).
- Not being able to be hit while doing 5kms is not that much of a problem, since you won't be hitting anything yourself either. Its almost like a cloak, except there are counters to nanoing, but not to cloaking.
- Do not base your game changes on EFT, or even Sisi. Sisi is not Tranquility, you don't have to deal with motherships, titans, jumpbridge networks on Sisi. All of those affect the environment in which nanos are used, and are part of why nanos are needed to keep small gang warfare outside of camping a bloody gate for 3 hours viable.
- If you make changes, make them gradually. Why would you change 15 things at the same time? Make 1 or 2 changes, then see if the result is what you want. If you change 15 things at the same time, and you **** up, then you still don't know which of the 15 things was 'too much'.
- If nanos are no longer viable, it will make less fights happen. People are not gonna keep coming in small gangs if they get blobbed time after time and forced to logoff. If you would give normal ships just a bit more ability to fight back when attacked by nanos, that would not have the same effect as reducing the speed of nanoships.
- Why don't you add a new type of T2 ammo that does less damage but has superior tracking? You have the T2 ammo that does more damage but has 75% penalty on tracking. Add another type of T2 ammo that has say a 50% bonus on tracking. Then as long as people carry that they have a shot at even hitting those 10kms vagas.
This sums up most of the points quite nicely though.
---
|
sjakareasha
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:36:00 -
[43]
if this nerf would happen it would ruin the game for everyone i know in eve this is idiotism speeds just as they are now are ****in good dont **** this up for everyone
this will cause total chaos
|
Inertial
The Python Cartel
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:38:00 -
[44]
I am against the nano nerf the way it stands now.
we are recruiting!
|
MrCranberry
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:39:00 -
[45]
\o nerf the new dev blog
|
GalaticVoyag3r
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:48:00 -
[46]
Quote:
A few points:
- People who say that it was possible to go on 0.0 roams before nanos, so it should be possible after. You are mistaken. 0.0 has changed. You will be surrounded by defenders using jumpportals and wiped out in your small gang if you jump through the next gate. Its not that nanogangs don't use scouts, its that nanogangs can go through small gatecamps without being slowed down enough for a big blob to catch them.
- That is not just a matter of getting to warp faster. A nanogang will typically be able to jump into a 10-15 man gatecamp and run off without losses if they just run off. Nanogangs don't kill anything while running off, but they can run through smaller gatecamps. That is important because otherwise the only alternative becomes to log off or cloak (unless you want to Leeroy and die horribly).
- Not being able to be hit while doing 5kms is not that much of a problem, since you won't be hitting anything yourself either. Its almost like a cloak, except there are counters to nanoing, but not to cloaking.
- Do not base your game changes on EFT, or even Sisi. Sisi is not Tranquility, you don't have to deal with motherships, titans, jumpbridge networks on Sisi. All of those affect the environment in which nanos are used, and are part of why nanos are needed to keep small gang warfare outside of camping a bloody gate for 3 hours viable.
- If you make changes, make them gradually. Why would you change 15 things at the same time? Make 1 or 2 changes, then see if the result is what you want. If you change 15 things at the same time, and you **** up, then you still don't know which of the 15 things was 'too much'.
- If nanos are no longer viable, it will make less fights happen. People are not gonna keep coming in small gangs if they get blobbed time after time and forced to logoff. If you would give normal ships just a bit more ability to fight back when attacked by nanos, that would not have the same effect as reducing the speed of nanoships.
- Why don't you add a new type of T2 ammo that does less damage but has superior tracking? You have the T2 ammo that does more damage but has 75% penalty on tracking. Add another type of T2 ammo that has say a 50% bonus on tracking. Then as long as people carry that they have a shot at even hitting those 10kms vagas.
|
Eledh
Xenobytes
Stain Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:55:00 -
[47]
against
-------------------------------------
[x_x]you asked we are happy?
we are happy and protected!
|
Mermalior
Jugis Modo Utopia
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:56:00 -
[48]
against
-------------------------------
This game is about the people |
Hul'ka
Minmatar
MicroFunks
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 13:59:00 -
[49]
again-st
---------
I want to phew phew
|
Jade Constantine
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:02:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Heartstone
Edited by: Heartstone on 26/07/2008 13:23:11
Against in it's implementation outlined in the original DevBlog but probably not for the reason you would expect.
Quote:
A few points:
- People who say that it was possible to go on 0.0 roams before nanos, so it should be possible after. You are mistaken. 0.0 has changed. You will be surrounded by defenders using jumpportals and wiped out in your small gang if you jump through the next gate. Its not that nanogangs don't use scouts, its that nanogangs can go through small gatecamps without being slowed down enough for a big blob to catch them.
- That is not just a matter of getting to warp faster. A nanogang will typically be able to jump into a 10-15 man gatecamp and run off without losses if they just run off. Nanogangs don't kill anything while running off, but they can run through smaller gatecamps. That is important because otherwise the only alternative becomes to log off or cloak (unless you want to Leeroy and die horribly).
- Not being able to be hit while doing 5kms is not that much of a problem, since you won't be hitting anything yourself either. Its almost like a cloak, except there are counters to nanoing, but not to cloaking.
- Do not base your game changes on EFT, or even Sisi. Sisi is not Tranquility, you don't have to deal with motherships, titans, jumpbridge networks on Sisi. All of those affect the environment in which nanos are used, and are part of why nanos are needed to keep small gang warfare outside of camping a bloody gate for 3 hours viable.
- If you make changes, make them gradually. Why would you change 15 things at the same time? Make 1 or 2 changes, then see if the result is what you want. If you change 15 things at the same time, and you **** up, then you still don't know which of the 15 things was 'too much'.
- If nanos are no longer viable, it will make less fights happen. People are not gonna keep coming in small gangs if they get blobbed time after time and forced to logoff. If you would give normal ships just a bit more ability to fight back when attacked by nanos, that would not have the same effect as reducing the speed of nanoships.
- Why don't you add a new type of T2 ammo that does less damage but has superior tracking? You have the T2 ammo that does more damage but has 75% penalty on tracking. Add another type of T2 ammo that has say a 50% bonus on tracking. Then as long as people carry that they have a shot at even hitting those 10kms vagas.
This sums up most of the points quite nicely though.
Have to agree with this. 0.0 combat is already dying to the endless blob and curse of absolute defense advantage. This nerf to speed should never ever be implemented on the live server before there are significant anti blob/distributed sovereignty attack measures enacted for 0.0 space. Current situation with nano-ships and speed is not driving significant numbers of people to actually quit the game of eve-online. Removing ANY opportunity for non blob warfare in 0.0 without addressing ANY of the issues with blobs and mindless lagfest hotdrop warfare in 0.0 will actually drive pvpers out of eve and its not in the interest of the game in any way shape or form.
Anti-nano whine brigade will end being the straw that broke the camels back in 0.0.
Speaking personally I don't actually mind many of the changes on the table in and of themselves - but they are simply a terrible idea in the context of actual warfare on the live server in nullsec right now. I can't support ANY gameplay change that will further increase blob power and defensive bonus in 0.0 and so if we ever get a change to make a decision on this on the CSM I'll be voting against it and expressing my opinion on the matter in the strongest possible terms to the developers.
Star Fraction | Dare to Dream!
|
|
|
Pheonix Kanan
Caldari
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:03:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Mister Xerox
We all had it coming, so come on folks, let's just suck it up and use your own words...
ADAPT
Why are the pvp'ers ALWAYS adapting. We use ECM, you whine for a nerf and it gets nerfed. We use damps, you whine for a nerf and ccp nerfs it. We use NOS, you whine for a nerf and, OMG GUESS WHAT, it gets nerfed. We are always adapting. ALWAYS coming up with new ways to make your sorry excuse for an eve life miserable. So the nano nerf really won't change anything. But don't, DO NOT, i'll say it again so it gets through, DO NOT EVER tell us to adapt.
-----
|
poid
Xenobytes
Stain Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:25:00 -
[52]
against
|
Ackuula
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:27:00 -
[53]
/for some of the changes
such as reducing the agility in MWD use and scramblers being able to shut them down
That's a proper use of counters which I can appreciate.
|
Miss KillSome
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:31:00 -
[54]
its totaly crap
|
GO MaZ
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:32:00 -
[55]
I'm not too bothered about speed being nerfed (although I dispise the fact that CCP are nerfing skirmish mods when it's a tool that is used by a very small number of people and those people who do use it have likely spent the best part of a year skilling to help their gang mates  ), but I don't like the way in which this is being achieved with a shotgun nerf to pretty much all things related to speed.
There's no way to predict the outcome of making this many changes (no, not even on SISI) at once when the problem could likely be mitigated with one or more well placed changes instead of a blanket of poor decisions 
---
|
Schmell
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:36:00 -
[56]
AGAINST NERF!
|
Econom
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:37:00 -
[57]
against
|
Kadesh Priestess
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:38:00 -
[58]
Nice nerf. Uncommonly well thought-out change from CCP's side...
/vote against those who against nerf
|
Patalogoanatom
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:46:00 -
[59]
|
Souseseki
|
Posted - 2008.07.26 14:51:00 -
[60]
against
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 73 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |