| 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) |
ganksalot
   |
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:08:00 -
[1261]
signed |
Gegel
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:15:00 -
[1262]
SUPPORT THIS THREAD
AGAINST NERF
|
Ramanuja
Black Plague.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:18:00 -
[1263]
Against!
Balance if u please. Dont take away!
|
Sorum Daemoth
Insidious Existence
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:35:00 -
[1264]
AGAINST!
CCP failed at nerfing the nanoes and also nerfed rapiers, webs, blasterboats, and a bunch of other shit too, there should be no nano nerf and if their should be one this isn't it.
You just got WTF EXIT ganked! |
Gort
Storm Guard Elite
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 20:49:00 -
[1265]
 Originally by: agent apple
Again someone bends it all to suit their own purposes, this is not a simple yes or no topic.
Most respectable pvp'ers know that nano's need balancing. That consisting off brining polycarbs inline with their module counterparts and stopping cruisers getting over ~5km/s sans vaga. This does however exclude screwing over normal nano cruisers in the 3-4km/s range.
So no, like most I don't oppose balance. I do however dislike random ******ed changes and mass nerf batting.
This.
--
When in doubt, empty the magazine. |
Hracky
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:11:00 -
[1266]
Against!
Yay we got 25 more pages then the for so i hope we win! :D
The nanonerf will kill ALOT of ships i know there are diferent sollutions for those ships but we dont want a change CCP will loose alot of members now if this gets to the TQ server.
|
Cerys Magente
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:31:00 -
[1267]
Against the proposed changes |
Cy Gal
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:35:00 -
[1268]
Against |
cats collective
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:48:00 -
[1269]
Rock/ paper/ scissors
Break the scissors
Paper is happy
Rock is happy, until it runs out of scissors to kill
Then rock is broken
Paper is happy, until it runs out of rocks to kill
Then paper is broken.
If CCP break their scissors, the failure cascade begins.
|
JLobes
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:48:00 -
[1270]
Worst idea after the script thing
AGAINST! 
|
Dark Intaki
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:57:00 -
[1271]
Against
Is just too much, not only make ships slower but nerf webs as well?
just for trying to bring afterburners into the table? geez...
|
Phoenix Lonestar
Black Plague.
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 22:58:00 -
[1272]
Against it all the way
|
Einstein MF
Clockwork Orange Ltd
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 23:00:00 -
[1273]
Eventhough Im Amarr and a carebear, this is too much
Is a whole Minmatar nerf, what else are the rusty buckets good for if not speed?
just to make drones hit? or missiles?
Nerf if you need too, but dont kill the game
All in all we're just bricks on the wall! |
Mia Archer
Insidious Existence
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 23:10:00 -
[1274]
Edited by: Mia Archer on 30/07/2008 23:10:07
its true that nano's need to be nerfed and reworked but CCP has taken it way too far, instead of spending time to think up a way of balancing things around the system that already exists they would rather bash everyting with the nerf bat till its totaly unrecognizable and redo the whole thing and basicaly say screw everyoen who has invested time and isk into the current system. So Against 100%
____________________________________________
|
Endless Subversion
The Accursed
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 23:17:00 -
[1275]
Patch overnerfs so many thing it isn't funny.
Very much against.
|
Cotirani
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 23:21:00 -
[1276]
I am against the current changes proposed, but however I am not against a speed nerf entirely.
|
Dakisha
Corp 1 Allstars
The Requiem
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 23:29:00 -
[1277]
/sign
|
Jack Gilligan
THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 00:34:00 -
[1278]
Against in it's current form.
It's too extreme, too cataclysmic. Too SOE like.
(yes that is a grave insult to CCP, to compare a move of theirs to SOE)
I'd rather see a nerf that affects the high end (cruisers going freaking 10K+) but leave reasonable fits alone (say 3-5K). These changes are going to make reasonable setups cost billions because it seems to be balanced based on people fitting crazy stuff.
I also disagree vehemently with the webifier nerf, WTF? Nerf the only thing that CURRENTLY can be used to break nanos?
The MWD change is just ******ed. A T2 MWD should be faster than a T1.. Ditto faction and officer ones...
Also, I disagree with giving warp scrams the ability to also shut off MWD's. That makes one module way too powerful. If you want to add that ability to a scram/disruptor module it should be via script so that you have to load either warp scram or MWD scram script.
Webs also should be scripted one for strength, another for longer range at the expense of strength...
---
My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my corp or alliance. |
Hekktor Zarkon
Decadence.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 00:58:00 -
[1279]
Having the invitation to a Marathon race i started training, being nearly ready someone told me: 'hey dude, they shortened the distance... it's just 100m now!' I thought - 'hell s..t I need to change my training and get some spikes!'
Then - when the races finally started - the referee came: 'Hello sportsmen.. the organizers of these fine games got the audiences opinion - they better like to see WERESTLING' ...
Hello? CCP? Adjusting..., balancing, fine tuning... ok - but turning the whole thing upside down in between?
I vote NO the planned 'changes'.
-;= |
Essque
Starlancers
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 01:30:00 -
[1280]
Originally by: Avon
Originally by: DREAMWORKS
Who ever came up with this nerf-has never played this game.
I very much doubt the people voting against it have actually tried it.
It isn't the drastic nerf they are making it out to be.
In fact, it is pretty darn good.
I would have nerfed it harder tbh.
Just out of interest, is this merely another example of your usual trolling, or indeed your honest opinion?
|
xeroxgirl
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 01:50:00 -
[1281]
/signed
|
Whispi
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 01:52:00 -
[1282]
that
|
Tisni
Personal Vendetta
Vendetta Alliance.
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 02:35:00 -
[1283]
Edited by: Tisni on 31/07/2008 02:45:43
AGainst your taking it all away
|
d3vo
The Space BorderLine
United For 0rder
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 02:42:00 -
[1284]
We need a nerf but this is the wrong one. I am against!
__________
\(^.^)/ |
Allard Blackheart
Personal Vendetta
Vendetta Alliance.
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 02:44:00 -
[1285]
the nerf of the pollcarbs/mwd reuse timer YES
warp scram killing mwds/WEB nerf/gang skill nerf NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sig starts here
|
StepFam
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 02:47:00 -
[1286]
Edited by: StepFam on 31/07/2008 02:48:20
[size=24]HELL NO[/size]
|
fisty
Personal Vendetta
Vendetta Alliance.
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 03:09:00 -
[1287]
against
|
Rothran
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 03:10:00 -
[1288]
This will KILL small gang PvP. There will be NO WAY that a smaller force can engage a blob without getting annihilated. This will move from a game of skill into a game of who can make the biggest BLOB. Small gang PvP is the most rewarding experience that this game has to offer, and this patch will destroy it.
AGAINST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
Slate Fistcrunch
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 03:22:00 -
[1289]
Too many radical changes at once. You've had many months to address the issue in which you could have changed one module at a time and gradually worked to a solution.
|
Rostran Targo
Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 03:35:00 -
[1290]
Against
C'mon CCP, there has to be another to implement this. A very large and painful kick in the balls certainly isn't the way to go.
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
| |
|
| 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 |