EVE Search - Attention: due to fuel shortages speedlimits have been reduced.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Attention: due to fuel shortages speedlimits have been reduced.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Oftherocks Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:27:00 - [31] Edited by: Oftherocks on 30/07/2008 04:27:38 Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Near invulnerability? Do you actually fly combat in this game? Take a look at the posters corp Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate Hes in the caldari militia noob corp- perhaps the biggest collection of fail ever seen in this game. SKUNK Umm, dude you quoted CCP Taera, not Stab Wounds.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:29:00 - [32] Edited by: Chainsaw Plankton on 30/07/2008 04:33:46 Edited by: Chainsaw Plankton on 30/07/2008 04:32:49 Originally by: Oftherocks Edited by: Oftherocks on 30/07/2008 04:27:38 Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Near invulnerability? Do you actually fly combat in this game? Take a look at the posters corp Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate Hes in the caldari militia noob corp- perhaps the biggest collection of fail ever seen in this game. SKUNK Umm, dude you quoted CCP Taera, not Stab Wounds. he was quoting VicturusTeSaluto? ...but that is not who he was talking about, now I'm confused. but stab wounds is, there should have been some sort of clarification!
Oftherocks Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:34:00 - [33] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton Originally by: Oftherocks Edited by: Oftherocks on 30/07/2008 04:27:38 Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Near invulnerability? Do you actually fly combat in this game? Take a look at the posters corp Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate Hes in the caldari militia noob corp- perhaps the biggest collection of fail ever seen in this game. SKUNK Umm, dude you quoted CCP Taera, not Stab Wounds. he was quoting VicturusTeSaluto? Actually, I think he was replying to VicturusTeSaluto, who was replying to CCP Taera
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:35:00 - [34] Originally by: Oftherocks Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton Originally by: Oftherocks Edited by: Oftherocks on 30/07/2008 04:27:38 Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Near invulnerability? Do you actually fly combat in this game? Take a look at the posters corp Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate Hes in the caldari militia noob corp- perhaps the biggest collection of fail ever seen in this game. SKUNK Umm, dude you quoted CCP Taera, not Stab Wounds. he was quoting VicturusTeSaluto? Actually, I think he was replying to VicturusTeSaluto, who was replying to CCP Taera right I edited a few times. although his post should be edited for clarity
VicturusTeSaluto Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:42:00 - [35] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Near invulnerability? Do you actually fly combat in this game? Take a look at the posters corp Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate Hes in the caldari militia noob corp- perhaps the biggest collection of fail ever seen in this game. SKUNK I was quoting the dev, not the FW noob. Not that I am surprised that you can't tell the difference.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:50:00 - [36] Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Might I suggest you shut up about things you obviously know nothing about. Interceptors may be faster than other ships, they are too slow to survive long enough to do what their primary function is, tackling enemy ships. Nice 'boost'...
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:52:00 - [37] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Might I suggest you shut up about things you obviously know nothing about. Interceptors may be faster than other ships, they are too slow to survive long enough to do what their primary function is, tackling enemy ships. Nice 'boost'... Additionally, your comment on feedback is incorrect. Feedback is wanted in the Game Development Forum, not the Features and Ideas discussion.
VicturusTeSaluto Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.07.30 04:56:00 - [38] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Might I suggest you shut up about things you obviously know nothing about. Interceptors may be faster than other ships, they are too slow to survive long enough to do what their primary function is, tackling enemy ships. Nice 'boost'... Additionally, your comment on feedback is incorrect. Feedback is wanted in the Game Development Forum, not the Features and Ideas discussion. You are smart.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:02:00 - [39] Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: Malachon Draco Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Might I suggest you shut up about things you obviously know nothing about. Interceptors may be faster than other ships, they are too slow to survive long enough to do what their primary function is, tackling enemy ships. Nice 'boost'... Additionally, your comment on feedback is incorrect. Feedback is wanted in the Game Development Forum, not the Features and Ideas discussion. Burn lol --
Kazang Gallente KnightRaven Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:12:00 - [40] Please dont talk about realism in EVE, its a sci-fi game. The 2 things dont go together. What is so idiotic about your "fake" comment about ships being slowed down is that you do not even realise what accelerating at 2km/s/s would do to the human body. You would be rendered into a fine paste on the wall of your pod. Let alone the forces involved in stopping or changing direction. You would blackout long before that anyway at much, much lower acceleration. I cant take your opinion seriously when have no clue of what are you talking about and obviously haven't even fully read the dev blog.

MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:19:00 - [41] Quote: I have never encountered an instance where speed resulted in near invulnerability try longing in some day? Originally by: Dapanman1 Terrible idea, you're an idiot
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:25:00 - [42] Originally by: MotherMoon Quote: I have never encountered an instance where speed resulted in near invulnerability try longing in some day? Try using the ingame counters that have been provided some day? --
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:33:00 - [43] Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: VicturusTeSaluto Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Near invulnerability? Do you actually fly combat in this game? Take a look at the posters corp Stab Wounds Caldari State Protectorate Hes in the caldari militia noob corp- perhaps the biggest collection of fail ever seen in this game. SKUNK I was quoting the dev, not the FW noob. Not that I am surprised that you can't tell the difference. Even IM confused as to what the hell im on about now SKUNK
Mahke Carrion Crows	Posted - 2008.07.30 05:54:00 - [44] Edited by: Mahke on 30/07/2008 05:54:52 Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton Originally by: Ash Vincetti Edited by: Ash Vincetti on 30/07/2008 04:12:50 Originally by: CCP Taera Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) No, they are not. As a nearly dedicated interceptor pilot, the viability and utility for them is completely out. Can't afford snakes, never could, but I was able to tack in on a battleship from 200km out quickly enough that I could have him tackled before I was vaporized. With the way the interceptors have been changed, they neither have the speed or transversal to do that, nor the survivability to tackle up close and remain alive. Yes Large guns won't hit it if it's orbiting sub 10km, But a neut + drones will still mess you up, and what battleship pilot doesn't carry those two these days? I'm sorry, but "proportionally" there is no "boost" to interceptors. They are now deader than ever. heh warrior IIs will catch you unless you are snaked, and then (with snakes) you will get hit by all sorts of small turrets and light precision missiles. sitting on sisi in a zealot with 4 overdrive IIs, a snake set, and doing less than my tq zealot with no snakes 2 od 1 nano (2758 sisi vs 3077 tq) Oh noes, precision lights, warrior IIs, and small turrets can hit you now? So the exact weapons that SHOULD be useful for fighting fast ships can now actually do significant damage, and your spreading your sweet tears like a fine manure over the forum over this? As representatives from CCP have stated, speed should mitigate incoming damage, not altogether eliminate it. Don't get me wrong, I think maybe minmatar ships in particular and ceptors should keep a bit more of their speed, its what makes them them, but seriously, your tears about being able to be hit by stuff particularly geared towards hitting small fast stuff is exactly why a nerf was needed.
Shiho Weitong Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:00:00 - [45] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton heh warrior IIs will catch you unless you are snaked, and then (with snakes) you will get hit by all sorts of small turrets and light precision missiles. sitting on sisi in a zealot with 4 overdrive IIs, a snake set, and doing less than my tq zealot with no snakes 2 od 1 nano (2758 sisi vs 3077 tq) And with weapons specifically designed to hit frigates, and in case of the precision even more specifically small and fast frigates, this is a bad thing for the game... How is that?? Oh, I get it. You lost your "I can't lose" button. ----------------------- Why is it called common sense, when it's clearly very rare. I had a mind once, but alas, I seem to have forgotten where I left it.
Phrixus Zephyr Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:08:00 - [46] Originally by: CCP Taera instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. What planet are you on? Do you even play the game?
Karanth Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:08:00 - [47] I thought the reason the United Federation of Planets was imposing the Warp 5 speed limit was to reduce the damage to subspace, not due to a fuel shortage. I'll be contacting my representatives on the Federation Council about this ASAP.
Mitsuni Abashadoni Minmatar The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:08:00 - [48] Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) This just underlines the point that's been made over and over, and then a few more times. You still haven't understood that it is not speed alone that determines whether or not you survive, it's agility. Going umpteen kilometers per second in a straight line is nice and dandy if you want to set a speed record, but in combat, it means bupcis because it's all about orbit speed. This is why you guys should try to actually use these setups in a combat situation instead of changing multiple variables that you clearly do not understand. Speed is nice, but it's worthless without agility, and you're screwing around with pretty much everything that relates to agility and mass.
GO MaZ The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:13:00 - [49] You can tell this patch is poorly grounded when CCP employees (maybe not those directly behind the proposed changes, but people who should have an idea on these things at least) are calling a 50% speed nerf against ships whose only strength is speed (and indeed, running down people a long way off and holding them there for others to arrive) a boost ---
Lennit Purn Blindsight Inc. House of Mercury	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:30:00 - [50] Originally by: Fumunda minuts I very seldom sport any slow ships cause they are a drag (literally). You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Beltantis Torrence	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:37:00 - [51] Edited by: Beltantis Torrence on 30/07/2008 06:42:58 Removed post. Nvm.
Kikusaku bhp Mining	Posted - 2008.07.30 06:43:00 - [52] Originally by: Lennit Purn Originally by: Fumunda minuts I very seldom sport any slow ships cause they are a drag (literally). You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Inconceivable!!
Serilla The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:03:00 - [53] Originally by: Mitsuni Abashadoni Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) This just underlines the point that's been made over and over, and then a few more times. You still haven't understood that it is not speed alone that determines whether or not you survive, it's agility. Going umpteen kilometers per second in a straight line is nice and dandy if you want to set a speed record, but in combat, it means bupcis because it's all about orbit speed. This is why you guys should try to actually use these setups in a combat situation instead of changing multiple variables that you clearly do not understand. Speed is nice, but it's worthless without agility, and you're screwing around with pretty much everything that relates to agility and mass. The heavy handed speed reduction aside, I don't think CCP has bothered to consider things like acceleration (which atm is horrible). Instead they plug t2 rigs, and high grade snakes into a spreadsheet and look at the maximum velocity and consider everything ok. __________________
Kellen Pikara Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:04:00 - [54] Edited by: Kellen Pikara on 30/07/2008 07:04:53 Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) Play your own game sometime, you might be surprised. There's a pretty complicated relationship between speed, acceleration, and agility that has been totally thrashed, particularly in the small hulls.
teji	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:04:00 - [55] Originally by: CCP Taera You do not need to start over - speed is still a viable option, we've just made it an option instead of a mandatory tool for near invulnerabilty. Relatively speaking, Interceptors are actually getting a boost! Check it out on Singularity and give your feedback in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum. :) I thought trolling was against the rules.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Please Enter Password	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:06:00 - [56] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 30/07/2008 07:06:39 I have a question for the ones complaining about this "nerf" as game braking". Would you be happy if there was only one ship to choose from? As that's what this change is about, making so that nano-fitting isn't the ONLY viable option(i know it's not but it's FOTM and as such, too used) when going to combat. So, would you rather there's many many options to choose from and many many ways to battle in your own...umm...Edium sir? Yes! In your own Edium!, or that we all fly in rookie ships at mach2k and pewpew eachother with mining lasers? Just curious, and wasn't about to clutter the forum with another thread about it... My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
teji	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:11:00 - [57] Edited by: teji on 30/07/2008 07:13:54 Edited by: teji on 30/07/2008 07:13:12 Quote: As that's what this change is about, making so that nano-fitting isn't the ONLY viable option(i know it's not but it's FOTM and as such, too used) when going to combat. The change is about taking something that is marginally imbalanced and instead of balancing it they are removing it's viability completely from the game meanwhile breaking 20 other things. It's no longer an option. While you spout your crap about "options" CCP is busy removing those options from the game. Nanoers generally want balance. They were ready for some nerfs but they would love that nanoing actually work instead of being removed in favor of another fotm.
Sheriff Jones Amarr Please Enter Password	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:15:00 - [58] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 30/07/2008 07:16:01 Originally by: teji Quote: As that's what this change is about, making so that nano-fitting isn't the ONLY viable option(i know it's not but it's FOTM and as such, too used) when going to combat. The change is about taking something that is marginally imbalanced and instead of balancing it they are removing it's viability completely from the game. It's no longer an option. While you spout your crap about "options" CCP is busy removing those options from the game. From what i've heard, it used to be that nano-ships couldn't be hit at all. I don't find that a "marginally unbalanced" issue. Also, i doubt it's THAT killing blow to nanoships, just that they aren't THAT imbalanced anymore. Or are they changing nano effects from +90% to -20% or something? My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Ash Vincetti Decorum Inc Tygris Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:29:00 - [59] Edited by: Ash Vincetti on 30/07/2008 07:32:26 Originally by: Sheriff Jones Or are they changing nano effects from +90% to -20% or something? By the way, i'm not complaining about people going off the tangent, but i would like an objectional answer as i'm trying to understand what the fuzz is about. The problem is that all agility went out the window. So what if you can theoretically hit 5.5k/s in a dedicated interceptor now? During day to day maneuvering in a skirmish you'll be lucky to hit 4k/s, and will go down to 500-1000m/s in tight turns (based on the testing i've done on sisi) That basically means it's suicide to tackle a group of battleships, you'll be sniped out of the sky before you can get under their guns, and if you happen to DO get under their guns, pray none of them are packing a scram, because you'll be dead in the water for 10 secs as your MWD deactivates, a neut hits you, and you get drone-pwned. Not even warrior IIs, even simple warrior I's. Use an AB and orbit close? Not really survivable. Drones will catch up to you, neuts will ruin your day, the battleship as it stands today has TOO many counters to frigs + interceptors. Whereas before you could kite at 20-30km and hold a point on, doing that at the current speeds means you are easy to hit vs a turret ship, easy to intercept an orbit if the pilot is any good, easy to neut or disable, easy for their support to deal with you. That's it for interceptors and small ships when it comes to multi-ship engagements. Not enough firepower, not enough defense, too many counters from the larger ships. Better off in a HIC + Covops. edit and clarification: I'm speaking for interceptors only. I haven't tested HACS, i've been mostly playing with my malediction (gistii, all lows dedicated to speed, both rig slots, using different combinations and how they perform, as well as mid-range rogues + zors. I have never been able to afford snakes, but testing from others confirms that HG snakes + mindlinked claymore will add 1,000m/s tops to an already "maxed out" interceptor. You're talking 6-7km/s interceptors that cost billions, handle like bricks, with no agility to speak of, and that perform worse under battle conditions than a TQ interceptor with standard t2 equipment and no rigs. ----- free bree!
Sheriff Jones Amarr Please Enter Password	Posted - 2008.07.30 07:34:00 - [60] Edited by: Sheriff Jones on 30/07/2008 07:39:01 Question and claarification to above before judgement: Can the battleship kill the interceptor if the interceptor doesn't want to(aka, keeps it's distance/etc)? The reason i ask is that if the above is correct, this might be a step towards a more realistic battle scenario where one frigate should NOT go near a battleship. If the battleship can't fight frigates, and the frigates can't fight battleships(one on one), then it would force fleets to have more frigate vs frigate, cruiser vs frigate, cruiser vs cruiser etc fights and leave the big boys fight amongst eachother. Unless ofcourse you fit a battleship for a destroyer role. My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: 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.