EVE Search - Nano NERF alternative for all.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Nano NERF alternative for all.

» 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)
Pan Crastus Anti-Metagaming League	Posted - 2008.07.31 10:32:00 - [31] Edited by: Pan Crastus on 31/07/2008 10:34:31 Originally by: The Mach Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 03:10:06 Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 02:22:07 Damps. Work on a falloff based system. ECM. Work on a falloff based system. Seem like nerfed systems that are quite effective still? Why not make webs a falloff based weapon? Don't flame yet.... Proposal. (For the purpose assume all items be T2.) Web does 60% webbing at 10km... but the effectiveness dies from there (allows nanos to be effective but risky now) At 20km the web would do 40% webbing ( 8km/s Sac would still go 4800m/s orbiting at 20km) At 30km the web would do 30% From 30km to 50km the webbing goes from 30% - 0% (50km is the point at which a web is no longer effective at all.) It's all a game of balance, with this idea nanos still have their place BUT there is now a risk involved. Risk vs Reward Please Post constructive comments I will edit in good ideas that further balance the nano problem. Certainly better than what the Caldari noob whiners got CCP to do, but still overpowered. It will mean that e.g. 2 crows with 1 web each will kill any nanoship easily (except the vaga perhaps which can still hit fast targets at 20km). It's going in the right direction, even though it's defeatism in the light of people completely ignoring the existence of Hyenas, Rapiers, Huginns, ECM as counters to nanoships. PS. I'd rather see this a bit less drastic and at the same time nanoships that weren't designed to be nano'd (Ishtar, Curse) nerfed by adding some mass. Also, LSE's should take more PG (x2 perhaps), wich will nerf passive tanking appropriately as well. How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
Lily Cole	Posted - 2008.07.31 10:36:00 - [32] Give nanonubbles the ability to web their target AS WELL? Go back to T20 Land.
PooPooPlater Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:08:00 - [33] Originally by: Lily Cole Give nanonubbles the ability to web their target AS WELL? Go back to T20 Land. afriad you might die now?
PooPooPlater Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:15:00 - [34] Originally by: Bo Bojangles Yeah i hate the idea. Why does everyone want to be a Rapier? You do this then everyone will be webbed all the time, even you. Being webbed is no fun. And the fellow above me is right. Blasterboats would just have a hell of a time ever doing any damage and my AC's wouldn't fair much better. If I ever managed to close at an effective range to use my AC's, it's doubtful that I'd ever get out. 'Sides you'd have to give the Rapier/Huginn some other role entirely as it's bonus would be rendered useless. I mean sure, it'd be able to web from 150 out or something but then,.. what good is that? The beauty is, That your blaster boat wont slow down much UNTIL its in range, Its only 60% web at 10km which means your blaster boat will be going about 500m/s still. If they are ready for you and have multiple webs to keep you at range, you die << emo rage, you can die in eve....
Jonathan Davis The Bastards	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:22:00 - [35] Bump so CCP are more likely to read this awsome idea -
McDonALTs	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:25:00 - [36] Idea is awful. nanoships would use web their targets. The problem with nano was that it was close to impossible to tackle them without nanoships. Your idea does not answer that. Also, Afterburners as a pvp mod would remain useless with your idea.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:42:00 - [37] Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 31/07/2008 12:43:51 Originally by: The Mach Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 03:10:06 Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 02:22:07 Damps. Work on a falloff based system. ECM. Work on a falloff based system. Seem like nerfed systems that are quite effective still? Why not make webs a falloff based weapon? Don't flame yet.... Proposal. (For the purpose assume all items be T2.) Web does 60% webbing at 10km... but the effectiveness dies from there (allows nanos to be effective but risky now) At 20km the web would do 40% webbing ( 8km/s Sac would still go 4800m/s orbiting at 20km) At 30km the web would do 30% From 30km to 50km the webbing goes from 30% - 0% (50km is the point at which a web is no longer effective at all.) It's all a game of balance, with this idea nanos still have their place BUT there is now a risk involved. Risk vs Reward Please Post constructive comments I will edit in good ideas that further balance the nano problem. ECM/Damps do a hit test every cycle. Webs would have to do a hit test every time the range of the target changed to scale the web amount. Result: overloaded server with too much data. So while your idea may sound cool, it's totally not workable in reality. EDIT: if it were easy, it would have been done years ago, because every couple of weeks someone comes up with this 'amazingly unique and original idea that no one has ever thought of before'. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y COLLECTION Inveniam viam aut faciam.
umop 3pisdn Minmatar Fnck the blob.	Posted - 2008.07.31 12:56:00 - [38] More proof of bobs small gang pvp prowess itt... With eves mechanics this means a 45 man blob stops any nano ship at 50km dead. Everyones a rapier, if everyone has a shitload of friends... Meanwhile, mr solo gets screwed
The Mach Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:04:00 - [39] How about we stay on subject instead of smacking bob, mmmkay? TQ handles the ECM and Sensor Damps with relative ease. Putting webs in would not add much strain to the server (if any). I never said it was unique, but I'm bringing it up now because its the right time and place for a "cool" idea.
Lily Cole	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:20:00 - [40] Originally by: The Mach How about we stay on subject instead of smacking bob, mmmkay? TQ handles the ECM and Sensor Damps with relative ease. Putting webs in would not add much strain to the server (if any). I never said it was unique, but I'm bringing it up now because its the right time and place for a "cool" idea. BoB deserve every negative thing that ever happens to them for what they did, and we'll NEVER find out everything they did with CCP's blessing, approval and assistance. And your idea is stupid for all the reasons outlined you can't be bothered to read because it didn't come from your favourite Dev. Now..... go..... away..... worthless..... cheating..... trash.
The Mach Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:27:00 - [41] Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 13:27:56 I Lolled ^^^ I can haz magic powers! Go go gadget DEV button?
Kazuma Saruwatari Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:28:00 - [42] Besides the BoB bashing, I like the idea. Numbers are a bit skewed, but the idea itself? Golden. -
sakana North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:31:00 - [43] its an interesting idea, i'd maybe take it a step further and say you can only be webbed by one person at once, or basically numbers remain the deciding factor as always.
The Mach Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.31 13:32:00 - [44] I agree, I made the numbers up on the fly for the purpose of the idea. Please post new numbers if you think they are off and HOW it will balance with CURRENT TQ nanos REMEMBER: this is to be in place of the upcoming nerf so a 20km/s ceptor still does 20km/s.
Chili Palma	Posted - 2008.07.31 14:23:00 - [45] Originally by: The Mach Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 03:10:06 Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 02:22:07 Damps. Work on a falloff based system. ECM. Work on a falloff based system. Seem like nerfed systems that are quite effective still? Why not make webs a falloff based weapon? Don't flame yet.... Proposal. (For the purpose assume all items be T2.) No alternative for joo. Take the bat like everyone else, kid. Web does 60% webbing at 10km... but the effectiveness dies from there (allows nanos to be effective but risky now) At 20km the web would do 40% webbing ( 8km/s Sac would still go 4800m/s orbiting at 20km) At 30km the web would do 30% From 30km to 50km the webbing goes from 30% - 0% (50km is the point at which a web is no longer effective at all.) It's all a game of balance, with this idea nanos still have their place BUT there is now a risk involved. Risk vs Reward Please Post constructive comments I will edit in good ideas that further balance the nano problem.
Svizac Marmotov Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.31 14:35:00 - [46] Here are my few ideas.Please feel free to comment and propose changes and discuss details like numbers etc... First,I dont think MWD should have the role of "bigger and faster afteburner". It should have role of tactical positioning, lasting for short time, giving tremedous boost, or working like short range(50-100km(this is just example numbers) jump drive. ABs could have some sort of their own energy pool instead of draining the capacitor directly, so that it gets exhausted and needs to be recharged before activating again. Scram and web ideas: instead of being "applied" they could be something like single "hit" weapons. Hiting someone with scram adds the time before the warp drive adjusts, warp core stabs reduce that time. Also could be done with webs. That could make them be used more tacticaly, like scraming the target when he might try to flee when his tank fails, rather than simply perma scraming/webing someone. Some other ideas to this include tracking and or sig radius to webs and scrams, stacking penalty when applied by multiple people, reactivation delay longer than their applied effect(e.g. +30 seconds warp core calibration, 50 seconds reactivation perhaps) Turret Tracking: instead of being able to 100% outrun the turret tracking(you basicaly have that either you can hit them if they are slower,or can't at all), it would simply influence of chance of hit.Like never being able to 100% outrun the guns,but greater the difference smaller of chances of being hit, something like turret getting a lucky shot. (e.g. shooting at orbiting inty with medium turrets would have like 3-5% chance of hitting) Base speed diference between classes should be alot bigger. Perhaps if the average BS speed is say 130m/s, make frigs go 400-500m/s. This would also make AB even less "must have so you dont get killed by every single cruise missile and large turret" and more of speed boost when needed, more tactical. Well, those were some of my ideas. Feel free to flame :) ------------------------------ Death solves all problems, No man,no problem!
The Mach Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.31 16:32:00 - [47] Svizac: I like the MWD idea alot, it would give AB's a plce in pvp which they dont currently have. with your web idea, would they be unlimited range? and how effective?
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2008.07.31 16:36:00 - [48] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 31/07/2008 16:36:34 If you start getting webbed 49 km away, it will take you quite a while to get close to someone, specially if they are going in the other direction... --- Originally by: Roguehalo Can you nano Titans?
The Mach Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.07.31 16:43:00 - [49] Edited by: The Mach on 31/07/2008 16:43:52 Jim, your still thinking about this with the old web style. At 49km the web amount would be less than 1% web, a blasterboat doing 1109m/s would be going 1100m/s. why wouldn't you web them back?
D0ny1 Caldari Wing 4213	Posted - 2008.07.31 16:43:00 - [50] Lots of good points being brought out here. Restating what I view as the goal of a change. What I see as a nano problem is that we have a group of nano fitted ships that can reasonably be countered by only a similar ship or a small group of Minmitar-only specialty ships (rapier,huginn,hyena). The core point being that you either have to be doing 'ludicrous' speed yourself of be in a ship capable of long range webbing to counter the type of defense these nano ships have. I believe one of the best aspects of eve combat is what many refer to as the rock/paper/scissors. The good mechanics are not limited to only one race to counter them. Examples: ECM is mainly in the realm of Caldari ships, but counter-ecm (ECCM) is available to everyone. Damps are a specialty of Gallente ships, but counter-damps (sensor boosters) are available to everyone. What is the counter to the nano fitted ships? You can say 'get your own nano' or 'get a specialized long range web ship', but that is just rock/rock/rock now instead of rock/paper/scissors and diminishes the game play to where you either fly the flavor of the day ship in small gangs or die messily. What I like about the basic point of the OP is that it provides some measure of counter to anyone willing to fit the right modules. As to the ships that require the speed charge to get in close for their weapons (ac/blaster ships) the option to fit your own webs can be available depending upon ship config. This one I'm still thinking about and I'd have to look at the auto-pest and blaster-thron builds again as I dont usually fly those to really think of the impact. It is a good point that needs considering. I do think something needs to be changed from our current state of too safe nano ships that have become the flavor of the month so that other ship configurations can become viable again.
Svizac Marmotov Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.31 17:38:00 - [51] Originally by: The Mach with your web idea, would they be unlimited range? and how effective? their range could be similar to current. I like that fallof and efficiency dependant upon range idea. Also, perhaps 2 types of webs, just like with warp scramblers, short and long ranged ones? Perhaps also scripts, like + range , or +effeciency. ------------------------------ Death solves all problems, No man,no problem!
ragewind Caldari Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2008.07.31 17:51:00 - [52] common scene on the eve forums THIS IDEA IS WIN!!! make it fit the disrupters max without bonuses 24KM on fall off for the T2. ow and your bob so uses your DEV MSN FFS and make it happen!!!
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.07.31 18:29:00 - [53] Put a 15k/s cap on all speed. end of sentence
Promethian child Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2008.07.31 19:06:00 - [54] not such an bad idea tbh
PooPooPlater Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2008.07.31 21:20:00 - [55] Originally by: Matrixcvd Put a 15k/s cap on all speed. end of sentence CCP is effectively doing that tbh.
Thorradin State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.31 22:48:00 - [56] This would be rather nice boost to larger ships, and pretty much ensure interceptors become more obsolete than AFs.
Thorradin State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.31 22:59:00 - [57] Originally by: Pan Crastus Certainly better than what the Caldari noob whiners got CCP to do, but still overpowered. It will mean that e.g. 2 crows with 1 web each will kill any nanoship easily (except the vaga perhaps which can still hit fast targets at 20km). Originally by: Dev Blog If one then takes a look at the max velocity on missiles and drones, it is readily apparent that our combat system was never designed for such speeds. Even when we did some basic tests on our internal servers, with special high-speed missiles, we quickly noticed Destiny (our physics engine) behaving very strangely. Underlined some important parts, but keep crying that it was 'Caldari noobs' ***ing about it, since there were never any nano complaints before FW, and CCP's engine only stopped working with such speeds at the Emp Age launch(?). Quote:** It's going in the right direction, even though it's defeatism in the light of people completely ignoring the existence of Hyenas, Rapiers, Huginns, ECM as counters to nanoships. PS. I'd rather see this a bit less drastic and at the same time nanoships that weren't designed to be nano'd (Ishtar, Curse) nerfed by adding some mass. Also, LSE's should take more PG (x2 perhaps), wich will nerf passive tanking appropriately as well. This change, having this much range, coupled with the minny recons, would be pretty insane. Those ships would shut down movement on battlefields like ECM and RSD can kill fighting in general(ECM more so). Increasing the reqs for LSEs sounds good. However the PG on caldari ships, which is already painfully low, has to be boosted then otherwise the shield tanking race isn't going to be able to (passive) shield tank with any real effect, you'll have passive tanked myrms tanking better than the Drake. A nighthawk with its current, horrifically low PG, would be beyond crippled if it didn't get much needed love. Regardless of what changes hit TQ, if these speeds really are doing weird things to EVE, CCP isn't going to let them continue to exist. If they tone down everything else as well, going slower will just be a 'zomg look at mah number' thing, since if an inty going 5km/s ends up being as hard to hit as they were going 10km/s now, the nerf won't be nearly as harsh as it is to some right now.
R3dSh1ft Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.07.31 23:01:00 - [58] I think this has been pondered for awhile by many eve patrons, but it was assumed that ccp would never change anything that was so basic to the way eve is played. Well if that tower of cards is about to come crashing down, I would wholeheartedly agree this is the way to rebuild it. DKOD - an awesome synchronised killing machine
Thorradin State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.07.31 23:01:00 - [59] Originally by: **ooPlater Originally by:** Bo Bojangles Yeah i hate the idea. Why does everyone want to be a Rapier? You do this then everyone will be webbed all the time, even you. Being webbed is no fun. And the fellow above me is right. Blasterboats would just have a hell of a time ever doing any damage and my AC's wouldn't fair much better. If I ever managed to close at an effective range to use my AC's, it's doubtful that I'd ever get out. 'Sides you'd have to give the Rapier/Huginn some other role entirely as it's bonus would be rendered useless. I mean sure, it'd be able to web from 150 out or something but then,.. what good is that? The beauty is, That your blaster boat wont slow down much UNTIL its in range, Its only 60% web at 10km which means your blaster boat will be going about 500m/s still. If they are ready for you and have multiple webs to keep you at range, you die << emo rage, you can die in eve.... Even as a missile user reading your comment makes me sick. A Mega charging down a Raven would be lucky to still have armor left by the time it got into range if it's webbed and getting hit that entire time.
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.07.31 23:23:00 - [60] I suggested something similar in a thread a while back, the only difference being that I think that sig radius should play into the effectiveness of webs (i.e. so that cruisers get hit harder by the web than frigs). I think something along these lines would be a much better alternative (though missiles would still need a rework, I agree with CCPs assertion that a ship should never be immune to the appropriate weapon class for its respective class) -- Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed

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.