| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Red Thunder
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
   |
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:09:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Originally by: Red Thunder
Originally by: Red zeon
what poll? link?
go to the assembly hall and look for the biggest thread for the against topic
I don't really know how good a reflection of public opinion these topics are, where the griefer alliances mobilize all their members and alts to post against it while the thread in favor of it only gets votes from passersbys...
lol yea its all rigged and completely meaningless
i wonder what you would be saying if the for thread was winning...
Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines |
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:28:00 -
[32]
I would say you guys need to do a better jobs at rallying your people. Actually even the current numbers are less than what Tri, PL etc. should be able to muster 
And if you are reading this, you have arrived at the signature without noticing...
|
TheEndofTheWorld
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:46:00 -
[33]
Edited by: TheEndofTheWorld on 02/08/2008 12:48:50
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
So the ships still can go fast, just not fast enough to guarantee you will come back home intact? Seems fine to me...
Seriously, you nano***gots are starting to become slightly ridiculous. You can still go fast, you can still go past gatecamps, you can still bail out of fights gone bad. The only thing that changes is that you WILL occasionally take losses on the way. Which seems perfectly fine to me. Ever hear these mantras of 'don't fly what you can't afford to lose' or 'safer but not safe'?
If you can't take losing ships because you suck at making iskies or epeen deflation physically hurts you, there are other games catering better to your risk-free ways of life
Personally I believe that this might actually boost small gang combat (that is, relatively even fights, nanos were used 99% for killmail collecting, not for real fights) since people with conventional setups will be much more willing to engage intruders without having way superior numbers as they know they have a chance of catching at least one or two.
Of course, the people only concerned with killmails and efficiency ratios (i.e. role model nano***s) won't care about this, but for those who enjoy the actual fight more than the killmail this can only be good.
Not fast enough means it is pretty much pointless to fly anything else than BC/BS+, tbh this nerf was too much. Standard 3-4km/s cruisers were hardly anything gamebreaking, but those mega snaked, mega faction stuff was broken, but they could have just nerfed the highend stuff...
No one blobbed because of nanoships, they blobbed because the can and want to. This is not some role model nanopilot thing, everyone does it. 20 man strong gang goes to a 0.0 hostile territory? 1h of waiting and the defenders come with 30+. It was a common scenario even before anyone flew a nanophoon, still is. This will only boost 0.0 alliances who are 10j+ away from empire. Now going into those systems is harder, forming defensive gangs will be a lot easier as well. Did the 0.0 alliance really need another boost?
|
Maeltstome
Minmatar
Suicidal Office Clerks
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:54:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
I don't really know how good a reflection of public opinion these topics are, where the griefer alliances mobilize all their members and alts to post against it while the thread in favor of it only gets votes from passersbys...
So basically what your sayiong is we ignore the masses?
-------
[12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5
[12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF |
Alex Ravenshaw
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:57:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Alex Ravenshaw on 02/08/2008 12:57:56
nano nerf - Fine, needed to happen
All the other nerfs - no way..... mass? webs? nerf to blaster boats? The scram change is not good either. Minmatar and gallente got sharfted hard tbh. Caldari and amarr are back on top.
Lets all train lasers!!!
________
[INFOD] + |
Stab Wounds
Caldari
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 13:04:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Maeltstome
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
I don't really know how good a reflection of public opinion these topics are, where the griefer alliances mobilize all their members and alts to post against it while the thread in favor of it only gets votes from passersbys...
So basically what your sayiong is we ignore the masses?
hahaa pwned
i'm praying those griefer alliances all rage quit soon 
|
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 13:08:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Alex Ravenshaw
Edited by: Alex Ravenshaw on 02/08/2008 12:57:56
nano nerf - Fine, needed to happen
All the other nerfs - no way..... mass? webs? nerf to blaster boats? The scram change is not good either. Minmatar and gallente got sharfted hard tbh. Caldari and amarr are back on top.
Lets all train lasers!!!
Back on top? I think this is the first time Amarr have actually been on top in the history of Eve as a race...even if a bit exaggerated. Gankageddon was one ship, so its dominance was an exception to the rule.
Originally by: CCP Oveur
The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
I'm the Juggernaut, *****! |
Maeltstome
Minmatar
Suicidal Office Clerks
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 13:09:00 -
[38]
define greifer.
The Church order smacking from teh leadership downwards. Goons think they are playin a forum which has a spaceship plugin, so they smack regardless. Tri Slap members for smacking. D2 used to pretend to fight through smack, then jump all their caps out before the battle.
As for actual griefing?
You haven't lived 'til you've had a drone lottery 
-------
[12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5
[12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF |
Alex Ravenshaw
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 14:07:00 -
[39]
Amarr was always fine.
________
[INFOD] + |
mal1coy
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 14:16:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Skallebank
no matter which side of the argument your on [and i see both sides and fly both nano ships and all the others] you surely must admit the amount of training spent on hacs and nav ect is now basicly useless. go ahead with you nerf ccp , but let me respend my skill points on something usefull .
me ducks from the sacred nerfbat
well hacs is still ownage how can they be a waste of time to use training on ?
|
Red Thunder
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 15:35:00 -
[41]
because battleships are practically just as fast, tank better, deal more damage, are cheaper etc etc
Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines |
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr
The Grim Reapers
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 15:43:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Naviset
tbh the game will be a lot more boring now that all the hacs and recons are horribly cost inefficient again, like the old days :-P
This. HACs were terrible before nanos (cost-effectiveness wise), they became good with nanos, and now they will be terrible again.
Smart money's on BC+BS training now.
|
Matrixcvd
Caldari
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 16:19:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Tarminic
Why don't you actually take one out for a spin on the test server?
done, they suck, all the tier 2 BCs do everything better, everything is getting pwn'd by drakes and ravens. utter pish
|
Maeltstome
Minmatar
Suicidal Office Clerks
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 16:35:00 -
[44]
Astarte V Myrmidon - i go with astarte (sick DPS thats non-detroyable)
Sleipnir V Hurricane - i go with sliepnir (better range, dps and tank)
Absolution V Harbinger - i go with absolution (lower DPS, but massive tank)
Nighhawk V Drake - Neither will brake the others passive tank. Neither will be able to gank themselfs suffiently to do it.
-------
[12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5
[12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF |
TheEndofTheWorld
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 16:44:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Maeltstome
Astarte V Myrmidon - i go with astarte (sick DPS thats non-detroyable)
Sleipnir V Hurricane - i go with sliepnir (better range, dps and tank)
Absolution V Harbinger - i go with absolution (lower DPS, but massive tank)
Nighhawk V Drake - Neither will brake the others passive tank. Neither will be able to gank themselfs suffiently to do it.
Now compare them to mega, mael, arma, raven...
|
Maeltstome
Minmatar
Suicidal Office Clerks
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 16:50:00 -
[46]
his argument was that they could be beaten by teir 2 counterparts - not BS's. And with the changes that so terribly hurt Command ships against frigs, wont these same issues mean theyc an avoid more damage from BS's themselfs?
Hey, im just talking crazy.
-------
[12:07] w33Daz: a trained 1 skill fur 24 mins n it took 2 days aff drones lvl 5
[12:07] w33Daz: A WIS LIKE WTF |
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 17:05:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 02/08/2008 17:05:43
Originally by: Red Thunder
because battleships are practically just as fast, tank better, deal more damage, are cheaper etc etc
Now here you have something that I am more than willing to agree is almost as broken as current speeds. The price (or lack thereof) of Battleships and to a lesser degree Battlecruisers does need looking into.
And if you are reading this, you have arrived at the signature without noticing...
|
Rumai Ning
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 17:47:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Rumai Ning on 02/08/2008 17:47:25
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 02/08/2008 17:05:43
Originally by: Red Thunder
because battleships are practically just as fast, tank better, deal more damage, are cheaper etc etc
Now here you have something that I am more than willing to agree is almost as broken as current speeds. The price (or lack thereof) of Battleships and to a lesser degree Battlecruisers does need looking into.
t2 is a luxury, not a standard.
|
ZW Dewitt
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 18:08:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Red Thunder
lol yea its all rigged and completely meaningless
Not rigged as such, but there are some serious problems with the sampling... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_bias
|
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 18:27:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 02/08/2008 18:30:22
Personally, I disagree with the whole battleship price thing. It's all affordable once you're a bit in game anyway. And considering the extra bonuses and T2 resistances... well...
As for the whole nano nerf in the first place... Come on. The damn physics engine wasn't made to handle anything going past 6 km/s in the first place! Battlecruisers outrunning light drones? Machariel battleships with autocannons speeding around like fighters? It's inconsistent, broken and redundancy-inducing to the point where you begin to wonder why the heck the races haven't continued development only on this technology, why there are different kinds of warfare or tech in the first place, why missiles even exist... and certainly why CCP introduced MWDs to begin with.
It's clear from the start that EVE is largely a strategy game. It's not a fighter simulation. Nanoing and the use of MWDs though, have both largely reduced the game to that, and it is making many features of the game rather redundant or depressing, fleet battles laggy and jittery, and the gameplay unbalanced. Removing the elements of excessive speed will re-balance the game, help bring strategy back and reduce exploitation, and hopefully even help with the situation in 0.0.
So I say cut the crap, CCP. Even speaking as an Interceptor, Stealth Bomber and Recon pilot, I'm up for it. Lots of people are bound to be whining, but in a game like this, where actual flying skills and reflexes play a miniscule role, and for a reason, they are most likely the people who simply don't deserve this sort of advantage.
In my opinion, MWDs should either be hamstrung or removed from the game entirely.
|
Red Thunder
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 20:18:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Aleus Stygian
Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 02/08/2008 18:30:22
Personally, I disagree with the whole battleship price thing. It's all affordable once you're a bit in game anyway. And considering the extra bonuses and T2 resistances... well...
As for the whole nano nerf in the first place... Come on. The damn physics engine wasn't made to handle anything going past 6 km/s in the first place! Battlecruisers outrunning light drones? Machariel battleships with autocannons speeding around like fighters? It's inconsistent, broken and redundancy-inducing to the point where you begin to wonder why the heck the races haven't continued development only on this technology, why there are different kinds of warfare or tech in the first place, why missiles even exist... and certainly why CCP introduced MWDs to begin with.
It's clear from the start that EVE is largely a strategy game. It's not a fighter simulation. Nanoing and the use of MWDs though, have both largely reduced the game to that, and it is making many features of the game rather redundant or depressing, fleet battles laggy and jittery, and the gameplay unbalanced. Removing the elements of excessive speed will re-balance the game, help bring strategy back and reduce exploitation, and hopefully even help with the situation in 0.0.
So I say cut the crap, CCP. Even speaking as an Interceptor, Stealth Bomber and Recon pilot, I'm up for it. Lots of people are bound to be whining, but in a game like this, where actual flying skills and reflexes play a miniscule role, and for a reason, they are most likely the people who simply don't deserve this sort of advantage.
In my opinion, MWDs should either be hamstrung or removed from the game entirely.
warriors 2s can do 10kms, which no bc can outrun, and machariels arent exactly commonly used are they? stop using the extremes as if it is the most common ship.
and i dont know what your on about the physics engine not being able to handle it, it seems to be doing fine to me, the thing thats breaking it is bs blobs....
Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines |
korrey
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 20:36:00 -
[52]
When did the Sacrilege become a "Main Nano-ship"?? What is wrong with you people? The Sacrilege was never intended to be a Nano ship, nor half the other ships you mentioned.
I see 3 ships on that list that are actually speed-oriented.
Vaga, Curse and Inties. (Possibly Dictors). Zealots? Sacrileges? None of them are speed ships.
-----------
Amarr- If you like to handicap yourself before the fight begins, then we may accomodate your needs surprisingly well. |
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 20:58:00 -
[53]
Originally by: korrey
When did the Sacrilege become a "Main Nano-ship"?? What is wrong with you people? The Sacrilege was never intended to be a Nano ship, nor half the other ships you mentioned.
I see 3 ships on that list that are actually speed-oriented.
Vaga, Curse and Inties. (Possibly Dictors). Zealots? Sacrileges? None of them are speed ships.
I think it's the fact that as a ship meant to use mainly, and only, assault missiles, which have low range. They mean that it's only useful when orbiting right outside webber range and under the guns of most Battleships, and in range to pummel cruisers and frigs. Which, of course, involves completely ignoring the fact that the Sacrilege's resists and armor potential makes it by far the most resilient HAC... Then again, one shouldn't expect nano-users to be able to count on anything that involves actual resilience.
Also, Red Thunder... I wasn't the one who introduced the extremes to this thread in the first place. Not to mention that it becomes hard not to talk about anything but extremes when it comes to anything involving microwarpdrives...
Machariel battleships are more common than you seem to think, and I was talking orbit speeds when it came to the drones. Then again, the battlecruisers which I've been up against, mainly Myrms and Canes, all seem to have the approach of using EWAR and then getting in so absurdly close to you that you really can't fire at them, if you're in a Battleship or a Cruiser...
|
Red Thunder
Most Wanted INC
G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 21:42:00 -
[54]
Originally by: korrey
When did the Sacrilege become a "Main Nano-ship"?? What is wrong with you people? The Sacrilege was never intended to be a Nano ship, nor half the other ships you mentioned.
I see 3 ships on that list that are actually speed-oriented.
Vaga, Curse and Inties. (Possibly Dictors). Zealots? Sacrileges? None of them are speed ships.
i dont care what they are designed for, im on about what people use them for, atm sac is one of the best as it perma mwds with no cap mods
Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines |
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 21:49:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Red Thunder
Originally by: korrey
When did the Sacrilege become a "Main Nano-ship"?? What is wrong with you people? The Sacrilege was never intended to be a Nano ship, nor half the other ships you mentioned.
I see 3 ships on that list that are actually speed-oriented.
Vaga, Curse and Inties. (Possibly Dictors). Zealots? Sacrileges? None of them are speed ships.
i dont care what they are designed for, im on about what people use them for, atm sac is one of the best as it perma mwds with no cap mods
Most any Khanid ship pretty much rules because they combine awesome cap with awesome armor and missiles...
|
Elhina Novae
Amarr
Destruction Reborn
CORPVS DELICTI
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 22:45:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Elhina Novae on 02/08/2008 22:45:29
Nanobalancing is the shit even thou i loose my precious nano-ratting Sacrilege lmao.
Now we need better projectiles for my Prophecy
PS. CCP thanks for this game balancing.
------------
Somebody set up us the bomb |
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 23:23:00 -
[57]
Rather than this overkill nerf on Nano's, it'd be better if they had put some thought into it and implemented more counters (they sort of did this, but then backed off by nerfing webs). How about the scripted web suggestion that allows normal webs to reach out at longer ranges for a weakened slow %? How about some of the suggestions like a terminal velocity for a given ship, which basically caps the speed at X meters per second? If you thought t2 fit Ishtars and what not were game breaking, you're just doing it wrong, lol. Plenty of counters already exist, and they could just add more to make it easier for people to counter the nanoboats. The problem imho was the pimped ships, which could reach absurd speeds, and were harder to counter (although not impossible). But these changes kick the crap out of the t2 nano's, which weren't even a problem to begin with.
Rather than sledgehammer nerfing nano's to make missiles hit, I'd rather they change missiles so that it's not such an all-or-nothing system. It amazes me that people think it's a good thing that missiles will now hit easily on nano ships. Before missiles hit for close to 0 (and that's DEFINILTEY a problem), now they'll be hitting nano ships for close to 100% damage. A lot of good a "speed tank" does when a drake can hit you for nearly 100% damage, eh? It's basically no tank at all.
It'd be much better imo if they'd change this so missiles would hit for less damage, and I'm not talking 0 or .1, heh. It might be different if there was a reasonable counter to missiles, but atm there isn't. Still, I can't say these changes are good, because they simply make missiles too powerful against nano's, and will lead to people not nano'ing these ships at all. And unless you like killing rats and asteroids all day, this IS a problem, because most people aren't going to go roaming in tanked t2 cruisers, which are costly and have no chance of escaping when they inevitably run into a superior force in hostile territory. The result? Less PVP. A good nano nerf patch in my mind should ENCOURAGE PVP and add counters, while making nano'ing still a viable option. Not only this, but they are kicking blaster boats and (even moreso) the poor Matari, while boosting Amarr/Caldari even more... what a terrible patch, haha.
Nano's DEFINITELY needed changing, because it was too esay with a little ISK (and there's plenty of that floating around these days) to get them going at gamebreaking speeds. But this goes too far, and just screws things up even more imo. T2 nano's weren't a problem, and they especially wouldn't be a problem if CCP added more counters to them.
Scrap this crap, order pizza, have another killer "5 hour meeting", and try again. My $0.02.
|
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 00:30:00 -
[58]
You are onto the same thing as I am, Boz. Check my Speaker's Corner post for details. But largely, I think that it's Microwarpdrives that's upset the whole calculation. Nanos just need a few more stacking penalties, if that. But it's MWDs and the lack of balance between missile velocities, explosion velocities, tracking, and ship speed that has brought on all this nano***gotry.
|
Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 06:07:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Red Thunder
top speeds with t2 and lvl 5:
vaga - 3.2kms
ishtar - 2kms
sac - 2.1kms
rapier - 2.2kms
curse - 1.8kms
crow and other ceptors - 5kish
dictors - 3kms
seriosly ccp WTF these ships are now useless!!!
vaga is too slow in orbit to evade missile damage
ishtar, sac, rapier, curse are all too slow to avoid any damage even in a straight line, so there seems no point in flying them when t1 bs's have better dps, tank, and are cheaper
You're ******ed, vaga was going that fast pre nano age. It was fine then.
-----------------
Friends Forever |
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.03 07:12:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Red Thunder
i dont care what they are designed for, im on about what people use them for, atm sac is one of the best as it perma mwds with no cap mods
So basically what you are saying is 'I don't care about game design and balance, I just want my overpowered precious back' ?
This is exactly what is wrong with nano***s across the board.
And if you are reading this, you have arrived at the signature without noticing...
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |