Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Caldari 5
Amarr The Element Syndicate Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 16:17:00 -
[1]
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Warp Core Stabilizer II the most useless T2 item? I thought all T2 items increased the effectiveness of their purpose. the WCS II doesn't increase the Stability of the Warp Core any more then the rest of the WCS, at best the WCS II is a named item.
WCS I Scan Res Bouns -50% Targeting Range Bonus - 50% Warp Scramble Strength -1
WCS II Current(Create a New Named item with same stats) Scan Res Bouns -40% Targeting Range Bonus - 40% Warp Scramble Strength -1
WCS II Proposed Scan Res Bouns -50%(Maybe another value?) Targeting Range Bonus - 50%(Maybe another value?) Warp Scramble Strength -2
|
Karentaki
Gallente Maximum Yarrage
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 16:35:00 -
[2]
I'll agree with this as soon as +3 scramblers are introduced (not officer ones) However, now you are just reading my signature... Or are you...
========= Sporks FTW |
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 16:47:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Anubis Xian on 05/08/2008 16:47:06 Auto Targeter II
Any T2 Armor Plate
Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
I'm the Juggernaut, *****! |
Caldari 5
Amarr The Element Syndicate Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 16:54:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Anubis Xian Edited by: Anubis Xian on 05/08/2008 16:47:06 Auto Targeter II
Any T2 Armor Plate
I'm assuming that you are saying they are useless too? Auto Targeter II increases number of targets and Autotargeting Range, obviously better then the T1.
T2 Armor Plates actually increase the Armor compared to their T1 version
Sorry both of those actually have an improvement in their intended purpose, thus useful.
|
Takashi X2
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 17:11:00 -
[5]
1600 mm steel II +4200hp +3.75mil kg 1600 mm tungsten +4200hp +2.75mil kg
tungsten cost about the same and has wayy better fitting requirements
steel II's are useless (all sizes are basically the same way)
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 17:19:00 -
[6]
They should just switch the mass increase between tungsten and steel II. Would make sense considering tungsten is more than 2.5 times more dense than steel.
On the WCS II maybe make it special: WCS II Scan Res Bouns -75% Targeting Range Bonus - 75% Warp Scramble Strength -0 Immunity to Focused Warp Scrambling and Bubbles, cannot be fitted on capital or super capita ships.
Now that would make them worthwhile. -------- Ideas for: Mining
|
Caldari 5
Amarr The Element Syndicate Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 17:45:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Takashi X2 1600 mm steel II +4200hp +3.75mil kg 1600 mm tungsten +4200hp +2.75mil kg
tungsten cost about the same and has wayy better fitting requirements
steel II's are useless (all sizes are basically the same way)
1600 mm steel I +3000hp +3.75mil kg 1600 mm steel II +4200hp +3.75mil kg
Far as I can see the Steel II is better than the Steel I, however I do agree with you on that Tungsten vs Steel thing is a little wacked.
|
Asharee Intrefer
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 18:39:00 -
[8]
I think propulsion jamming should get a total overhaul. Make it less on/off in some way. Maybe by changing it from "sorry, you'll be stuck there until you go boom, have a nice day" to "it might take a bit longer to form a warp field û if you lack the means to fight back, please curl up in the fetal position and hope they didn't bring guns large enough to kill you fast enough".
In the latter case, WCS would speed up the process of breaking free from the jam, and T2 versions could get better bonuses.
|
Siouxsie Xai
Gallente Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 19:42:00 -
[9]
I say either remove negative side affects of warp core stabs, or include the same negative side affects to warp scramblers. One thing That I noticed about this games pvp, is that it cators to the aggressor.
CCP claims they want more people to get involved in pvp and to move out of empire, but they keep giving people reasons to hide. Some changes that I would suggest are.
Rather than continualy nerf nanos, add a stat to each ship. This would be the maximum a ship can travel without compromising ship hull integrity ( and no amount of bonuses or mods will make it faster than this number ). ( I assume warping uses a technique that keeps all ships safe ) Not sure what to call this. BUt it is rediculous to nerf an item that is only exploitable by a handfull of ships, when the problem can be solved by focusing on the ships themselves. Nano nerfs hurt all ships not just the ones that can exploit it.
As I said match the side affects of stabs with scramblers, or remove them.
Make podding a warcrime in FW area's. FW should be an introductory to pvp, and I believe it was suppossed to be. Concord will not respond to poddding in FW areas but you should get a faction hit. ( makes no sense to completly remove casualties to war heh )
Change the leaderships bonus from a faster scan resolution to tracking speed.
I am aware of most of the arguements of why people would not like these changes. BUt you have to look at the source. They are people who want easy kills, and to never have to worry about runners. Meanwhile the people with less sp, and or no desire to pvp get virtualy ignored. This shows a level of favoritism. Fact is if you want a kill you should have to work for it, it shouldn't be easy. And excaping even a decent pilot is near impossible. This is not carebear crap I am suggesting, it is a balance between the killers and their prey. It keeps people hiding in hi sec. So in a way it is self defeating to keep things the way they are.
Pirates brag about a 100 to 1 win ratio. But lets take a look at their choices of targets. The only real defence is to allways warp to 0, and even that is not going to work in 0.0 space.ANd that does not work for people whoa re willing to at least try to fight. IF pirates are haviong it this easy, CCP are nerfing the wrong people.
0.0 is why I suggested the change to leadership bonus, gives a pilot a chance to get their pods out of there, as is in 0.0 your ship goes down.. your pod is lost.
The above is just my opinion, don't waste anyones time with evel33t responses, discuss or ignore. Thank you. I was going to make my own thread about it, but this thread addresses it just fine. ( I am not into wasting bandwidth heh ) I consider the missing pleasure hub interior a bug.. even if it is not. Please fix it. :P |
Jerid Verges
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:36:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Siouxsie Xai *snip*
I couldn't agree more. WCS suck already as it is, and there is no countermeasure for Warp Bubbles. It's total crap.
|
|
Aarin Wrath
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 20:49:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Abrazzar Edited by: Abrazzar on 05/08/2008 17:58:08 They should just switch the mass increase between tungsten and steel II. Would make sense considering tungsten is more than 2.5 times more dense than steel.
On the WCS II maybe make it special: WCS II Scan Res Bouns -75% Targeting Range Bonus - 75% Warp Scramble Strength -0 Immunity to Focused Warp Scrambling and Bubbles, cannot be fitted on capital or super capital ships.
Now that would make them worthwhile.
IMHO: -75% on targeting range and speed, on a capital ship, would be fine. Capital ships take forever to lock as it is. Add to that a 75% nerf and they will be useless (unless equiped for smartbombs).
Anyhoo: yeah immunity to focused scram and bubbles would be awesome. Since there is no counter for those two items.
Heck I would be up for -100% range and speed, if I can trade that off for immunity to warp bubbles and focused scrams.
|
Typhado3
Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 03:19:00 -
[12]
/signed
|
Kiki Arnolds
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 03:44:00 -
[13]
If WCS II are useless, why do people pay for named WCS? We killed somone with WCS IIs fitted, and had a hearty laugh, that alone makes their existance worth it... ç¦ |
Takashi X2
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 05:33:00 -
[14]
WCS's are NOT ment as combat modules rather a defencive one ment to be put on things that just want to run through... Although i agree we need a counter for bubbles i dotn think WCS's are teh answer to that.
The reason they nerf you so bad is simple.. to detract combat ships from using them. If you have ever tried to pvp with out a warp disruptor then you know exactly what it would be like to fight a ship that the WCS doesnt nerf.
Also cuz its a low slot if screws armor tankers in combat outta a slot that is already has to be shared with damage mods while shield tankers could care less (i know cap mods yadda yadda but generally pvp is shorter so cap sometimes doesnt come into play as much)
Over all i think the nerf is a very fine placement on them cuz they shouldnt be used on combat ship, again its a very im running away module keep it that way... tho the t2 could use some spurcing up.. kinda pointless just to change the amount nerf when that targeting shouldnt even matter on the ship type ment to field em
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 06:08:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Asharee Intrefer I think propulsion jamming should get a total overhaul. Make it less on/off in some way. Maybe by changing it from "sorry, you'll be stuck there until you go boom, have a nice day" to "it might take a bit longer to form a warp field û if you lack the means to fight back, please curl up in the fetal position and hope they didn't bring guns large enough to kill you fast enough".
In the latter case, WCS would speed up the process of breaking free from the jam, and T2 versions could get better bonuses.
Currently the coming change is going to be like "NO, we have said you should stay there, no easy MWD escape for you."
|
Caldari 5
Amarr The Element Syndicate Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 19:15:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Takashi X2 WCS's are NOT ment as combat modules rather a defencive one ment to be put on things that just want to run through... Although i agree we need a counter for bubbles i dotn think WCS's are teh answer to that.
I agree that the WCS is a defensive module, this is why I have no issue with fitting 4 of them to my Courier Frigate. The trouble is that it is becoming more and more often that I am still being stopped at low sec gate camps and loosing cargo(normally BPOs, Skill Books), mainly due to the campers having 3 campers all with warp strength -2 disruptors/scramblers, although I did come across 1 camper that was running 3 -2's that's insane and you can tackle pretty much everything with one ship, if it's 3 or 4 ships they deserved to get me, but 1?
|
Morcam
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 21:18:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Morcam on 06/08/2008 21:19:25
Originally by: Abrazzar Edited by: Abrazzar on 05/08/2008 17:58:08 They should just switch the mass increase between tungsten and steel II. Would make sense considering tungsten is more than 2.5 times more dense than steel.
On the WCS II maybe make it special: WCS II Scan Res Bouns -75% Targeting Range Bonus - 75% Warp Scramble Strength -0 Immunity to Focused Warp Scrambling and Bubbles, cannot be fitted on capital or super capital ships.
Now that would make them worthwhile.
Whoa, THAT would be awesome. I like the part about not being able to fit on caps or super caps. However, I can also see the people saying that -75% makes a cap useless :) I want either way.
Edit: Sorry, didn't see the bit about bubbles. No immunity to bubbles, just focused.
|
DraedPirate Roberts
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 08:39:00 -
[18]
WHAT? Definitely immunity to bubbles! That is ridiculous how easy people camp gates in 0.0 with a heavy-dicter bubble. You literally have no chance of escape UNLESS you're flying an interceptor yourself, and if you're not, you're pretty much screwed, unless you're in a gang with enough firepower to crash a gatecamp anyways! The odds are definitely stacked in the aggressor's favor in this game, and its by design too... CCP needs to nerf THAT.
|
Vyktor Abyss
IONSTAR Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 10:19:00 -
[19]
Complete tosh...
Small Smartbomb II is more useless than a T2 WCS.
And they got WCS changes about right since they severly gimp your fit on a ship as they should do given they allow "easy, get out of jail free" pvp.
Are you a nano-*** looking for a new way to pvp with little risk? Simple: (i) Improved Cloak II - they new ***s choice.
And if you run into a anchored bubble you're not scouting well enough. Complain all you want but those people have probably waited long borig hours for someone as daft as you to jump in. They deserve their feast.
Dictor bubbles are easily avoided (see (i) above).
|
DraedPirate Roberts
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 10:22:00 -
[20]
Edited by: DraedPirate Roberts on 07/08/2008 10:23:30 Yeah, erm, I fly a Drake? Definitely not a nano-fit anything... Sorry, but that improved cloak would help me about as much as armor plates on said Drake. Pretty useless. Especially since I'd be moving at snail speed. And about the scouting, what do you do when the ONLY route to your destination is camped? Or rather, ALL routes to your destination are camped, all the time? I'm SURE you've experienced perma-camps... there is no way around them. I'm not talking about anchored bubbles, I'm talking about the heavy interdictor mobile bubble.
|
|
Vyktor Abyss
IONSTAR Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 10:55:00 -
[21]
Try fitting a MWD plus Improved cloak II.
Jump through gate you're 15km off gate, pulse MWD, aligned out of bubble towards target, cloak - decloak and insta-warp OR stay cloaked moving further out of range if you're somehow not out of the bubble (unlikely).
Its easily done in a Megathron, nevermind a Drake.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 19:16:00 -
[22]
I am not sure I would call it 'useless' since it does at least decrease the penelty from a WCS....
but yeah, a +2 WCS would be nice. WCSs are a case of a defensive module being significantly underpowered when compared to the offensive equivalent.
|
Plekto
CCITT
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 07:33:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Plekto on 08/08/2008 07:34:31 Why not avoid all of this nonsense and just make WCS rigs?
Logically, the warp core's stability should be something that is designed into the warp core/ship itself. It shouldn't take up any fitting slots, either.
Also, being jammed should add a multiplier for warp time and not just shut you down entirely. As it is, if you get a ship jamming you with a couple of t2 jammers(which ARE more powerful than their t1 versions), you're meat. You could be flying a ship the size of a small city and yet its ability to warp can be nerfed by a ship the size of a large car...
I'd also make another change. Ships that are smaller than your class of ship(as determined by weapon/MWD/etc fitting size) cannot jam you. Period. There are specialized ships now in the game that can bubble you or otherwise tackle/jam/etc you. But no frigate should be able to do anything to a ship the size of a BS, let alone a Carrier or larger. Back when the game started, there was a need, but now with two types of interdictors, a change seems logical.
|
Lisa Waen
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 21:31:00 -
[24]
I wholeheartedly agree with scrams not being a permalock on a warp drive. How about having it set up this way: a 15sec delay per level of difference before warp can occur? An example: Ship A (aggressor) uses -2 level warp scram on you (with a 60sec reload for use), ship b (runner)is equipped with a single WCS (-1). There would be a 15 second delay before you can warp outta there. Now with a skillful pirate group you could effectively lock down the ship by rotating scrambles, but if your timing isn't good, the runner will slip out as soon as there is a hole in the scramble set. Bubbles give a one-time -4, -6, or -8 level hit to all, depending on the source of the bubble (interdictor frig, HIC, or permabubble). Plus I agree that WCS 2s should have a +2 strength with the increased target penalties (about -60%). This would allow a good 'cade runner to be able to escape most situations, but still be nailed down under concerted effort. It shouldn't be easy to catch someone designed to be slippery with only one ship, no matter what the ship is, but if you have more ships working together, even a good 'cade runner should be brought down once in a while.
|
Kethry Avenger
Krell-Korp
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 04:52:00 -
[25]
This topic speaks to me of one of my pet peeves in EVE. I think that there should be a basic relationship between items of different meta levels, tech levels and accessibility.
In my opinion Starting with Tech 1, named items should do whatever it is the module does better than Tech 1 or the same with better fittings.
Tech II should always do whatever the module does better than the best named item but with worse fittings.
Storyline items should be better fittings than best named but not necessarily better stats.
Faction Gear should have the stats of at least Tech II and have good fitting requirements.
Deadspace Gear should be better than Faction gear but its fittings might not be as good.
Officer stuff should be the absolute best stats but keeping with the source have large powergrid requirements.
This is one of many dreams I have for EVE. Now CCP sick some intern on sorting all that out for the 1000's of items.
|
Caldari 5
Amarr The Element Syndicate Soldiers of the Forgotten Abyss
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 14:56:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Lisa Waen I wholeheartedly agree with scrams not being a permalock on a warp drive. How about having it set up this way: a 15sec delay per level of difference before warp can occur? An example: Ship A (aggressor) uses -2 level warp scram on you (with a 60sec reload for use), ship b (runner)is equipped with a single WCS (-1). There would be a 15 second delay before you can warp outta there. Now with a skillful pirate group you could effectively lock down the ship by rotating scrambles, but if your timing isn't good, the runner will slip out as soon as there is a hole in the scramble set. Bubbles give a one-time -4, -6, or -8 level hit to all, depending on the source of the bubble (interdictor frig, HIC, or permabubble). Plus I agree that WCS 2s should have a +2 strength with the increased target penalties (about -60%). This would allow a good 'cade runner to be able to escape most situations, but still be nailed down under concerted effort. It shouldn't be easy to catch someone designed to be slippery with only one ship, no matter what the ship is, but if you have more ships working together, even a good 'cade runner should be brought down once in a while.
Some good ideas there.
|
TharOkha
|
Posted - 2008.08.09 15:23:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Caldari 5 Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Warp Core Stabilizer II the most useless T2 item? I thought all T2 items increased the effectiveness of their purpose. the WCS II doesn't increase the Stability of the Warp Core any more then the rest of the WCS, at best the WCS II is a named item.
WCS I Scan Res Bouns -50% Targeting Range Bonus - 50% Warp Scramble Strength -1
WCS II Current(Create a New Named item with same stats) Scan Res Bouns -40% Targeting Range Bonus - 40% Warp Scramble Strength -1
WCS II Proposed Scan Res Bouns -50%(Maybe another value?) Targeting Range Bonus - 50%(Maybe another value?) Warp Scramble Strength -2
/signed
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |