Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
D3MoRaLiZ3
|
Posted - 2008.10.01 21:03:00 -
[1]
Ok im not on the forums alot, but was just wondering if sum1 could answer these few questions for me.
1) What is the actual specific changes tht r gonna b made?
2) Will a nano curse still b viable after the nerf? (just got a new account skilling towards Ammar cruiser V, want to know if its actually worth it)
|
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 08:37:00 -
[2]
Edited by: lebrata on 02/10/2008 08:40:32
Originally by: D3MoRaLiZ3
1) What is the actual specific changes tht r gonna b made?
Every patch so far has made cruiser sized ship and smaller death traps and not worth flying, caused problems with BS, missile ships and totally screwed over small gang combat and a lot of other aspects of pvp in the game in general so i doubt it will be implemented any time soon.
Originally by: D3MoRaLiZ3 2) Will a nano curse still b viable after the nerf? (just got a new account skilling towards Ammar cruiser V, want to know if its actually worth it)
The patch as was killed speed tanking utterly and without exception, hacs became expensive wastes of space and anything smaller was also not worth flying. Battle cruisers especially caldari battle cruisers and battleships were the only things worth flying normally in RR setups.
The whole patch and the idea behind it sucked tbh but as with most ideas the ppl behind it are a little slow and a little unwilling to admit it and look for other more positive options like the addition of BS sized webs that have extra range in concert with the mwd killing scram idea that everybody thought was great.
|
Stork DK
Minmatar Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 12:26:00 -
[3]
You can still nano your ship if you spend isk and skillpoints on it. You won't be as fast as you can be now but you will be faster than your oppenent which is really what its all about. -----
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 12:28:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Stork DK You can still nano your ship if you spend isk and skillpoints on it. You won't be as fast as you can be now but you will be faster than your oppenent which is really what its all about.
and still 3mln sp drake will pown you :D
|
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 12:37:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl
Originally by: Stork DK You can still nano your ship if you spend isk and skillpoints on it. You won't be as fast as you can be now but you will be faster than your oppenent which is really what its all about.
and still 3mln sp drake will pown you :D
And why should a faster ship be able to kill a slower tanked one? By your logic my inty should be able to kill your nano hac because its so cool and faction pimped.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 13:09:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Murina on 02/10/2008 13:11:35
Originally by: Stork DK
You can still nano your ship if you spend isk and skillpoints on it. You won't be as fast as you can be now but you will be faster than your oppenent which is really what its all about.
1 v 1 statistics and scenarios are pointless and stupid to use as a base for any changes to the game. The nerf makes all cruiser sized and smaller ships death traps in gang fighting even if you pimp them out with billions in mods and in snake implants. It reduces gang combat to f1-f8 slug fests where the only ships needed and worth flying are hard hitting BC or larger BS fitted for pure damage and RR.
Removing nano just because a few lazy players do not want to work as a team and use tacklers plus ewar and logistics just like any good roaming gang does is a terrible idea and the sheer amount of problems it has caused to all aspects of pvp on the test server is testament to its stupidity.
|
Stork DK
Minmatar Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 13:12:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
And why should a faster ship be able to kill a slower tanked one? By your logic my inty should be able to kill your nano hac because its so cool and faction pimped.
I suggest you try nano before whining with the rest of the bears on the forums. Being fast does not mean invincibility and able to kill everything.
Being fast means being able to escape from a fight when outnumbered or loosing and avoid more damage than you can physically tank.
And as it were in the first "Nano Rebalancing" patch on Sisi the missiles became too powerfull due to no tracking and them being faster than all other ships.
Devs have stated that they'r looking into explosion velicity and explosion radius. (Stealth Halo boost anyone?) -----
|
Christari Zuborov
Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 21:22:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Christari Zuborov on 02/10/2008 21:25:53
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl
Originally by: Stork DK You can still nano your ship if you spend isk and skillpoints on it. You won't be as fast as you can be now but you will be faster than your oppenent which is really what its all about.
and still 3mln sp drake will pown you :D
And why should a faster ship be able to kill a slower tanked one? By your logic my inty should be able to kill your nano hac because its so cool and faction pimped.
Pssst.. Don't tell anyone this, but if your nano inty webbed a nano HAC gunslinger that wasn't also equipped with a web, your nano inty WOULD kill that nano HAC. It could also kill a nano HAC missile spammer as well, but your chances are less.
|
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Caldari Wreckless Abandon G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.10.02 21:57:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Felix Dzerzhinsky on 02/10/2008 21:58:50 There are going to be so many changes - anything is speculation. What remains constant is: 1) speed will be nurfed, 2) missles will be nurfed if sig.rad/velocity is increaced/decreaced for ships , 3) blasters will be buffed if webs are nurfed.
edt. removed explanations for simplicity sake. ----
ECCM is a Counter-measure not a defense. |
Stork DK
Minmatar Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 07:14:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky Edited by: Felix Dzerzhinsky on 02/10/2008 21:58:50 There are going to be so many changes - anything is speculation. What remains constant is: 1) speed will be nurfed, 2) missles will be nurfed if sig.rad/velocity is increaced/decreaced for ships , 3) blasters will be buffed if webs are nurfed.
edt. removed explanations for simplicity sake.
Blasters will be fine even with the web nerf. Most heavy blaster ships have plenty of midslots for a dual web. -----
|
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 09:02:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Murina on 03/10/2008 09:03:26
Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky 1) speed will be nurfed,
Enough said with this tbfh as it will kill skilled small gang combat in eve if all ppl need do is f1-f8 to kill summat in static slug fests instead of working as a versatile team to do so.
And it is not a fore gone conclusion as the tests so far have shown how much speed does for the game and how much the game will suck on every level without it.
|
Fistme
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 15:28:00 -
[12]
Quote: Blasters will be fine even with the web nerf. Most heavy blaster ships have plenty of midslots for a dual web.
.... Really guy? ....
|
Euriti
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 16:32:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Stork DK
Originally by: Felix Dzerzhinsky Edited by: Felix Dzerzhinsky on 02/10/2008 21:58:50 There are going to be so many changes - anything is speculation. What remains constant is: 1) speed will be nurfed, 2) missles will be nurfed if sig.rad/velocity is increaced/decreaced for ships , 3) blasters will be buffed if webs are nurfed.
edt. removed explanations for simplicity sake.
Blasters will be fine even with the web nerf. Most heavy blaster ships have plenty of midslots for a dual web.
False. Most blasterships only have 3 or 4 mids and need them all for something already.
|
Stork DK
Minmatar Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.10.03 22:03:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Euriti False. Most blasterships only have 3 or 4 mids and need them all for something already.
"Midslots" Domi: 4 Mega: 4 Hype: 5 Rokh: 6
Geddon have 3 midslots and far worse traking than a megathron but you dont see us whining do you ? -----
|
Chi Quan
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.10.04 12:46:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Chi Quan on 04/10/2008 12:46:56 hey, ever heard of mandatory midslots? mwd/AB + scram + web for exemple? if i put a dualweb on my mega why the hell not remove the mid and give a shipbonus to webstrenght? oh yea, 'cause the mega already gets a bonus to tracking. and where goes the scram to? seriously... fly the ships before you say they are fine. even the tracking of cruiser guns against bs is awfull.
ah yea, and Rohk is a shield tanker, so it needs the meds for something else ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it. |
ollobrains2
Gallente New Eve Order Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.10.04 12:54:00 -
[16]
mmm im a armour tanker u mean ill be more competitive in pvp not necessarily win but not be insta death from a nano gang or a nano pilot - hurrah needs to be a balance
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.04 14:57:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Murina on 04/10/2008 15:00:09
Originally by: ollobrains2 mmm im a armour tanker u mean ill be more competitive in pvp not necessarily win but not be insta death from a nano gang or a nano pilot - hurrah needs to be a balance
To be competitive in pvp you need to improve your team work and individual skills, crying to ccp to lower the bar so what ever silly ratting fit you are using can be effective against true pvpers fitted to kill things has never been successful and never will be (although the whining on this forum shows that you carebears are still trying lol).
You will still "insta death" (what ever that means) from roaming gangs of ships even if nano is nerfed or are you so deluded that you think pvpers are going to start choosing fits that will lose??.
The problem is not nano it is you and the sooner you come to terms with that and start improving youe piloting and teamwork skills the better for eve and yourself tbh. |
Stork DK
Minmatar Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.10.04 21:47:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Chi Quan Edited by: Chi Quan on 04/10/2008 12:46:56 hey, ever heard of mandatory midslots? mwd/AB + scram + web for exemple? if i put a dualweb on my mega why the hell not remove the mid and give a shipbonus to webstrenght? oh yea, 'cause the mega already gets a bonus to tracking. and where goes the scram to? seriously... fly the ships before you say they are fine. even the tracking of cruiser guns against bs is awfull.
ah yea, and Rohk is a shield tanker, so it needs the meds for something else
Theres alotta standard whine stuff in this post here. 1) MY SHIPS NEED THIS AND THAT FOR IT TO WORK AND WITH THESE CHANGES I WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE MY SETUP WHICH I CANT 2) BOOST MY SHIP 3) A SHIELD TANK HAVE TO USE ALL THE MEDSLOTS
right.. Geddon vs mega. Tracking is worse on a geddon. Damage is about equal tho the geddon have better range. Geddon needs a cap inject just to keep shooting. Mega needs one to surive a heavy neut.
Swap your currently "mandatory" Ogre-II's-for-uber-gank-damage-of-face**** for some web drones. Then change your setup instead of clinging to your standard loadout while crying for a nerf to the nerf.
Nerfs hit us all so deal with it like the rest of us instead of whining. -----
|
Chi Quan
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 00:25:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Stork DK scissors: paper is fine, nerf rock
let me guess, you fly amarr right? for their operational range, blasters have the worst tracking. powerful webs obscured this flaw, now with web-strenght changing, it becomes clear. why do not use web drones? because i need to do full damage once i'm close enough to use my blasters, else the damage i received getting close is too much for my tank (and i will not go into detail that many blaster setups are set up as glass cannons).
i could also argue that a geddon with projectile guns is very resistant against neuting, but that argument would fall under in the same nonsense-category as your suggestion of using web drones.
do you know staking?
+ at least 30% of most gallente blaster boat damage comes from the drones, for me the choice is clear.
a mega can shoot without caping out, but only if it uses low dmage ammo and no mwd. the cap life of antimatter + mwd () is 1,16 minutes without injector which i would have to leave home due to the 2.web or extra tracking comp.
this is rather solo oriented yes, should i rater take an assisted setup into consideration? how about a cap transferring guardian? oh wait, that would be better for the amarr bs. a webbing huggin maybe? than i wold have to grant the opponent the same advantage, as comparing 2vs1 fights is obviously pointless. and again we are back to square one,'cause webbed blaster = 0dps blaster due to range tank.
cap problems on a geddon do not have anything to do with the nano issue.
on another note, i'd love to fit some other mods on my mids, drone nav computers, some ecm/eccm, maybe even some tracking disrupters, but nooo, according to you, if you have limited med slots, so should everybody else.
to the op: sorry i'm getting ot here i'd love to see propulsion mods being OPTIONAL mods, but that's hardly ever going to happen ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it. |
Stork DK
Minmatar Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 10:14:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Chi Quan
let me guess, you fly amarr right?
No i fly minmatar.
Originally by: Chi Quan
for their operational range, blasters have the worst tracking. powerful webs obscured this flaw, now with web-strenght changing, it becomes clear.
A couple falloff rigs should give you the same range as the "overpowered" minmatar.
Originally by: Chi Quan
why do not use web drones? because i need to do full damage once i'm close enough to use my blasters, else the damage i received getting close is too much for my tank (and i will not go into detail that many blaster setups are set up as glass cannons).
Perhaps you could try switching your setup so its not a piece of paper with guns /o\
Originally by: Chi Quan i could also argue that a geddon with projectile guns is very resistant against neuting, but that argument would fall under in the same nonsense-category as your suggestion of using web drones.
But according to you, you need full damage to fly solo! And yes the abaddon with 800mms can be quite effective but how is suggesting web drones nonsense? Arent you complaining that you dont have enough mids for an extra web?
Originally by: Chi Quan do you know staking?
ya..?
Originally by: Chi Quan + at least 30% of most gallente blaster boat damage comes from the drones, for me the choice is clear.
Again this need to fit for maximum damage and zero defence. There are alternatives ya know.
Originally by: Chi Quan a mega can shoot without caping out, but only if it uses low dmage ammo and no mwd. the cap life of antimatter + mwd () is 1,16 minutes without injector which i would have to leave home due to the 2.web or extra tracking comp.
Why would you leave your mwd running?
Originally by: Chi Quan this is rather solo oriented yes, should i rater take an assisted setup into consideration? how about a cap transferring guardian? oh wait, that would be better for the amarr bs. a webbing huggin maybe? than i wold have to grant the opponent the same advantage, as comparing 2vs1 fights is obviously pointless. and again we are back to square one,'cause webbed blaster = 0dps blaster due to range tank.
2 falloff rigs = 20km + including falloff (30+ with null)
Originally by: Chi Quan cap problems on a geddon do not have anything to do with the nano issue.
nope it has to do with you complaining that you dont have enough midslots.
Originally by: Chi Quan on another note, i'd love to fit some other mods on my mids, drone nav computers, some ecm/eccm, maybe even some tracking disrupters, but nooo, according to you, if you have limited med slots, so should everybody else.
Point me to where i claim that will ya.
Originally by: Chi Quan i'd love to see propulsion mods being OPTIONAL mods, but that's hardly ever going to happen
Prenerf you say you need mwd, web, disruptor and injector. Try using a couple web drones and scrapping the mwd. Woah! two slots open. Then maybe put a tracking disruptors or sensor damps in there. Profit! -----
|
|
scim atar
Phantom Squad Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 11:31:00 -
[21]
Edited by: scim atar on 05/10/2008 11:31:44 The nerf bat needs to be corked.Small simple changes would be alot better for all, changes to stack penalties for mods effecting speed not mass addition to the ships as a whole.Certain ships of all races use speed to make their use more advantageous but 20k inties 15 k hacs needs to be fixed that doesn't mean 4 k inties and 2.5 k hacs though. Balance in speed doesn't mean make everything so slow its useless in its niche.
and as far as posters question changes are still being worked on as the initial blast was utter crap tbh
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 11:34:00 -
[22]
Why are ppl bleating on about 1 v 1 stats in BS when it is a rarity in eve and battleships are best and mostly used and dps and RR platforms.
Typical defensive gang setup:-
LARGE SHIPS
BS (fitted for mid range high dmg and RR) used for dealing high dmg.
BC/CS (fitted for mid range moderate dmg and gang bonuses) used for dealing medium dmg and dishing out gang bonuses.
SMALL SHIPS
Hacs/recons/ceptors/ewar frigs (speed fitted along with items for respective bonuses) Used for logistics, tackle, ewar and low dmg.
A gang fitted like this will tear through and other form of gang in eve and does regularly. You can even leave the BS at home and go roaming with the rest and use the BC as dmg platforms.
This is a currant TQ setup and it is highly effective so what change anything?.
|
Chi Quan
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 12:17:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Chi Quan on 05/10/2008 12:17:57
Originally by: Stork DK
A couple falloff rigs should give you the same range as the "overpowered" minmatar.
i never claimed minmatar were overpowered, and i have a problem with TRACKING at OPTIMAL not falloff
Originally by: Stork DK
Perhaps you could try switching your setup so its not a piece of paper with guns /o\
shure, but that would turn my stups into railboats (the explication is rather long on this one, you can either accept the short statement or not) which are NOT BLASTERBOATS
Originally by: Stork DK But according to you, you need full damage to fly solo! And yes the abaddon with 800mms can be quite effective but how is suggesting web drones nonsense? Arent you complaining that you dont have enough mids for an extra web?
drone damage makes up for a big part of blaster boat dps, relesing them early only results in them being shot down, if i took web drones (which only come in heavy variants btw) i would cut down on exactly those dps that i need to bring down my target, and those dps postnerf are the more reliable part due to bad blaster tracking. also web drones stack against the web module, their already weak -30% speed effect is further limited. and i'll just pretend i didn't read that nonsensical "solo" argument.
Originally by: Stork DK + at least 30% of most gallente blaster boat damage comes from the drones, for me the choice is clear.
Again this need to fit for maximum damage and zero defence. There are alternatives ya know. not if you fly blaster boats. ..hmm, thinking about it, what alternatives? you say i hould fit more tank on my ship and i should fit a second web and i should also use web drones. what were those alternatives again?
Originally by: Stork DK Why would you leave your mwd running?
if you compare a shutdown mwd on a mega with a shutdown mwd on a geddon, the geddon is more cap stable. by about a minute if you want to know exactly. i don't leave the mwd running once im close, but chances are high that i indeed have to activate it for at least 40 seconds to get close.
Originally by: Stork DK 2 falloff rigs = 20km + including falloff (30+ with null)
aah, i see, the alternatives you mentioned. once again, TRACKING not falloff.
Originally by: Stork DK nope it has to do with you complaining that you dont have enough midslots.
you don't get it, i am complaining about TRACKING ON BLASTERS with the new webstrenght.
Originally by: Stork DK Point me to where i claim that will ya.
here:
Originally by: Stork DK Most heavy blaster ships have plenty of midslots for a dual web.
translation: slots to spare, not unlike others.
Originally by: Stork DK Prenerf you say you need mwd, web, disruptor and injector. Try using a couple web drones and scrapping the mwd. Woah! two slots open. Then maybe put a tracking disruptors or sensor damps in there. Profit!
sensor damps on a close range ship? what should i exacly acomplish with this? maybe dampening interceptors below webrange, but in a BS i wont hit them with blasters even if they come closer and get webed (which is indeed the way it should be). i am also rather shure i won't hit them in a cruiser with blasters either.
edit: any you can keep any spelling errors you find ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it. |
Dianeces
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.05 20:30:00 -
[24]
It's a shame there isn't a midslot module which boosts tracking on turrets. We could call it something like a tracking computer.
|
Stork DK
Minmatar Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 06:50:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Stork DK on 06/10/2008 06:50:25
Originally by: Chi Quan
i never claimed minmatar were overpowered, and i have a problem with TRACKING at OPTIMAL not falloff
Fight in falloff for less tracking \o/
Originally by: Chi Quan
drone damage makes up for a big part of blaster boat dps, relesing them early only results in them being shot down, if i took web drones (which only come in heavy variants btw) i would cut down on exactly those dps that i need to bring down my target, and those dps postnerf are the more reliable part due to bad blaster tracking. also web drones stack against the web module, their already weak -30% speed effect is further limited.
Have 2-3 web drones and the rest as ogres \o/
Originally by: Chi Quan ..hmmm, thinking about it, what alternatives? you say i should fit more tank on my ship and i should fit a second web and i should also use web drones. what were those alternatives again?
Web drones, 2 ambit rigs, 2 lars and null. 1 unit of falloff fighting mega \o/
Originally by: Chi Quan
if you compare a shutdown mwd on a mega with a shutdown mwd on a geddon, the geddon is more cap stable. by about a minute if you want to know exactly.
Surprise amarr is a cap race.
Originally by: Chi Quan aah, i see, the alternatives you mentioned. once again, TRACKING not falloff.
Fight in falloff and do less tracking \o/
Originally by: Chi Quan
you don't get it, i am complaining about TRACKING ON BLASTERS with the new webstrenght.
Fight in falloff for less tracking \o/
Originally by: Chi Quan
Originally by: Stork DK Point me to where i claim that will ya.
here:
Originally by: Stork DK Most heavy blaster ships have plenty of midslots for a dual web.
translation: slots to spare, not unlike others.
wtf are you on about?
Originally by: Chi Quan sensor damps on a close range ship? what should i exacly acomplish with this? maybe dampening interceptors below webrange, but in a BS i wont hit them with blasters even if they come closer and get webed (which is indeed the way it should be). i am also rather shure i won't hit them in a cruiser with blasters either.
A single damp might let your drones survive, tho this works better with ecm drones.
This is my last post here as you seem ignorant enough to keep rambling about how you cant possibly change your fittings. Send me a mail once you adapt. \o/
Fly safe o/ -----
|
Euriti
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 08:32:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Stork DK
Originally by: Euriti False. Most blasterships only have 3 or 4 mids and need them all for something already.
"Midslots" Domi: 4 Mega: 4 Hype: 5 Rokh: 6
Geddon have 3 midslots and far worse traking than a megathron but you dont see us whining do you ?
Domi is a droneboat. Mega need a cap booser in the last mid or it'll run out of cap way too fast. The hype needs double cap boosters usually. The rokh is a shield tanker.
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 12:12:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Euriti
Originally by: Stork DK
Originally by: Euriti False. Most blasterships only have 3 or 4 mids and need them all for something already.
"Midslots" Domi: 4 Mega: 4 Hype: 5 Rokh: 6
Geddon have 3 midslots and far worse traking than a megathron but you dont see us whining do you ?
Domi is a droneboat. Mega need a cap booser in the last mid or it'll run out of cap way too fast. The hype needs double cap boosters usually. The rokh is a shield tanker.
Mega runign too fast? Try geddon 3x mroe cap use with 3 meds.
|
Fenix Zealot
Caldari Aeon Of Strife DEFI4NT
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 15:55:00 -
[28]
Originally by: lebrata
The patch as was killed speed tanking utterly and without exception, hacs became expensive wastes of space and anything smaller was also not worth flying. Battle cruisers especially caldari battle cruisers and battleships were the only things worth flying normally in RR setups.
The whole patch and the idea behind it sucked tbh but as with most ideas the ppl behind it are a little slow and a little unwilling to admit it and look for other more positive options like the addition of BS sized webs that have extra range in concert with the mwd killing scram idea that everybody thought was great.
Adapt or die. Isn't that the line nano pilots give noobs they choose to pick on with impunity?
The simple fact is that nano has become too powerful and too one sided. A proposed nerf would not be in existance if this were not true. Its just been far too long without a nerf that everyone has become spoiled with near invulnerability. Nano will not, however, be out of the question. All the nano nerf means is that you wont be invulnerable when ur nanoed, which means you WILL take damage in almost any fight, unless you properly utilize ewar of some nature, tracking disrupters, damps, ecm whatever. Nano will not be completely dead. The devs made that VERY clear when they decided they wanted to re-think the nano nerf (and nerf missiles in the process, which are already underpowered enough as is with torps being the only exception, but whatever)
The nano nerf isn't even on singularity anymore. That means that the nerf is likely to be 2 or more months away from making an appearance on tranquility. I think people are gettin too fussy about things. When i get my cerberus, im going to nano it, regardless of the nerf. Yes im going to nano the slowest current nano hac after the nano nerf, because it really isn't going to be that bad.
Besides, all this means really is that nano gangs are going to have to slightly rethink how they approach a battle. For my part, i think the real risk of death makes the engagement more fun if you win in the end. Aside from that fact alone, real risk also introduces the need to plan out the situation and use certain tactics, rather than just activate guns, orbit at optimal, and wait for the enemy to die (or run away if things get too risky, or if they take any sort of damage). En Taro Adun! |
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.10.06 16:22:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Fenix Zealot
For my part, i think the real risk of death makes the engagement more fun if you win in the end.
My main has roughly 2000 kills on battleclinic and i am not that active at the moment cos i am moving house you have 50, what makes you think that you are qualified to know what your talking about considering you obviously do not pvp.
Originally by: Fenix Zealot Aside from that fact alone, real risk also introduces the need to plan out the situation and use certain tactics, rather than just activate guns, orbit at optimal, and wait for the enemy to die
The fact that you consider nano to be "hit orbit activate guns" as you commented here shows how little you know about it or pvp for that matter.
And its not about risk its about certainty cos cruisers and small ships like them melt in the first volley without speed to protect them.
THIS ISSUE IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE ABOUT RATTERS AND LAZY PLAYERS WANTING TO LOWER THE BAR SO THEIR RATTING SETUPS CAN BE EFFECTIVE AGAINST PURE PVP SPEC'D SHIPS.
LOCK TARGET F1-F8 IS NOT A SKILL.
|
Big Zulu
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 06:33:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Big Zulu on 07/10/2008 06:33:05
Originally by: lebrata
Originally by: Fenix Zealot
For my part, i think the real risk of death makes the engagement more fun if you win in the end.
My main has roughly 2000 kills on battleclinic and i am not that active at the moment cos i am moving house
/epeen
Warning! Your overloaded Ego II hits universe, shallowing it for 100% damage.
Edit: Post with your main! _________
I has bree.. |
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 08:37:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 07/10/2008 08:37:23
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 02/10/2008 13:45:26 1 v 1 statistics and scenarios are pointless and stupid to use as a base for any changes to the game. The nerf makes all cruiser sized and smaller ships death traps in gang fighting even if you pimp them out with billions in mods and in snake implants. It reduces gang combat to f1-f8 slug fests where the only ships needed and worth flying are hard hitting BC or larger BS fitted for pure damage and RR.
Removing nano just because a few lazy players do not want to work as a team and use tacklers plus ewar and logistics just like any good roaming gang does is a terrible idea and the sheer amount of problems it has caused to all aspects of pvp on the test server is testament to its stupidity.
There is something even more stupid, tougth, and that's assuming a scenario of 1 nano vs X ganged ships for balance purposes, as if nano ships were always operating solo.
There is no reason why nano ships would be nearly immune to just about anything save a few specialised Ewar ships and other nano ships, in a 1 v 1 situation. If you can't understand that, you haven't got the brains to do any balancing. ------------------------------------------
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 09:33:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Shadowsword
There is no reason why nano ships would be nearly immune to just about anything save a few specialised Ewar ships and other nano ships, in a 1 v 1 situation.
Oh dear did somebody pop your ratting raven?.
1. Nano is only invulnerable/immune to badly organized gangs with pve setups and it should be (pvp setups > pve setups) and (organized gangs > disorganized gangs), you talk about balance but the fact is that the nano gangs i run have a specific number of very specific ships all with very specific bonuses so if balance is what you are bleating on about to beat me you should need as many specific (if slightly different) ships and fits.
Originally by: Shadowsword If you can't understand that, you haven't got the brains to do any balancing.
Now i understand where your ignorance comes from you think that removing options is the same as balancing.
Balancing is not the same as reducing options there are modules in eve that speed ships up and theirs modules in eve that slow them down that is called balance. Removing or nerfing the mods that speed ships up just because ppl cannot be bothered to fit and fly with the mods that can combat them is not balancing and it never will be.
Snipers are invulnerable to any other ship due to the range they operate at and can be aligned and warp off if anything burns to get near them or drops out of warp near them. They are only vulnerable to other sniper fitted ships so by your "balance" theory every sniper ship should be reduced in range to "balance" them with other less specific fitting styles.
Your idea of balance will have us all in one ship with a single fit and in a sand box.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 10:44:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 07/10/2008 10:45:56
Originally by: Shadowsword
There is no reason why nano ships would be nearly immune to just about anything save a few specialised Ewar ships and other nano ships, in a 1 v 1 situation. If you can't understand that, you haven't got the brains to do any balancing.
So why: 1. why falcon is immune to 99% of ships/setups in 1v1 situation? 2. why arazu/lachesis is immune to 99% ships/setups in 1v1 situation? 3. why passive shieldtanked ships are immune to most setups in this game (except high skilled gank setup battleships)? 4. why permarun dualrep battleships are immune to most setups 1v1 (especially hyperion which can tank carrier)? 5. why snipers are immune to ALL afterburner setup fleets?
I could go into infinity with it and thinking of more and more stupid situations. Thing is - this game is full of rock-paper-scissor setups/ships and nanos are not an exception from this. Tell me when was last time you died in proper PvP battleship to 1 nanoship? I dont think it ever happened. When you die to nanoships its either their wolfpack or you are in NPCing ship. In both situations you would die to snipers/rr/heck - even ceptors.
Only thing totally stupid about nano ships is their "uber" speed. Ships going 15k+ are wrong. But nanos going 3-5km/s are perfectly vulnerable to most damage IF you know how to apply it. Did you ever use AC's + faloff rigs or pulses with locus rigs/TEs? I can tell you - they **** faces of most nanoships. Same neuts - they disable most of them. If something is out of neut range you can be sure that you CAN WARP AWAY. Surprised? Or maybe you dont use neuts/acs/pulses/ecm/webs etc? Then why the **** are you whining? EVE is not f1-f8 game and should never be. Otherwise i could play Starcraft instead and just throw more zerglings (f1-f8 frigs) or ultralisks (f1-f8 battleships).
tl;dr - you have no clue how to play this game except "blob" - fix 15km/s+ nanos
EDIT: o yea its quite funny when people screaming "nanos are overpowered" try to nano sometimes and die horribly to non-nano gangs (NC dying in p3en. 200 nanos vs 100 snipers, 150 kill 30 (?) loss for sniper side)
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:48:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
EDIT: o yea its quite funny when people screaming "nanos are overpowered" try to nano sometimes and die horribly to non-nano gangs (NC dying in p3en. 200 nanos vs 100 snipers, 150 kill 30 (?) loss for sniper side)
I dont know what kind of nano gangs youre running but it is utter fail to die to non nano gangs as a nano gang. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Support Barrage |
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 12:54:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
I dont know what kind of nano gangs youre running but it is utter fail to die to non nano gangs as a nano gang.
Nano gang vs RR BS gang = RR BS own any nano that gets even close to it with nuets but nano has 0 chance to break the RR tank.
Nano gang vs fully mixed gang = the logistics and ewar keep the tacklers in the mixed gang alive as they slow the nano the dmg dealers in the mixed gang melt the tackled nano.
ect ect ect...
Your pvp experience is pathetically lacking i suggest you join eve uni and learn the basics.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 13:01:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
EDIT: o yea its quite funny when people screaming "nanos are overpowered" try to nano sometimes and die horribly to non-nano gangs (NC dying in p3en. 200 nanos vs 100 snipers, 150 kill 30 (?) loss for sniper side)
I dont know what kind of nano gangs youre running but it is utter fail to die to non nano gangs as a nano gang.
Im not NC - i was sniping. And "fail"? No - its skill and proper sniper/punce spots. They managed to get close to our snipers only twice bubbling only those who werent at speed/unaligned.
|
Trent Nichols
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 18:30:00 -
[37]
Back when this debate was really raging I saw a few people suggest that polycarbs be nerfed. Was that too simple?
Logistics deployables mean less grind and more pewpew! |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 19:15:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Trent Nichols Back when this debate was really raging I saw a few people suggest that polycarbs be nerfed. Was that too simple?
polys, snakes, claymores
yes its that simple, but guess noone cares. better redo whole system than just tweak it
|
Seth Ruin
Minmatar Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.10.07 21:03:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Seth Ruin on 07/10/2008 21:04:29
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 07/10/2008 13:39:48 Nano gang vs RR BS gang = RR BS own any nano that gets even close to it with nuets but nano has 0 chance to break the RR tank (if the RR BS gang has tackle its a even bigger wipe out for the nano gang).
Nano gang vs fully mixed gang = the logistics and ewar keep the tacklers in the mixed gang alive as they slow the nano then the dmg dealers in the mixed gang melt the tackled nano instantly (regularly used by my corp/alliance as its great fun and involves virtually every ship type and fit in the game and team work + individual piloting skills).
Nano gang vs good sniper gang = sniper gang warps in and out from pounce spots popping nano ships and as soon as the nano closes the aligned snipers warp away and reposition.
Nano vs Carebear ratting ship gang = nano wins and the carebears run to forum crying for a nerf nerf.
ect ect ect...
Your pvp experience is pathetically lacking i suggest you join eve uni and learn the basics.
The problem with any one of your situations in which nano fails is the concept of catching them, which simply will not happen given even a half-intelligent nano pilot. I've never seen a nano gang let a RR BS gang get close to them. I've never seen a nano gang sit in place long enough to let snipers get them. And your argument of a mixed gang simply shows the flaw in nanos: The only way to catch a nano is to be a nano! Otherwise, the nano will engage or disengage at will.
Originally by: Deva Blackfire claymores
Don't you dare touch my Claymore -.-
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 01:39:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Seth Ruin
Originally by: Deva Blackfire claymores
Don't you dare touch my Claymore -.-
They are overpowered, period. Giving 30+% (cant remember exact number now) velocity bonus is just stupid. Drop it to 15% and we are set.
Same for snakes - almost 50% velo boost for hi grades... Make it 20-25% and done.
Polys - get in line with modules (actually worse than mods - no rig should EVER be better than module).
And suddenly 15km/s ship speed drops by half.
|
|
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 02:54:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Seth Ruin The problem with any one of your situations in which nano fails is the concept of catching them, which simply will not happen given even a half-intelligent nano pilot. I've never seen a nano gang let a RR BS gang get close to them. I've never seen a nano gang sit in place long enough to let snipers get them. And your argument of a mixed gang simply shows the flaw in nanos: The only way to catch a nano is to be a nano! Otherwise, the nano will engage or disengage at will.
This. If ever die in a nano currently, you fail. Nano isn't an "I win" button. It's an "I don't lose" button. It's broken.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 08:18:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Murina on 08/10/2008 08:24:16
Originally by: Seth Ruin The problem with any one of your situations in which nano fails is the concept of catching them, which simply will not happen given even a half-intelligent nano pilot. I've never seen a nano gang let a RR BS gang get close to them.
Nor me but then nobody said BS were as fast as nano, roaming nano gangs are looking to kill stuff so they attack the RR BS (by definition a defensive formation) that is when they nuet and kill or tackle and kill the nano.
RR BS is not a mobile formation, stop focusing on what you think is nano's total immunity as its making you not bother to think or try and focus on its weaknesses and it has plenty pal you just need to open your eyes to see them.
Originally by: Seth Ruin I've never seen a nano gang sit in place long enough to let snipers get them.
You have never flown with burn eden or if you prefer have a chat with deva blackfire as triumvirate wasted a whole fleet of NANO ships with snipers a short time ago.
Originally by: Seth Ruin And your argument of a mixed gang simply shows the flaw in nanos: The only way to catch a nano is to be a nano! Otherwise, the nano will engage or disengage at will.
Anybody can disengage at will, a gang jumping into a camp can burn back to the gate and lose maybe one ship if any at all, a gang can be aligned and insta warp, or even station/pos/gate hug, the ability to disengage with light or no losses is easy in eve for all classes not just nano.
Why do ppl keep bringing the ability to disengage up like its a pure nano issue?, i mean do you actually expect ppl to sit still and let you shoot them if this stupid nerf goes through?.
How is the need for fast tacklers a flaw, you need snipers to kill snipers or they warp off when you get close, you need RR BS and or capitals to kill RR BS or they just tank you.
The need to tackle nano to kill it is a bonus not a flaw as it forces the most fun and skill + teamwork intensive pvp in the game, the ppl complaining about it obviously find it to hard or are lazy and want f1-f8 pvp to rule.
|
Chi Quan
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 18:11:00 -
[43]
Quote: This is my last post here as you seem ignorant enough to keep rambling about how you can't possibly change your fittings.
Send me a mail once you adapt. \o/
Fly safe o/
don't take this personally now, but you have obviously very little experience with gallente and blaster boats in particular. i know the nano nerf will probably hit minmatar (which you fly) the hardest (i hope not, but that's an entire different story), don't vent your anger on me because of this.
why should a nano nerf hit a blaster boats, which nobody complained about before, it's like a doctor that tries so cure a headache but ends up amputating a leg.
changing the fits as you suggest would yield better results using railguns instead of blasters.
btt and a last attempt to clarify things:
Originally by: Stork DK Fight in falloff for less tracking \o/
i need MORE tracking not less.
unlike projectiles, hybrid weapons, especially blasters do not use falloff, your damage goes down too much (falloff largest auocannon=16km; falloff largest blaster=10km) lighter blasters with more tracking also have less range and falloff, while projectile weapons have the same falloff in their class. in short, blasters aren't meant to and don't fight in falloff. using falloff rigs makes sense with projectiles, not with hybrids (ok, maybe with rails if you want to snipe)
Originally by: Stork DK Surprise amarr is a cap race.
i know that, thanks. however i should note that you contradict yourself (not putting the quotes):
- you: Geddon needs a cap inject just to keep shooting. Maga uses one to protect against neuting, thus it is optional
- me: geddon is more cap stable firing guns and mwding, than an uninjected mega, an injected mega needs the cap for its mwd, and due to the shorter blaster range, it has to burn the mwd longer to get there.
- you: amarr is the cap race.
what now? choose: are amarr more cap stable or not? if the mega indeed needs the one med for the injector to reach cap stability (which it doesn't), it has exaclty the same amount of remaining slots as the geddon (3). [link http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=887232&page=1#14] sidenote: cap stability with an injector is illusionary, because you definitely run out of changes at some point.
Originally by: Stork DK wtf are you on about?
drawing your attention to contradictory statements
if you really want proof how broken blasters would have been after the originally anticipated changes, look at this [link http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=834365] summary: a fully skilled blasterthron (bonuses coming from the BS skill, tracking skill and an implant) using electrons (best tracking) only lands the 1% wrecking shots on a webbed(!) cruiser without fitting. this is broken and there is no sane argument you can bring to make this seem balanced.
on minmatar ships, drones are optional. not so on gallente ships, you need them to do the damage gallente are famous for.
take a hypothetical fight of a vaga and a deimos (against a random third target, not 1on1 against each other):
the vagabond using ecm drones is effective, because it can dictate range without requiring a lock, and the ecm helps when it slows down to shoot and counters conterwebbing and nos (because they require lock).
the deimos needs the lock for the web, it can't maintain combat distance otherwise (FYI: current tq: top speed vaga t2 nano-combat fit= 6kms/ top speed vigiliant t2 combat fit= 3.8kms stats with original nano nerf: vaga= 3.2kms/ vigilinat= 2.1kms)
and before you get started, the numbers by themselves should not imply that the faster one is broken (it is imbalanced for other reasons, thats a different can of worms, which i dont want to open atm), one will be the fastest and one will deal the most damage. it just shows that one can maneuver itself better into firing position than the other. [to be continued] ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it. |
Chi Quan
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.10.08 18:13:00 -
[44]
however the deimos needs the web to keep the target at combat range (requiring a target lock), the vagabond can maneuver and dictate range without it. thats why a lot of nano-vagas use either a second LSE or some electronic module on the last (dare i say spare) slot instead of a web.
now on to web drones(post original nerf): single web: speed -60% single web + 2 webdrones: speed -74,1%, dps for mega -15% (lol) dualweb: speed -83%
not even close to the 90% webs do now. and this is what masked the bad tracking of blasters since day one, as webs were mandatory before the nerf, there was no issue visible with their tracking. with decreased webbing power (no on/off module any longer actually being good) blasters showed their flaw. this whole thing would have extincted blaster boats as there is nothing that can better switch the overall odds in your favor than an mwd and a web (+ anti warp gear)
so i come back to my options: considering i indeed manage to free up 2 of my 4 slots, i can fit the following (hitlist style): tracking rigs: insufficient effect, albeit possible. i can now have these as mandatory modules. drone nav comp: nice, my drones get to the target faster, a pure drone boat would benefit more from this though tracking comp: not useful, a second web has a better effect within my combat range ecm: a single module may reduce incoming overall dps by an average of 10%; maybe more, maybe not at all eccm: nice, but the executing cruiser can range tank sensor booster: i have no problem with low targeting speed or range sensor dampener: i maneuver close to the enemy, well inside what i can dampen down to tracking disruptor: when the target orbits me, i can indeed lower incoming turret dps, my own guns won't hit better though, so i just die slower or hope that my mates kill the opposition while i play bait (i would prefer a better tank for this kind of work though). target painter: a bigger sig radius does not help better with tracking than a web or tracking comp, it may help my mates while i play bait though cap rechargers/batteries: on the long run better than injectors, but that implies that i somehow survive the fight before starting it shield extenders: hmm... eh? shield boosters: cap problems guns with this (god forbid i left the mwd on) hull repairer: i'd rather actively tank armor ship and cargo sensors: now i can add insult to injury and acctually see what crappy setup killed me
eveo 101 ftv ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it. |
Stormhold
Art of War Exalted.
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 11:45:00 -
[45]
Nerfing nanos is needed, but I do not know if the proposed changes themselves are be good - due to posted problems with blaster ships for example. Vagabond, atleast, should still be usable for nanoing in some decree. The fact that it can't permarun mwd or shoot while mwding make it a lot more passable than a nano ishtar for example (even though an ishtar's drones are ludicrously easy to blow up.), even though it's max speeds could be nerfed, it - for example - should still be able to use the same tactics for fighting. I mean, what's the point of vaga if it's expected to be an autocannon deimos anyway? Deimos itself is already pointless. I do fear hacs will become bigger AFs with this nerf. Atleast some hacs will need rebalancing if they can't nano up.
What is wrong with nano hacs/recons then? Their ability to flee from anything. The counters are webs and neuts, and only webs can really catch them, since in most cases a good pilot can get out even if hit by neuts. What ships do these two things well enough then? Minmatar recons and amarr recons, which are (apart from pilgrim, but it has no range bonus anyway) nanoed up themselves too. Now, the only really viable way to actually kill and not just drive away nano setups is to surprise them with a rapier or a huginn. So, the only real counter are highly specialized t2 ships of a single race that are also generally nanoed up themselves since it's the most viable setup? Oh god, that is so very wrong. Sure, neuts in battleships or curse can do wonders, but killing a decent pilot even with those will be hard. Sure, they'll flee, but that's not the same.
The above is not the reason I really hate nano ships though. The reason I hate them is that they make me see no point in flying pretty much anything else than remote repairing battleships, nanoed up recons, nanoed up hacs, falcon or interdictors of either variety. I was going to buy myself a hurricane or a harbinger, but it struck me, what do I actually need these ships for? Apart from killing single non-nanoed non-decently fitted-battleship targets (yes, there are that many total idiots, just yesterday a corpmate soloed an idiotically fitted rattlesnake in an onyx.) they wouldn't be really useful, as a nanoed up ishtar could pretty much do the same and also attack battleships or fight with very bad odds. Sure, though, a battlecruiser could actually web that drake who you just happen to encounter at a gate without a faction web and survive it, but it isn't a big enough tradeoff.
In the bottom line, nano ships aren't that miraculously untouchable as some people claim they are, but they are very much so, and that does need to be nerfed. If not for the ships themselves, for making traditional tank and/or gank viable again in smaller size classes too. I for one enjoyed this game more when the only nanoed web avoiding ships were pretty much crow and vaga (and both considerably slower than nowadays, btw). Remember people actually solo roaming in battleships once in a while? Remember interceptor gangs which could solo a battleship - but with a lot of effort? Hell, remember people actually almost always trying to defend themselves from you ganking them (or vice versa) and actually causing you some sort of danger?
That is what I miss in EVE, and EVE could still be more like that, if just CCP had kept things like rigs and gang bonuses and many other things out of the equation, or atleast made them play a much smaller role.
Oh, and along speed nerfs also nerf the ability of battleships to neut the shit out of smaller ships so easily. Make neuts less usable against smaller ship classes (for example heavy should be ok against bs and cs, but against cruiser or smaller it should neut considerably less already). Smaller ships need to survive with something, currently it is speed, and I do firmly believe that a ship two sizes smaller than the ship attacking it should be quite decent at avoiding damage.
|
Stormhold
Art of War Exalted.
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 11:49:00 -
[46]
Also, with current proposed changes, making afterburners considerably faster (starting from +200% speed or something atleast) might not be a bad idea. Might also allow webs to be a bit stronger than proposed.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 12:36:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Stormhold Also, with current proposed changes, making afterburners considerably faster (starting from +200% speed or something atleast) might not be a bad idea. Might also allow webs to be a bit stronger than proposed.
200% speed is mwd boost levels ffs.
What difference do you see boosting afterburners making in gang combat if all you need do is hit f1-f8 to melt the ship using it?.
|
Nostejio
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:09:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Murina 200% speed is mwd boost levels ffs.
What difference do you see boosting afterburners making in gang combat if all you need do is hit f1-f8 to melt the ship using it?.
It's actually a massive difference. The math on tracking is huge on speed AND sig. A vaga with such an afterburner would do possible 1500? That's 1/4 The speed as the current mwd speeds with decent skills and 2 poly I's. With 1/5th the sig radius. The math on tracking and sig is multiplication. Essentially That means you're losing a 4x on speed but gaining a 5x on sig.
Very rough math not doing rad's/sec here sorry.. someone else can... lol
6000m/s / 550sig radius, diameter from end to end is actually 1100. So the ratio at max trans looking at the ship sideways which is usually the longest way from the guns perspective, is 6000:1100 or 5.4545~
After the nerf it would be 1500:220 or 6.8181~. Its an increased ratio in your favor by 25%. Or in plain english it would make the vagabond 25% harder to hit.
|
Stormhold
Art of War Exalted.
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 14:22:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Stormhold on 09/10/2008 14:23:18
Originally by: Murina 200% speed is mwd boost levels ffs.
Could I have some of those 'shrooms too, please?
http://www.eve-online.com/itemdatabase/EN/shipequipment/propulsion/microwarpdrives/12076.asp For refrence, t2 mwds still seem to be 550% without any skills just like when I started EVE, t1 500%. 200% base speed afterburners or something like that would hardly make them obsolete in terms of speed when speed is what is needed.
While this would probably not make it viable itself - mind you, I can't be bothered to make more throughout calculations about perfect speed boost amounts etc - I do think it might not be a bad idea to seperate modules which's main function is to get close to the enemy (blaster ships, for example) or far away from the enemy fast and then not care about speed after that and the modules which allow you to keep them on and speed tank, to some degree atleast. This would be a very drastic change and need a pile of other stuff balanced around it, but yeah, aren't they nerfing a huge load of stuff heavily now in any case?
And by speed tanking I don't necessarily mean current stay out of web range-stuff. With nerfed webs that might mean closer orbit. Point is, currently afterburners are rather useless in pvp, and the difference between AB and MWD speed boost is so high that you can easily increase AB speed and possibly make it an useful module. After all, it won't **** your capacitor, needs less cap to run, doesn't increase signature and is easier to fit.
|
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 16:16:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Fullmetal Jackass on 09/10/2008 16:25:01
Originally by: Chi Quan
Originally by: Stork DK Fight in falloff for less tracking \o/
i need MORE tracking not less.
unlike projectiles, hybrid weapons, especially blasters do not use falloff, your damage goes down too much (falloff largest auocannon=16km; falloff largest blaster=10km) lighter blasters with more tracking also have less range and falloff, while projectile weapons have the same falloff in their class. in short, blasters aren't meant to and don't fight in falloff. using falloff rigs makes sense with projectiles, not with hybrids (ok, maybe with rails if you want to snipe)
Straight out of the CCP tracking guide. They even say it twice: "So to repeat: the goal for every pilot is to find a distance where the range penalty doesn't reduce the chance to hit by too much and the turret is still able to track the target."
Optimal plus falloff is still a 50% hit rate. Battle ship blaster cannons are higher damage and have a faster ROF then BS AC's. They track at almost exactly the same speed. Nuets vs 800mm for example have 1.5 times the optimal but 60% of the fall off. It's still 10km. Use it. There is a 15% diff in opt + fall off. I'm pretty sure blasters put out at least 15% more dps then AC's. Deal with it.
Gallente gank ships have ruled pvp for as long as I've been playing (two and a half years btw). Activate MWD, aproach, scram, web, lauch drones, activate blasters, win. (At least they finally fixed NOS.) Heaven forbid you might have to change tactics and set up a bit. Or even worse, fly in a gang.
Speed is gettin reworked. It's happening. Find a way to make it work like the rest of everyone else.
|
|
Kopkiller
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 18:58:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass
Gallente gank ships have ruled small scale and solo pvp for as long as I've been playing (two and a half years btw). Activate MWD, aproach, scram, web, lauch drones, activate blasters, win. (At least they finally fixed NOS.) Heaven forbid you might have to change tactics and set up a bit. Or even worse, fly in a gang. .
ROFLMAO
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 19:07:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Murina on 09/10/2008 19:11:57
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass
Gallente gank ships have ruled small scale and solo pvp for as long as I've been playing (two and a half years btw). Activate MWD, aproach, scram, web, lauch drones, activate blasters, win. (At least they finally fixed NOS.) Heaven forbid you might have to change tactics and set up a bit. Or even worse, fly in a gang. .
Yea i mean wtf would eve come to if all the thousands of regular 1 v 1 bs fights in eve suddenly became rare and gang fighting was the norm.......hey wait.......
Dude stop posting every time you post you lokk more naive and stupid.
PS: nos still kicks ass if you know how to use it correctly in BS fighting, i challenge you to come on sisi and il give you a lesson in 1v1 BS fighting on my main.
|
Chi Quan
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 20:20:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass ...
as stated, my options are limited (more like non existent). i explicitly excluded autocannons from the the arguments because i know less about them than blasters (i confess, after the EA upgrade, i started a minmatar alt. for, you guessed it, nanos, but i'm not complaining about that, i almost lost hope ccp would actually do something against nanos so i tried jumping on the bandwagon. you know, good old "adapt or gtfo")
but i still don't understand why i, as someone who did not use fotm-tactics, has to suffer because someone else did. and this p***es me of the most. i spend a long time getting to t2 blasters, something around half a year, and now this.
you may not have seen how bob was beaten in the late 07 alliance tournament in the final round by 10 thoraxes. hell, that was a hell of a good fight. and nowhere near overpowered (ppl actually said bobs setup was overpowered). you should watch it some time it was really fun.
the ruling of solo pvp by gallente was largely because of favorable slot layout: mids for tackle, lows for tank. nano put an end to this, vagas, claymores, sacrileges and curses ruled solo pvp, again due to favorable slot layout: enough mids for tackle and tank + speed in the lows (+ polys) ---- You don't have to like it - I don't blame you for not liking it. |
Dizeezer Velar
Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 21:15:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Dizeezer Velar on 09/10/2008 21:16:17 double post
|
Dizeezer Velar
Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 21:16:00 -
[55]
Stork DK Blasters will be fine even with the web nerf. Most heavy blaster ships have plenty of midslots for a dual web.
Dead wrong, in fact, ridiculous statement.
|
KiIIBiII
|
Posted - 2008.10.09 22:43:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 04/10/2008 15:00:09
Originally by: ollobrains2 mmm im a armour tanker u mean ill be more competitive in pvp not necessarily win but not be insta death from a nano gang or a nano pilot - hurrah needs to be a balance
To be competitive in pvp you need to improve your team work and individual skills, crying to ccp to lower the bar so what ever silly ratting fit you are using can be effective against true pvpers fitted to kill things has never been successful and never will be (although the whining on this forum shows that you carebears are still trying lol).
You will still "insta death" (what ever that means) from roaming gangs of ships even if nano is nerfed or are you so deluded that you think pvpers are going to start choosing fits that will lose??.
The problem is not nano it is you and the sooner you come to terms with that and start improving youe piloting and teamwork skills the better for eve and yourself tbh.
Lol and lol again, nano need nerfing alot, and don't say things like improving somwhones skills or that if somwhone buy fit/implants for xx bil he should go as fast as they go, simple example, vega going 19km/s webed will go 3km/s and will get out of your web range in half of second, and thats why it need to be nerfed, becouse spending isk and sp can't make you immortal, and such vega is immortal!
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 08:49:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Murina on 10/10/2008 08:53:27
Originally by: KiIIBiII
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: ollobrains2 mmm im a armour tanker u mean ill be more competitive in pvp not necessarily win but not be insta death from a nano gang or a nano pilot - hurrah needs to be a balance
To be competitive in pvp you need to improve your team work and individual skills, crying to ccp to lower the bar so what ever silly ratting fit you are using can be effective against true pvpers fitted to kill things has never been successful and never will be (although the whining on this forum shows that you carebears are still trying lol).
You will still "insta death" (what ever that means) from roaming gangs of ships even if nano is nerfed or are you so deluded that you think pvpers are going to start choosing fits that will lose??.
The problem is not nano it is you and the sooner you come to terms with that and start improving youe piloting and teamwork skills the better for eve and yourself tbh.
Lol and lol again, nano need nerfing alot, and don't say things like improving somwhones skills or that if somwhone buy fit/implants for xx bil he should go as fast as they go, simple example, vega going 19km/s webed will go 3km/s and will get out of your web range in half of second, and thats why it need to be nerfed, becouse spending isk and sp can't make you immortal, and such vega is immortal!
You have never seen a vaga doing 19kms in combat as its a dream fit nobody uses apart from maybe on sisi or in safe space to show off to buddies, but even if they had it would be useless cos at 6kms it cannot hit anything let alone 19kms.
Needing to use unrealistic and useless fits to add substance to this stupid nerf is pathetic. But hey if the 19kms fits disappeared tomorrow i nor any other pvper would be bothered in the slightest. |
Zey Nadar
Gallente Heavily Utilized Mechanic Mayhem Einherjar Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 10:04:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Murina
Dude stop posting every time you post you look more naive and stupid.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 10:06:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Murina on 10/10/2008 10:08:22
Originally by: Zey Nadar
Originally by: Murina
Dude stop posting every time you post you look more naive and stupid.
Oh look a troll with nothing to add to the discussion.
Full post for relevance:
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass
Gallente gank ships have ruled small scale and solo pvp for as long as I've been playing (two and a half years btw). Activate MWD, aproach, scram, web, lauch drones, activate blasters, win. (At least they finally fixed NOS.) Heaven forbid you might have to change tactics and set up a bit. Or even worse, fly in a gang. .
Yea i mean wtf would eve come to if all the thousands of regular 1 v 1 bs fights in eve suddenly became rare and gang fighting was the norm.......hey wait.......
Dude stop posting every time you post you look more naive and stupid.
PS: NOS still kicks ass if you know how to use it correctly in BS fighting, i challenge you to come on sisi and il give you a lesson in 1v1 BS fighting on my main. |
KiIIBiII
|
Posted - 2008.10.10 22:09:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 10/10/2008 08:58:32
Originally by: KiIIBiII
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: ollobrains2 mmm im a armour tanker u mean ill be more competitive in pvp not necessarily win but not be insta death from a nano gang or a nano pilot - hurrah needs to be a balance
To be competitive in pvp you need to improve your team work and individual skills, crying to ccp to lower the bar so what ever silly ratting fit you are using can be effective against true pvpers fitted to kill things has never been successful and never will be (although the whining on this forum shows that you carebears are still trying lol).
You will still "insta death" (what ever that means) from roaming gangs of ships even if nano is nerfed or are you so deluded that you think pvpers are going to start choosing fits that will lose??.
The problem is not nano it is you and the sooner you come to terms with that and start improving youe piloting and teamwork skills the better for eve and yourself tbh.
Lol and lol again, nano need nerfing alot, and don't say things like improving somwhones skills or that if somwhone buy fit/implants for xx bil he should go as fast as they go, simple example, vega going 19km/s webed will go 3km/s and will get out of your web range in half of second, and thats why it need to be nerfed, becouse spending isk and sp can't make you immortal, and such vega is immortal!
You have never seen a vaga doing 19kms (and 90% web = 1.9kms btw) in combat as its a ultra rare dream fit nobody uses apart from maybe on EFT, sisi or in safe space to show off to buddies, but even if they had it would be useless cos at 6kms it cannot hit anything due to transversal let alone at 19kms.
Needing to use unrealistic and useless fits to add substance to this stupid nerf is disgusting, and screwing over the entire game because of them is pathetic. But hey if the 19kms fits disappeared tomorrow i nor any other pvper would be bothered in the slightest as long as the others were left alone.
If you never sow such then don't speak up about nano nerf and mayby somtimes visit some 0.0 then you will have good view on how nano is annoing, its simply way to pvp for evryone with lack of brain in fight and tactic (and TS web 80% = 3.8kms btw). |
|
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 07:59:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 09/10/2008 19:56:43
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass
Gallente gank ships have ruled small scale and solo pvp for as long as I've been playing (two and a half years btw). Activate MWD, aproach, scram, web, lauch drones, activate blasters, win. (At least they finally fixed NOS.) Heaven forbid you might have to change tactics and set up a bit. Or even worse, fly in a gang. .
Yea i mean wtf would eve come to if all the thousands of regular 1 v 1 bs fights in eve suddenly became rare and gang fighting was the norm.......hey wait.......
Dude stop posting every time you post you look more naive and stupid.
PS: NOS still kicks ass if you know how to use it correctly in BS fighting, i challenge you to come on sisi and il give you a lesson in 1v1 BS fighting on my main.
Dude yer such a troll. Still ****ed I stopped talkin to you in the other thread? Game's not balanced around 1v1.
PS: I never said anything negative about nos, I said they fixed it. It's no longer required pvp gear, aka blanced.
|
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 08:05:00 -
[62]
BTW I notice you edit nearly every post you've ever made? Can't get it right the first time? Proof read much? Or do you just like play games and change your posts after people reply?
Epic fail at debate. Decent troll though.
|
Esmenet
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 08:32:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass BTW I notice you edit nearly every post you've ever made? Can't get it right the first time? Proof read much? Or do you just like play games and change your posts after people reply?
Epic fail at debate. Decent troll though.
Well at least he has a clue about pvp, something you fail at.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 08:46:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:04:03
Originally by: KiIIBiII
If you never sow such then don't speak up about nano nerf and maybe sometimes visit some 0.0 then you will have good view on how nano is annoing, its simply way to pvp for everyone with lack of brain in fight and tactic (and TS web 80% = 3.8kms btw).
So:
1. Next time you post a speed decrease i suggest you post web type along with it as anybody can do math and the strongest web = 90%.
2. I have lived in 0.0 for years as a pure pvper and i have never seen a gang of 19kms hacs in combat or even one in combat for that matter, the norm is 4-6km depending on the type and maybe a occasional 8-10km pimped out one.
3. Slowing ships so f1-f8 in pve ships is not skilled pvp pal.
4. Nano is not annoying to fight against its fun to fight against cos it requires skill, team work and good choices to combat it, instead of the static f1-f8 crap you get ratting.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 09:06:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:31 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:26 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:21 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:14 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:09 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:10:50
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass BTW I notice you edit nearly every post you've ever made? Can't get it right the first time? Proof read much?
Your right correcting spelling mistakes is the real issue here..........
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 11:29:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Murina
4. Nano is not annoying to fight against its fun to fight against cos it requires skill, team work and good choices to combat it, instead of the static f1-f8 crap you get ratting.
Actually nano vs nano are the most fun fights you can get. They depend HEAVILY on pilot skill as compared to blob mentality of BS vs BS (all shoot at one target, if you are dying stfu and do it silently). And if you think any ****** can fly nanoships (thats to previous poster) - i welcome you to try and engage one of our gangs.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 11:56:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: Murina
4. Nano is not annoying to fight against its fun to fight against cos it requires skill, team work and good choices to combat it, instead of the static f1-f8 crap you get ratting.
Actually nano vs nano are the most fun fights you can get. They depend HEAVILY on pilot skill as compared to blob mentality of BS vs BS (all shoot at one target, if you are dying stfu and do it silently). And if you think any ****** can fly nanoships (thats to previous poster) - i welcome you to try and engage one of our gangs.
I enjoyed flying with you on my main while we were in rqm for a while (although some of the rqm pilots/corps sucked you did not) and then in the new TRI.
And your right static blob fighting involves no skill, that is why the nerf hounds are trying to promote it, they figure lowering the bar will help them get kills.
|
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 13:08:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:19:01 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:18:55 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:18:49 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:17:52 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:17:45 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:17:37 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:31 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:26 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:21 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:14 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:11:09 Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 09:10:50
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass BTW I notice you edit nearly every post you've ever made? Can't get it right the first time? Proof read much?
Your right correcting spelling mistakes and posts is the real issue here..........
You may be playing word games and manipulating the truth to serve you noobish and skilless ends, i suppose that's why you think correcting posts make difference.
My posts and content can be read by all and are still correct no matter how many edit's their are.
Yer just ****ed that the nano nerf is finally goin through and trollin it up in the mean time. Enjoy the nerf. I know I can't wait for the tears.
|
Fullmetal isaJackass
Hide behind a alt corp
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 15:29:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass
Yer just ****ed that the nano nerf is finally goin through and trollin it up in the mean time. Enjoy the nerf. I know I can't wait for the tears.
I guess this must the biggest victory you have had in eve then? other then sucking roids and posting with alts that is?
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 15:51:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 15:54:29
Originally by: Fullmetal isaJackass
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass
Yer just ****ed that the nano nerf is finally goin through and trollin it up in the mean time. Enjoy the nerf. I know I can't wait for the tears.
I guess this must the biggest victory you have had in eve then? other then sucking roids and posting with alts that is?
/signed.....morons always need sumat to blame, he will proly spam the forums with cloaking and sniping nerf threads as soon as this is over, anything to avoid the real truth (he sucks at pvp and is afraid of failing if he tries to learn).
Still they are gonna put this on sisi first so i have no doubt myself and others will be testing it to see how viable cruiser and smaller ships are in gang pvp.
Ok ok we all know (at least us pvpers do) that without speed they are gonna get insta melted in gang combat but with undeniable proof ccp will need to rethink again or just go ahead implement a nerf that makes most cruiser hulls and all smaller hulls pointless to fly in gang pvp.
|
|
ArmyOfMe
Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 16:04:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Murina
Ok ok we all know (at least us pvpers do) that without speed they are gonna get insta melted in gang combat but with undeniable proof ccp will need to rethink again or just go ahead implement a nerf that makes most cruiser hulls and all smaller hulls pointless to fly in gang pvp.
Sadly i fear that there are to few people testing this on sisi, and usally the test pvp is nothing like tq pvp so the devs will simply not notice the real problems at first.
My guess is that the nerf will come on tq. then the players that never really bother using the forums(and thats a LOT) will notice the problems as well and come on the forums to whine. Dont think that even if most of eve starts whining that the devs will say they did something wrong and will continue like everything is ok.
Originally by: deadmaus
Because by the time we had calmed Plague down after he heard BoB were back in the vicinity it was too late to do anything |
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 16:11:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Murina on 11/10/2008 16:13:52
Originally by: ArmyOfMe
Originally by: Murina
Ok ok we all know (at least us pvpers do) that without speed they are gonna get insta melted in gang combat but with undeniable proof ccp will need to rethink again or just go ahead implement a nerf that makes most cruiser hulls and all smaller hulls pointless to fly in gang pvp.
Sadly i fear that there are to few people testing this on sisi, and usally the test pvp is nothing like tq pvp so the devs will simply not notice the real problems at first.
My guess is that the nerf will come on tq. then the players that never really bother using the forums(and thats a LOT) will notice the problems as well and come on the forums to whine. Dont think that even if most of eve starts whining that the devs will say they did something wrong and will continue like everything is ok.
Maybe but with the last patch i put together gangs of up to 30 per side (mostly 10-20 per side though)with a fella who used "red crayon" to type in local to oversee and check results.
The tests were as fair and as varied as we could make them, both sides took turns in all the various setups and ship types we used, and we had players from both sides of the fence who participated in the testing.
|
ArmyOfMe
Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 16:49:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Murina
But with the last patch i put together gangs of up to 30 per side (mostly 10-20 per side though)with a fella who used "red crayon" to type in local (ccp dude) to oversee and check results.
The tests were as fair and as varied as we could make them, both sides took turns in all the various setups and ship types we used, and we had players from both sides of the fence who participated in the testing.
Even the most deluded nerfits and carebears who wanna kill gang pvp for f1-f8 pve ship blobs cannot deny actual factual results.
I agree, and i remember your test results from sisi and have no doubts they were done correctly. but what i ment was that a lot of these problems wont start showing until roaming gangs on tq actually venture into 0,0 systems controlled by alliances that knows what they are doing were they will run into large bubbles, jump bridges, carriers, motherships and even titans from time to time(hello tribute).
once all those drawbacks start showing you will see a lot more people crying to get nanos back, while sadly ppl like jackass a few posts up will laugh their asses off sitting in cyno jammed systems with large bubble camps all around so they can mine/rat in peace.
Originally by: deadmaus
Because by the time we had calmed Plague down after he heard BoB were back in the vicinity it was too late to do anything |
Fullmetal Jackass
|
Posted - 2008.10.11 21:14:00 -
[74]
Ahhhhh, the bitter tears of joy for me. I haven't had this much fun on the forums in ages.
|
lebrata
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 08:46:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass
Ahhhhh, the bitter tears of joy for me. I haven't had this much fun on the forums in ages.
I see you learned forum posting from the goons while they were spanking you last year.
Originally by: Fullmetal Jackass Edit: BTW the changes aren't done yet so your whines and doomsaying are premature. I doubt you all will be happy, but I'm reasonably sure CCP can come up with a balanced fix.
I find it hard to put my faith in a group of ppl who created a mission that needed a mwd...in a dead space area.
|
Zey Nadar
Gallente Heavily Utilized Mechanic Mayhem Einherjar Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 11:51:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: Murina
4. Nano is not annoying to fight against its fun to fight against cos it requires skill, team work and good choices to combat it, instead of the static f1-f8 crap you get ratting.
Actually nano vs nano are the most fun fights you can get. They depend HEAVILY on pilot skill as compared to blob mentality of BS vs BS (all shoot at one target, if you are dying stfu and do it silently).
They depend heavily on your characters skillsheet, your ship, and the money you got. This is the issue I got with it.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 12:04:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Murina on 12/10/2008 12:07:08
Originally by: Zey Nadar
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: Murina
4. Nano is not annoying to fight against its fun to fight against cos it requires skill, team work and good choices to combat it, instead of the static f1-f8 crap you get ratting.
Actually nano vs nano are the most fun fights you can get. They depend HEAVILY on pilot skill as compared to blob mentality of BS vs BS (all shoot at one target, if you are dying stfu and do it silently).
They depend heavily on your characters skillsheet, your ship, and the money you got. This is the issue I got with it.
An interesting argument although every race can fit a form of nano ship, navigational skills should be trained anyway and the cost at the moment on TQ for the standardly used nano ship is around 150-200mil depending on type and choice of rigs.
A couple of billion will give you a extra boost to speed but i have found that its not really worth flying in real and regular combat with a 2-3 or more billion isk ship.
Its not such a huge benefit as it seems cost/risk wise as needing to slow to non mwd speeds to do dmg and be effective is a great leveler for pimped nano compared to std fitted nano unless your in a ishtar (and drones die easily) and even fully snaked a ishy can be hit doing 9kms by a lot of ships.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 12:07:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Zey Nadar
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: Murina
4. Nano is not annoying to fight against its fun to fight against cos it requires skill, team work and good choices to combat it, instead of the static f1-f8 crap you get ratting.
Actually nano vs nano are the most fun fights you can get. They depend HEAVILY on pilot skill as compared to blob mentality of BS vs BS (all shoot at one target, if you are dying stfu and do it silently).
They depend heavily on your characters skillsheet, your ship, and the money you got. This is the issue I got with it.
So you think that in 30 vs 30 nano brawl having one 5bil ship means you automatically win? Get gang, come to vale please.
|
Zey Nadar
Gallente Heavily Utilized Mechanic Mayhem Einherjar Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 12:43:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
So you think that in 30 vs 30 nano brawl having one 5bil ship means you automatically win? Get gang, come to vale please.
No, that is not what I said. My point was that the talk about 'skill-intensiveness' I often see nanopilots use is poppy**** since issues I listed always come first in a RPG-type game. Plus I play other games if I want something skill-intensive. In fact im participating in world cyber games world final in november in one. Anybody who thinks that a laggy MMO is something 'skill-intensive' is delusional.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 17:29:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Zey Nadar Anybody who thinks that a laggy MMO is something 'skill-intensive' is delusional.
Steer clear of laggy blob fighting and stick to small to med gang fighting you will be surprised how skill intensive it can be and how much you need to rely on team work to be successful.
|
|
Trojanman190
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 19:19:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Zey Nadar
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: Murina
4. Nano is not annoying to fight against its fun to fight against cos it requires skill, team work and good choices to combat it, instead of the static f1-f8 crap you get ratting.
Actually nano vs nano are the most fun fights you can get. They depend HEAVILY on pilot skill as compared to blob mentality of BS vs BS (all shoot at one target, if you are dying stfu and do it silently).
They depend heavily on your characters skillsheet, your ship, and the money you got. This is the issue I got with it.
Why should this be an issue? You don't don't get a flat bonus in eve for being 4 levels higher than someone and saying the amount of money you have shouldn't matter makes the entire concept of loss in eve ridiculous. What would be the point if losing your titan meant nothing? What would you work for? Epic mounts?
Nanoships are expensive - older players probably have or know how to make isk. Nanoships are sp intensive - older players have lots of sp. Nanoships are skill intensive - older players have been doing this for a very long time...
This being an rpg where losing a ship means you completely lose the ship, I think you are missing the entire point of not only eve but rpgs in general by saying that skill points and wealth don't matter.
Also, I just caught this, but you mentioned that your 'your ship' should not be an issue. Well, this being a game about internet space ships.... wtf should matter if not the ship?
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |