EVE Search - this speed stuff is ridiculous

All Channels

Ships and Modules

this speed stuff is ridiculous

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Syn G Gallente Pegasus Mining and Securities	Posted - 2008.10.09 17:05:00 - [1] all this nerfing really is insane. why not just add fitting requirements to overdrives and nano's... since speed is relied on as a "tank," make nanoers choose between "tank" and damage, just like its always been. the only thing is that the fitting requirements would have to be tailored to frigate sized, cruiser sized, and bs sized modules kind of like the after burners and mwd's already are. sounds to me like a lot less work than "completely revamping formulas" and what not. it would bring balance and keep nanoing as a viable option.
Red Thunder Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.10.09 17:33:00 - [2] they already did....its called adding damage mods or adding speed mods Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines
Rajere Vicious Inc	Posted - 2008.10.09 17:45:00 - [3] Edited by: Rajere on 09/10/2008 17:49:02 What part do you not understand? "keeping nanoing as a viable option" is NOT a requirement for the changes, in fact the intention of the changes is more like the opposite. The problem is how we define "viable." People against the nanonerf want to remain invulnerable, or atleast want that to remain a possibility at a certain skill/isk investment. They define "viable" as nanoing remaining overpowered at whatever speeds they personally can achieve and above, but being balanced ie not viable for anyone with less sp/isk invested than whatever they're currently at. It's very hard to agree on what "Viable" means for what is ultimately a binary metric (am I fast enough to avoid risk/disengage at will, or not). They could have not changed anything to do with speeds, and instead announced changes to webs in order to bring nanoing in line. The change would be cahnge the default range of stasis webifier is 50km. 75km for hyena, 100km for rapiers/huginns, do the same with warp disrutors (50km normal, 75km keres/tackle interceptors, 100km on arazu/lachesis). That would have achieved the same results. You're still able to achieve whatever speeds you want, but now your targets will be counter you. non-nano gang A and nano-gang B face off and end up 90% webbing/scrambling each other at range, and the better piloted/organized team wins. Arguments for "keeping nanoing as a viable option" make about as much since in either scenario, whether CCP is nerfing speed directly or boosting everyones ability to counter speed. After the changes, ppl good at nanoing will start dying, people who are bad at it will start dying alot more often. How to Fail at Eve
Red Thunder Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.10.09 17:57:00 - [4] lol that change sounds terrible, would just have gangs stuck 90km from each other unable to move haha Eagles may soar, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines
Rajere Vicious Inc	Posted - 2008.10.09 18:12:00 - [5] Edited by: Rajere on 09/10/2008 18:15:28 assuming neither gang has the foresight to bring effective counters to long range ships, yeah, the nano change will produce hilarious situations like that. ^Note that that the statement is true regardless of whether they nerf speed or boost webs. In general, range will have a greater importance, and you will need to think about counters for it. Again, that statement holds true regardless. Either way, the situation is less silly than what happens when a non-nano gang encounters a nano gang currently. A disorganized gang of non-nano's gets picked apart, an organized team sits there not dying until the nanogang decides to pss off. Ironically both before and after involves two gangs staring each other down at 80-90km unable/unwiling to close range. The only thing that really changes is that if they did implemented either change, the nano-gang will no longer have the option to pss off at their leisure. Either they won't have the speed if they nerf speed, or they'll be webbed and pointed if they boosted webs/points. This allows a non-nano gang to kill off a Nanogang if they're more organized/better prepared than the nanos, an option that is sorely missing currently. How to Fail at Eve
Megan Maynard Minmatar 17th Minmatar Tactical Wing	Posted - 2008.10.09 18:29:00 - [6] Originally by: Rajere Edited by: Rajere on 09/10/2008 18:15:28 assuming neither gang has the foresight to bring effective counters to long range ships, yeah, the nano change will produce hilarious situations like that. ^Note that that the statement is true regardless of whether they nerf speed or boost webs. In general, range will have a greater importance, and you will need to think about counters for it. Again, that statement holds true regardless. Either way, the situation is less silly than what happens when a non-nano gang encounters a nano gang currently. A disorganized gang of non-nano's gets picked apart, an organized team sits there not dying until the nanogang decides to pss off. Ironically both before and after involves two gangs staring each other down at 80-90km unable/unwiling to close range. The only thing that really changes is that if they did implemented either change, the nano-gang will no longer have the option to pss off at their leisure. Either they won't have the speed if they nerf speed, or they'll be webbed and pointed if they boosted webs/points. This allows a non-nano gang to kill off a Nanogang if they're more organized/better prepared than the nanos, an option that is sorely missing currently. You're a freaking idiot. Your assumption that nano ships run around invun all the time proves to me that you are lumping any ship going over 4000 m/s into the same catagory as a 10k/s crow. I'll repeat, you are a freaking idiot. It isn't that hard to kill nano ships, but the whiners whined enough that they are going to over nerf an entire race of ships. I am perfectly content going 4-6 k/s in a stabber, that is nano. The extreme cases are no different then any other extreme, they paid alot of isk for it and are getting what they paid for. With this nerf my hyena barely hits 4 k/s, it's a small expensive death trap now. The stabber goes ~4-5 k/s and is about as agile as a brick. (Which means pilot changes occur slower.) I don't care about webs, scrams, missiles, whatever. What's ****ing me off is because of ONE set of implants they are changing the entire mechanics system of the game. Get rid of the stupid speeds, 10+k/s and leave the rest alone dammit.
slothe Caldari Murky Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.09 20:01:00 - [7] can we just see how it pans out before we complain please.
Rajere Vicious Inc	Posted - 2008.10.09 23:39:00 - [8] Edited by: Rajere on 09/10/2008 23:41:45 toot toot, here comes the clue-train, making a special one time stop just for you, DIAF kthx Tired of schooling you idiots, a 10k crow is only special because it means somebody lolbothered putting rigs on an interceptor worth 2x more than the interceptor, per rig. Or they dropped 25mil on a 1mn mwd and put it on something other than a Sabre. enjoy your 90DPS while you're only able to tackle something while you're orbiting dangerously close to hi2u Heavy Energy Neutralizer, instead of being able to tackle from the other side of the solar system. Take those tech 1 polycarbs and Tech 2 modules and go do 10k in an Ishtar instead. Or go even faster with a zealot, or how about a sacrilege? Pick your favorite Nanoship, they're all broken! idiot.
LadyLubU2 Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.10.10 00:08:00 - [9] Rajere 4 president! -- Sig: NARF FALCONS!!! Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Terianna Eri Amarr Scrutari	Posted - 2008.10.10 00:19:00 - [10] Originally by: Rajere Edited by: Rajere on 09/10/2008 17:49:02 What part do you not understand? "keeping nanoing as a viable option" is NOT a requirement for the changes, in fact the intention of the changes is more like the opposite. The problem is how we define "viable." People against the nanonerf want to remain invulnerable, or atleast want that to remain a possibility at a certain skill/isk investment. They define "viable" as nanoing remaining overpowered at whatever speeds they personally can achieve and above, but being balanced ie not viable for anyone with less sp/isk invested than whatever they're currently at. It's very hard to agree on what "Viable" means for what is ultimately a binary metric (am I fast enough to avoid risk/disengage at will, or not). They could have not changed anything to do with speeds, and instead announced changes to webs in order to bring nanoing in line. The change would be cahnge the default range of stasis webifier is 50km. 75km for hyena, 100km for rapiers/huginns, do the same with warp disrutors (50km normal, 75km keres/tackle interceptors, 100km on arazu/lachesis). That would have achieved the same results. You're still able to achieve whatever speeds you want, but now your targets will be counter you. non-nano gang A and nano-gang B face off and end up 90% webbing/scrambling each other at range, and the better piloted/organized team wins. Arguments for "keeping nanoing as a viable option" make about as much since in either scenario, whether CCP is nerfing speed directly or boosting everyones ability to counter speed. After the changes, ppl good at nanoing will start dying, people who are bad at it will start dying alot more often. __________________________________ Originally by: Arthur Frayn How much to ruin all your holes, luv?
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam Exalted.	Posted - 2008.10.10 00:30:00 - [11] Originally by: slothe can we just see how it pans out before we complain please. This I'm definately going to miss my 3.5km/sec Cerbs as they're buckets of fun to fly, but ultimately dealing 300 dps at up to 180km whilst maintaining such speed is a little silly. And then you have your 7km/sec Vagabonds for when you just want to make all the enemy ceptors log off in frustration. ...but ultimately, if it's overpowered it's overpowered. Besides, It'd be kind of nice to fit something other than Overdrives/Polys for once. - Infectious -
Reto The Last Resort	Posted - 2008.10.10 01:44:00 - [12] Originally by: Rawr Cristina Originally by: slothe can we just see how it pans out before we complain please. ...but ultimately, if it's overpowered it's overpowered. Besides, It'd be kind of nice to fit something other than Overdrives/Polys for once. ...if you want to roam in 0.0 in less than a 20man gang you can forget about it. eve is a blob game and if you cant avoid getting killed by every blobs and camp you cant fight in small scale. fact is. the less mobile you are the less chance in 0.0 you have. ask yourself why every 0.0 alliance with around 500 members can always counter your roaming attempts by a single warp bubble and a couple of snipe bs?
Denuo Secus	Posted - 2008.10.10 02:05:00 - [13] I'm looking forward to this changes. It's so stupid that fitting a MWD (with all it's drawbacks) is mandatory and if I undock in my assault ship today I could also self destruct immediately because as soon a webber hits me I'm dead - immediately. The announced changes don't only nerf nanos...they add so much diversity! Today's PvP seems colorless to me since I read about this planned speed changes! Today it's just: MWD+Web+Point+NanoMagic....Homer Simpson would say "boooring..." ^^ Just my 0.02 ISK
Lubomir Penev Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.10.10 15:08:00 - [14] Originally by: Rawr Cristina Besides, It'd be kind of nice to fit something other than Overdrives/Polys for once. Already happening, locus rigs are the new polys. Can't wait for the whines about uncounterable 150km Zealots and Muninns gangs... -- I'm done whining about AFs, it looks like they are making them right \o/
Crackzilla The Shadow Order	Posted - 2008.10.10 16:11:00 - [15] Originally by: Reto ...if you want to roam in 0.0 in less than a 20man gang you can forget about it. Maybe you meant "if you want to roam in 0.0 mostly risk free or without scouts". There is no right to cross space without risk of being trapped or threatened. Originally by: Reto eve is a blob game and if you cant avoid getting killed by every blobs Thats how it should be. Numbers should provide advantages over quality besides lagging the node out as a pseudo grid wide web. Small groups have the advantage in that they can strike quickly, get in, get out before reinforcements arrive. Classic guerrilla warfare. Originally by: Reto and camp you cant fight in small scale. Can't fight in small scale when throwing a small light mobile force against a larger prepared force that lies in wait. Doesn't mean that small scale cannot be used, only that it must be used smarter. If I recall things didn't turn out so well in the charge of the light brigade. Originally by: Reto ask yourself why every 0.0 alliance with around 500 members can always counter your roaming attempts by a single warp bubble and a couple of snipe bs? Because thats how it should be. A 0.0 alliance with a bit of intel and organization should be able to control a choke point while folks are willing to gate camp. A light mobile force should be seriously threatened at these choke points. The mobile force should be forced to either find a better way in or be prepared to take serious losses. Otherwise what is the point of the choke point? If a bubble and snipers cannot control choke points (which they cannot effectively do today against most roaming gangs) then the bubble + snipers will be replaced with an even larger blob of nanos to counter the roaming nanos. Lots of huginns/rapiers/falcons in the mix. Blacks op were designed to bypass these choke points. They're rarely used because frankly speed is currently better. A nano nerf won't kill small scale pvp. It will only force folks to fight smarter.
Kalii Parcon Fire Mandrill	Posted - 2008.10.10 16:38:00 - [16] This is something that I talked about in a different forum, but it's at least an alternative to whacking some innocent ships while trying to kill off an overpowered tactic: Not that this is a GOOD solution, but if you wanted fast ships to be fast, while keeping slower heavier DPS/Tank ships slower, why don't they just make the MWD a role-specific module? Interceptors, Interdictors etc. Tacklers remain fast (like they are supposed to be) but hardly invincible, while the proposed leveling out of speed based on hull class makes for a much more realistic gradient in speed when MWD's are not even an option. Hit and run guerrilla warfare is still possible, but may require new tactics: webbing, neuting, jamming recons, stealth bombers for DPS etc. after tacklers lock down the target. It's just an idea, but if you want to nerf an overpowered tactic it's important to be careful that you nerf the tactic without alienating your player base by nullifying months of training as may be the case with some gallente and minmatar pilots. A large portion of gallente ships rely on close quarters, minmatar rely on their speed at a racial level. You could even work in an AB bonus to ships that rely on speed or close quarter. Boosting an afterburners performance isn't the game breaking mechanic, its offering that same percentage based bonus to a module that already gives a gigantic boost that makes larger hulls going 4+ km/s overpowered. For the people arguing that the removal of MWD's will make it impossible to move around solo in 0.0 space, interceptors will still be able to MWD, and covops will still be able to cloak. If you're taking anything larger than that through 0.0 space solo, you're already taking a big risk. Just an alternative to the broad strokes that MAY whack some innocent ships and pilots.
Eternum Praetorian Tupperware Party	Posted - 2008.10.10 16:45:00 - [17] Wont Af's and recons be the new roaming speed gangs of the future? And with AB's to boot do to the changes.
Reto The Last Resort	Posted - 2008.10.10 17:32:00 - [18] Edited by: Reto on 10/10/2008 17:33:53 Originally by: Crackzilla <<crackzilla quoting reto>> dude the game is not only about blobs and alliances controlling 0.0 i and a huge portion of eves pvpers want and need the fun of everyday raids. if you allow everyone to controll chokepoints to easily this leads to eve become a stagnant and pretty small universe wheree you cant travel 5 jumps undisturbed. read my last posts i tested 0.0 travel and tbfh its simply a gankers advatage atm ppl who sit around a blob up a gate can kill anyone while you cant even avoid camps as chokepoints bridge the main routes in 0.0. atm blob > all. and ccps stated game policy is to kill blobs. also the last devblog revealed that skirmishes are a viable tactic and the devs want to preserve em. but if you enforce the chokepoint control of alliances and campers you force skirmishes to extinct. skirmishes are about mobility and eves infrastructure is not capable of allowing you free spaceflight as you have to use bottlenecks like gates. Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
Crackzilla The Shadow Order	Posted - 2008.10.10 18:35:00 - [19] Originally by: Kalii Parcon why don't they just make the MWD a role-specific module? Interceptors, Interdictors etc. The issue is that the best way to doing this is to increase mass and possible reduce the effectiveness of mwd for everything else. This creates problems with blaster boats etc as previously stated. My guess is when we're done falcon alts will be used to create slings for blaster boats that can't slow boat 50km. Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Wont Af's and recons be the new roaming speed gangs of the future? Thats the entire point of these changes. Light mobile forces with minimal tanking and not much dps. Effective as a small group. Maybe even stealth bombers might make a return as the dps of choice. One could hope black ops ships are useful. Originally by: Reto i and a huge portion of eves pvpers want and need the fun of everyday raids and smallscale gangwarfare. if you allow everyone to controll chokepoints too easily this leads to eve becoming a stagnant and pretty small universe where you cant travel 5 jumps undisturbed without a huge force. If someone wants to dedicate the resources they should be able to force a fight on a gate. Rather then nano gang jump in, mwd outside of bubble and warp off (or back to the gate if they had no scout). If you allow nanos then eve is stagnant and a very small universe where you don't dare fight if the other side might have reinforcements 5 jumps away. Originally by: Reto read my last posts i tested 0.0 travel and tbfh its simply a gankers advantage atm ppl. who sit around and blob up a gate can kill anyone while you cant even avoid camps as chokepoints bridge the main routes in 0.0. atm blob > all. Scout entrances into 0.0. Usually there are alternative ways in that aren't as camped. Look at using black ops to get into 0.0. All issues you've listed can be solved with better planning. Originally by: Reto skirmishes are about mobility and eves infrastructure is not capable of allowing you free spaceflight as you have to use bottlenecks like gates. skirmishes are about brains, intel, and patience. You're going behind enemy lines. There is something wrong with this trend of freely traveling 40-50 jumps as you go down main street. Originally by: Reto i for one would hate to get my scout killed every time we run to a chokepoint just to see if theres a blob on the other side of the gate. But this is what scouts are for. This is what the map is for to tell you how many are in each system. Either way jumping blind into a gate should involve considerable risk.
Reto The Last Resort	Posted - 2008.10.10 22:31:00 - [20] Originally by: Crackzilla >>anti-pyramid quatage<< mate did you listen to the dev blog and reconed that currently you cannot forsee a gate camp other than using a scout and due to the intended changes scouts cant survive a camp? also its not a huge dedication to place a bubble on a gate. and lest. i wasnt just scouting entries into 0.0 was traveling in deep 0.0 aswell. i also think you dont want to understand that roaming is about flying around in 0.0 and not utilising expensive and costly equipment like black ops. also did you consider that a black ops bs can only enter a system for a silly price in fuel and also it is only capable of bridging in covert ops ships which is making smallscale player resort to cloaking ganks. eve is for everyone and not just for ppl who want to secure space easily. sorry but your view seems narrow minded and you would accept the negleting of one playergroup for the gain of the other and this is not balance. Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
sdthujfg	Posted - 2008.10.10 22:48:00 - [21] Originally by: Megan Maynard You're a freaking idiot. Your assumption that nano ships run around invun all the time proves to me that you are lumping any ship going over 4000 m/s into the same catagory as a 10k/s crow. I'll repeat, you are a freaking idiot. It isn't that hard to kill nano ships, but the whiners whined enough that they are going to over nerf an entire race of ships. I am perfectly content going 4-6 k/s in a stabber, that is nano. The extreme cases are no different then any other extreme, they paid alot of isk for it and are getting what they paid for. With this nerf my hyena barely hits 4 k/s, it's a small expensive death trap now. The stabber goes ~4-5 k/s and is about as agile as a brick. (Which means pilot changes occur slower.) I don't care about webs, scrams, missiles, whatever. What's ****ing me off is because of ONE set of implants they are changing the entire mechanics system of the game. Get rid of the stupid speeds, 10+k/s and leave the rest alone dammit. How does it feel to lie page after page to prove a point that doesnt exist or are you so stupid that you cant see why nanos have to be nerfed?
sdthujfg	Posted - 2008.10.10 22:49:00 - [22] Originally by: Lubomir Penev Originally by: Rawr Cristina Besides, It'd be kind of nice to fit something other than Overdrives/Polys for once. Already happening, locus rigs are the new polys. Can't wait for the whines about uncounterable 150km Zealots and Muninns gangs... And cov ops cloaking 240km falcons are more counterable? I think zealots and muninns are the least of your range problems.
Grimpak Gallente Trinity Nova Trinity Nova Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.10 22:57:00 - [23] troll baiting, but hey... gonna quote myself here now: Originally by: Grimpak a simple nerf to polys and snakes would be enough to counter the "ludicrious speed" nanos, and still be able to make ships that go fast, go fast. but we all know how CCP deals with nerfs (ie, using a sledgehammer approach to nail down a single nail). --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.10.10 23:05:00 - [24] yet another nano thread that Rajere is fail posting in...
carleyjones Caldari Blood and Silver	Posted - 2008.10.10 23:17:00 - [25] Originally by: Rajere Edited by: Rajere on 09/10/2008 17:49:02 What part do you not understand? "keeping nanoing as a viable option" is NOT a requirement for the changes, in fact the intention of the changes is more like the opposite. The problem is how we define "viable." People against the nanonerf want to remain invulnerable, or atleast want that to remain a possibility at a certain skill/isk investment. They define "viable" as nanoing remaining overpowered at whatever speeds they personally can achieve and above, but being balanced ie not viable for anyone with less sp/isk invested than whatever they're currently at. It's very hard to agree on what "Viable" means for what is ultimately a binary metric (am I fast enough to avoid risk/disengage at will, or not). They could have not changed anything to do with speeds, and instead announced changes to webs in order to bring nanoing in line. The change would be cahnge the default range of stasis webifier is 50km. 75km for hyena, 100km for rapiers/huginns, do the same with warp disrutors (50km normal, 75km keres/tackle interceptors, 100km on arazu/lachesis). That would have achieved the same results. You're still able to achieve whatever speeds you want, but now your targets will be counter you. non-nano gang A and nano-gang B face off and end up 90% webbing/scrambling each other at range, and the better piloted/organized team wins. Arguments for "keeping nanoing as a viable option" make about as much since in either scenario, whether CCP is nerfing speed directly or boosting everyones ability to counter speed. After the changes, ppl good at nanoing will start dying, people who are bad at it will start dying alot more often. Nanos SHOULD remain viable and yet again nothing in your post proves otherwise. Nanos have always been viable, even back in 04/05 but people chose to fly other style fittings & ships instead. People relied less on nano fits because there were no dictors, large anchored bubbles, cyno jammers, jump bridges and the like. The eve pvp landscape over the years has changed by ccp and people adapted by using nanos. Aside from the fact that the nerf is just poorly thought out; you can't just drop speeds by half and then sort missiles a bit - if they were to do this nerf properly, they'd have to look at turret tracking, optimal ranges of EVERY SINGLE WEAPON IN THE GAME, decloak ranges on gates, bubble diameter and all the rest which links in to ship speed in some way.
Megan Maynard Minmatar 17th Minmatar Tactical Wing	Posted - 2008.10.10 23:43:00 - [26] Originally by: sdthujfg Originally by: Megan Maynard You're a freaking idiot. Your assumption that nano ships run around invun all the time proves to me that you are lumping any ship going over 4000 m/s into the same catagory as a 10k/s crow. I'll repeat, you are a freaking idiot. It isn't that hard to kill nano ships, but the whiners whined enough that they are going to over nerf an entire race of ships. I am perfectly content going 4-6 k/s in a stabber, that is nano. The extreme cases are no different then any other extreme, they paid alot of isk for it and are getting what they paid for. With this nerf my hyena barely hits 4 k/s, it's a small expensive death trap now. The stabber goes ~4-5 k/s and is about as agile as a brick. (Which means pilot changes occur slower.) I don't care about webs, scrams, missiles, whatever. What's ****ing me off is because of ONE set of implants they are changing the entire mechanics system of the game. Get rid of the stupid speeds, 10+k/s and leave the rest alone dammit. How does it feel to lie page after page to prove a point that doesnt exist or are you so stupid that you cant see why nanos have to be nerfed? Lie after lie??? The ONLY thing that needs nerfing are the items that are breaking intended game mechanics. Nerfing an entire class of ships into worthlessness is not a good game change. I went on the test server, I played with normal set ups, not snake fit shit that the devs seem to think everyone has. Fit out a stabber with 3 overdrives and a mwd and that is what it's like to fly the stabber with the current patch they are referring too. The simple fact is those whining want their HEAVY ships to hit something that is intended not to be hit by heavier ships. That is the SOLE source of this whine patch. It's not hard killing nano hacs, it's not hard to kill ceptors, it's pretty easy actually.
sdthujfg	Posted - 2008.10.10 23:46:00 - [27] Originally by: Megan Maynard Lie after lie??? The ONLY thing that needs nerfing are the items that are breaking intended game mechanics. Nerfing an entire class of ships into worthlessness is not a good game change. I went on the test server, I played with normal set ups, not snake fit shit that the devs seem to think everyone has. Fit out a stabber with 3 overdrives and a mwd and that is what it's like to fly the stabber with the current patch they are referring too. The simple fact is those whining want their HEAVY ships to hit something that is intended not to be hit by heavier ships. That is the SOLE source of this whine patch. It's not hard killing nano hacs, it's not hard to kill ceptors, it's pretty easy actually. It is so satisfying to see all the people, like whole tri alliance and alike, are crying their hearts out on the forums because their only way of warfare (a very cheap and easy one) is getting nerfed, and for a good reason. Your tears are music to my ears. Look a rhyme.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order	Posted - 2008.10.11 00:29:00 - [28] Originally by: Reto currently you cannot forsee a gate camp other than using a scout and due to the intended changes scouts cant survive a camp? Gate camps have been dealt with for years before nanos. After the changes it is likely that nanos won't be able to solo without some risk. However a small gang with cov ops or ceptors stand a decent chance (<<<< scouts!). I think folks have forgotten how to deal with the basics. Originally by: Reto also its not a huge dedication to place a bubble on a gate. and lest. i wasnt just scouting entries into 0.0 was traveling in deep 0.0 aswell. It does take effort to get a large enough force to effective camp the gate. Scouts on the other gates. Webbers. Dps. Tacklers. Then there has to be enough traffic to keep the gang occupied. Otherwise folks get bored and wander off. If you're encountering gate camps likely because you were scouted or it marks a regional jump that someone wants to protect. As it stands gate camping to stop nanos isn't terribly effective. After the patch nanos will have to take the same risks as everyone else, gather intel, and use their brains. Originally by: Reto i also think you dont want to understand that roaming is about flying around in 0.0 and not utilising expensive and costly equipment like black ops. also did you consider that a black ops bs can only enter a system for a silly price in fuel and also it is only capable of bridging in covert ops ships which is making smallscale player resort to cloaking ganks. A black ops is about 3-4x the cost of a nano (ship + fittings + poly's). It shouldn't be directly risked when possible unlike the stealth bombers and recons. Black ops doesn't exist to jump bridge folks into a fight as much as jump a small force past some defenses. The fuel cost is fairly reasonable compared to carriers/rorquals/jump freighters. The point is that the ships dedicated to hit and run are ignored and have no real role. Securing space is more than just putting up a bubble. Its having a task force on hand that can move around and attempt to trap and fight intruders. Currently this isn't very effective unless the task force relies on nanos and jump bridges. Bubbles aren't very effective to secure gates without a number of huggins/rapiers/falcons + dps. Roamers have no guaranteed right to travel through 0.0 risk free.
Lyria Skydancer Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.10.11 00:31:00 - [29] Originally by: Crackzilla Roamers have no guaranteed right to travel through 0.0 risk free. This. People should get used to that. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Support Barrage
BiggestT Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana	Posted - 2008.10.11 05:28:00 - [30] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: Crackzilla Roamers have no guaranteed right to travel through 0.0 risk free. This. People should get used to that. They already are Awesome EVE history Missiles ba-oom!

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.