EVE Search - wth did you do to my missiles?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

wth did you do to my missiles?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Vikarion Caldari White Rose Society	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:17:00 - [151] Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 12/11/2008 04:14:47 Originally by: Vikarion Originally by: Cpt Branko That's because Caldari don't know jack about game mechanics. No, it's because it was a stupid decision. And I have about 15 million SP in Amarr, about 1.8 in Caldari. What does that tell you? You know how badly Amarr with 1.8M SP suck? Oh, wait you want easymode without any SP, or fitting challenges? Ohwait. That said, the patch, as a whole, sucks. But pretending like missiles are the broken thing is laughable. You're missing the point. I don't have a huge personal stake in this, and it's my opinion that the whole system is now practically destroyed.
Dianeces The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:18:00 - [152] Originally by: Vikarion Kronos drone bay: 125 m3 Raven drone bay: 75 m3 Turns out five light drones only take up 25m3. Which conveniently leaves 50m3 for a flight of five medium drones. It's amazing how that works.
GO MaZ The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:21:00 - [153] I have a claymore. It goes 8k/sec with an oversized mwd on, after the patch. Cruise from a manticore STILL hit it for 200 a pop (even though they're too slow to catch it haha). I severely doubt they suck that ****ing bad against cruisers, and you should be using drones against frigs anyway. As with any major balancing patch, you have to work around the new issues that the balancing creates. Missile users have to find new ways of achieving the same damage, nano users have to find new ways of achieving the same damage avoidance / tanking ability. Adapt or die! ---
Vikarion Caldari White Rose Society	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:21:00 - [154] Originally by: Dianeces Originally by: Vikarion Kronos drone bay: 125 m3 Raven drone bay: 75 m3 Turns out five light drones only take up 25m3. Which conveniently leaves 50m3 for a flight of five medium drones. It's amazing how that works. Did you read the patch notes? Drones got nerfed. And, unless you're packing drone links, good luck getting Guristas to get close enough to hit. Also, many players are complaining that their missiles aren't doing very much damage to BS, either.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:22:00 - [155] Originally by: Dianeces Originally by: Vikarion Kronos drone bay: 125 m3 Raven drone bay: 75 m3 Turns out five light drones only take up 25m3. Which conveniently leaves 50m3 for a flight of five medium drones. It's amazing how that works. and we all know medium drones ROCK vs cruisers i know, i'll go fit a target painter and ignore my tank. they didn't really nerf the uber rich mission runners. but Joe Anyone expecting to go out there in a t1 raven will be having a rough time of it.
Vikarion Caldari White Rose Society	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:22:00 - [156] Originally by: GO MaZ I have a claymore. It goes 8k/sec with an oversized mwd on, after the patch. Cruise from a manticore STILL hit it for 200 a pop (even though they're too slow to catch it haha). I severely doubt they suck that ****ing bad against cruisers, and you should be using drones against frigs anyway. As with any major balancing patch, you have to work around the new issues that the balancing creates. Missile users have to find new ways of achieving the same damage, nano users have to find new ways of achieving the same damage avoidance / tanking ability. Adapt or die! Try using an AB. Should cut down that incoming damage a bit.
GO MaZ The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:23:00 - [157] Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Joe Anyone expecting to go out there in a t1 raven will be having a rough time of it. Joe anyone should train some more skills or stick to doing level 3's until he has enough SP to use missiles properly (they still work surprisingly!) ---
Taius Pax	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:25:00 - [158] Edited by: Taius Pax on 12/11/2008 04:25:54 Originally by: Pedro Snachez I fly a Kronos with pretty much maxed out gunnery and I needed to fit 2 Shadow Serp tracking comps and a domination web to be able to hit cruisers and frigs orbiting me. Let me just say that the whines about your max-dps Ravens/Golems having issues killing smaller ships warms me inside. Welcome to how the rest of the mission-running world does things. And by does things, I mean "uses their brains". 1. Use drones. 2. Use Target painters. 3. Go a little lighter on the unnecessary perma-run booster setups. 4. Profit. Sorry you can't do missions on braindead afk mode anymore. 1. Use drones. Check! 2. Use Target painters. OH CRAP, RAVENS SHIELD TANK AND KIND OF NEED THAT MID SLOT 3. Go a little lighter on the unnecessary perma-run booster setups. - OK Pedro, you just lost your cred. It's nearly impossible to perma tank an active shield set up and have it do any kind of damage. I've never known anyone who uses a perma tank Raven to mission.
Thorian Baalnorn	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:28:00 - [159] OK, correct me if im wrong, But they nerfed missles so you do less damage to speeding ships( speed tanks) but they nerfed ship speeds so you could actually hit them with missles. This is how i am understanding it. So they nerfed one thing( speed tanking) so missles were useable against speed tanks( amoung other reasons) then they nerfed missles so speed tanking was once again viable tanking for missles. So in short the actual change is they ****ed twice as many people off yet everything in a fight will play out exactly the same way between a missleboat and speed tank....
Dianeces The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:29:00 - [160] Edited by: Dianeces on 12/11/2008 04:31:41 Originally by: Vikarion Did you read the patch notes? Drones got nerfed. Medium drones got nerfed.....against frigate sized targets. Furthermore, Originally by: Vikarion And, unless you're packing drone links, good luck getting Guristas to get close enough to hit. And, unless then changed the Raven, it has two utility high slots to fit drone links. Edit: Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia and we all know medium drones ROCK vs cruisers I'm sure if you let the medium drones work on the cruisers and BCs while you're shooting the BS with your cruises you'll be fine. Of course, this would require using proper sized weapons for proper sized targets. I know that's a tough concept to get used to, I'm sure you'll adapt though. Or die. Either way.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:30:00 - [161] Originally by: GO MaZ Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Joe Anyone expecting to go out there in a t1 raven will be having a rough time of it. Joe anyone should train some more skills or stick to doing level 3's until he has enough SP to use missiles properly (they still work surprisingly!) i dont disagree with you but notice how they never really went out and said 'level 4 missions are too profitable for empire, the difficulty of these have been brought in line" or whatever in patch notes. I'm not naive, i think they knew full well what they were doing. Either you are going to go back to level 3's or you are going to invest in their uninsurable golem isksink designed for one thing and one thing only, level 4 missions. either way, its a crappy and needless thing to do in my opinion, that makes it a valid ***ch (not something i need educated on, which this thread seems more than abundant of people willing to 'educate' those voicing their complaints (aka trolling and rubbing it in w/ obvious information). If they want to continue to increase grind and isk sinks they need to come out and say it.
Vikarion Caldari White Rose Society	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:30:00 - [162] Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn OK, correct me if im wrong, But they nerfed missles so you do less damage to speeding ships( speed tanks) but they nerfed ship speeds so you could actually hit them with missles. This is how i am understanding it. So they nerfed one thing( speed tanking) so missles were useable against speed tanks( amoung other reasons) then they nerfed missles so speed tanking was once again viable tanking for missles. So in short the actual change is they ****ed twice as many people off yet everything in a fight will play out exactly the same way between a missleboat and speed tank.... It's a little more complex than that... Missiles were generally nerfed - less DPS, less ability to hit smaller ships. MWDs were nerfed. Missiles are still good against MWD-using ships. Net result? Missiles suck against anything not using an MWD or a size catergory larger (in which case they still suck, because they don't do enough DPS).
Pedro Snachez Revolution Holdings	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:31:00 - [163] Originally by: Vikarion Originally by: Pedro Snachez 1. Use drones. Kronos drone bay: 125 m3 Raven drone bay: 75 m3 Originally by: Pedro Snachez 2. Use Target painters. Shield tank. Originally by: Pedro Snachez 3. Go a little lighter on the unnecessary perma-run booster setups. That's a Dominix you're thinking of. Ravens don't perma-tank well without really expensive dead-space/officer gear. Originally by: Pedro Snachez 4. Profit. Not anymore. Originally by: Pedro Snachez Sorry you can't do missions on braindead afk mode anymore. Again, you are thinking of a Dominix. In a Raven, it's literally impossible to AFK mission. Someone has to fire the missiles. True to an extent. I was really addressing the OP who was complaining that his Uber DPS fit didn't work so well anymore. But Some of your points aren't totally accurate either. 1. Yes, the Kronos bay is bigger. However, bay size =/= bandwidth. The Raven can carry a flight of lights and mediums and that's all you should be using on cruisers/frigs anyway, so what's the point? 2. Shield Tank. You seriously can't sacrifice 1 slot to use a target painter? I've flown a Raven and 95% of missions won't even come close to pushing your tank as long as you don't aggro the whole room. If you need to use all of your mids and rigs for tank then you're doing something wrong. This expansion seems to be all about sig radius, so why is it such blasphemy that you might need to sacrifice some tank for gank? Before this patch the Raven had it both ways: Uncontested lows for BCUs and mids for tank. Now you'll have to balance it. 3. Again, I was aimed more at the OP. If he's got highs full of faction launchers, my guess would be that he has a faction tank too. 4. As for the profit, we'll see. My guess is that people are unwilling to break out of their old ways of thinking about CNRs and Golems. There are people that are figuring out that nano still works to a certain degree, just without all the polycarbon rigs. This probably won't be any different. 5. I wasn't meaning true walk away from keyboard. Sorry. I just meant the F1-F7, try not to fall asleep way of doing missions.
GO MaZ The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:31:00 - [164] Originally by: Vikarion Try using an AB. Should cut down that incoming damage a bit. I had a poke about with missiles on sisi a couple of days ago. The only problem I had hitting with a cruise raven on a cruiser sized ship was with a haloed ab vaga going full speed (~1300m/s). Your mission cruiser rats are definitely not going 1300m/s on ab and I can almost guarantee you they have a bigger sig than the vaga. Target painters also made a massive difference to damage in that case, more so than a web. You could always try target painting drones if you're not willing to replace tank with a TP, but you have so many options available to you to improve your damage output vs. small targets it isn't even funny - web drones, target painter drones, explosion velocity rigs, explosion radius rigs, damage drones, better skills, hardwirings, the list goes on. You could even team up with someone else and run missions with a friend with a target painter on, but god forbid people play multiplayer in an MMO right? ---
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:31:00 - [165] Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn OK, correct me if im wrong, But they nerfed missles so you do less damage to speeding ships( speed tanks) but they nerfed ship speeds so you could actually hit them with missles. This is how i am understanding it. So they nerfed one thing( speed tanking) so missles were useable against speed tanks( amoung other reasons) then they nerfed missles so speed tanking was once again viable tanking for missles. So in short the actual change is they ****ed twice as many people off yet everything in a fight will play out exactly the same way between a missleboat and speed tank.... see my last post. i think it evolved that way yes... but then they realized they had more to gain than looking at just those 2 variables of the equation.
Khamal Jolstien Caldari Product Number 3	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:32:00 - [166] Originally by: Vikarion Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn OK, correct me if im wrong, But they nerfed missles so you do less damage to speeding ships( speed tanks) but they nerfed ship speeds so you could actually hit them with missles. This is how i am understanding it. So they nerfed one thing( speed tanking) so missles were useable against speed tanks( amoung other reasons) then they nerfed missles so speed tanking was once again viable tanking for missles. So in short the actual change is they ****ed twice as many people off yet everything in a fight will play out exactly the same way between a missleboat and speed tank.... It's a little more complex than that... Missiles were generally nerfed - less DPS, less ability to hit smaller ships. MWDs were nerfed. Missiles are still good against MWD-using ships. Net result? Missiles suck against anything not using an MWD or a size catergory larger (in which case they still suck, because they don't do enough DPS). This is definitely the problem. Missiles have a ton of drawbacks, compensated by ease of use. Now it has all those drawbacks and no good points about them.
Aeo IV Amarr Xomic OmniCorporation	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:33:00 - [167] This seems to happen every time CCP makes a change to the game balance, they try to make some fix in the game's pvp, which may or may not be broken, but manage to hit everyone with the nerf bat, it's stupid, and it needs to stop. CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, because it's a PVEers who are paying a greater percentile of the total income from this game, not the average PVPer. I'm not suggesting that CCP should carter to the PVEer at the expense of the PVPer, but CCP really shouldn't be catering to the PVPer at the expense of the PVEer. Yes, Nanos where a problem, yes, CCP tried to fix the problem, but Missiles, being already crap for PVP, but very good for PVE, should not have been hit with the nerf bat. There are many ways that the nano problem could have been solved, but this isn't it, and I don't know who in CCP thought this would solve the problem. As I identified months ago, the problem with Nanos is that Webbers simply don't work well against them-- you need often times, more then one webber to slow it down enough to hit it, and often times they'd slip out of range. All CCP needed to do is realize that the problem with the webber is that it simply doesn't have the range to do it's job, and simply cannot slow the target down enough, or fast enough, to make a difference. Like I said a long while ago, the problem has to do with the way the game handles modifies, as always a percent, which means if you move fast enough, I can take away 99% of your speed, and still have you moving faster then a ship can hit. This is a fundamental underlying problem. I suspect it causes other problems with the game we're not aware of as of yet, and it will cause future problems. But CCP choice not to realize this problem, in favor of a series of nerfs that ends up hurting everyone, including people who aren't even using nanos, and ultimately benefits few to none.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:37:00 - [168] Originally by: Pedro Snachez 1. Yes, the Kronos bay is bigger. However, bay size =/= bandwidth. The Raven can carry a flight of lights and mediums and that's all you should be using on cruisers/frigs anyway, so what's the point? 2. Shield Tank. You seriously can't sacrifice 1 slot to use a target painter? I've flown a Raven and 95% of missions won't even come close to pushing your tank as long as you don't aggro the whole room. If you need to use all of your mids and rigs for tank then you're doing something wrong. This expansion seems to be all about sig radius, so why is it such blasphemy that you might need to sacrifice some tank for gank? Before this patch the Raven had it both ways: Uncontested lows for BCUs and mids for tank. Now you'll have to balance it. 3. Again, I was aimed more at the OP. If he's got highs full of faction launchers, my guess would be that he has a faction tank too. 4. As for the profit, we'll see. My guess is that people are unwilling to break out of their old ways of thinking about CNRs and Golems. There are people that are figuring out that nano still works to a certain degree, just without all the polycarbon rigs. This probably won't be any different. 5. I wasn't meaning true walk away from keyboard. Sorry. I just meant the F1-F7, try not to fall asleep way of doing missions. 1. mediums vs cruisers = fail 2. flat out false. plenty of missions can push a standard tank over the line when you take one mid out of the equation. even w/o full room aggro (the assault, mordus anything, the larger angel missions etc etc) 3. so your comments only apply to the super rich. ok to recognize they intentionally screwed over the average joe shmoe 4. fair enough. ppl expecting to still play the game somewhat similar to how they have been playing it the past few years? fair complaint as well. 5. i think the very idea of needing to pay attention to spawns/triggers and damage types is good enough dont you? or should every mission be a gladiatorial event testing your capabilities to the brink? i think there are many false assumptions to the ease and skill required of a lot of missions. oh, and obligatory 'fit a TP, screw caldari, caldari suck, thats what you get for crying bout nanos rabblerabblerabble!!'
GO MaZ The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:41:00 - [169] Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia 1. mediums vs cruisers = fail Just a quick one I dunno if you've tested them after the patch but they're **ing ** vs. cruisers and above ---
Nameless Soldier	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:41:00 - [170] Originally by: Aeo IV CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, because it's a PVEers who are paying a greater percentile of the total income from this game, not the average PVPer. I'm not suggesting that CCP should carter to the PVEer at the expense of the PVPer, but CCP really shouldn't be catering to the PVPer at the expense of the PVEer. Here's a really big tip: No REAL PvPers were leading the charge on the nano nerf. Wannabe PvPers and poseurs, yes they whined and cried their littles eyes out. The REAL PvPers, though they agreed that some of the nano setups were way out of hand and needed to be tweaked, also knew how to easily counter and handle nanos. To paraphrase from a middling movie: "After the first half hour if you haven't spotted the sucker, then YOU are the sucker." If you didn't know how to counter, deal with and/or kill nanos before this patch then guess what, you weren't a real PvPer anyways.
Khamal Jolstien Caldari Product Number 3	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:43:00 - [171] Originally by: Nameless Soldier Originally by: Aeo IV CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, because it's a PVEers who are paying a greater percentile of the total income from this game, not the average PVPer. I'm not suggesting that CCP should carter to the PVEer at the expense of the PVPer, but CCP really shouldn't be catering to the PVPer at the expense of the PVEer. Here's a really big tip: No REAL PvPers were leading the charge on the nano nerf. Wannabe PvPers and poseurs, yes they whined and cried their littles eyes out. The REAL PvPers, though they agreed that some of the nano setups were way out of hand and needed to be tweaked, also knew how to easily counter and handle nanos. To paraphrase from a middling movie: "After the first half hour if you haven't spotted the sucker, then YOU are the sucker." If you didn't know how to counter, deal with and/or kill nanos before this patch then guess what, you weren't a real PvPer anyways. Using broken mechanics, does not a PVPer make. Unfortunately, CCP broke the rest of the game's mechanics. Oops.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:46:00 - [172] Originally by: Aeo IV CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, Quoted for extreme irony.
Szent AdamKiraly Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:47:00 - [173] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Aeo IV CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, Quoted for extreme irony. ooo quotin dis.
Thorian Baalnorn	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:49:00 - [174] Originally by: GO MaZ Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Joe Anyone expecting to go out there in a t1 raven will be having a rough time of it. Joe anyone should train some more skills or stick to doing level 3's until he has enough SP to use missiles properly (they still work surprisingly!) I heard this same arguement with T2 mods on a Raven." you shouldnt fly a raven until you can fit all T2 mods on it." Have anyone of you even flown a raven? I can fly and tank in a raven perfectly ... well could on level 4s with t1 mods. Arguements on " you should fly a more expansive ship" are ridiculous at best in missioning. spending more money isnt always the solution to doing better. I shouldnt need a CNR or Golem to tank a level 4 mission. Not only that but the fact is we are talking about missle damage. their are many level 4 npc ships that require a decent DPS to overcome their tank. A golem may be a better tank and better for mission running but by no means necessary. Your taking away alot of peoples income( level 3s dont pay crap and personally im in no hurry to train for a golem just so i can make decent cash on a mission. it would take me 25 plus missions just to make the cost back. ) by making it hard for them to complete missions. lower income from mission runners means less money going into the market which means ... well take a look at the US economy.
Nameless Soldier	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:51:00 - [175] Originally by: Khamal Jolstien Originally by: Nameless Soldier Originally by: Aeo IV CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, because it's a PVEers who are paying a greater percentile of the total income from this game, not the average PVPer. I'm not suggesting that CCP should carter to the PVEer at the expense of the PVPer, but CCP really shouldn't be catering to the PVPer at the expense of the PVEer. Here's a really big tip: No REAL PvPers were leading the charge on the nano nerf. Wannabe PvPers and poseurs, yes they whined and cried their littles eyes out. The REAL PvPers, though they agreed that some of the nano setups were way out of hand and needed to be tweaked, also knew how to easily counter and handle nanos. To paraphrase from a middling movie: "After the first half hour if you haven't spotted the sucker, then YOU are the sucker." If you didn't know how to counter, deal with and/or kill nanos before this patch then guess what, you weren't a real PvPer anyways. Using broken mechanics, does not a PVPer make. Unfortunately, CCP broke the rest of the game's mechanics. Oops. To paraphrase from a middling movie: "After the first half hour if you haven't spotted the sucker, then YOU are the sucker." If you didn't know how to counter, deal with and/or kill nanos before this patch then guess what, you weren't a real PvPer anyways. Sup sucker?
Aeo IV Amarr Xomic OmniCorporation	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:51:00 - [176] Originally by: Nameless Soldier Originally by: Aeo IV CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, because it's a PVEers who are paying a greater percentile of the total income from this game, not the average PVPer. I'm not suggesting that CCP should carter to the PVEer at the expense of the PVPer, but CCP really shouldn't be catering to the PVPer at the expense of the PVEer. Here's a really big tip: No REAL PvPers were leading the charge on the nano nerf. Wannabe PvPers and poseurs, yes they whined and cried their littles eyes out. The REAL PvPers, though they agreed that some of the nano setups were way out of hand and needed to be tweaked, also knew how to easily counter and handle nanos. To paraphrase from a middling movie: "After the first half hour if you haven't spotted the sucker, then YOU are the sucker." If you didn't know how to counter, deal with and/or kill nanos before this patch then guess what, you weren't a real PvPer anyways. Here's a bigger tip. The whole "no true scotsman" is a logical fallacy. If they engage in PVP regularly, they're PVPers, even if the hard core "I have a 25 man fleet with someone specialized to handle anything anyone could throw at us" ***** and moan about how they're not. And again, I don't care, all I know is somehow between Nanos broken, and Nanos fixed, someone broke my Raven. And my Abaddon. And my SB. And probably a good host of other things I haven't realized.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:51:00 - [177] Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn I heard this same arguement with T2 mods on a Raven." you shouldnt fly a raven until you can fit all T2 mods on it." Have anyone of you even flown a raven? I can fly and tank in a raven perfectly ... well could on level 4s with t1 mods. Arguements on " you should fly a more expansive ship" are ridiculous at best in missioning. spending more money isnt always the solution to doing better. I shouldnt need a CNR or Golem to tank a level 4 mission. But CCP decided to nerf solo PVP, so why not nerf solo L4 farming too? Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Szent AdamKiraly Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:53:00 - [178] I'd love to say nanoes were never broken, it was just the players but i would probably get ****d
Spiritsister Ayala	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:53:00 - [179] Guys, guys, guys... stop whining...missiles are just perfect now. I have just seen my cruise missiles hit a BS npc for 22! damage... UBER, isnt it? Wait, here is more: a HAC npc tanked 26 volley of cruise missiles. - These guys were 6 volley before the "expansion". So yes, these are the facts that prove missiles are working perfectly now. BTW: all you guys saying "adapt or die", "fit TP", "now all caldari got what he deserves" "train more" now can see the actual difference between how it was and how it is now. you might get some idea why we missile users dont like this aspect of the "expansion"
Khamal Jolstien Caldari Product Number 3	Posted - 2008.11.12 04:55:00 - [180] Originally by: Aeo IV Originally by: Nameless Soldier Originally by: Aeo IV CCP really needs to stop listening to goddamn whiny pvpers out there, because it's a PVEers who are paying a greater percentile of the total income from this game, not the average PVPer. I'm not suggesting that CCP should carter to the PVEer at the expense of the PVPer, but CCP really shouldn't be catering to the PVPer at the expense of the PVEer. Here's a really big tip: No REAL PvPers were leading the charge on the nano nerf. Wannabe PvPers and poseurs, yes they whined and cried their littles eyes out. The REAL PvPers, though they agreed that some of the nano setups were way out of hand and needed to be tweaked, also knew how to easily counter and handle nanos. To paraphrase from a middling movie: "After the first half hour if you haven't spotted the sucker, then YOU are the sucker." If you didn't know how to counter, deal with and/or kill nanos before this patch then guess what, you weren't a real PvPer anyways. Here's a bigger tip. The whole "no true scotsman" is a logical fallacy. If they engage in PVP regularly, they're PVPers, even if the hard core "I have a 25 man fleet with someone specialized to handle anything anyone could throw at us" ***** and moan about how they're not. And again, I don't care, all I know is somehow between Nanos broken, and Nanos fixed, someone broke my Raven. And my Abaddon. And my SB. And probably a good host of other things I haven't realized. Another good point that many people have been missing. They fixed nanos with a sledge hammer, and the missile users are the collateral damage. Also, for the next troll, just b ecause I use Missiles does not mean I'm a carebear.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: 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.